Anyone who was SELECTED with high CN, but NEVER got interview??? Please share your experience

[raevsky]

Was Bangladesh still on DV95? Also, was it also a year when regions did not go current by fiscal year end? (I could only get data back to 2003).

Bangladesh won 14541, and Nigeria 15047. Poland won 49985.
Cutoff levels were going up and down and then again up and down throughout the year. Only EU was current by the end of the year. And SA was available, then became unavailable, and ended the year with available non-current again.

 

[SusieQQQ]

Thanks again Raevsky - I guess lots of teething problems and learning lessons for them in the first year!

 

[Kayend]

Thanks again Raevsky - I guess lots of teething problems and learning lessons for them in the first year!

Yes, do you notice that no one country has more than 6,100 in last few years. There might have some kind of control to make sure it will not select more than 6,100 for any given country to make sure not to waste the chances for other countries. I am sure this is the kind of learning and experience they have to fine tune the system. And DV-14 is the same, a fine tune year where they add additional ~40% selectees so the outcome of this year will be interesting.

 

[Britsimon]

Yes, do you notice that no one country has more than 6,100 in last few years. There might have some kind of control to make sure it will not select more than 6,100 for any given country to make sure not to waste the chances for other countries. I am sure this is the kind of learning and experience they have to fine tune the system. And DV-14 is the same, a fine tune year where they add additional ~40% selectees so the outcome of this year will be interesting.

I'm not sure that would be legal. All entries within a region are supposed to start with the same chance of being selected. capping a country would be contrary to that principle - don't you think?

 

[raevsky]

That would not be legal from my point of view. Even if the initial selection was truly random, but the countries were "cut" with a limiting number afterwards.
But that is what happened in DV-13 - 5 countries have this kind of limit (Ukraine, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Ghana). There is reportedly 6th country - Uzbekistan. CEAC does not have data for it, but I do not have real doubts about it.
So, that is what happens and what does not look legal to me.

 

[Britsimon]

That would not be legal from my point of view. Even if the initial selection was truly random, but the countries were "cut" with a limiting number afterwards.
But that is what happened in DV-13 - 5 countries have this kind of limit (Ukraine, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Ghana). There is reportedly 6th country - Uzbekistan. CEAC does not have data for it, but I do not have real doubts about it.
So, that is what happens and what does not look legal to me.

Oh well - I'm not planning starting a fuss to cause another DV2012 type redraw!!!

 

[raevsky]

Oh well - I'm not planning starting a fuss to cause another DV2012 type redraw!!!

 

[SusieQQQ]

I'm not sure that would be legal. All entries within a region are supposed to start with the same chance of being selected. capping a country would be contrary to that principle - don't you think?

They do say that no more than 7% of the visas can come from each country, so maybe it's somehow linked to that.

And there are of course countries within a region that have lower cut-offs than the overall region, which iirc also tend to be the most populous ones. But that may just be a way of managing the numbers they can physically deal with at the embassies.

 

[Zee Zee]

Yes, I know someone who was in this situation. You need to search newsgroups back to 1999-2000, because since that time they had hidden number to eliminate this type of situation. Search for Olgda Barinov 1999 oor 2000, do not remember exactly. I had a long correspondence with her, I know her personally

There is nothing useful about Olga's case that I was able to find out, however I figured from some older posts on Google's groups that she was doing an AoS? Here is the thing: at that time, USCIS followed its own schedule here in US and applicants who would have been current overseas still had to wait to be scheduled for an available date for interview here. There were many cases like this in Los Angeles, many weren't scheduled for an interview by the end of the fiscal year; and, if I remember well, after one guy ended up suing them - they finally changed the procedures about scheduling DV winners who were adjusting the status. I think that's what happened to Olga... we still need someone who was doing consulate processing for confirmation.

There is a case from Macedonia, not called for an interview for DV-2003 (search Question about strange DV lottery case). However, knowing the region, I wouldn't be surprised if Mecedonian post office never delivered the notification letter (common thing in Balkans at that time).

 

[raevsky]

They do say that no more than 7% of the visas can come from each country, so maybe it's somehow linked to that.

That could have been the case in the past with Ukraine. Ukraine will not get even close to 3500 visas now. In DV-11 it had 1676 visas. CEAC shows 1392 visas issued in Kiev so far.
I think they added Ukraine to this list many years ago when this thing could be possible. They somehow did not remove Ukraine.

The same thing could be with other countries as well. I know Uzbekistan is close to 3500. Egypt and Ethiopia could be. Not Ghana or Nigeria or Ukraine any more.

 

[raevsky]

There is nothing useful about Olga's case that I was able to find out, however I figured from some older posts on Google's groups that she was doing an AoS? Here is the thing: at that time, USCIS followed its own schedule here in US and applicants who would have been current overseas still had to wait to be scheduled for an available date for interview here. There were many cases like this in Los Angeles, many weren't scheduled for an interview by the end of the fiscal year; and, if I remember well, after one guy ended up suing them - they finally changed the procedures about scheduling DV winners who were adjusting the status. I think that's what happened to Olga... we still need someone who was doing consulate processing for confirmation.

There is a case from Macedonia, not called for an interview for DV-2003 (search Question about strange DV lottery case). However, knowing the region, I wouldn't be surprised if Mecedonian post office never delivered the notification letter (common thing in Balkans at that time).

I have a number of examples in Russian form from prior years when people ended up under cutoff and were not scheduled interviews. That was pretty common. Some of them are still posting and some of them still playing, and some of them win again.

 

[Kayend]

I'm not sure that would be legal. All entries within a region are supposed to start with the same chance of being selected. capping a country would be contrary to that principle - don't you think?

Not sure about legality, but it is fair to limit per country quota during selection because if any given country has more than 10k selectee for example, chances are at least 3-4k will not have their interview (because of 7% country quota) and that take up other applicants opportunity to be selected. To me this is wasteful.

 

[raevsky]

And if finally by the end of the program year the 3500 quota is underfilled as a result of the cut while it would be filled without the cut?
Nothing in the law allows any kind of limiting the number of visas per country other than 7% per country limit. So, if any kind of action before considering application for visas limited finally the number of visas, that is a non-legal way of limiting the number of visas per country.
If, however, the limit 3500 is satisfied anyway, the measure would not look unlawful because it had the purpose of limiting number of visas only.

 

[mreuselectee]

Hello and congratulations to all who are selected!!
I know that there are dual opinions regarding high CN number and possibility of receiving interview and GreenCard.
So I thought to open this thread and ask You all very much, if anyone of you (or anyone you personally know) have ever been selected before, but never had even possibility of getting interview just because of high CN, please share your information and experience.

"Experience is always larger than language."
- Adrienne Cecile Rich

I have started similar thread on 14 January 2013. This is exactly what I have written:
Title: Is there anyone who was selected for dv lottery but was not appointed to the interview?
Hello forum users!
I was selected for the dvlottery 2013. I was a little concerned about my case number. I have 2013EU00018***. I am from Uzbekistan and my country is in exception now, it is stopped at 13 400. I was wondering if there is anyone who was selected for dv lottery but was not appointed to the interview? Might it be that some one was selected, but never gets the 2nd notification letter to the interview?
and got just 1 answer from forum user who's name is Lazder, he has written:
"Uzbekistan is in trouble now, apparently they have run out of visas for that region
Yes there have been cases when there was not enough visas for everyone... but most of the time by August every region becomes Current. if you speak Russian, I sent you PM link to Russian forum with people experiencing same issues."

But he was wrong, Uzbekistan was not in trouble, I have received my immigrant visa to US. So I don't believe in any information in this forum.

 

[Sm1smom]

A big congratulation on making it through and getting your visa!

It's unfortunate a single user provided you with misleading information/response that could have denied you the opportunity of realizing your dream. I totally understand your skepticism about this forum based on that experience.

However, that should not be used as the main yardstick for measuring the accuracy of information people provide. Agreed most of us providing information here are not immigration attorneys, the information we share is based on personal experience and additional information or knowledge gathered in the course of our different journeys and research. We try as much as possible to denounce glaringly misleading information when we come across them and at the same time we put up disclaimers that we're not legal gurus.

I'm glad things turned out well for you at the end of the day.

I have started similar thread on 14 January 2013. This is exactly what I have written:
Title: Is there anyone who was selected for dv lottery but was not appointed to the interview?
Hello forum users!
I was selected for the dvlottery 2013. I was a little concerned about my case number. I have 2013EU00018***. I am from Uzbekistan and my country is in exception now, it is stopped at 13 400. I was wondering if there is anyone who was selected for dv lottery but was not appointed to the interview? Might it be that some one was selected, but never gets the 2nd notification letter to the interview?
and got just 1 answer from forum user who's name is Lazder, he has written:
"Uzbekistan is in trouble now, apparently they have run out of visas for that region
Yes there have been cases when there was not enough visas for everyone... but most of the time by August every region becomes Current. if you speak Russian, I sent you PM link to Russian forum with people experiencing same issues."

But he was wrong, Uzbekistan was not in trouble, I have received my immigrant visa to US. So I don't believe in any information in this forum.

 

[mreuselectee]

A big congratulation on making it through and getting your visa!

It's unfortunate a single user provided you with misleading information/response that could have denied you the opportunity of realizing your dream. I totally understand your skepticism about this forum based on that experience.

However, that should not be used as the main yardstick for measuring the accuracy of information people provide. Agreed most of us providing information here are not immigration attorneys, the information we share is based on personal experience and additional information or knowledge gathered in the course of our different journeys and research. We try as much as possible to denounce glaringly misleading information when we come across them and at the same time we put up disclaimers that we're not legal gurus.

I'm glad things turned out well for you at the end of the day.

Thank you, Sm1smom!
I found out that some people on this forum had been giving advises, based on the experience that they had never had. This is not good I think.
Thank you!

 

[Britsimon]

Thank you, Sm1smom!
I found out that some people on this forum had been giving advises, based on the experience that they had never had. This is not good I think.
Thank you!

That really should not be a surprise. This is an internet forum with many people sharing opinions and information with varying degrees of accuracy. The reader is expected to take that opinion and advice and decide for themselves whether to rely on it or not. If that makes the reader uncomfortable then the best advice is to pay for advice from a professional (although very few immigration lawyers are conversant with the DV process and therefore will often give bad advice).

 

[stelunea]

I guess there aren't many other options but being patient and waiting - so will do!

 

[Britsimon]

I guess there aren't many other options but being patient and waiting - so will do!

Exactly - we are all powerless in this game of patience. Please stay active on the forum and keep yourself informed so that if you get a chance you can react quickly and be ready.

The other thing you should do - apply for DV1015 - you might win again with a low number!!!

 

[as29]

Exactly - we are all powerless in this game of patience. Please stay active on the forum and keep yourself informed so that if you get a chance you can react quickly and be ready.

The other thing you should do - apply for DV1015 - you might win again with a low number!!!

Hi Britsimon, hopefully we do not get disqualified if we also apply for dv2015.