• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

ceac updated

I found OC360 to be an interesting one, came up as interview being changed to another location.

Transfer in Progress
Immigrant Visa Case Number: 2014OC360 01 SYD
Case Creation Date: 03-Oct-2012
Status Updated Date: 17-Dec-2013

Your Immigrant Visa case has been transferred to another U.S. Consular office. You should check back for your case status at a later date.
 
One more thing about CEAC data - it does not include aos cases - which again will look like holes (I believe). AOS globally is around 5% of cases, so say around 2500 for the year.
 
britsimon said:
They don't freeze her age but there is an allowance made in these cases under the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA). The CSPA gives a window of time when a child who has already reached 21 can be treated as a child for the DV interview. According to my calculations she would be OK with your interview date - however, it would be best to get Sm1smom to confirm that - and she will probably know how you should handle the interview also. One thing - your daughter must be unmarried - so no last minute weddings!
Click to expand...

Very well Simon,
You got me to laugh. She is so unmarried and in her 3rd year at the university.
I do hope the calculations work in her favour though.
 
mijoro said:
OC01 - 100 = 34 Interviews, 66 holes, 39 visas issued 4 on AP and 4 rejected
OC101 -200 = 35 Interviews, 65 holes, 50 visas issued, 7 on AP, 3 rejected
OC201 - 300 = 30 Interviews, 70 holes, 47 visas issued, 6 on AP, 7 rejected
OC301 - 400 = 34 Interviews, 66 holes, 50 visas issued, 4 on AP, 5 rejected
OC401 - 438 = 38 Interviews, 21 visas issued,3 on AP, 3 rejected
Click to expand...

Response rate is currently 39.04%

The success rate of people interviewed ( including dependants) is 47.26%
 
Simon if next months allocation jumps the same way as it has the previous months will that make a big difference to your predicitions?
 
mijoro said:
Simon if next months allocation jumps the same way as it has the previous months will that make a big difference to your predicitions?
Click to expand...

I assume you mean the slow pace for OC? I would be surprised and gutted to see slow progress in the next VB. Put simply, we can predict how they could fill up the quotas, but if they don't call enough people forward then they could under-fill despite their intentions.
 
vladek15425 said:
Mijoro 47 % for OC is definitely in your favour hey! You are guaranteed an interview at this rhythm :)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree. The 2011 figures show 36%. If the success rate exceeds that, then the quota will fill sooner - i.e. not good for high numbers.
 
I tend to agree with simon on this one as I am sitting right in the middle it's very iffy for me as in the past my number wouldn't have gotten an interview. As it stands I think I am I the danger zone I can't imagine how the 3k people are feeling
 
Roselyna said:
She turned 21 in September 2013, but I had submitted our forms already.

I was hoping they would freeze her age. At least that was what I was directed to do. This will be so unfair.
I hope this is some kind of mistake. I just hope it is.
Click to expand...

britsimon said:
They don't freeze her age but there is an allowance made in these cases under the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA). The CSPA gives a window of time when a child who has already reached 21 can be treated as a child for the DV interview. According to my calculations she would be OK with your interview date - however, it would be best to get Sm1smom to confirm that - and she will probably know how you should handle the interview also. One thing - your daughter must be unmarried - so no last minute weddings!
Click to expand...

The Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA) provides some sort of relieve to derivative beneficiaries of DV lottery selectees who could potentially loose eligibility for immigration derivative benefit as a result of turning 21. To calculate eligibility for children in this category, DOS uses the period between the first day of the eDV application (in this case Oct 1st 2012? not quite sure of the exact date the 2014 eDV application was open) and the date the principal applicant was notified of their selection (May 1st, 2013) as the "petition pending period". This period will be subtracted from the beneficiary's age on the date the principal applicant's CN becomes current.

Based on the information you've provided Roselyna, it looks like your daughter could be covered under the CSPA Act. There's roughly 242 days between when the eDV 2014 application began (in Oct 2012) and when selectees where notified (in May 2013). Your daughter turned 21 on Oct 2003, the number of days between when she turned 21 and when your CN becomes current is roughly about 120 to 130 something days (somewhere in between). This means she would have been 21 for less than 242 days by time of your interview and she still qualifies just like Simon posted earlier. You may want to go through the following document (page 6 to be precise) for a better explanation of how the calculation works:

http://www.wolfsdorf.com/articles/DV_Article_2004-05.pdf

Is your daughter listed as a derivative on your IL though? You should also contact KCC for a better clarification of what is going on with your case. I would suggest you print out this article also and take it along to your interview as something to use in presenting your case if indeed your daughter is being left out based on the assumption that she's aged out.

Actually Simon, they sort of "freeze the age" :), but not based on when the forms were returned to KCC. The CSPA formula for such cases is that the child's age will freeze as of the date that a visa number becomes available for the petition in question reduced by the number of days that the petition was pending.
 
Sm1smom said:
The Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA) provides some sort of relieve to derivative beneficiaries of DV lottery selectees who could potentially loose eligibility for immigration derivative benefit as a result of turning 21. To calculate eligibility for children in this category, DOS uses the period between the first day of the eDV application (in this case Oct 1st 2012? not quite sure of the exact date the 2014 eDV application was open) and the date the principal applicant was notified of their selection (May 1st, 2013) as the "petition pending period". This period will be subtracted from the beneficiary's age on the date the principal applicant's CN becomes current.

Based on the information you've provided Roselyna, it looks like your daughter could be covered under the CSPA Act. There's roughly 242 days between when the eDV 2014 application began (in Oct 2012) and when selectees where notified (in May 2013). Your daughter turned 21 on Oct 2003, the number of days between when she turned 21 and when your CN becomes current is roughly about 120 to 130 something days (somewhere in between). This means she would have been 21 for less than 242 days by time of your interview and she still qualifies just like Simon posted earlier. You may want to go through the following document (page 6 to be precise) for a better explanation of how the calculation works:

http://www.wolfsdorf.com/articles/DV_Article_2004-05.pdf

Is your daughter listed as a derivative on your IL though? You should also contact KCC for a better clarification of what is going on with your case. I would suggest you print out this article also and take it along to your interview as something to use in presenting your case if indeed your daughter is being left out based on the assumption that she's aged out.

Actually Simon, they sort of "freeze the age" :), but not based on when the forms were returned to KCC. The CSPA formula for such cases is that the child's age will freeze as of the date that a visa number becomes available for the petition in question reduced by the number of days that the petition was pending.
Click to expand...


Thanks Mom for jumping in. I was thinking that was the calculation (starting 2nd October to 1 May) but wanted your input to be sure. In terms of freeze - yeah I see how you could describe it that way.

As I read Roselynas posts her 21 year old was on the entry forms,, the 230 forms and was on the 2NL - the only fly in the ointment was the CEAC data.
 
mijoro said:
I tend to agree with simon on this one as I am sitting right in the middle it's very iffy for me as in the past my number wouldn't have gotten an interview. As it stands I think I am I the danger zone I can't imagine how the 3k people are feeling
Click to expand...

In the case of OC, it comes down to how much quota they have. As we have said before, a tiny increase from the global pot will make a huge difference to OC. I keep thinking the doubling of selectees signaled something...
 
Sm1smom said:
The Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA) provides some sort of relieve to derivative beneficiaries of DV lottery selectees who could potentially loose eligibility for immigration derivative benefit as a result of turning 21. To calculate eligibility for children in this category, DOS uses the period between the first day of the eDV application (in this case Oct 1st 2012? not quite sure of the exact date the 2014 eDV application was open) and the date the principal applicant was notified of their selection (May 1st, 2013) as the "petition pending period". This period will be subtracted from the beneficiary's age on the date the principal applicant's CN becomes current.

Based on the information you've provided Roselyna, it looks like your daughter could be covered under the CSPA Act. There's roughly 242 days between when the eDV 2014 application began (in Oct 2012) and when selectees where notified (in May 2013). Your daughter turned 21 on Oct 2003, the number of days between when she turned 21 and when your CN becomes current is roughly about 120 to 130 something days (somewhere in between). This means she would have been 21 for less than 242 days by time of your interview and she still qualifies just like Simon posted earlier. You may want to go through the following document (page 6 to be precise) for a better explanation of how the calculation works:

http://www.wolfsdorf.com/articles/DV_Article_2004-05.pdf

Is your daughter listed as a derivative on your IL though? You should also contact KCC for a better clarification of what is going on with your case. I would suggest you print out this article also and take it along to your interview as something to use in presenting your case if indeed your daughter is being left out based on the assumption that she's aged out.

Actually Simon, they sort of "freeze the age" :), but not based on when the forms were returned to KCC. The CSPA formula for such cases is that the child's age will freeze as of the date that a visa number becomes available for the petition in question reduced by the number of days that the petition was pending.
Click to expand...

This really gives me some relief. Thank you very much.
I will however follow through as you said and keep the forum posted.

I have already sent an email to the embassy in Ghana and will contact KCC too.

Soon after I was notified in may, 2013, I sent an email to KCC to inform them but they asked that I contact the embassy here, which I did and they also sent me an email and asked that I print that email and take along to my interview.

Yes, She is listed on my 2NL.

Thanks again. I'm most grateful.
 
Roselyna said:
This really gives me some relief. Thank you very much.
I will however follow through as you said and keep the forum posted.

I have already sent an email to the embassy in Ghana and will contact KCC too.

Soon after I was notified in may, 2013, I sent an email to KCC to inform them but they asked that I contact the embassy here, which I did and they also sent me an email and asked that I print that email and take along to my interview.

Yes, She is listed on my 2NL.

Thanks again. I'm most grateful.
Click to expand...

The fact that she is on the 2NL is good as it means she is expected on the day of the interview. If I were you I would print out the link that Mom gave so you can refer them to the rule if needed. In the case of CP, the CO has the power to make a decision, even a wrong decision, so it is worth being armed to plead your case.
 
britsimon said:
I'm not sure I agree. The 2011 figures show 36%. If the success rate exceeds that, then the quota will fill sooner - i.e. not good for high numbers.
Click to expand...
I assumed that if OC gets about 1300 visa quota and if running the on the same rythm of 50 % getting visas than may be mijoro will get interviewed :) beside 2011 calculations and hopefully won't be lot
Of high family numbers including till CN2000, in anyway I'm pretty confident that they will reach to interview at least half of the selectees, and I think the same actualy for all the other regions...
 
vladek15425 said:
I assumed that if OC gets about 1300 visa quota and if running the on the same rythm of 50 % getting visas than may be mijoro will get interviewed :) beside 2011 calculations and hopefully won't be lot
Of high family numbers including till CN2000, in anyway I'm pretty confident that they will reach to interview at least half of the selectees, and I think the same actualy for all the other regions...
Click to expand...


Ahh I see what you are saying, and it makes good sense. Yes I think Mijoro should be able to relax - but there are alot of people above her number that want the same thing. Fingers crossed for them all.
 
'your search didnot return any data' what does it mean?may we say all these case numbers are holes?please help me to understand this!
 
Results:
1. Sloner effect is no longer reproducible - up to number EU5157. All numbers present in Warsaw schedule are also present in CEAC, but some that are in CEAC are not in schedule - .
1460
1737
1817
2056
2708
3025
3078
3513
4055
4297
4340
I do not have data above 5157 yet, but it makes no sense to check Sloner effect again. So, that means CEAC has more data than before - because of Sloner effect. My theory that that was a pilor project looks to be confirmed.

2.
AF up to 11381 in DV-13 as of 5/27/2012 contained 3695 rows ( 4005 with Sloner effect, estimated), and 3241 in DV-14;
AS up to 3694 - 1386 (dv-13), 1558(Sloner effect) and 1812 (dv-14)
EU up to 5281 - 958(dv-13), 1083(Sloner effect) and 1376(dv-14)
OC up to 636 - 172(dv-13), 194 (Sloner effect) and 200(dv-14)
SA up to 845 - 228(dv-13), 260 (Sloner effect) and 232(dv-14)

and EU are still running - not completed. Target number for AF is 21750, for EU - 16700.

Explanation - AF for special countries is not current for some numbers lower than 11381. That is why.
For other regions DV-14 has a little bit less holes (except SA) than DV-13, or my estimate of Sloner effect is a little bit undervalued.
Anyway, if my estimates were wrong (I hope they were not) - than the error is towards lower end, not higher end. My estimates for boundary value could be higher than they should be. Or rejection rates would be higher - I have not investigated that yet. Another possibility - some rows with Ready status will be removed later, like at he very end of DV-13
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top