Confusion in Murthy bulletin on Visa Numbers and Retrogation.

D

dbwr

New Member
Hi All.,

Please find the bulltin description.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Additional Visa Numbers Consumed from Prior Years

Approximately 131,000 additional visa numbers were made available from a provision in the law that permitted the rollover of unused numbers in fiscal years 1999 and 2000 into subsequent years. Of these, 30,000 were used in fiscal year (FY) 2003. The remaining numbers are expected to be completely used in FY2005.

There is movement in Congress to provide some additional, limited EB3 visa numbers - possibly for nurses and other professionals or skilled workers - but there is no guarantee that a law will be passed to accomplish this. Any significant developments in this important area will be the subject of future MurthyBulletin articles, all of which also become available on MurthyDotCom.
Future Projections of EB3 Retrogressions

For the remainder of FY2005, the DOS expects the EB3 numbers not to move much in either one direction or the other. EB1 and EB2 are not expected to retrogress during FY2005, which ends September 30, 2005.

Projections of EB2 Retrogressions

In the second half of FY2006, the EB2 category is expected to retrogress for mainland China and India. The DOS projects that the EB1 category may possibly also retrogress for India and China in FY2006.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


to my understanding ther were another 100K unused numbers which will be used for FY 2005. But already we all filed the GC before the retro.Does any one know

why they are not using it currently

if not

when they will use it...in future....
 
Technicaly they should use unused visas in 2005 year. This was also menstioned in Jan 2005 buletine. I do not know why DOS or Murthy or any other wib site does not say that EB3 PD will move.

May be we are not understanding something!!!

Any thoughts.
 
yes baby....

Some thing is wrong in understanding the usage...Might be some experts can say.

Wait and see...
 
Here is bit more explanation.

REF: http://www.americanvisas.com/chronicle/winter2005.htm


In anticipation of the last quarter of FY05 starting on July 1st, can VO confirm, discuss and/or explain the following?
·(1) Is it correct that the limits of section 201(a)(2) do not apply to the fourth quarter of FY05?
VO: Correct, the 27% limitation only applies to the first three quarters, with any remaining numbers to be made available in the final quarter. But remember that if the 27% limits are being reached, then a maximum of 19% of the annual limit would be available for the final quarter. In recent years the quarterly limits were not a factor because of the lack of demand for numbers, primarily from CIS for adjustment of status cases. During FY-2005 the quarterly limits are being met as a result of the CIS backlog reduction efforts.
· (2)What plans do the VO, NVC, and IV posts have to ensure that all documentarily qualified visa applicants from the three EB-3 visa retrogressed countries will be able to be issued visas during this last quarter of FY05?
VO: We are confident that all available visa numbers will be made available in FY05. For FY05 the total employment-based numbers available for use will be the regular 140,000 + approximately 7,000 unused family from FY04 + 101,000 AC21. It is preferable to make a larger amount of the numbers available during the first three quarters of the fiscal year, so that there is not an unmanageable amount available during the final quarter. We attempt to avoid situations requiring a drastic increase in processing at a time when the overseas NIV workload is at its peak, there could be overseas staffing shortages because of the summer rotation cycle, or CIS processing could be impacted because of end of year staffing issues. Currently CIS is using about 90% of all Employment-based numbers, and maximizing number use can be controlled through moving or holding the cut-off date for the three oversubscribed countries.
(3) Was the visa cut-off for purposes of computing the 27% demand value under INA 202(a)(2) based on the statutory 140,000 (per INA 201(d)(1)(A) or on the total available under paras. 1-5 of INA 202(b)? If the latter, shouldn't this include the temporary AC21 "pool" visas and thus should equal 241,000? If the former, why?
VO: Calculations were based on the total amount of numbers available during FY-2005, which are estimated to be approximately 247,000, including the remaining AC21 numbers. Per AC21 approximately 131,000 numbers were "recaptured" based on unused FY-1999 and FY-2000 Employment-based numbers. During FY-2003 approximately 30,000 were used, and the remaining 101,000 are being utilized during FY-2005. AC21 numbers were not required in the other fiscal years because demand did not exceed the amount of numbers available under the normal annual limit.
·(4) What you expect in advancement per country for the remainder of FY05 and as of 10/1/05? EB3 Philippines? EB3 China? EB3 India?
VO: For the remainder of FY05 EB3 should remain pretty much where it is now, with no retrogression for EB1 or EB2. Based on the current numerical guidelines established by the INA we expect the oversubscription of the China and India EB2 categories at some point during FY-2006. It is possible that FY06 could also see the oversubscription of the EB1 category for China and India. At this time we expect Philippines EB1 and EB2 to remain "current". For the foreseeable future Employment visa availability will be impacted as both CIS and DOL continue with their backlog reduction efforts. The priority dates of applicants in these backlogs could require cut-off date movement to slow, stop, and in a worst case scenario retrogress. The Other Workers category is going to retrogress and could go unavailable. Notifications regarding visa availability can result in a rush to finalize action on cases, resulting in fewer numbers being available for the remainder of the year, which affects the cut-off dates.
 
I think who ever is filed are ok i guess from this description.

Now Clarification still needed is if USCIS wants to use the Ac-21 pool of 100k and any left overs in 2005 fourth qT for retro candidates. can they use it.
I mean can they allocate these numbers in the fourth quarter, even though he/she is a retro candidate. If the answer is yes, every one who filed the GC before dec-2004 and is affected by retro at later stage can expect their GC in July to Sep 2005, if their documentation and every thing is done before.

That means FP, RFE completion and no other issue is pending except the application is on "Visa on hold" stage.

This is my wild guess....

Any comments
 
May 9, according to Shusterman, is when the next House-Senate meeting is to debate the appropriations bill (that contains the EB3 provision).
Lets see what happens.
 
Can we have more experts/gurus to throw more light on this.

dbwr said:
I think who ever is filed are ok i guess from this description.

Now Clarification still needed is if USCIS wants to use the Ac-21 pool of 100k and any left overs in 2005 fourth qT for retro candidates. can they use it.
I mean can they allocate these numbers in the fourth quarter, even though he/she is a retro candidate. If the answer is yes, every one who filed the GC before dec-2004 and is affected by retro at later stage can expect their GC in July to Sep 2005, if their documentation and every thing is done before.

That means FP, RFE completion and no other issue is pending except the application is on "Visa on hold" stage.

This is my wild guess....

Any comments
Click to expand...
 
avi101.,

Where from that may 9th dates came from .
Can some one post that links .

Also usually how long this kind of House-Senate approvals will take, any one have any idea
 
Visa Recapture

The main reason why Congress and Senate are bending over backwards for EB3 visa recapture is to help qualified nurses get GC. Nurses come under Schedule A occupations and do not require a Labor certification. They directly apply for I-140 and I-485. Their priority date is the I-140 application date. If USCIS does not intend to make the priority date 'Current' for Eb3 China, Philliphines and India, then the recapture of visas from 2001 to 2004 would be a futile attempt, since the nurses would be unable to adjust status or in most cases not able to get an immigrant stamp at a consulate abroad becos of retrogression. Incidentally, most of the nurses are from these very retrogression affected countries, especially from Philliphines. In my opinion, once the 'visa recapture' becomes law, the Priority Dates have to become current.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top