Dallas Backlog Elimination Center Tracking

[shaaka]

RIR Case Breakdown by month:

Cases--Month--Year
1 -- 1 -- 1900
21 -- 3 -- 1903
5 -- 4 -- 1903
7 -- 5 -- 1903
1 -- 12 -- 1997
1 -- 1 -- 1998
1 -- 4 -- 1998
2 -- 6 -- 1998
1 -- 8 -- 1998
3 -- 9 -- 1998
2 -- 10 -- 1998
1 -- 12 -- 1998
3 -- 2 -- 1999
3 -- 3 -- 1999
2 -- 4 -- 1999
1 -- 5 -- 1999
5 -- 6 -- 1999
1 -- 7 -- 1999
8 -- 8 -- 1999
12 -- 9 -- 1999
25 -- 10 -- 1999
47 -- 11 -- 1999
57 -- 12 -- 1999
24 -- 1 -- 2000
17 -- 2 -- 2000
32 -- 3 -- 2000
12 -- 4 -- 2000
13 -- 5 -- 2000
13 -- 6 -- 2000
14 -- 7 -- 2000
42 -- 8 -- 2000
30 -- 9 -- 2000
14 -- 10 -- 2000
11 -- 11 -- 2000
7 -- 12 -- 2000
15 -- 1 -- 2001
36 -- 2 -- 2001
171 -- 3 -- 2001
6126 -- 4 -- 2001 (the queue is here now)
195 -- 5 -- 2001
288 -- 6 -- 2001
373 -- 7 -- 2001
451 -- 8 -- 2001
366 -- 9 -- 2001
474 -- 10 -- 2001
323 -- 11 -- 2001
424 -- 12 -- 2001
513 -- 1 -- 2002
666 -- 2 -- 2002
1096 -- 3 -- 2002
1401 -- 4 -- 2002
1700 -- 5 -- 2002
1423 -- 6 -- 2002
1642 -- 7 -- 2002
1526 -- 8 -- 2002
1593 -- 9 -- 2002
1465 -- 10 -- 2002
1403 -- 11 -- 2002
1781 -- 12 -- 2002
1941 -- 1 -- 2003
1926 -- 2 -- 2003
1948 -- 3 -- 2003
2122 -- 4 -- 2003
2184 -- 5 -- 2003
2014 -- 6 -- 2003
2151 -- 7 -- 2003
1950 -- 8 -- 2003
2129 -- 9 -- 2003
2007 -- 10 -- 2003
1304 -- 11 -- 2003
1619 -- 12 -- 2003
1250 -- 1 --2004
1061 -- 2 -- 2004
854 -- 3 -- 2004
603 -- 4 -- 2004
530 -- 5 -- 2004
518 -- 6 -- 2004
407 -- 7 -- 2004
684 -- 8 -- 2004
54 -- 9 --2004

Remember this is split between 2 BEC's

I am attching an XL file with BREAKDOWN OF RIR AND NON-RIR CASES by
year-month-state

So you guys can do all the permutations yourself, by using filters


Points to be considered before you guys get all depressed and all

* This data is from Early Sep 2004
* 8 months have passed and San Francisco DOL (as I know) has processed all the cases (except the remand back to state) upto April 2002 PD.
* Similarly other DOLs would have also processed cases
* What I think is the numbers after the huge bump at 4/2001 (6126 cases) are a little inflated till May 2002.
* If you look at the excel spreadsheet you will see that CA DOL has the majority of cases for each month

Overall I think, there are lesser number of cases pending in BEC after April 2001 than is indicated in the data. That would explain the discrepancy between the 55,000 number quoted by BECs against the 69367 that I find in the database.



[

ZB you are amazing. Really a good break down report...When you say the queue is in 2001

6126 -- 4 -- 2001 (the queue is here now)...

Where are the results...

This guys list below should have got the results approval or denial letters? Why we don't see none...

1 -- 1 -- 1900
21 -- 3 -- 1903
5 -- 4 -- 1903
7 -- 5 -- 1903
1 -- 12 -- 1997
1 -- 1 -- 1998
1 -- 4 -- 1998
2 -- 6 -- 1998
1 -- 8 -- 1998
3 -- 9 -- 1998
2 -- 10 -- 1998
1 -- 12 -- 1998
3 -- 2 -- 1999
3 -- 3 -- 1999
2 -- 4 -- 1999
1 -- 5 -- 1999
5 -- 6 -- 1999
1 -- 7 -- 1999
8 -- 8 -- 1999
12 -- 9 -- 1999
25 -- 10 -- 1999
47 -- 11 -- 1999
57 -- 12 -- 1999
24 -- 1 -- 2000
17 -- 2 -- 2000
32 -- 3 -- 2000
12 -- 4 -- 2000
13 -- 5 -- 2000
13 -- 6 -- 2000
14 -- 7 -- 2000
42 -- 8 -- 2000
30 -- 9 -- 2000
14 -- 10 -- 2000
11 -- 11 -- 2000
7 -- 12 -- 2000
15 -- 1 -- 2001
36 -- 2 -- 2001
171 -- 3 -- 2001

 

[JustWatching]

RIR Case Breakdown by month:

Cases--Month--Year
1 -- 1 -- 1900
21 -- 3 -- 1903
5 -- 4 -- 1903
7 -- 5 -- 1903
1 -- 12 -- 1997
1 -- 1 -- 1998
1 -- 4 -- 1998
2 -- 6 -- 1998
1 -- 8 -- 1998
3 -- 9 -- 1998
2 -- 10 -- 1998
1 -- 12 -- 1998
3 -- 2 -- 1999
3 -- 3 -- 1999
2 -- 4 -- 1999
1 -- 5 -- 1999
5 -- 6 -- 1999
1 -- 7 -- 1999
8 -- 8 -- 1999
12 -- 9 -- 1999
25 -- 10 -- 1999
47 -- 11 -- 1999
57 -- 12 -- 1999
24 -- 1 -- 2000
17 -- 2 -- 2000
32 -- 3 -- 2000
12 -- 4 -- 2000
13 -- 5 -- 2000
13 -- 6 -- 2000
14 -- 7 -- 2000
42 -- 8 -- 2000
30 -- 9 -- 2000
14 -- 10 -- 2000
11 -- 11 -- 2000
7 -- 12 -- 2000
15 -- 1 -- 2001
36 -- 2 -- 2001
171 -- 3 -- 2001
6126 -- 4 -- 2001 (the queue is here now)
195 -- 5 -- 2001
288 -- 6 -- 2001
373 -- 7 -- 2001
451 -- 8 -- 2001
366 -- 9 -- 2001
474 -- 10 -- 2001
323 -- 11 -- 2001
424 -- 12 -- 2001
513 -- 1 -- 2002
666 -- 2 -- 2002
1096 -- 3 -- 2002
1401 -- 4 -- 2002
1700 -- 5 -- 2002
1423 -- 6 -- 2002
1642 -- 7 -- 2002
1526 -- 8 -- 2002
1593 -- 9 -- 2002
1465 -- 10 -- 2002
1403 -- 11 -- 2002
1781 -- 12 -- 2002
1941 -- 1 -- 2003
1926 -- 2 -- 2003
1948 -- 3 -- 2003
2122 -- 4 -- 2003
2184 -- 5 -- 2003
2014 -- 6 -- 2003
2151 -- 7 -- 2003
1950 -- 8 -- 2003
2129 -- 9 -- 2003
2007 -- 10 -- 2003
1304 -- 11 -- 2003
1619 -- 12 -- 2003
1250 -- 1 --2004
1061 -- 2 -- 2004
854 -- 3 -- 2004
603 -- 4 -- 2004
530 -- 5 -- 2004
518 -- 6 -- 2004
407 -- 7 -- 2004
684 -- 8 -- 2004
54 -- 9 --2004

Remember this is split between 2 BEC's

I am attching an XL file with BREAKDOWN OF RIR AND NON-RIR CASES by
year-month-state

So you guys can do all the permutations yourself, by using filters


Points to be considered before you guys get all depressed and all

* This data is from Early Sep 2004
* 8 months have passed and San Francisco DOL (as I know) has processed all the cases (except the remand back to state) upto April 2002 PD.
* Similarly other DOLs would have also processed cases
* What I think is the numbers after the huge bump at 4/2001 (6126 cases) are a little inflated till May 2002.
* If you look at the excel spreadsheet you will see that CA DOL has the majority of cases for each month

Overall I think, there are lesser number of cases pending in BEC after April 2001 than is indicated in the data. That would explain the discrepancy between the 55,000 number quoted by BECs against the 69367 that I find in the database.



[

You would also need to remove NY DOL cases from this list as they have not been transferred to BRCs. Other DOLs as well, Boston DOL, Seattle DOL, Denver DOL.

 

[MD2001]

ZB,

Nice work. DOL should have taken you as volunteer for porting the old database to new database (we might have not landed in this stupidity of entering the cases manually).

anyway my point is, can you post the info like this in Philly BPC thread as well OR do we need really two threads. Most of us post/read both the threads always.

 

[diamond202]

Could be a Y2K problem

Cases in 1900 and 1903 could be due to Y2K problem! I don't think you should discard them.

*202
[
QUOTE=Zany_Brainy]Found 38 cases amongst regional cases which were filed in March/April 1903 can you believe that....!!!! (All are TX regional cases)

Anyway, eliminating them

Thanks[/QUOTE]

 

[GCCovet]

Cases in 1900 and 1903 could be due to Y2K problem! I don't think you should discard them.

*202
[
QUOTE=Zany_Brainy]Found 38 cases amongst regional cases which were filed in March/April 1903 can you believe that....!!!! (All are TX regional cases)

Anyway, eliminating them

Thanks

[/QUOTE]

Or they might be dataentry errors!

 

[usaratb]

PD 12/01/2003
RD 11/14/2004

1st Love Letter (45 Day letter) Received on FEB MID -- Required Evidance docs


2nd Love Letter (45 Day letter) Received on APRIL 1st-- Continue or withdraw

 

[Whyallthis]

Hi
This message is for ZB, maan you have done phenomenal work by providing all this information and I really appreciate it.
Now from what you have provided combining it with Icarus and others, it looks sensible that if it goes as we see, RIR regional DOL cases should be clear with in the period of 8-9 months(I am talking about only in Dallas BEC).
As my PD is in 2003 it will take them somewhere around 4-5 months or may be 6 months for that.
And considering BEC goal clearing backlog in 24 months it looks on time.

 

[Kanjoos]

Zany brainy- Would like to trust your analysis, but....

Zany...

I still think there are errors in the analysis, You are pushing everything to SWA for example 'Remand Issued to State','Remand Issued to Employer'. Although the cases goes to State, but it still is in RIR queue, its just an RFE. So please run query including these 2 conditions and then come up with the numbers.

Thanks for the good work, appreciate it. And we need to find out members who have Apr 2001 - Dec 2001 who have filed in RIR or NON-RIR, coz we need to know how the approval process is working. Iam sure, we will start seeing some approval letters in MAY, as I said, its taking 30-50 days to just send letters of approval after being approved.

 

[fastergcwanted]

Don't want to spoil the party but I do no think it has been confirmed yet if regional cases are going to be processed first...it would be totally unfair to all those 2001/2002/2003 SWA cases who have been waiting for a long time. Let's wait till DOL comes out with some kind of formula for forming their queues...Too early yet!!!!

Let's hope the system is fair and QUICK...and all or us see our cases approved in very near future.

 

[sravu]

Ainy,
All the analysis you did was superb, but i think it is per RD at DOL, is there any way we can get the split up based on PD for all pending RIR cases? That will be really helpful for people to assess their probable approval dates with 90/day assumption.
Thanks
Sravu

 

[gp111]

Don't want to spoil the party but I do no think it has been confirmed yet if regional cases are going to be processed first...it would be totally unfair to all those 2001/2002/2003 SWA cases who have been waiting for a long time. Let's wait till DOL comes out with some kind of formula for forming their queues...Too early yet!!!!

Let's hope the system is fair and QUICK...and all or us see our cases approved in very near future.

You are right fastergcwanted.. The system should not be unfair BUT... If you take a look in to database, MOST regional Cases are Actually Filed in 2000,2001,2002 & 2003.. So Its not a bad Idea Start approving regional cases & Adjust the Processing Queue with FIFO whenever SWA cases entered in to the system, rather then waiting for all cases to be entered & then start the process. Also Number of SWA cases with PD 2001/2002 is smaller then Regional Cases with PD 2001/2002 So Adjustment of Queue should not be much difficult or unfair..

 

[gp111]

RIR Case Breakdown by month:

Cases--Month--Year
1 -- 1 -- 1900
21 -- 3 -- 1903
5 -- 4 -- 1903
Overall I think, there are lesser number of cases pending in BEC after April 2001 than is indicated in the data. That would explain the discrepancy between the 55,000 number quoted by BECs against the 69367 that I find in the database.



[

Excellent Analysis..

Question:

Are this case numbers by RD or PD ? I mean did you use State Receive Date or RO Received Date ?

Small Suggestion:

For Accurate number of Cases at BEC, Remove all CA cases With RD of APR-2003 & before that, as they will get processed at SF DOL.

 

[fastergcwanted]

You are right fastergcwanted.. The system should not be unfair BUT... If you take a look in to database, MOST regional Cases are Actually Filed in 2000,2001,2002 & 2003.. So Its not a bad Idea Start approving regional cases & Adjust the Processing Queue with FIFO whenever SWA cases entered in to the system, rather then waiting for all cases to be entered & then start the process. Also Number of SWA cases with PD 2001/2002 is smaller then Regional Cases with PD 2001/2002 So Adjustment of Queue should not be much difficult or unfair..

Sure, don't have problem with processing starting with regional cases. What's not fair as some posts indicated, is processing all 55000 regional cases (including even some 2004 ones ) before starting SWA cases.

 

[highhopes2]

How long after the 45 day letter

3 Questions -

1. Are there any preliminary estimates regarding how long the labor process will take after one gets the 45 day letter brom the Backlog Reduction Centers ?

2. Do the PDs on postings refer to the priority dates from the SWA or some other priority date?

3. Now that PERM is up and running, what are the chances that someone applies tomorrow and gets the approval in a couple of months while someone who has applied thru RIR more than a year ago is left hanging indefinitely??

 

[new2imm]

Sometimes I wonder how do working people justify spending hours and hours on these immigration forums whereas the achivement is a big 0.

 

[spidey]

Sure, don't have problem with processing starting with regional cases. What's not fair as some posts indicated, is processing all 55000 regional cases (including even some 2004 ones ) before starting SWA cases.

Gentlemen (or Ladies if that applies to you) -

When has it mattered to the DOL what you think is fair or not.
If it had, would we be in this mess to begin with?

Although I agree 100% with what has been exchanged between you two....
Frankly, at this point for most of us it's just from one endless wait to another... remember EB3 retrogression ?

 

[Zany_Brainy]

Here is the rule..

Zany...

I still think there are errors in the analysis, You are pushing everything to SWA for example 'Remand Issued to State','Remand Issued to Employer'. Although the cases goes to State, but it still is in RIR queue, its just an RFE. So please run query including these 2 conditions and then come up with the numbers.

Thanks for the good work, appreciate it. And we need to find out members who have Apr 2001 - Dec 2001 who have filed in RIR or NON-RIR, coz we need to know how the approval process is working. Iam sure, we will start seeing some approval letters in MAY, as I said, its taking 30-50 days to just send letters of approval after being approved.

All these cases are in the SWA queue and are not in the Regional queue anymore..

Look at validation, BEC themselves released the 55,000 number.

Also, when I asked my friends friend in Philly BEC, he said that the only status we should consider is 'Recieved Regional Office' as those are the cases which have never been touched and all other cases are not to be considered in the queue numbers.

Thx
ZB

P.S. I will appreciate any help I can get in getting information on how many cases we can take off from this list based on what the regional DOLs have processed since Sep 2004. I know CA has processed till April 2002 (PD) cases.

Also, when I say we are the the 'April 2001' position in the queue, I am basing that off the fact that ICARUS told us that they were at teh 04/30 date for the last 3 weeks.. (makes sense, it has 6000+ cases)

 

[Zany_Brainy]

Ok

Excellent Analysis..

Question:

Are this case numbers by RD or PD ? I mean did you use State Receive Date or RO Received Date ?

Small Suggestion:

For Accurate number of Cases at BEC, Remove all CA cases With RD of APR-2003 & before that, as they will get processed at SF DOL.

These numbers are by PD (state_office_recd_date)
I will do what you suggested and post an update today (remove all cases with Apr 2003 RD and before for CA)

Can anyone tell me where the other DOLs are at the moment on RD then I can take those off too...

Thanks
ZB

 

[GotGC??]

Excellent Analysis but still questions...

Great work, ZB!!

I still cannot understand one thing: RIR cases filed in April 2001 (e.g., in CA but applies equally to other states as well). I thought SF DOL was/is processing cases with RD <= Apr 2003. In that case SF DOL would have already handled (processed, approved, denied) the ~2138 cases with PD April 2001??

Why will these and similar cases need to go to BEC??

Excellent Analysis..

Question:

Are this case numbers by RD or PD ? I mean did you use State Receive Date or RO Received Date ?
QUOTE]

 

[Zany_Brainy]

This analysis is based on PD

Ainy,
All the analysis you did was superb, but i think it is per RD at DOL, is there any way we can get the split up based on PD for all pending RIR cases? That will be really helpful for people to assess their probable approval dates with 90/day assumption.
Thanks
Sravu

Seems like you have not seen the database, all of my analysis is by PD.

Thanks