Dallas Backlog Elimination Center Tracking

45-day notice received

Lawyer Just sent an email. I got my 45-day receipt notice last week (4/5/05)
Interstingly, my lawyer refuses to give me my new backlog receipt number. Giving me some bull crap reason.
Also, my case has gone to Phillie. Even though I am from CA. Has anyone's case from CA gone to philli.

Details:
PD: 10/2002
RD: 2/2004
45-day notice: 4/5/2005 -- Sent to PHilli !!



duv_sree said:
My CASE info:

State: CA
EB2, RIR

Filed on 10/2002
Transferred to DOL on 09/2003 (EDD receipt in on 02/2004)

From the info on this board, people who have filed way after me have
got their 45-day notice.

I am beginning to fear that my case is lost. MY lawyers are not very helpful.
Can I send the Dallas BRC an email at status@DAL.DFLC.US to get my case
status.

Any advice would be useful.
Thanks,
sree
Click to expand...
 
245i cases

GotGC?? said:
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??

gp111 said:
Excellent Analysis..

Question:

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

the Cases filed before 30th April 2001 are mostly the 245i cases that the SFO DOL ignored and gave precedence to the cases filed after that date.

The reason they were ignored was that 245i gave deportation protection to all who filed under that act and there was no hurry to get them naturalized

Now they are processing them in the same queue as ours, if they had not, we would be much better off...

thanks
ZB
Click to expand...
 
ZB,

if I remembered right, you should use Local Received date as PD at least for Dallas Region (Region 6) in the new DOL database. state received date was NOT the priority date for Old Dallas DOL.

Zany_Brainy said:
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
Click to expand...
 
Aha!

One keeps learning new things everyday :) Thanks ZB!

So that means the numbers in your XLS - after ignoring the cases that may have already been processed by DOLs (e.g., <= Apr 2003 for CA) - will give the best available estimate of the cases in BEC now. I say 'rough' because I found many cases (~ 30-40% cases known to me) missing in the original access databases from where you took the data.

Zany_Brainy said:
the Cases filed before 30th April 2001 are mostly the 245i cases that the SFO DOL ignored and gave precedence to the cases filed after that date.

The reason they were ignored was that 245i gave deportation protection to all who filed under that act and there was no hurry to get them naturalized

Now they are processing them in the same queue as ours, if they had not, we would be much better off...

thanks
ZB
Click to expand...
 
To Zany, may be your friend is incorrect.

I said this because, my friends case which is Dec 18, 2003 regional in Chicago was a remand case to employer. His PD is Nov 22 2002 from Michigan. His case number at BEC is D-05005-09XXX.

So definitely, the case remanded to employer or any of those conditions are still in regional queue and not SWA.



Zany_Brainy said:
the Cases filed before 30th April 2001 are mostly the 245i cases that the SFO DOL ignored and gave precedence to the cases filed after that date.

The reason they were ignored was that 245i gave deportation protection to all who filed under that act and there was no hurry to get them naturalized

Now they are processing them in the same queue as ours, if they had not, we would be much better off...

thanks
ZB
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
spidey said:
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 ?
Click to expand...

You are right spidey...DOL doesn't care either way. I am just crossing my fingers and hoping for the best for everyone who is waiting endlessly. Need to see some light at the end of the tunnel..... :D
 
Wrong wrong wrong......
* This data is from Early Sep 2004 ???????????
Then where is my case in the db???? PD 04/07/2004 went to chicago in 10/2004. There are 1000s of cases which were not in DB. Even people in this forum has PD in 2003/2004 and still the cse# not in the DB.


Zany_Brainy said:
RIR Case Breakdown by month:
* 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
Click to expand...
 
s_chicago said:
Wrong wrong wrong......
* This data is from Early Sep 2004 ???????????
Then where is my case in the db???? PD 04/07/2004 went to chicago in 10/2004. There are 1000s of cases which were not in DB. Even people in this forum has PD in 2003/2004 and still the cse# not in the DB.


Zany_Brainy said:
RIR Case Breakdown by month:
* 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
Click to expand...

May be because, your case went to regional in 10/04 (Oct o4) and the data is of September 04. I mean, as your case did not go to Regional before 10/04, it was still sitting at SWA or was considered 'SWA' case.
I may be wrong.
Click to expand...
 
s_chicago said:
Wrong wrong wrong......
* This data is from Early Sep 2004 ???????????
Then where is my case in the db???? PD 04/07/2004 went to chicago in 10/2004. There are 1000s of cases which were not in DB. Even people in this forum has PD in 2003/2004 and still the cse# not in the DB.


Zany_Brainy said:
RIR Case Breakdown by month:
* 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
Click to expand...

Guru's
Which queue will i be in.
My RIR PD is Nov 03 (CA)
My case was shipped out of CA SWA in late sep. Went to SFDOL, but did not receive a confirmation from them (only sent out confirmation from CA SWA)
My case was entered in the BRC database in dallas in mid nov. Received and responeded to 45 day letter in early feb.
I was thinking mine is in Regional Queue, as it was shipped out of SFDOL to BRC. Any comments appreciated.
--MC
Click to expand...
 
s_chicago said:
Wrong wrong wrong......
* This data is from Early Sep 2004 ???????????
Then where is my case in the db???? PD 04/07/2004 went to chicago in 10/2004. There are 1000s of cases which were not in DB. Even people in this forum has PD in 2003/2004 and still the cse# not in the DB.
Click to expand...

Your Case is not in Database because it went to Regional In OCT-2004 while this database is updated for Cases which reached to Regional before Sept-04
 
question for ZB

Zany_Brainy said:
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
Click to expand...

ZB,

Thanks for the analysis!

My brain is not functioning properly right now.…. Just need to confirm that if these numbers are for the cases that make Regional Office.

Or

If this is included the SWA cases that “'Recieved Regional Office' as those are the cases which have never been touched” ? And if the numbers is included SWA cases that have never been touched, then I would like to know where is my case? SWA: Indiana, Priority Date: May 1, 2001, RIR (I didn't see any number for May 1, 2001 from Indiana)

Thank you in advance.
 
The database is certainly not current; also, not all cases in the DB made it to BEC. At least we know that all San Francisco cases with an RD before May 2003 never made it to BEC. I guess ZB's report reflects the worse case scenario not the real BEC situation.

Patience and remember: if it doesn’t break you, it just makes you stronger

CA/RIR
PD: June 2002
RD: May 2003
Transfered to Philly
45D received last March
 
Last edited by a moderator:
my Q#

My RIR, non-IT case was received at Texas state TWC in August 2002 which made it to the Dallas Regional DOL in February 2003. So my PD is 8/2002, all right? Now, according to the monthly break-down on page 112 of this thread/forum, there are 34173 Regional/RIR cases with PD August 2002 or earlier at the BEC. However, according to the monthly break-down on page 114 of this thread/forum, there are "only" 19648 such cases at the BEC. Divide it by 2 to allow for 2 BEC's. I get my Q# = 9824. Divide it by 90 : 110 days or almost 4 months. But when will that 4 month start from? Today, tomorrow, next month, next year, next decade? The possibilities are limitless with the BEC's............
 
DOL Q&A:

http://www.workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/foreign/pdf/perm_faqs_4-6-05.pdf

from immigration-law.com

04/14/2005: PERM Q&A (II) to Spur PERM Filings by Backlog Application Filers

One question which the backlog filers have been anxiously awaiting was the affect of a new PERM filing on the pending cases in the Backlog Processing Centers. Some of them were reluctant to file a new application under the PERM program for fear that their pending applications might be considered automatically withdrawn or denied. However, the release of Q&A II has made clear that unless the PERM filers chose to withdraw by filing of the PERM applications, the pending cases at the Backlog Processing Centers will be processed without being affected by such filing. This policy is thus likely to spur filing of new applications by those whose pre-PERM applications have been pending as these cases may not be affected by the new PERM application regardless of the outcome of the decision of the PERM applications.





Please post your comments on:
can we file for a new application for PERM keeping the pending case at BEC.
From the same employer, same beneficiary and same job?

According to the above from DOL Q&A, it seems they wont correlate the BEC case and PERM case unless you choose to select "convert old case" when filing PERM..

If its true, them it may benefit EB2 filers whose numbers have not retrogresses yet..
 
You are in SWA queue

getinfo said:
ZB,

Thanks for the analysis!

My brain is not functioning properly right now.…. Just need to confirm that if these numbers are for the cases that make Regional Office.

Or

If this is included the SWA cases that “'Recieved Regional Office' as those are the cases which have never been touched” ? And if the numbers is included SWA cases that have never been touched, then I would like to know where is my case? SWA: Indiana, Priority Date: May 1, 2001, RIR (I didn't see any number for May 1, 2001 from Indiana)

Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...

These numbers are cases which were in the regional office before Sep 2004.
If your case had moved to one of the regional before the BEC's were formed, then you are in the regional queue, otherwise you are in the SWA queue.

thx
 
Read the FAQ's the DOL refused to answer the questions of that nature and how come immigration-law.com folks interprit the way they did.


gc_us_k said:
DOL Q&A:

http://www.workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/foreign/pdf/perm_faqs_4-6-05.pdf

from immigration-law.com

04/14/2005: PERM Q&A (II) to Spur PERM Filings by Backlog Application Filers

One question which the backlog filers have been anxiously awaiting was the affect of a new PERM filing on the pending cases in the Backlog Processing Centers. Some of them were reluctant to file a new application under the PERM program for fear that their pending applications might be considered automatically withdrawn or denied. However, the release of Q&A II has made clear that unless the PERM filers chose to withdraw by filing of the PERM applications, the pending cases at the Backlog Processing Centers will be processed without being affected by such filing. This policy is thus likely to spur filing of new applications by those whose pre-PERM applications have been pending as these cases may not be affected by the new PERM application regardless of the outcome of the decision of the PERM applications.





Please post your comments on:
can we file for a new application for PERM keeping the pending case at BEC.
From the same employer, same beneficiary and same job?

According to the above from DOL Q&A, it seems they wont correlate the BEC case and PERM case unless you choose to select "convert old case" when filing PERM..

If its true, them it may benefit EB2 filers whose numbers have not retrogresses yet..
Click to expand...
 
GC_DJ said:
Read the FAQ's the DOL refused to answer the questions of that nature and how come immigration-law.com folks interprit the way they did.
Click to expand...

See this from Murthy.com

=====================================================
Filing under PERM When Non-PERM Case is Pending

The DOL reiterated that they do not like to see a company file multiple labor certification applications for an individual. The DOL would prefer not to see a company file a labor certification application for a Software Engineer if the company has already filed a Programmer Analyst labor certification application for that same beneficiary, for example. The DOL did not directly answer whether a labor certification application filed under PERM for Job B for a beneficiary would affect a pending non-PERM application filed for that same beneficiary for Job A in the same company. Therefore, it is unclear whether this stated preference is simply that, a preference obviously connected with the desire to eliminate extra work for the DOL, or an issue that will legally impact the outcome of the case.
=====================================================

DOL refuses to say anything on this particular issue so all attorneys are just spitting out their assumptions.
 
how about this then?

EB2 Retrogression Expected in FY2006

Mr. Oppenheim indicated that, based on currently available data, he believes the Employment-Based Second Preference (EB2) category for certain members of the professions holding advance degrees or persons of exceptional ability will not likely retrogress for the remainder of the current fiscal year. He does expect retrogression to occur in EB2 for nationals of mainland China and India starting sometime in fiscal year (FY) 2006 (October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006). The predicted EB2 retrogression is not expected until the latter half of FY2006. The affected countries will likely only be India and mainland China, not the Philippines in the EB2 category.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top