EB2 retrogression is not true - Expect Big surprise in March visa bulliton.

C

can_card

New Member
We have been under false impression that EB1 is better than EB2, based on number of peoples are applying for it (demand). However it is not true. The reality is, the demand for EB1 visa numbers are higher than EB2. If any one analyze the immigration statistics, the number of EB1 visas issed from year 1999 to 2005 is higher than EB2. In last year alone 66000 EB1 485s were approved compare to 43000 in EB2 and for EB3 it was 122000.

In no single year from 1999 to 2005, the demand for EB2 exceeded about 44000, which is almost equal to the yearly limit. Therefore, the retrogression EB2 class was not justifyable. On top of that about 51,000 visas were recaptured from EB2 alone in the year 1999 and 2000 (AC21-recapture) and these visa numbers were allotted to EB3 and EB1. The EB2-recaptured numbers never issued to the EB2 peoples in the pipeline.

DOS lately realised this fact i.e demand for EB1 is much higher than EB2. Here is the top DOS official statement to AILA.

"Worldwide: Based on the current level of number use in the Employment First and Second preference categories there will be no need to impose a cut-off date for the categories. While the First preference number use is relatively close to my target, the Second preference is significantly below my target which doesn't make a lot of sense. China and India: The same lack of demand comments apply to these First and Second preference cut-offs. This has resulted in the rapid advancement of the China and India cut-offs, which I expect to continue for the next several months."

I do not know how DOS calculating cutoff dates. God only knows. If there is more demand in EB1 compare to EB2, then it should retrogress more compare to EB2. Or the rate of forward movement in cutoff dates for EB2 should be higher than EB1. If they fix this problem or calculation, EB2 cutoff dates should jump atleast by two years, in March Visa bulliton.

To add my point, DOS informed that " DOS does not want to be in a position where there are large amounts of numbers available for use late in the fiscal year, and not enough time to make use of them. But, when/if the USCIS demand does materialize it may be necessary to hold or retrogress (at some point) those dates".

It is already five months over in this year. If they move the visa numbers this much slow, at the end of the year (sep 06), there will be lot of numbers unused and it can not be recaptured, unless congress pass some law like AC21 or REAL ID act.

We will wait for the big surprise atleast in EB2 with in next 10-15 days.
 
The fact that now it also depends on per country demand/limit cannot be overlooked. I was told by my lawyer that china has more EB1 applicants than INDIA and INDIA has more EB2 applicants than China.
At the end of day these statements will not matter much.
We have wait for next bulletins only.
 
eb1doc said:
The fact that now it also depends on per country demand/limit cannot be overlooked. I was told by my lawyer that china has more EB1 applicants than INDIA and INDIA has more EB2 applicants than China.
At the end of day these statements will not matter much.
We have wait for next bulletins only.
Click to expand...

Per country limit is applicable only if, overall demand is more than supply in particular catagory. If demand is lesser than supply, per country limit does not applicable, as per AC 21 law.

Through out FY 2005, EB1 & EB2 was "current" for IN, CH and ROW. Even then, only 43000 visas were issued in EB2, despite massive backlog reduction by USCIS in approving 485s. A total of 242000 EB-485s approved in 2005 alone, when both EB1 and EB2 was "current" for IN and CH. Still, only 43000 EB2 was approved. Out of this 43000 EB2 visas, India consumed about 17,000 and China 9000.

However, FY 2006 started with heavy/steep retrogression in EB1 and EB2 for IN and CH. With this retrogresson in FY 2006, one can easily assume that howmany EB2 visa numbers might have been issued sofar and howmuch will be left.

My predicition is that only 10-15% of EB2 visas might have been consumed sofar (after five months elapse of FY 2006). The remaining 85% of EB2 visas should be issued before Sep 2006, otherwise it will be unused. With this rate of movement in advancing EB2 cutoff dates, they cannot issue all the visas before end of the FY.
 
Probably by the end of the year when they realize that the EB2 numbers will not be entirely used up they will forward the cut-off dates for both EB2 and EB3 to use up the numbers for the FY2006.
Then in Oct again they will retrogress the dates back to 1998.
neocor
 
can_card said:
The remaining 85% of EB2 visas should be issued before Sep 2006, otherwise it will be unused. With this rate of movement in advancing EB2 cutoff dates, they cannot issue all the visas before end of the FY.
Click to expand...
can_card: Take into account that unused EB2 visas may be added to EB3 category.
 
Streamflow said:
can_card: Take into account that unused EB2 visas may be added to EB3 category.
Click to expand...

Thats worry me too. There has been righ amount of demand for EB2 visas since 1999. There has been enough number of EB2-485s always pending with USCIS to consume the allocated visa numbers per year. If USCIS approve timly the 485s, there will be no retrogression in EB2/EB1 pipeline. It will be big unjustice to EB2 folks waiting in the pipeline for years, and issue very less visa to them and redirect rest of the numbers to EB3.
 
Can card just reading on immigration-law.com posted on 25 jan as per them EB2 demand is very high for most of teh country than EB1

The State Department has just released a report of immigrant visas and I-485 granted in FY 2005 by country and by immigrant category. We are reporting the following 10 countries in EB immigration categories to learn where each of EB category immigrants came from. This 10-country summary may indicate which coutries have more stakes in each of EB visa categories (EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, EB-EW) in the comprehensive immigration reform.
EB-1 EB-2 EB-3 EB3EW Pref. Total Comment

Focus (EB)
country Eb1 Eb2 Eb3
India 6,336 16,687 23,250 149 47,160 3 & 2
China 6,422 9,346 4,761 237 20,928 2 & 1
Mexico 2,932 368 11,844 788 16,676 3
Korea 3,427 1,405 8,316 915 16,167 3 & 1
Phil 777 979 2,911 41 12,723 3
Canada 5,756 1,643 4,544 13 12,329 1 & 3
U.K. 7,204 883 2,636 22 10,946 1
Brazil 1,883 329 6,227 356 9,145 3
Colombia 2,408 339 2,929 140 6,049 3 & 1
Venezuela 3,027 231 1,594 41 4,974 EB-1
 
eb1doc said:
Can card just reading on immigration-law.com posted on 25 jan as per them EB2 demand is very high for most of teh country than EB1
Click to expand...

No. You are wrong. The total EB1 that were approved in 2005 was 66000, however EB2 was 43000 only. See the full report(pdf) released by DOS, particularly last two pages.

If you want to read all the statistics go to

http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/statistics/yearbook/index.htm

From 1999 to 2005 the total demand for EB1 is higher than EB2. My analysis was reported here only after reading all the statistics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
can_card said:
No. You are wrong. The total EB1 that were approved in 2005 was 66000, where us in EB2 it was 43000 only. See the full report(pdf) released by DOS, particularly last two pages.

If you want to read all the statistics go to

http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/statistics/yearbook/index.htm

From 1999 to 2005 the total demand for EB1 is higher than EB2. My analysis was reported here only after reading all the statistics.
Click to expand...

well lets read it this way
The EB2 demand in two major retrogressed countries is more that EB1
 
MrGC2004 said:
well lets read it this way
The EB2 demand in two major retrogressed countries is more that EB1
Click to expand...
You are right. However, except India and China there is no demand for EB2 from any other nations. Whatever both countries consumes in EB2 catagory, the total demand remains almost with in annual limit. Therefore imposing the retrogression for these two contries based on the country limit is not applicable/justifyable as per AC21 law.

However this is not the case in EB1. Apart from IN & CH, most of the countries demands more in EB1. For example, in FY 2005, UK consumed more numbers compare to India. (It surprise me that why DOS did not impose cut off date for UK). In EB1 ROW consumed 53000 visas out of total of 66000 approved. However in EB2 ROW only consumed 17000 out of total of 43000 was approved. This clearly tells that demand for EB1 is more in IN, CH and ROW.

In other words, demand for EB1 is almost uniform in top consuming countries. Therefore imposing the cutoff dates for oversubscribing countries is justifyable. The demand for EB2 is not uniform. There is two big spikes in the curve (IN/CH) and it goes almost to very minimum in other countries. As total demand in EB2 is less/equal to the annual limit imposing cut off dates for IN and CH is not justifyable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If we think about a lot of EB2 are still stuck in labor then it's no surprise of less approvals of EB2 compared to EB1 last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top