latest development

Wait, wait, wait.
Isn't the New Delhi website the ones that posted totally out of logic dates back in Nov 2005 ? I remember that New Delhi posted incorrect dates. Unfortunately we cannot trust that one.
 
akela said:
What optimism you guys are talking about looking at this website report (if true). It is a disaster from Indian point of view.

Lets see, where as we were expecting that the dates would move significantly for India in EB-1 and EB-2 and less significantly in EB-3 (based on Oh-law website), it has not moved at all for EB-1 and EB-2 and managed to move by 3 months and 22 days for EB-3. If this is true, the only conclusion I have is, USCIS is not doing any math to predict the dates, it's plain and simple using a crystal ball (that too not so perfect ball). I guess I should now stop using logic or math in trying to figure the backlog, I guess USCIS is not using it either.

rgds,
Click to expand...


How can you ever think about that those idiots use math and logic? Did they ever do anything remotely resemble intellegence? You must haven been playing Beethoven to cows.
 
I am really surprised how DOS work. Kindly read the para below from their remarks:
Third: I had been concerned that the amount of 245(i) filings during March/April 2001 would result in a large concentration of demand, and limit movement of the cut-off date. So far this has not been the case, and it may be that such cases (if they exist in large numbers) are still in the DOL backlog.

Looks like they dont have any figures from anywhere and they are just working on speculation. This will result in all visa numbers unused.
Professional incompetency exists a lot in there. In fact they are professionally bankrupt and idiot guys. I am expecting an apology from them.
 
There is no logic here .. its to much to expect

Guys and Gals,

Is it surprising that there is no hard evidence to back up the reasoning for this retrogression? I think not.

Here is what I think the reasons are for this retrogression -

1. Pure speculation from DOS and USCIS on the number of 245i cases and fear of huge backlogs because of these. They do not have any hard numbers on the number of 245i cases. Just to cover their a**, they threw the dates back by 5-6 years.

2. The DOS and USCIS realized that over the past few years (especially 04), the service centers went on an approval ramage with no regard for RD/ND. Because the PDs for everything was current, thousands upon thousdands of cases with PDs in 03 and even 04 got approved before the thousands from 02 and before. They realized this in 05 and with PERM pumping in more and more recent PD cases, the only way out for them was to freeze the approval of newer PDs by retrogressing the dates by several years. This way they are ensuring that cases are approved in a sequential manner. Although this is a good move, this sounds more like digging a hole for oneself and then getting out of it by implementing drastic measures. Had the USCIS approved cases in a proper sequential manner to begin with, this situation would have never occured.

3. Finally, I believe that the USCIS really wanted to meet the 6 month approval time by Sept 2006 that Bush promised in his first year. By retrogressing the PDs, they are again covering their a** by claiming that they can approve cases in 6 months if the PD is current but since there is a shortage of visa numbers, they can't meet that deadline. So 245i cases are being conveniently used as an excuse for incompetence.

Maybe I am being to cynical but I have lost faith in this screwed up system. My case has been abused even before retrogression. Whatever be the reasons for this retrogression, we are the ones who are suffering. The government and the USCIS is playing with our lives. The sad part is that no one really cares about this.

regards,

saras76
 
Make Sence

saras76 said:
Guys and Gals,

Is it surprising that there is no hard evidence to back up the reasoning for this retrogression? I think not.

Here is what I think the reasons are for this retrogression -

1. Pure speculation from DOS and USCIS on the number of 245i cases and fear of huge backlogs because of these. They do not have any hard numbers on the number of 245i cases. Just to cover their a**, they threw the dates back by 5-6 years.

2. The DOS and USCIS realized that over the past few years (especially 04), the service centers went on an approval ramage with no regard for RD/ND. Because the PDs for everything was current, thousands upon thousdands of cases with PDs in 03 and even 04 got approved before the thousands from 02 and before. They realized this in 05 and with PERM pumping in more and more recent PD cases, the only way out for them was to freeze the approval of newer PDs by retrogressing the dates by several years. This way they are ensuring that cases are approved in a sequential manner. Although this is a good move, this sounds more like digging a hole for oneself and then getting out of it by implementing drastic measures. Had the USCIS approved cases in a proper sequential manner to begin with, this situation would have never occured.

3. Finally, I believe that the USCIS really wanted to meet the 6 month approval time by Sept 2006 that Bush promised in his first year. By retrogressing the PDs, they are again covering their a** by claiming that they can approve cases in 6 months if the PD is current but since there is a shortage of visa numbers, they can't meet that deadline. So 245i cases are being conveniently used as an excuse for incompetence.

Maybe I am being to cynical but I have lost faith in this screwed up system. My case has been abused even before retrogression. Whatever be the reasons for this retrogression, we are the ones who are suffering. The government and the USCIS is playing with our lives. The sad part is that no one really cares about this.

regards,

saras76
Click to expand...
 
New Delhi site been updated

Even if EB3 PD for India has been corrected to Jan 2000, EB3 worldwide cut-off date still shows Current, which remains real doubtful :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top