Outlook for FY2007

[xxx123]

EB3 ROW to EB3 India

I meant april 30, 2001.

People who are subject to 245i take a long time for their cases to be approved. They get sent to local office for interview; fingerprints, expire, etc.

According to the visa bulletin once demand is more then supply then they will take the earliest priority date of the 2801 case and use that as the posted date.

Just repeating previous question to UN

My point is if its not working horizontally(ROW to other retrogressed countries in same category)in case of EB2,why would it work in case of EB3 later on?

Is is because EB3 retrogressed countries has more pending cases than EB2 countries?

Let me know

Thanks
xxx123

 

[santa4u]

UN - If you are from EB3 ROW - don't criticize India!

UN,

If you are from EB3 ROW - you should abstain from criticizing India for using up visa numbers... I agree with can_card, that there is very little proof that India used up any more than 131000 allowed due to recapture from FY1999/FY2000....I won't be surprised, if the numbers show that ROW really used more than 140K all each of these last five years or so!

Since USCIS does not really publish 485 approval statistics (except CP stats)...we can never prove either way!

Well, I think it's not for you or any of us to decide ...who received more or who received less....It's just US govt bending laws to suit their needs...What about Schedule A - when EB3 ROW was doomed...they still gave away 50K to them for free...

Bottomline, US Congressman/Senators do what they feel....

Let's not indulge in such activities of pointing fingers at each other...I understand that was not your goal...but one of your comments on India using up quota from ROW in this thread is unwarranted! May be ROW used up some of 131000 - which was specifically opened up for sofware professions by AC21...ROW should be blamed for not sticking to their quota and biting into 131000!

Well, if you wanna take a bite at India - then let me take a bite at you!
Just for fun!

Let's have fun sharing our outlook for FY2007...UN, I appreciate your valuable insights...

India eb3 went over their 7% limit and then caused all of eb3 to go unavailable. The 7% is a hard cap; country cannot go over that limit unless the supply is greater then the demand for the other countries.. This is the part that broke the law. This is not gray.

Sure, I belong to eb3 row. I could care less about the greencard. I've just waited long enough that I might as well just see the process through.

 

[gcstrat]

Demand v/s supply

UN

From your post (emphasis mine):


The AC21 removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available.
In recent years, the application of the rules outlined in AC21 has allowed countries such as China – mainland born, India, and the Philippines to utilize large amounts of employment numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
During FY-2006, due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap.

=================

FOR FY-2007, except for Eb3, the situation is different. USCIS cannot ignore AC-21.
And they have to adhere to the 28.6% limit per category.

My theory, in FY-2006, there was very little spillover. I await more detailed numbers to test my theory.

Regards
GCStrat

 

[fsheikh]

UN / Gurus
Any indications on how the EB3 ROW for all other countries would move in 07? All I see in this thread is focus only on India.....!!!


EB-3 PD 12/18/2003
P-051xx-xxxxx
Still waiting for LC to be approved.....

 

[jambalakadi1]

http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/msraug06/BENEFIT.HTM


please look at june 2006 immigration statistics..

New I-485 receipts 60K, EAD recepits: 143K

Pending I-485 650K, Pending EAD 272K

Interesting thing here is, these pending EAD numbers are rotating through out the year.

Because of these backlogs atleast 80% of I-485 pending filers apply of EAD and AP each year i.e 80% of 650K is 520K.. lets say 500K

SO revenue is (500,000 * $180) for EAD renewal+ (500,000*$375) for AP
= 270 Millions..

Looks like a very profitable business for USCIS and govt. No wonder why USCIS breaks/bends laws for people to apply more I-485's but makes more money in the name of retrogression while we wonder how this immigration quota and retrogression formula works.

 

[can_card]

Therefore, if overall demand is greater then supply then 7% limit applies. India eb1, eb2, eb3 cannot go over 7% even if there is visas available in eb1, eb2, eb3 for ROW. Only row can get unused visas from higher categories until the total demand for visas is less then supply.

Looks like I and many of us misinterpreted AC21. There doesn't appear to ever have been a provision where a retrogressed country in eb1 can take ROW visas in eb1 if ROW is retrogressed in a lower category.,

I really appreciate your cleverness in mis-interpreting the law.

The AC21 law, says A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remaindeIf the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under r of the calendar quarter.

The law excuslivly says each paragraphs in EB catagories. If they want to generalize all EB catagory put-togeter, they might have drafted in different wordings. Any one thinking in right logic will not interpret the way you interpreted. As per your logic, there is no meaning of EB preferences. As per yourt logic, if DOS cannot issue visa to a restraunt cook from EB3-ROW due to retrogression then DOS will not issue visa to EB1-Indian, even if he won nobel prize " your quote: There doesn't appear to ever have been a provision where a retrogressed country in eb1 can take ROW visas in eb1 if ROW is retrogressed in a lower category".

 

[WellWisher007]

the word 'OR'

The word 'OR' within the sentence makes the word 'total' apply individually for each paragraph, according to my interpretation. So, can_card is right, according to me.

Don't you think "total" has different meaning then if it said


paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder If the number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants in each visa category who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under r of the calendar quarter.


Regardless: Looks like DOS is also misinterpreting. There is an e-mail link on comments/questions at the bottom of the visa bulletin. Perhaps someone can send them an e-mail and tell them they are doing it wrong and they should have their lawyers look at it. (i know this sounds sarcastic but that is what they are doing and if they have the kahunas to specifically state it in a visa bulletin; then they have a much greater tolerance of risk/lawsuits then I could ever have imagined).

 

[WellWisher007]

UN, I agree with your analysis. However you missed fsheikh's main question in his posting completely.

"Any indications on how the EB3 ROW for all other countries would move in 07?"

Any insights?

When I first got on these boards, I could not understand what the urgency was. Some of the postings just seemed to be "cribbing" (another word I learned from my AP friends.

However, immigration to me has reinforced many stereotypes.

Indians=Information technology
Koreans=dry cleaners
Pakistanis=gas station and convenience stores
Chinese - Way over qualified for the most part but willing to take less due to immigration purposes.

Of all the professions - the IT Consulants have the most to gain by filing 485 and getting greencard as fast as possible. Main reason is not that they want to change careers but they really act as self employed and their employer takes a cut for running their payroll and keeping them legal. There is family separation because one spouse is working in one state and another spouse working in another due to the transient nature of Computer consulting. The desire to get out of the travel component and get a permanent job or to become self employed and keep all their billings is what gives this urgency. The computer consultants have the most to gain financially by being able to get their greencard the fastest or to be able to file the 485.

Due to the above paragraph is why the discussion is so focused on India. Also, most of the active posters are Indian nationals. Although Chines, ROW people also feel urgency in getting greencard; the people with most to gain is the computer consultants.

My fellow friends, I seek your comments on this.

 

[WellWisher007]

what's AP

AP = Andhra Pradesh?
AP = Advance Parole?

pardon my ignorance, if it is a very obvious acronym and I did not get it.

When I first got on these boards, I could not understand what the urgency was. Some of the postings just seemed to be "cribbing" (another word I learned from my AP friends.

However, immigration to me has reinforced many stereotypes.

Indians=Information technology
Koreans=dry cleaners
Pakistanis=gas station and convenience stores
Chinese - Way over qualified for the most part but willing to take less due to immigration purposes.

Of all the professions - the IT Consulants have the most to gain by filing 485 and getting greencard as fast as possible. Main reason is not that they want to change careers but they really act as self employed and their employer takes a cut for running their payroll and keeping them legal. There is family separation because one spouse is working in one state and another spouse working in another due to the transient nature of Computer consulting. The desire to get out of the travel component and get a permanent job or to become self employed and keep all their billings is what gives this urgency. The computer consultants have the most to gain financially by being able to get their greencard the fastest or to be able to file the 485.

Due to the above paragraph is why the discussion is so focused on India. Also, most of the active posters are Indian nationals. Although Chines, ROW people also feel urgency in getting greencard; the people with most to gain is the computer consultants.

My fellow friends, I seek your comments on this.

 

[WellWisher007]

usage of word 'total' and 'or'

And if you read the complete section in one go, logically speaking, the interpretation of the word 'total' does apply to individual paragraphs 1,2,3,4 or 5 and not to total of paragraphs 1,2,3,4 and 5

So, according to my understanding of this section of the law, EB1 ROW should flow through to retrogressed EB1 before flowing to EB2 ROW; Similarly EB2 ROW should flow through to retogressed EB2 before flowing to EB3 ROW.

The word 'OR' within the sentence makes the word 'total' apply individually for each paragraph, according to my interpretation. So, can_card is right, according to me.

 

[desi3933]

eb1 RoW should flow to eb2 RoW and eb3 RoW

I agree with this observation -- As long as eb3 RoW is retrogressed, the unused visas from eb1, eb2 RoW will go to eb3.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and this ain't legal advice, its just my opinion.
-----------------------------------------
PD: Jan 2000
LC: Mar 2000
I-140 EB3: Jun 2000
I-140 EB2: Oct 2000
I-485: Jul 2000
I-485 AD: May 2002

 

[WellWisher007]

Please provide facts supporting your observation

What is the basis of your observation?

I agree with this observation -- As long as eb3 RoW is retrogressed, the unused visas from eb1, eb2 RoW will go to eb3.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and this ain't legal advice, its just my opinion.
-----------------------------------------
PD: Jan 2000
LC: Mar 2000
I-140 EB3: Jun 2000
I-140 EB2: Oct 2000
I-485: Jul 2000
I-485 AD: May 2002

 

[desi3933]

Here is the link

What is the basis of your observation?

http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dl...20/slb-1312?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and this ain't legal advice, its just my opinion.
-----------------------------------------
PD: Jan 2000
LC: Mar 2000
I-140 EB3: Jun 2000
I-140 EB2: Oct 2000
I-485: Jul 2000
I-485 AD: May 2002

 

[santa4u]

My guess is EB3ROW should move fast and hopefully be current in 1-2 years for sure...
I am predicting movement of 3 months for each month....(Just my pure guess!) or faster...

The biggest supporting factor for EB3 ROW is (EB2 ROW/EB1 ROW) staying current....as long as they stay current...EB3 ROW can only accerate towards the "Current" status

If EB3-ROW becomes current,
What about EB3-OW (ROW) Category? They will temporarily benefit but they have a hard cap of 10k

But it EB3 ROW becomes current - the hope of getting green card in 6 months...man lot of attorneys are gonna come up with ways to abuse the system and use it! So, my personal take EB3 ROW may never become current - in the long term!

 

[can_card]

http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dl...20/slb-1312?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and this ain't legal advice, its just my opinion.
-----------------------------------------
PD: Jan 2000
LC: Mar 2000
I-140 EB3: Jun 2000
I-140 EB2: Oct 2000
I-485: Jul 2000
I-485 AD: May 2002

You guys smartly interpreting. If you guys right, why DOS made EB1 current for india for the september 2006, while EB3-ROW severly retrogressed, for the same period? I defintly confirm that EB1-India might have consumed 7% of the quota very well before september 2006. As per your logic, EB1 & EB2 India never become current or consume more than 7% as long as EB3-ROW retrogressed. It can not be possible.

Since all you guys belong to EB3 you wish your interpretation should be right, it is not the case, however. I am sorry for that.

 

[santa4u]

You guys smartly interpreting. If you guys right, why DOS made EB1 current for india for the september 2006, while EB3-ROW severly retrogressed, for the same period? I defintly confirm that EB1-India might have consumed 7% of the quota very well before september 2006. As per your logic, EB1 & EB2 India never become current or consume more than 7% as long as EB3-ROW retrogressed. It can not be possible.

Since all you guys belong to EB3 you wish your interpretation should be right, it is not the case, however. I am sorry for that.

EB1-India - I think, is a case of annual limits not getting reached end of the fiscal year...and hence, they were forced to open it up....for Sept 2006...

I firmly beleive that spillover is happening from EB1 ROW/EB2 ROW to EB3 ROW...other wise how can you explain EB2 ROW staying current? It's obviously benefiting from EB1 ROW spillover! Similarly, why is EB3 ROW moving so fast, past April 01...benefiting from spillover of EB2 ROW/EB1 ROW - there is no other explanation...

If the case were of - EB1-India getting spillover from EB1-ROW....
the same would be true for EB2-India : it should get spillover from EB2-ROW...but the dates for EB2-India are so far retrogressed 4 years almost! Obviously EB2-India is not getting spillover...so from the same reasoning,
EB1-India is not getting spillover....from EB1-ROW

Unfortunately, AC21 is not applicable to individual Employement Preference buckets (EB1 or EB2 or EB3)...(How I wish it were so!) But, unfortunately, it is applicable to the entire bucket of employment category!


AC21 says,
Section 104(a) of the AC-21 Act provides that if, on a quarterly basis, the number of visas available in all the employment-based preferences exceeds the number of immigrants qualified to receive the visas, then the overflow of visas may be allocated without regard to per-country ceilings.


And the other thing, AC21 says clearly - if supply exceeds demand...
then everybody is "Current"

AC21 only does one thing...(1) if ROW is current and (2) remaing visa numbers suplly is more than what is being demanded by retrogressed countries combined....then no more country limits...and all categories will stay "Current" then no more

(1) may happen soon... but (2) combined demand from retrogressed countries exceeding the remaining visa numbers - will take a long time to happen!

 

[desi3933]

>> If you guys right, why DOS made EB1 current for india for the september 2006, while EB3-ROW severly retrogressed, for the same period?

It is adjusted every quarter for unused numbers.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and this ain't legal advice, its just my opinion.
-----------------------------------------
PD: Jan 2000
LC: Mar 2000
I-140 EB3: Jun 2000
I-140 EB2: Oct 2000
I-485: Jul 2000
I-485 AD: May 2002

 

[santa4u]

EB1-India - I think, is a case of annual limits not getting reached end of the fiscal year...and hence, they were forced to open it up....for Sept 2006...

and the fact that it didn't reach the cap for FY2006...obviously means that it is estimating the same for FY2007...and hence it kept it current for Oct 2006

 

[desi3933]

what a logic

can_card wrote:
>> Since all you guys belong to EB3 you wish your interpretation should be right, it is not the case, however. I am sorry for that.

what a logic. Wonderful.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and this ain't legal advice, its just my opinion.
-----------------------------------------
PD: Jan 2000
LC: Mar 2000
I-140 EB3: Jun 2000
I-140 EB2: Oct 2000
I-485: Jul 2000
I-485 AD: May 2002

 

[can_card]

EB1-India - I think, is a case of annual limits not getting reached end of the fiscal year...and hence, they were forced to open it up....for Sept 2006...

and the fact that it didn't reach the cap for FY2006...obviously means that it is estimating the same for FY2007...and hence it kept it current for Oct 2006

What you mean by annual limit? All you arguing that, India EB1 can not take any spill over (ie more than 7%) from EB1-ROW if EB3-ROW is retrogressed?

Then same logic will be true to EB2. India EB2 can not take any spill over (ie more than 7%) from EB2-ROW if EB3-ROW is retrogressed?


Then how come for last two months of FY 2006 (Aug, sep 2006), EB1-India become "current" allowing all EB1 Indians to file 485 at the same time EB2-India become "unavailable"? If you think India EB1 has not consumed at least 7% in the first 10 months, I cannot belive.

It clearly indicates DOS has two different stargy for EB1 and EB2. I.e victimizing EB2 Indians to clear backlog in EB3-ROW.

In both cases EB1 and EB2 ROW was current through entire full year.