Predicted Priority Dates for final quarter of FY2005
- Thread starter rrajendr
- Start date
Once again, I am not in agreement with the views on Murthy's bulletin.
LaborCleared said:hahahaha. Look at this Murthy.com's article now. While I do not have anything against their practice and their bulletin reports, all year long they claimed the use of left over IV numbers can be used by enactment of law and now all of a sudden they took time to explain how the numbers work and also came with nice article saying 101k numbers are expected to be used in final quarter of FY 2005. What a funny article. A TOTAL CONTRADICTING ARTICLE. Where the hell are ethics of reporting??
USCIS had clearly mentioned in their Jan 2005 visa bulletin that 101k numbers are available for use in FY 2005. Atleast looking at that bulletin I thought it is an open secret.
On top of it they say DOS is expected the PD will not move in either direction which I have underlined and made it bold. Well, few days back DOS official had said that to AILA then how the heck they came up with the article to say rolledover 101k numbers will be used in final quarter of FY2005? Do they mean to say that USCIS/CP has enough applications pending with them to eat up all 101k numbers+ 19% of FY 2005 numbers in just 1 final quarter with out moving the PD's beyond the ball park range where they are right now? Do you guys think it is a MILLION DOLLAR question??? Well, I think it is a LIFE WITH GREEN CARD question....
Your thoughts needed please..
------------------------------------
I am not a lawyer. Just a reader of this forum and above are my personal opinons only.
kimmer2003
Registered Users (C)
A question about the allocation
I realize that you are all in the Employment Based category...however, does the allocation of 27% throughout the first 3 quarters of the fiscal year apply to the Family Based Category as well?
I have seen the FB categories stall, and show no movement of Priority Dates in the past.
Thanks
I realize that you are all in the Employment Based category...however, does the allocation of 27% throughout the first 3 quarters of the fiscal year apply to the Family Based Category as well?
I have seen the FB categories stall, and show no movement of Priority Dates in the past.
Thanks
I do agree
My understanding of Visa number usage and recapture is
1. Out of the available visa for a year, each quater is alotted 27%. According to DOS they say for FY2005 , first 3 quarters used them.
I suppose the unused visa of other countries can be used by enacting a law. That is what they are proposing now to use the ones for the years 2001-2004
2. The previoulsy enacted law i.e AC21 recaptured visa's of which only 30000 was used in 2003. The remaining, according to DOS is to be used in 2005
I am confused about this remaining visa usage. are they already started using this or they going to use it in the final quarter?
If they had already started, then we might have to wait until the new law is passed to recapture visa for the year 2001-2004. If the unused Visa's from Ac21 are to be used in the final quarter, then the PD's should move atleast by a year or 2
My understanding of Visa number usage and recapture is
1. Out of the available visa for a year, each quater is alotted 27%. According to DOS they say for FY2005 , first 3 quarters used them.
I suppose the unused visa of other countries can be used by enacting a law. That is what they are proposing now to use the ones for the years 2001-2004
2. The previoulsy enacted law i.e AC21 recaptured visa's of which only 30000 was used in 2003. The remaining, according to DOS is to be used in 2005
I am confused about this remaining visa usage. are they already started using this or they going to use it in the final quarter?
If they had already started, then we might have to wait until the new law is passed to recapture visa for the year 2001-2004. If the unused Visa's from Ac21 are to be used in the final quarter, then the PD's should move atleast by a year or 2
LaborCleared said:hahahaha. Look at this Murthy.com's article now. While I do not have anything against their practice and their bulletin reports, all year long they claimed the use of left over IV numbers can be used by enactment of law and now all of a sudden they took time to explain how the numbers work and also came with nice article saying 101k numbers are expected to be used in final quarter of FY 2005. What a funny article. A TOTAL CONTRADICTING ARTICLE. Where the hell are ethics of reporting??
USCIS had clearly mentioned in their Jan 2005 visa bulletin that 101k numbers are available for use in FY 2005. Atleast looking at that bulletin I thought it is an open secret.
On top of it they say DOS is expected the PD will not move in either direction which I have underlined and made it bold. Well, few days back DOS official had said that to AILA then how the heck they came up with the article to say rolledover 101k numbers will be used in final quarter of FY2005? Do they mean to say that USCIS/CP has enough applications pending with them to eat up all 101k numbers+ 19% of FY 2005 numbers in just 1 final quarter with out moving the PD's beyond the ball park range where they are right now? Do you guys think it is a MILLION DOLLAR question??? Well, I think it is a LIFE WITH GREEN CARD question....
Your thoughts needed please..
------------------------------------
I am not a lawyer. Just a reader of this forum and above are my personal opinons only.
LaborCleared
Registered Users (C)
According to the USCIS Jan 2005 bulletin, they will use the unused IV numbers from AC21 in the final quarter only. They can not use them in first 3 quarters. Any numbers carried over from past years should only be used in final quarter after that particular year's numbers are exhausted only. So I guess they still have those 101k numbers for use in final quarter of FY2005.
______________________________________
I am not an attorney. Just my opinions.
______________________________________
I am not an attorney. Just my opinions.
gc_vsc said:
Are we missing something
LabourCleared,
Thanks for your response. After seeing the jan2005 bulletin, I do agree that the unused visa's will be used in the final quarter. Then why is DOS , according to murthydotcom had mentioned that the PD are not going to move further both ways. Not sure how they work with these numbers.
gc_vsc
LabourCleared,
Thanks for your response. After seeing the jan2005 bulletin, I do agree that the unused visa's will be used in the final quarter. Then why is DOS , according to murthydotcom had mentioned that the PD are not going to move further both ways. Not sure how they work with these numbers.
gc_vsc
LaborCleared said:
LaborCleared
Registered Users (C)
you know what?
All confusion. No CLARITY.
gc_vsc said:
All confusion. No CLARITY.
explorer_inc
Registered Users (C)
It is truly a big confusion! The Jan05 visa bulleting says that the AC21 visa numbers (~101,000) can only be used once the annual limit is reached. That translates in to the fourth quarter of FY2005. However, the murthy bulletin article above says that they can use 27% of all available visa numbers (regular + from past years) in first three quarters. Although, I am sure it is an incorrect statement, according to the statement, DOS has already started using AC21 visa number in FY2005 and only 19% of total visa is available in the final quarter.
Regards, Explorer.
Regards, Explorer.
If DOS is taking into consideration the backlogged cases at DOL according to this article found at http://www.visalaw.com/05feb4/10feb405.html, then we are all doomed. Hope it does not work out that way.
Gc_vsc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seen any of these lately ? Thanks to Section 104(d) of AC 21, unused visa numbers from FY 1999 and 2000 were recaptured of which the Visa Office now tells us there are about 100,000 left.
The DOL tells us there were about 315,000 backlogged cases as of last October, maybe closer to 320,000. An educated guess would jack that up to say 350,000 now. We have all heard about the backlog reduction initiative, right? Suppose for the sake of argument that this campaign wipes out all but 200,000 through the 45 day letters, withdrawals and prayer. After PERM, 150,000 of these babies survive and, given conservative estimates, this amounts to a demand for 3 immigrant visas per labor certification beneficiary. Ignoring new filings, you are looking at an annual appetite for 450,000 employment-based immigrant visas at a time when the annual quota is 110,000. Remember this does not include any green card case for which a labor certification is not required and presumes no additional submissions. EB-3 will soon be backlogged for 9 years; EB-2 will have a 5 year line around the block and, of course, there will be enough EB-1 numbers to use up the annual 40,000 allotment each fiscal year. The recapture pool from past fiscal years will soon be drained bone dry.
Gc_vsc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seen any of these lately ? Thanks to Section 104(d) of AC 21, unused visa numbers from FY 1999 and 2000 were recaptured of which the Visa Office now tells us there are about 100,000 left.
The DOL tells us there were about 315,000 backlogged cases as of last October, maybe closer to 320,000. An educated guess would jack that up to say 350,000 now. We have all heard about the backlog reduction initiative, right? Suppose for the sake of argument that this campaign wipes out all but 200,000 through the 45 day letters, withdrawals and prayer. After PERM, 150,000 of these babies survive and, given conservative estimates, this amounts to a demand for 3 immigrant visas per labor certification beneficiary. Ignoring new filings, you are looking at an annual appetite for 450,000 employment-based immigrant visas at a time when the annual quota is 110,000. Remember this does not include any green card case for which a labor certification is not required and presumes no additional submissions. EB-3 will soon be backlogged for 9 years; EB-2 will have a 5 year line around the block and, of course, there will be enough EB-1 numbers to use up the annual 40,000 allotment each fiscal year. The recapture pool from past fiscal years will soon be drained bone dry.
Eb3 retrogression
check in shusterman.com... bad news again
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html
Future Projections of EB3 Retrogressions ©MurthyDotCom
For the remainder of FY2005, the DOS expects the EB3 numbers not to move much in either one direction or the other. EB1 and EB2 are not expected to retrogress during FY2005, which ends September 30, 2005.
check in shusterman.com... bad news againhttp://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html
Future Projections of EB3 Retrogressions ©MurthyDotCom
For the remainder of FY2005, the DOS expects the EB3 numbers not to move much in either one direction or the other. EB1 and EB2 are not expected to retrogress during FY2005, which ends September 30, 2005.
Last edited by a moderator:
helpwithGC
Registered Users (C)
What's the BAD news from SHUSTERMAN.com??
What's the BAD news from SHUSTERMAN.com??
What's the BAD news from SHUSTERMAN.com??
Friends.. keep up the hopes. I am sure there will be some positive outcome very soon...
appan said:
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html
Future Projections of EB3 Retrogressions ©MurthyDotCom
For the remainder of FY2005, the DOS expects the EB3 numbers not to move much in either one direction or the other. EB1 and EB2 are not expected to retrogress during FY2005, which ends September 30, 2005.
Last edited by a moderator:
Im atleast happy there is some real activity in this thread of thought which i was desparately floating 3 months before
all the points said above are valid. Dont worry abt murthy.com's views they go by the flow.
In summary my view is
1. They have not started using he 101K pool from AC 21 as they can use that only wehn annual limit is reached which means 4th quarter.
Last time they used this was on the fourth quarter if i remember right (Jul 2001)
2.Even if BEC clears up cases very quick or PERM effect we are not going to face a huge issue atleast for next 3-6 months bcos then the 140 for those applications must be cleared as well.
as i said earlier if i read the law clearly and understand it well i think it should become current in July. Worst case October (Q1) when the annual quota cycle refreshes.
We have only 45 days to go for the Q4 bulletin
Keep the Hopes up
/S
all the points said above are valid. Dont worry abt murthy.com's views they go by the flow.
In summary my view is
1. They have not started using he 101K pool from AC 21 as they can use that only wehn annual limit is reached which means 4th quarter.
Last time they used this was on the fourth quarter if i remember right (Jul 2001)
2.Even if BEC clears up cases very quick or PERM effect we are not going to face a huge issue atleast for next 3-6 months bcos then the 140 for those applications must be cleared as well.
as i said earlier if i read the law clearly and understand it well i think it should become current in July. Worst case October (Q1) when the annual quota cycle refreshes.
We have only 45 days to go for the Q4 bulletin
Keep the Hopes up
/S
You mean PD becomes current in Q4 of 2005 or Q1 of 2006 when they started using unused visas. As BEC clearing and apply 140, visa dates for EB3 might getrogate again. is this you mean? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Ohh my god my our PD is august 2004. I do not have hopes to reach my PD in near future unless congress takes any action.
Ohh my god my our PD is august 2004. I do not have hopes to reach my PD in near future unless congress takes any action.
LaborCleared
Registered Users (C)
A different school of thought
As far as I understand from DOS writeups they used 30K numbers from rolledover 131k in year 2003 but I am not sure if they used any in 2001.
Yes. they have the ability to start using those left over 101k numbers in last quarter of FY 2005 but my question is will they continue to use in 1st quarter of FY 2006 too because according to my understanding from DOS Jan 05 bulletin they can use the rolledover numbers only when annual quota has been exhausted. When you new quota starts on Oct 1, 2005 they are still left with 63% of that year numbers to use in the remaining 3 quarters, so, can they use the rolledover numbers from 101K? If they can not, my guess then is that dates will not move too much forward.
That being said, I am still hopefull that they will move forward.
As far as I understand from DOS writeups they used 30K numbers from rolledover 131k in year 2003 but I am not sure if they used any in 2001.
Yes. they have the ability to start using those left over 101k numbers in last quarter of FY 2005 but my question is will they continue to use in 1st quarter of FY 2006 too because according to my understanding from DOS Jan 05 bulletin they can use the rolledover numbers only when annual quota has been exhausted. When you new quota starts on Oct 1, 2005 they are still left with 63% of that year numbers to use in the remaining 3 quarters, so, can they use the rolledover numbers from 101K? If they can not, my guess then is that dates will not move too much forward.
That being said, I am still hopefull that they will move forward.
r_sada said:
For r_sada:
You mean PD becomes current in Q4 of 2005 or Q1 of 2006 when they started using unused visas. As BEC clearing and apply 140, visa dates for EB3 might getrogate again. is this you mean? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Ohh my god my our PD is august 2004. I do not have hopes to reach my PD in near future unless congress takes any action.
You mean PD becomes current in Q4 of 2005 or Q1 of 2006 when they started using unused visas. As BEC clearing and apply 140, visa dates for EB3 might getrogate again. is this you mean? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Ohh my god my our PD is august 2004. I do not have hopes to reach my PD in near future unless congress takes any action.
kimmer2003
Registered Users (C)
Family Preference Priority Dates
I have posted above, however did not receive a reply. Does anyone know if the FP Visa numbers are broken into percentages as well? Would there be a hope of movement in Q4 for FP 3 (married sons and daughters).
Thanks in advance.
I have posted above, however did not receive a reply. Does anyone know if the FP Visa numbers are broken into percentages as well? Would there be a hope of movement in Q4 for FP 3 (married sons and daughters).
Thanks in advance.
I saw the following at http://www.americanvisas.com/chronicle/winter2005.htm#DepartmentState
(3) Was the visa cut-off for purposes of computing the 27% demand value under INA 202(a)(2) based on the statutory 140,000 (per INA 201(d)(1)(A) or on the total available under paras. 1-5 of INA 202(b)? If the latter, shouldn't this include the temporary AC21 "pool" visas and thus should equal 241,000? If the former, why?
VO: Calculations were based on the total amount of numbers available during FY-2005, which are estimated to be approximately 247,000, including the remaining AC21 numbers. Per AC21 approximately 131,000 numbers were "recaptured" based on unused FY-1999 and FY-2000 Employment-based numbers. During FY-2003 approximately 30,000 were used, and the remaining 101,000 are being utilized during FY-2005. AC21 numbers were not required in the other fiscal years because demand did not exceed the amount of numbers available under the normal annual limit.
_______________________________________________________
As per the above , the AC21 visa'a are included in the yearly 27%. But I cannot believe that they had used it.
gc_vsc
(3) Was the visa cut-off for purposes of computing the 27% demand value under INA 202(a)(2) based on the statutory 140,000 (per INA 201(d)(1)(A) or on the total available under paras. 1-5 of INA 202(b)? If the latter, shouldn't this include the temporary AC21 "pool" visas and thus should equal 241,000? If the former, why?
VO: Calculations were based on the total amount of numbers available during FY-2005, which are estimated to be approximately 247,000, including the remaining AC21 numbers. Per AC21 approximately 131,000 numbers were "recaptured" based on unused FY-1999 and FY-2000 Employment-based numbers. During FY-2003 approximately 30,000 were used, and the remaining 101,000 are being utilized during FY-2005. AC21 numbers were not required in the other fiscal years because demand did not exceed the amount of numbers available under the normal annual limit.
_______________________________________________________
As per the above , the AC21 visa'a are included in the yearly 27%. But I cannot believe that they had used it.
gc_vsc
LaborCleared said:
Unfortunately, the americanvisas article is similar in wording to what Murthy was saying. And the question and answer format presented here sems to suggest quotes from an actual representative which all these websites are reporting. (Note the similarity in wording like "For the remainder of FY05 EB3 should remain pretty much where it is now"). I wish the DOS/VO would make public these so that we can know the authenticity.
If this is to be taken at face value, then why are they enacting the law for recapture of the visas if they are already asuming those visas available while calculating the visa cut off dates? Does not make sense.
Sandeep
If this is to be taken at face value, then why are they enacting the law for recapture of the visas if they are already asuming those visas available while calculating the visa cut off dates? Does not make sense.
Sandeep