Visa Bulletin: October cut-off date, looks bad

Friends,
I would say...please relax my friends....because this whole things looks little fishy to me....because if you look at any of the US embassies in the world they all start with http:// "name of the place".usembassy.gov/.....and the one..... This so called visa bulletin page is directed towards is:

http://usembassy.state.gov/manila/wwwh3227.html

This is pointing to http://usembassy.state.gov/"name of the place"..........
This is highly impossible...........I did couple of tests on the http://usembassy.state.gov website..............

Please you guys try it too………..

Also if you go to the manila US embassy web site from the above mentioned DOS website and than click the immigration VISA PRIORITY DATES....IT TAKES YOU BACK TO THE FOLLWOING:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2616.html


So THE CONCLUSION IS THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG SOMEWHERE AND I WILL WAIT TIL THE WORD IS OFFICIAL OR SOMETHING COMES FROM THE DOS CURRENT BULLETIN WEBSITE.

Praying for all......
 
What does it mean?

What does it mean?

In case the bulletin is true, does it mean that from now onwards, people can't file 140/485 unless the PD is current or they have time till end of September to file. I.E Can an approved EB2 file for 140/485 till the end of Sept since visas are current in Sept bulletin?
 
Something wrong with this or typo from Manila?

CATEGORY ALLX CHIN IND MEXICO PHILS
F1 22-Apr-01 22-Apr-01 22-Apr-01 1-Jan-93 22-May-91
E1 C 1-Jan-00 1-Aug-02 C C
E2 C 1-May-00 1-Nov-99 C C
Please pay attention to these two places-----could be typo:
1. Mexico Family 1 was Jan1, 1983 on September visa bulletin, but will be Jan1, 1993;
2. China EB1 will be 4 months worse than EB2. To me it’s not likely because there are many Chinese NIW, which belongs to EB2. There should not be more Chinese EB1 applicants than EB2.
 
drhnp said:
What does it mean?

In case the bulletin is true, does it mean that from now onwards, people can't file 140/485 unless the PD is current or they have time till end of September to file. I.E Can an approved EB2 file for 140/485 till the end of Sept since visas are current in Sept bulletin?
Click to expand...
Everything you said is correct.
 
Both Manila & travel.state.gov has same source: http://www.w3.org/

pkumar07_02 said:
Friends,
I would say...please relax my friends....because this whole things looks little fishy to me....because if you look at any of the US embassies in the world they all start with http:// "name of the place".usembassy.gov/.....and the one..... This so called visa bulletin page is directed towards is:

http://usembassy.state.gov/manila/wwwh3227.html

This is pointing to http://usembassy.state.gov/"name of the place"..........
This is highly impossible...........I did couple of tests on the http://usembassy.state.gov website..............

Please you guys try it too………..

Also if you go to the manila US embassy web site from the above mentioned DOS website and than click the immigration VISA PRIORITY DATES....IT TAKES YOU BACK TO THE FOLLWOING:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2616.html


So THE CONCLUSION IS THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG SOMEWHERE AND I WILL WAIT TIL THE WORD IS OFFICIAL OR SOMETHING COMES FROM THE DOS CURRENT BULLETIN WEBSITE.

Praying for all......
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What to interpret from this folks:

I went to travel.state.gov and then to the Manila site throgh it. Then I looked for Visa bulletins via this route (Consular & Visa Services-> Immigrant Visa Priority dates -> Current Bulletin). No mention of October Bulletin at all; although Sept's was there.

Keep your fingers crossed!
 
this doesn't speak for EB1 was also greatly retrogressed.

they don't have to keep the FIFO order for EB1.





egg0504 said:
Guys, I think they're using these old dates to make sure that when someone, who's PD is from early 2001, but still in SWA (no recruitment yet), will get his LC approved at the end of 2005, or in 2006, he'll still have a visa number. Using old dates is the only way to deny I-485 filing for PERM and random BEC approvals. They can't control FIFO at the LC level, so they try to do it at I-485. If they do so, they won't process I-485 for anybody at the first months of the new fiscal year, but later they can change the cut-off dates drastically, so they can give visa numbers to to 2001 and maybe 2002 people.
At least I hope that's the plan...
Click to expand...
 
Somethin' is up guys, somethin' is up!

Check this Note: The National Visa Center (NVC) in Portsmouth, New Hampshire forwards immigrant visa cases to the US Embassy in ANYWHERE only when they are about to become current. NVC can be reached at 603-334-0700 to check the status of cases.

ONE OF THE CURRENT MEMBERS CLAIMS THAT HE SENT OUT AN EMAIL TO THE CHENNAI CONSULATE, AND IN RESPONSE HE RECEIVED THIS:

We regret to inform you that the processing date of the employment based (E3 visa category) immigrant visa is no longer current and hence we cannot process your immigrant visa now. The current cut-off-date for E3 visa category for the month of October 2005 is 01JAN1998. Your priority date is 10SEP2002. We regret we are unable to predict when your turn will come. When your turn comes, you will be mailed appointment letter to process your immigrant visas.

Few things should be noted on above email that user claims, he received it when he sent out an inquiry.

1. It says "no longer current": This means the visa was current and now becomes no longer. Please note that in current September bulletin, it’s still unavailable.

2. Why would any consulate put E3 visa category inside parenthesis? And instead of wording EB-3, why it is using E3 visa category?

3. How could the email reply indicates and verifies that the current cut-off date for October 2005? It’s not in Chennai website, and they have no way to verify the prediction of Oct Bulletin.

4. Why are they regretting - giving relief to the members stating UNABLE TO PREDICT.

5. When the time comes, its NVC who mails out the letter, it has nothing to do with the consulate as the member is still in USA.

6. Normally when you sent an inquiry on your case, they sent out 2 lines of sentences, not the whole paragraph.

Since he claims his PD is Sept 2002, how NVC could forward his 485 to the consulate this early when the current visa is still unavailable.

IF THE ABOVE IS NOT TRUE, AND HE TRIED TO GIVE WRONG INFO TO THE COMMUNITY, I WILL PERSONALLY ASK RAJIV TO REVOKE HIS ID AND BLOCK HIS ACCESS. ITS JUST A MATTER OF DAYS, WE WILL SEE WHAT IS RIGHT OR NO. COZ WE AIN'T PLAYIN HERE, WE ARE HERE FOR SERIOUSNESS.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Suppose it's not a hoax

Please take a little bit time to look at September visa bulletin for Family First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens. Usually it means Unmarried sons and daughters less than 21 years old.

On this official visa bulletin, Mexico was Jan1,1983. It means a baby who was born in 1983 is not eligible to file in September 2005, or at lesat 22 years old. So basically it means Family First is unavailable for Mexican American's sons/daughters.

I am as curious as you why state department didn't simply put "U" for this category.

For the same reason, EB cut off date of 98/99 is still believable, although people filed at 98/99 was not eligible for H1 7th year extension yet or they all got green card already.

Basically 98/99 cut off date means EB2/3 is not availbe for India and China.
topgunjim said:
Guys,

Please don't panic - this has to be a hoax.

1. First of all, the html page, when loaded in Firefox, looks extremely suspicious - look at the color schemes used for the table. Look at the table headings - do you really think that a US embassy website will put up such a shabby thing?

2. How on earth will the US Embassy in Manila publish the October 2005 visa bulletin before the State Department publishes it in the US? Come one guys, think - it's the State department that releases the visa bulletin, not the US embassy in Manila. And when the State Department releases a visa bulletin, everyone gets notified - embassy sites link to the new bulletin from their respective websites.

3. The most sickening thing that came out of this hoax is the conduct of certain members :-

a. One gentleman claims that he called up the US embassy in Manila and presonally "confirmed" this so called retrogression.
b. Another gentleman claims to have received an e-mail from the Chennai consulate indicating "deep sympathy and sorrow" as visas are not available.

My request to the administrator / Rajiv - please ban these users from portal - let them use their "constructive minds" somewhere else.

4. The most compelling reason for me to believe this is a hoax - I tried to open this web page yesterday evening at home and as usual, IE crashed. I then ran a spyware scan on my system using Microsoft Antispyware and to my surprise, the scan resulted in two spyware detections - "IBIS Toolbar Adware" and "CnsMin Browser Modifier". Now I'm NOT sure if these came in through this URL, but I have strong reasons to believe so - my PC was rebuilt from scratch just last weekend and is up to date with latest service packs, antivirus, anti-spyware etc, and during this past week, I have not visited any "unusual" website other than the so called Manila one.

Please don't panic - this has to be a hoax.
Click to expand...
 
topgunjim said:
Guys,

Please don't panic - this has to be a hoax.

1. First of all, the html page, when loaded in Firefox, looks extremely suspicious - look at the color schemes used for the table. Look at the table headings - do you really think that a US embassy website will put up such a shabby thing?

2. How on earth will the US Embassy in Manila publish the October 2005 visa bulletin before the State Department publishes it in the US? Come one guys, think - it's the State department that releases the visa bulletin, not the US embassy in Manila. And when the State Department releases a visa bulletin, everyone gets notified - embassy sites link to the new bulletin from their respective websites.

3. The most sickening thing that came out of this hoax is the conduct of certain members :-

a. One gentleman claims that he called up the US embassy in Manila and presonally "confirmed" this so called retrogression.
b. Another gentleman claims to have received an e-mail from the Chennai consulate indicating "deep sympathy and sorrow" as visas are not available.

My request to the administrator / Rajiv - please ban these users from portal - let them use their "constructive minds" somewhere else.

4. The most compelling reason for me to believe this is a hoax - I tried to open this web page yesterday evening at home and as usual, IE crashed. I then ran a spyware scan on my system using Microsoft Antispyware and to my surprise, the scan resulted in two spyware detections - "IBIS Toolbar Adware" and "CnsMin Browser Modifier". Now I'm NOT sure if these came in through this URL, but I have strong reasons to believe so - my PC was rebuilt from scratch just last weekend and is up to date with latest service packs, antivirus, anti-spyware etc, and during this past week, I have not visited any "unusual" website other than the so called Manila one.

Please don't panic - this has to be a hoax.
Click to expand...


I called the manilla office... Look here I"m also affected here... Wake up!!!I am not making this up!!! Stop venting you frustrations on people who are trying to do something!!!

There is so much speculation going aound about the website's reliability so I wanted to know & I called up... (IF YOU WANT, CALL UP TOO)

I am not saying that the information is authentic.. For that we need to wait for the Visa bulletin.. Maybe there was a typo error in the data sent to Manilla or someone did a cut & paste wrongly,, etc...

But the fact is, sadly there is nothing wrrong with the Manilla's website.. Like what you are trying to comvince everyone to believe..

Look I am also affected if there is any truth in the website.. Lets not divide ourselves... But be united & see what's going to happen.. Even if there is a retrogression, Let's pray that it would move quick... waiting another 3 - 5 years is something nobody wants..

Radd
 
Correction

jnpr said:
Please take a little bit time to look at September visa bulletin for Family First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens. Usually it means Unmarried sons and daughters less than 21 years old.

On this official visa bulletin, Mexico was Jan1,1983. It means a baby who was born in 1983 is not eligible to file in September 2005, or at lesat 22 years old. So basically it means Family First is unavailable for Mexican American's sons/daughters.

I am as curious as you why state department didn't simply put "U" for this category.

For the same reason, EB cut off date of 98/99 is still believable, although people filed at 98/99 was not eligible for H1 7th year extension yet or they all got green card already.

Basically 98/99 cut off date means EB2/3 is not availbe for India and China.
Click to expand...
JNPR,
I have to correct your information.
1. Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: this is for those children who are already 21 or older and their citizen paren files a petition for them. If the child is under 21, there's no quota!
2. U (Unavailable) means that there's no more visa number for that category in the financial year. Cut-off dates are to control the flow, so Unavailable should not be used. If you see Unavailable, it means that they either didn't set up cut-off dates or that date was not good: too many people were allowed to file and they used up all available numbers.
3. For the same reason, using 98/99 as cut-off date for EBx categories will save visa numbers for old applications from 2001 and 2002, so 2005 PERM LCs cannot take it from them. I'm sure that 98/99 will quickly change to 2001 (as soon as BECs will have many approved LCs from those years), but then the cut-off date will slow down as all applications will flow in this "enforced" FIFO pipe.

* What I wrote for 3. is just guessing, but I think it makes sense.
 
egg0504 said:
JNPR,
I have to correct your information.
1. Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: this is for those children who are already 21 or older and their citizen paren files a petition for them. If the child is under 21, there's no quota!
2. U (Unavailable) means that there's no more visa number for that category in the financial year. Cut-off dates are to control the flow, so Unavailable should not be used. If you see Unavailable, it means that they either didn't set up cut-off dates or that date was not good: too many people were allowed to file and they used up all available numbers.
3. For the same reason, using 98/99 as cut-off date for EBx categories will save visa numbers for old applications from 2001 and 2002, so 2005 PERM LCs cannot take it from them. I'm sure that 98/99 will quickly change to 2001 (as soon as BECs will have many approved LCs from those years), but then the cut-off date will slow down as all applications will flow in this "enforced" FIFO pipe.

* What I wrote for 3. is just guessing, but I think it makes sense.
Click to expand...
Hi Egg0504,
You are right and I was wrong. Unmarried son/daughter means older than 21. Sorry for the confusion.

I agree with your analysis of "3", noticing that Familiy 1 for Mexico was Jan93 several months ago and changed to Jan83 suddenly and I think it will go back to Jan93 again.
 
As I said before, if the dates are not corrected at the Manila site in 2 days then they are indeed correct.
The official bulletin is out now.

Its time to forget about this for now and keep going about your regular day to day activities.
Like family based immigration the Employement based immigration is of no use to any senator or congressman. No one will be willing to push for anything and they as such wont get anything by doing any reform.

I think its better to go illigal now. Throw away your passport and Visa's, you got a better chance to get the GC as an illigal immigrant then a regular law binding employment based immigrant.

Once I think about it, cant we just apply for the GC as a illigal immigrant would. I mean without going through the labor and I-140 thing?
 
Visa bulletin for Oct 2005 - Visa cut off dates

Did anybody checked with attorney for an unexpected retrogress in EB2, EB3 ?

Is it temporary ? The reasons for this kind of retrogress etc etc.

Please post
 
Offical site for October visa number available

Employment-Based
All Chargeability CH IN ME PH

1st C 01JAN00 01AUG02 C C
2nd C 01MAY00 01NOV99 C C
3rd 01MAR01 01MAY00 01JAN98 01JAN01 01MAR01
Schedule A Workers C C C C C
Other Workers 01OCT00 01OCT00 01OCT00 01OCT00 01OCT00
4th C C C C C
Certain Religious Workers C C C

Bad news !!sad!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top