South Korea EB2 usage - what are we doing

[sachug22]

deleted

[meridiani.planum]

Originally Posted by sachug22

I posted this a few weeks back that South Korea is getting a big EB2 quota (most of them current) over 7% limit, way more than China.

Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 5,327 14,819 3,576
China 5,605 6,965 1,985
S Korea 1,923 7,125 4,727
Philippines 310 2,057 5,625
UK 3,472 2,043 909
Canada 2,368 3,404 1,207
Mexico 1,457 1,348 4,021
All 36,593 70,138 42,848

I have seen many South Korean GC approvals in last 4 months in EB2 Category.

Are we doing something for South Korea to be officially retrogressed for EB2 ?

a man was selling crabs. He had two buckets of them. On one he had a lid, on the other he did not. Someone asked him why. He said this one has crabs from ROW, if I dont put a lid they will climb up and escape. The other one has crabs from India, no need for a lid because even if one tries to climb out, the others cant bear it and pull him back.

[Abhinaym]

Originally Posted by meridiani.planum

a man was selling crabs. He had two buckets of them. On one he had a lid, on the other he did not. Someone asked him why. He said this one has crabs from ROW, if I dont put a lid they will climb up and escape. The other one has crabs from India, no need for a lid because even if one tries to climb out, the others cant bear it and pull him back.

Good point. But not an accurate analogy. I think a better one would be that there are 5 lines of crabs there and suddenly line #3 gets moving very fast. Shouldn't the poor crab in line #1 be asking "HEY WTF?!!"?

[vdlrao]

Originally Posted by sachug22

I posted this a few weeks back that South Korea is getting a big EB2 quota (most of them current) over 7% limit, way more than China.

Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 5,327 14,819 3,576
China 5,605 6,965 1,985
S Korea 1,923 7,125 4,727
Philippines 310 2,057 5,625
UK 3,472 2,043 909
Canada 2,368 3,404 1,207
Mexico 1,457 1,348 4,021
All 36,593 70,138 42,848

I have seen many South Korean GC approvals in last 4 months in EB2 Category.

Are we doing something for South Korea to be officially retrogressed for EB2 ?

sachug22, Good information. Thanks for letting us know. And is this information is for 2008. Because thats when EB2 started getting the spill over.
And it seems thats why the EB2 got more approvals over all.

[nk2006]

Originally Posted by sachug22

I look at this like differently, we all in building with people from each country and cateogy packed in one room. Our friends at DOS/CIS get to pick 140k random people from these room (based on 7% country quota and EB category). If they keep SK current that room is always empty and they break the 7% rule. If they follow the 7% rule the olds people in the building (india/china) get a chance to get out.

I agree. The crab analogy does not apply here. The country quota's are supposedly to stop some countries hogging most of visa numbers - but when it has the opposite effect it clearly shows how this quota system and over-flowing methods they are using is so useless.

In my ten years of greencard hassles I have seen many people getting their greencards in a fraction of that time - this after having three grad degrees and 10+ years experience - and if I feel a bit bad about the kid who just got promoted from intern to regular position and got his green card in eight straight months - it does not show my crab mentality but rahter failed country quota policies.

[pa_arora]

Originally Posted by sachug22

Even EB3 South Korea got more visas then India, China, UK, Cannda and Mexico. We have a cause where we all can stand together and say put control on SK visas.

I am doing what i can, talk to lawyer-members of AILA, write emails to DOS/CIS/Ombudsman. But Collectively we can do more.

sachug22, Please complete your profile.

Secondly, I would wait till next year numbers to see if they are really giving more visas to SK, or is it the case where they just wanted to use up all the leftover visas at the end of FY to avoid wastage.

[pa_arora]

Originally Posted by sachug22

The rule of 7% is to be implemented annually not over a decade/century.

4K Visa in EB2 and 1.5K Visa in EB3 for 2008 = 5.5K visa

If we wait to see 2009 the numbers the total could be 11K (that can move EB2 India forward by 1 year or EB3 India by 1 year or both by at 6 months or EB2/EB3 India/China by 4-6 months).

There is no question of decade/century here. U missed the point. What I said is - what if they have the visas to utilise at the end of FY and Indian/China cases are not riped. Thats what happened last year.

[nixstor]

OP,

on the outset it might seem that SK needs to be retrogressed but there is a possibility that it does not need to be.

What if all the above 7% cases were approved in the final Q and there were no India/Chinese available to be approved? Can you prove this one way or the other? No you cannot and any one cannot.

DOS is on a slippery slope, if they retrogress SK In final Q, they run the risk of not using up visa numbers as I & C old 485's have NC or other issues. If they do not retrogress it might seem like a injustice to I & C. Ideally, ( I say ideally and not practically) DOS should retrogress SK as there should be demand from old I & C cases after the USCIS/FBI joint effort.

This issue was already discussed here. (EB2 will be current with in year.)

The crab analogy applies here partly. These problems are minute problems compared to the bigger problem of retrogression and lack of required visa numbers. Our focus and effort needs to be on them and not on these issues that are actually offshoots of those bigger issues.

[liveundersun]

There are lots of I/C EB2 pending 485's with cleared NC, and CIS definitely has enough available I/C cases to approve.

SK really needs to be retrogressed since they have so many EB2, just like India & China.

Originally Posted by nixstor

OP,

on the outset it might seem that SK needs to be retrogressed but there is a possibility that it does not need to be.

What if all the above 7% cases were approved in the final Q and there were no India/Chinese available to be approved? Can you prove this one way or the other? No you cannot and any one cannot.

DOS is on a slippery slope, if they retrogress SK In final Q, they run the risk of not using up visa numbers as I & C old 485's have NC or other issues. If they do not retrogress it might seem like a injustice to I & C. Ideally, ( I say ideally and not practically) DOS should retrogress SK as there should be demand from old I & C cases after the USCIS/FBI joint effort.

This issue was already discussed here. (EB2 will be current with in year.)

The crab analogy applies here partly. These problems are minute problems compared to the bigger problem of retrogression and lack of required visa numbers. Our focus and effort needs to be on them and not on these issues that are actually offshoots of those bigger issues.

[h1techSlave]

Shouldn't we contact DOS/USCIS regarding this? And point out this error to them? How about a nice letter to DOS/USCIS with copies to AILA?

Originally Posted by sachug22

I posted this a few weeks back that South Korea is getting a big EB2 quota (most of them current) over 7% limit, way more than China.

Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 5,327 14,819 3,576
China 5,605 6,965 1,985
S Korea 1,923 7,125 4,727
Philippines 310 2,057 5,625
UK 3,472 2,043 909
Canada 2,368 3,404 1,207
Mexico 1,457 1,348 4,021
All 36,593 70,138 42,848

I have seen many South Korean GC approvals in last 4 months in EB2 Category.

Are we doing something for South Korea to be officially retrogressed for EB2 ?

[jsb]

Originally Posted by h1techSlave

Shouldn't we contact DOS/USCIS regarding this? And point out this error to them? How about a nice letter to DOS/USCIS with copies to AILA?

Ombudsman may be the best point to write on such issues. But the question is how does it impact you. Would those extra visas given to SK come to waiting people with India chargeability? Perhaps not, they would rather go to ROW candidates. An ROW candicate, therefore, would be more interested in demanding his/her rights.

[bindas74]

Originally Posted by liveundersun

There are lots of I/C EB2 pending 485's with cleared NC, and CIS definitely has enough available I/C cases to approve.

SK really needs to be retrogressed since they have so many EB2, just like India & China.

Hi,

Pardon my ignorance but I thought that Name check need not be completed for approval if it's been pending more than 6 months which most of our cases are since we applied in June/July/August 2007.

Can someone please clear my doubt?

-Regards

[a.j.2048]

Originally Posted by nixstor

OP,

on the outset it might seem that SK needs to be retrogressed but there is a possibility that it does not need to be.

What if all the above 7% cases were approved in the final Q and there were no India/Chinese available to be approved? Can you prove this one way or the other? No you cannot and any one cannot.

DOS is on a slippery slope, if they retrogress SK In final Q, they run the risk of not using up visa numbers as I & C old 485's have NC or other issues. If they do not retrogress it might seem like a injustice to I & C. Ideally, ( I say ideally and not practically) DOS should retrogress SK as there should be demand from old I & C cases after the USCIS/FBI joint effort.

This issue was already discussed here. (EB2 will be current with in year.)

The crab analogy applies here partly. These problems are minute problems compared to the bigger problem of retrogression and lack of required visa numbers. Our focus and effort needs to be on them and not on these issues that are actually offshoots of those bigger issues.

EB-3 was unavailable during July/Aug/Sep 2008. It looks like the DOS was extremely pessimistic in setting dates for EB-3 India/China in June 2008 when EB-3 ROW was moved to Mar 2006 but EB-3 I/C were held to Nov 01/Mar 03. If this happens again this year, more of the EB-3 overflow will go to ROW/Mexico rather than older EB3-I/C cases.

[liveundersun]

No. ROW EB2 don't need to use those extra visas since they are always current and even cannot use up their own quota. The 4,000 exta visas definately should be given to EB2-I/C based on the PD (I think Indian can get most of them).

Should we get a sure answer from Ombudsman for the reason why SK can take so many visas? Just curious if any citations can support what they are doing.

Originally Posted by jsb

Ombudsman may be the best point to write on such issues. But the question is how does it impact you. Would those extra visas given to SK come to waiting people with India chargeability? Perhaps not, they would rather go to ROW candidates. An ROW candicate, therefore, would be more interested in demanding his/her rights.

[snathan]

Please donate or just be another free rider. The choice is yours

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...3597&page=1000 (Contribtuion Campaign - 2009)