PDA

View Full Version : EB2 India move up & EB3 ROW current in July ?


dealsnet
03-18-2008, 08:50 AM
According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24

reddymjm
03-18-2008, 09:39 AM
Its more than 5 yrs now I started my GC process.

softcrowd
03-18-2008, 10:37 AM
I am 04/2004 EB2 and I just hope that Ron's prediction comes true.

One thing about his April PD movement "prediction" - Ron Gotcher never predicted that..He just said he passed on what he heard from an official.

But in this case (July one), it looks like his prediction!! So lets see!

illusions
03-18-2008, 11:32 AM
Ron Gotcher - "I can't take credit for passing along what I heard. I do believe, however, that an analysis of the data strongly supports the conclusion that substantial additional forward movement in cutoff dates is likely between now and July.", he also goes to say that EB3 ROW will be current, by July, lets hope there is some significant movement.

Hassan11
03-18-2008, 02:00 PM
Link is here: http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=26

Ron Gotcher said on his reply to some readers questions:
The mystery is solved. I have corresponded with Charlie Oppenheim in the Visa Office. He confirmed that the 27% limit does apply. He explained that during this fiscal year, the CIS consumed an unusually large number of Indian EB2 visas, thus making the category unavailable despite a retrogression in the cuoff date which was intended to hold number use within the limit.

He said that based on his discussions with the CIS, he was informed that the CIS did not feel that the current amount of pending Indian first preference demand would be insufficient to use all available numbers under the limit. Therefore, he allowed some of those numbers to fall down into Indian second preference.

So, the Indian second preference numbers used to establish a cutoff date for April are coming from left over Indian first preference, not worldwide numbers.
__________________

kartikiran
03-18-2008, 02:24 PM
Its more than 6 yrs now, since I started my GC process.
__________________
PD Date: 03/25/2002 EB3
I140 aprvd from TSC: 06/2006
485 filed @ TSC: June 29th 2007.

pointlesswait
03-18-2008, 02:32 PM
i dont think there is a hard and fast rule as who gets what of the spill overs..
USCIS makes it as.depending on the backlog..
so anyone planning to sue is wasting his time!

dhesha
03-18-2008, 03:26 PM
Any idea how far will it move? Will it come to Dec 2005 ;)

jonty_11
03-18-2008, 04:33 PM
Dont pin any hopes, only to see them come crashing down....
The dates will retrogress again as USCIS realizes the mamoth amount of applications for EB2 - India that are in the pipeline which they may not even have accounted for yet.

We are in for a long wait unless we get admin fixes or legislation...
PLease support IVs campaigns...

kaisersose
03-18-2008, 04:36 PM
At a minimum, EB3 ROW will advance sginficantly which is good for all those who were stuck in BEC.

It is believed country cap does not exist during the final quarter. If that is true, then some India EB2 (2004 and earlier) may also benefit.

optimystic
03-18-2008, 04:43 PM
Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be quite true as it contradicts the April bulletin. The bulletin says there are unused visas in the second category going to EB-2 India, and doesn't mention EB-1 at all.

There also seem to be people who are going to sue because they believe DOS ignoring per-country quotas is hurting their chances at EB-3 visas (i.e. they claim that if EB-2 India should get any extra visas then all of EB-3 ROW applications should be approved first). This situation is turning out to be quite interesting. I wonder if we're going to have another fiasco like the July 2007 one.


Just a question out of curiosity....why would someone choose 'taliban' as a login handle, knowing fully well the kind of unneccessary negative attention one can get. I do fully respect the individual's choice to choose her/her own id but just curious...And to jog the curiosity even more , this member seems to be tagged as 'banned' now.. :D...did the admins not like the chosen handle as well !!

optimystic
03-18-2008, 04:47 PM
Just a question out of curiosity....why would someone choose 'taliban' as a login handle, knowing fully well the kind of unneccessary negative attention one can get. I do fully respect the individual's choice to choose her/her own id but just curious...And to jog the curiosity even more , this member seems to be tagged as 'banned' now.. :D...did the admins not like the chosen handle as well !!

No personal jabs here....but think of the headlines any reporter following IV or in general immigration activities can come up with when he/she sees such a login id :D

pmb76
03-18-2008, 05:58 PM
Link is here: http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=26

Ron Gotcher said on his reply to some readers questions:
The mystery is solved. I have corresponded with Charlie Oppenheim in the Visa Office. He confirmed that the 27% limit does apply. He explained that during this fiscal year, the CIS consumed an unusually large number of Indian EB2 visas, thus making the category unavailable despite a retrogression in the cuoff date which was intended to hold number use within the limit.

He said that based on his discussions with the CIS, he was informed that the CIS did not feel that the current amount of pending Indian first preference demand would be insufficient to use all available numbers under the limit. Therefore, he allowed some of those numbers to fall down into Indian second preference.

So, the Indian second preference numbers used to establish a cutoff date for April are coming from left over Indian first preference, not worldwide numbers.
__________________

Your statement about 27% limit holding does not make sense ! As per the visa bulletin if numbers are not filled up in a particular category they will go to unsubscribed countries. Here is the excerpt from the April Visa bulletin:

D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY

Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual “per-country” limit. It has been determined that based on the current level of demand being received, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices, there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category. As a result, numbers have once again become available to the India Employment Second preference category. The rate of number use in the Employment Second preference category will continue to be monitored, and it may be necessary to make adjustments should the level of demand increase substantially.

vjkypally
03-18-2008, 06:05 PM
Its sad ROW EB3 from 06 is worried that EB2 India 03 are getting their GC's.And some are plannin to sue??????

nixstor
03-18-2008, 06:17 PM
I can use some help if I am missing some things here.

Snip from 202 a 5 (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=sethitdoc&doc_hit=1&doc_searchcontext=jump&s_context=jump&s_action=newSearch&s_method=applyFilter&s_fieldSearch=nxthomecollectionid|SLB&s_fieldSearch=foliodestination|act202a&s_type=all&hash=0-0-0-1435)

(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If 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 that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.

Paragraph in the above corresond to each category. So paragraph 1 is EB1. Paragraph 2 is EB2 and so on. So the translation is what the VB exactly said.

What does 203 (b) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 say?

Define EB1-EB5 categories. Find it here (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/slbid/1/2/15?hilite=).

I posted the same Q on Ron Gotcher's forum this afternoon and my post did not go through to be moderated (I got the message that the post was submitted and will be posted after moderator approves it) or the mod chose not to post it.

GC_ASP
03-18-2008, 06:28 PM
This is the post from Ron:

I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:


Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.

I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks

So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.

GCard_Dream
03-18-2008, 06:35 PM
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:

This is the post from Ron:

I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:


Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.

I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks

So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.

nixstor
03-18-2008, 06:40 PM
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:

When there are no country limits like in a situation quoted above, its completely based on PD's. India had
EB-2 Unavailable and EB-2 China was already Dec 03. Even going forward One country might leap ahead of other depending on PD's. There is no further favoring among retrgoressed countries. Thats how I understood it.

GC_ASP
03-18-2008, 06:45 PM
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".

When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.


If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:

GC_ASP
03-18-2008, 06:47 PM
Thats what I understood as well. Eb-2 benefited the most because of this.

When there are no country limits like in a situation quoted above, its completely based on PD's. India had
EB-2 Unavailable and EB-2 China was already Dec 03. Even going forward One country might leap ahead of other depending on PD's. There is no further favoring among retrgoressed countries. Thats how I understood it.

GCard_Dream
03-18-2008, 06:57 PM
The line "But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis" made me confused. I guess the statement above would still be true if India and China had equal number of pending cases with similar PDs then both countries would have received equal number of unused visas. I missed that fact that visa allocation was by PD. Thanks for the clarification.

Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".

When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.

tawlibann
03-18-2008, 07:00 PM
Sorry if this is offtopic but can someone explain to me who banned me and why? I didn't write anything offensive or abusive, and I didn't insult anybody. I was just discussing the issues I read in another forum.

If it is my handle, you don't like, well my name is Tawlibann Foggs (it is Celtic name, and quite rare but I like it). My friends call me Taliban jokingly (I know it may not be funny to all of you, and I didn't like it at first, but I can't stop people), so that's why the handle was 'taliban'. I hope that answers your questions, and I mean no harm to anyone.

I thought this forum was open to everybody to express their opinions and discuss relevant issues without insulting others. If you're going to keep banning me, please just let me know that I'm not welcome, and I'll leave. I thought Immigration Voice and its forum was open to all EB immigrants. I was even intending to become a contributing member, but now I'm kind of lost. Am I not supposed to post here? Is there something I missed?

Chicago Desi
03-18-2008, 07:10 PM
Welcome to the wonderful world of prejudice, ignorance and stereotyping.

Sorry if this is offtopic but can someone explain to me who banned me and why? I didn't write anything offensive or abusive, and I didn't insult anybody. I was just discussing the issues I read in another forum.

If it is my handle, you don't like, well my name is Tawlibann Foggs (it is Celtic name, and quite rare but I like it). My friends call me Taliban jokingly (I know it may not be funny to all of you, and I didn't like it at first, but I can't stop people), so that's why the handle was 'taliban'. I hope that answers your questions, and I mean no harm to anyone.

I thought this forum was open to everybody to express their opinions and discuss relevant issues without insulting others. If you're going to keep banning me, please just let me know that I'm not welcome, and I'll leave. I thought Immigration Voice and its forum was open to all EB immigrants. I was even intending to become a contributing member, but now I'm kind of lost. Am I not supposed to post here? Is there something I missed?

HV000
03-18-2008, 07:18 PM
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".

When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.

This will make prediction difficult since we do not know how many PDs are eligible in either country. Am i right?

nixstor
03-18-2008, 07:40 PM
Sorry if this is offtopic but can someone explain to me who banned me and why? I didn't write anything offensive or abusive, and I didn't insult anybody. I was just discussing the issues I read in another forum.

If it is my handle, you don't like, well my name is Tawlibann Foggs (it is Celtic name, and quite rare but I like it). My friends call me Taliban jokingly (I know it may not be funny to all of you, and I didn't like it at first, but I can't stop people), so that's why the handle was 'taliban'. I hope that answers your questions, and I mean no harm to anyone.

I thought this forum was open to everybody to express their opinions and discuss relevant issues without insulting others. If you're going to keep banning me, please just let me know that I'm not welcome, and I'll leave. I thought Immigration Voice and its forum was open to all EB immigrants. I was even intending to become a contributing member, but now I'm kind of lost. Am I not supposed to post here? Is there something I missed?

Here is what you provided on the banned id

Phone number 631-922-xxxx. I called the number and a lady answered. I asked "Is there any one living with last name FOGGS?" The answer is NO. I asked are you sure? She goes mad. I then went on to see the city you provided in MD exists, Google maps has no clue about the city.

There are many non-contributing & contributing members and its entirely your wish to do so or not but IV does not need any distractions. Don't bring in the free speech and 1st amendment now.

May be its fun for you and our friends, its not funny here.

pmb76
03-18-2008, 07:47 PM
Now for the rest of this year the EB2 queues for China and India are merged. Visa allocations will be solely based on Priority date. So for example if India has many priority dates that are before China's, India may end up getting more visa allocations. The same holds true if China has earlier priority dates than India does. That's how I inderstood it and I thought I would try to explain it to some who did not. Otherwise sorry for stating the obvious.

nixstor
03-18-2008, 07:53 PM
Now for the rest of this year the EB2 queues for China and India are merged. Visa allocations will be solely based on Priority date. So for example if India has many priority dates that are before China's, India may end up getting more visa allocations. The same holds true if China has earlier priority dates than India does. That's how I inderstood it and I thought I would try to explain it to some who did not. Otherwise sorry for stating the obvious.

Read the Sec 202 a 5 I posted in 1st page and corresponding links. It clearly says that the left over visa numbers under each category in every Q can be assigned with out country limits. Is there any one who is reading it other wise (or) Is there any text in the bill I am possibly missing?

tawlibann
03-18-2008, 08:17 PM
Here is what you provided on the banned id

Phone number 631-922-xxxx. I called the number and a lady answered. I asked "Is there any one living with last name FOGGS?" The answer is NO. I asked are you sure? She goes mad. I then went on to see the city you provided in MD exists, Google maps has no clue about the city.

There are many non-contributing & contributing members and its entirely your wish to do so or not but IV does not need any distractions. Don't bring in the free speech and 1st amendment now.

May be its fun for you and our friends, its not funny here.

I am not saying anything about free speech. I realize this is a forum that belongs to a private organization and has not obligations to provide a platform for free speech to anybody. That's why I said that if you do not want me here, I'll leave.

As to the details provided, these were not required details and I didn't agree to anyone to call me at home. I entered the phone, because the form was broken and gave me some errors. Btw, the registration form is still broken, because it has a section for Required Information, and Additional Information. In Additional Information (which I assume is optional), it is still asking whether I'm going to attend DC Rally in 2007. If you do not answer the question about the rally, it doesn't allow you to register.

I haven't filled out all of details, because as I said, I thought they were optional. If there was anything missing that you want me to fill in, you could've told me so rather than ban the handle.

arnab221
03-18-2008, 08:57 PM
On a lighter note .

The USCIS has a 4 year full time course for understanding PD's and restrogression . It is called BPD&R ( Bachelor of Priority Dates and Retrogression ) . This degree is recognised only by the in the US and H1b's are also granted based on this course .There is no education evaluation needed.



You could also do an MBPD&R and leads to Phd also . You could then join the USCIS and set PD's for the countries .

optimystic
03-18-2008, 09:26 PM
I am not saying anything about free speech. I realize this is a forum that belongs to a private organization and has not obligations to provide a platform for free speech to anybody. That's why I said that if you do not want me here, I'll leave.

As to the details provided, these were not required details and I didn't agree to anyone to call me at home. I entered the phone, because the form was broken and gave me some errors. Btw, the registration form is still broken, because it has a section for Required Information, and Additional Information. In Additional Information (which I assume is optional), it is still asking whether I'm going to attend DC Rally in 2007. If you do not answer the question about the rally, it doesn't allow you to register.

I haven't filled out all of details, because as I said, I thought they were optional. If there was anything missing that you want me to fill in, you could've told me so rather than ban the handle.

Tawlibann Foggs your real name...?? I donno but it still sounds like you are trying to be a smart aleck....to me. Your ?real? name sounds a lot like 'Taliban Fox' ...! (Googling on "Tawlibann celtic" did not turn up any results at all. Not that google is the final authority on such things. I apologize if its really your name. Dont start giving me red dots !!)

If it is really your name why not just use a non-controlversial handle and not attract any unnecessary attention at all in the first place? I have seen all your posts ( 3 -4 I think) so far and found them to be genuine ....so if its just the handle , why not give in and change it, rather than asking for trouble

optimystic
03-18-2008, 09:35 PM
Urgh.. Here come the red s...Why do I even bother posting comments!

h1techSlave
03-18-2008, 10:42 PM
USCIS director took the course and he failed. Then he went to Moscow and bought a fake BPD&R degree for $175. No wonder we are in such a mess.

On a lighter note .

The USCIS has a 4 year full time course for understanding PD's and restrogression . It is called BPD&R ( Bachelor of Priority Dates and Retrogression ) . This degree is recognised only by the in the US and H1b's are also granted based on this course .There is no education evaluation needed.



You could also do an MBPD&R and leads to Phd also . You could then join the USCIS and set PD's for the countries .

h1techSlave
03-18-2008, 10:49 PM
I think Nixtor should explain why he even bothered to call Mr. Foggs' number. There are many many people in this forum with incorrect phone numbers. Why nixtor is not banning all of them. There is even a member with handle 'taliban'.

I had wrong phone number and other contact details for almost 6 months, before I have updated those fields with correct information. Nobody banned me. Why single out Mr. Foggs?

Here is what you provided on the banned id

Phone number 631-922-xxxx. I called the number and a lady answered. I asked "Is there any one living with last name FOGGS?" The answer is NO. I asked are you sure? She goes mad. I then went on to see the city you provided in MD exists, Google maps has no clue about the city.

There are many non-contributing & contributing members and its entirely your wish to do so or not but IV does not need any distractions. Don't bring in the free speech and 1st amendment now.

May be its fun for you and our friends, its not funny here.

HV000
03-18-2008, 10:54 PM
Common Guys. Let's focus on the topic of this thread...

ajju
03-18-2008, 11:26 PM
I think Nixtor should explain why he even bothered to call Mr. Foggs' number. There are many many people in this forum with incorrect phone numbers. Why nixtor is not banning all of them. There is even a member with handle 'taliban'.

Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...

Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...

Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...

RED DOTS: Looks like lots of people are in excuse of getting offended.. and spreading RED DOTS... Good Luck...

bobzibub
03-18-2008, 11:45 PM
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...

Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...

Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...

:D

ajju
03-18-2008, 11:56 PM
USCIS director took the course and he failed. Then he went to Moscow and bought a fake BPD&R degree for $175. No wonder we are in such a mess.

funny :-) lets hope new director had passed and don't possess another fake BPD&R degree :-)

tawlibann
03-19-2008, 12:00 AM
:D

I agree. Let's forget about this misunderstanding. As to the current topic, here is also Greg Siskind's opinion (his blog) which I just found:


On the Visa Bulletin, DOS' Charles Oppenheim has the difficult job of trying to move the priority dates exactly enough to get the maximum number of visas issued in the fiscal year. In years past, hundreds of thousands of visas were wasted because of forecasting problems. It's one of the reasons behind last summer's mess. There is no grand conspiracy on Mr. Oppenheim's part to try and disadvantage any group or deliberately shortchange the immigrant community. So I'm going to assume that the moving around of the numbers was done with the goal of squeezing out every last visa of the 140,000 available.


There probably really isn't any conspiracy or wrongdoing on DOS's part with regard to the last bulletin, and I do hope they do their best to use visas efficiently so that everyone becomes Current sooner rather than later. Maybe they should just do a better job at explaining information and educating people, so that one group doesn't think they're becoming disadvantaged and start doing foolish things.

abstractvision
03-19-2008, 01:07 AM
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...

Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...

Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
Trying to understand why Mr. Foggs was singled out...

May be obscene name: Humm ..much better than existing F---GC,fuckadothead, chumki, chumma, xxxx, coolhokie, ussexy, saksibaby, funkycatspangky, faaltoo and plenty ..check the member list.
May be obscene posts: No...his posts were very decent. He pleaded his case very politely. Never lost his cool even after being banned without being told.
May be meaning of Taliban is wrong: No, It means..someone who is seeking religious knowledge. Nothing wrong in it.
May be bad relation with US: Humm, US may not have good relations now, that was not the case earlier in late eighties and early nineties...not too far back..;)
May be having political cause: What about existing handles like FREE_KASHMIR, us-alien...etc
May be reference to terrorism: Having a same name "AbstractVision" as a terrorist organization somewhere in remote part of the world doesnot make me a terrorist.
May be religious name: Humm...not like existing jaihanuman, saibaba,saint.. .etc
May be country specific: Hum...Jai_Hind, JisDeshMeinGangaBehthiHai etc.. more than 500 handles have meaning related to India and in Hindi, Tamil etc
May be phone call was not received by proper person: Humm..did someone tell him to expect a call..;) Being a member doesnot to be glued to phone 24 hrs waiting for someone to call. A private message with time would have been the right way.
May be phone no. was fake: I had my previous cell number in my profile that I used 2 years back. I corrected this evening after this interesting post. I wasn't red flagged.
May be handle name was a distraction: If handle names are distractions, I wonder how far can we go....no offense. We have got bigger problems to deal with.
May be incorrect details: Why would I put my correct details on the internet. Didn't someone educate me about Identity theft..;)
May be user was unaware of unpublished nomenclature: That sounds like the case. May be admins would like to publish the pool of words they are comfortable with and that may not be distraction.

No offense, but without letting the guy know beforehand is definitely not up to the mark. Give this guy a break.... . Lets not apply any rules retroactively....more than 80% of the handle names are ridiculous and does not seem to be coming from intelligent folks and people with exceptional abilities.

I agree we should respect other members and names should be decent..but I do not agree that names can be regulated by forum administrators with no set rules of engagement ....so many languages in the world...one decent meaning in one country/language can be offensive somewhere else.

What wonders me is that SO MANY easily understood obscene words in memberlist as handle were allowed by admin (F---GC,fuckadothead,xxxx,ussexy etc ) and 'Taliban' got hit by a 800 pound gurilla..;)..got banned....

I am looking forward to a REAL issue discussion and get over this handle issue. Lets move on...

nitkad
03-19-2008, 01:09 AM
Agreed.

:D

meridiani.planum
03-19-2008, 02:41 AM
May be meaning of Taliban is wrong: No, It means..someone who is seeking religious knowledge. Nothing wrong in it.


Next time you are in airport security try telling them that you are Taliban and see their reaction.

some words have sentiments attached to them that go beyond on the literal meanings of the terms. Thats where people need to be a bit sensitive. People here have invited news firms to check out our forums (someone was recently trying to get folks from CNN over); seeing handles like Taliban does not exactly help our cause... common sense, yeah?

dealsnet
03-19-2008, 09:17 AM
See Ron Gotcher's Immigration news letter.

http://imminfo.com/resources/newsletter/2008-03Newsletter.pdf

va_dude
03-19-2008, 09:44 AM
Guys... can we drop the whole discussion about this guy's name.

It is no advisable to discuss such topics in public forums on the internet. These keywords attract unwarranted attention.

dealsnet
03-19-2008, 10:03 AM
We need to focus immigration issue rather than talking about 'thali' or 'wali' bans. Some people coming to this forum to have fun and writing non sense. Please concentrate on our goal. ' make every EB based immigration current'. !!!


Guys... can we drop the whole discussion about this guy's name.

It is no advisable to discuss such topics in public forums on the internet. These keywords attract unwarranted attention.

gc4me
03-19-2008, 10:20 AM
This makes no sense to me. 300K LC was pending @backlog centers and all of them have PD 2005 and earlier. Non RIR was processed at the end and 90% of them are EB3. Considering 50% ROW, at least 100K EB3 ROW LCs out there with PD 2005 and earlier. And then comes the PERM LCs. At least another 50K EB3 ROW PERM LCs with PD 2005 out there. With limited EB3 ROW available visa each year (140K total, after retrogressed countries and spill over etc, not more than 40K each year), I see no reason for USCIS to move ROW to current.


According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24

dealsnet
03-19-2008, 11:07 AM
85,000 PERM cases certified in 2007. 2007 is a typical heavy filing year still...
One year 140,000 EB based visas available. If some how some of the back logs are eliminated, the future looks good as 140K for a year and less than 100K labor certifications per year. If the USCIS process with maximum visa/year, it is possible.

http://www.usavisanow.com/perm07.pdf

see a chart
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg&gid=1

xela
03-19-2008, 11:33 AM
I assume there are more people like me out there that originally filed in 2003 or 2002 for ROW EB3 and then there came Perm
Since nobody had touched my 2003 file (backlog), my lawyer advised me that PERM would be a good way to go, it also would give me a chance to file with a new job descroption that fit my by now different position.
Bad thing was that she did not advise me to recapture my 2003 date but rather kept both applications in the running saying that we could cancel the 2003 when they finally got to it, which was June 2007 and at that point I could file in July for 485 with the Perm. Now my 2003 case was a regular one so we would have had to redo the hiring we did already for the perm.

I have this feeling there were many older backlogged cases that people ended up cancelling last year since their PERM ones are further along and they did not want to go through any more hiring processes or lawyers payments. Or because they gave up?

h1techSlave
03-19-2008, 11:44 AM
Even if I take your figures at face value, I see a shortage of 60000 visas. This is because we need to consider that each LC will use more than one EB visa (due to family members). If I take a conservative figure that there will be one dependent for each LC candidate, we will need 200,000 EB visas for the 100,000 LCs.


85,000 PERM cases certified in 2007. 2007 is a typical heavy filing year still...
One year 140,000 EB based visas available. If some how some of the back logs are eliminated, the future looks good as 140K for a year and less than 100K labor certifications per year. If the USCIS process with maximum visa/year, it is possible.

http://www.usavisanow.com/perm07.pdf

see a chart
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg&gid=1

dealsnet
03-19-2008, 12:12 PM
The conservative approch for the dependants is 1.2 to 1.5 times the labor approvals. Not all people have a dependants.
Husband and wife have labor approved. Like my case, my wife have labor approved, but I have file with my labor, which have older PD. Working family with husband and wife in H1B most of them have labor approved. So the actual number will be diffrent.

From the PERM statistics,
ROW adjustment should be 55% from the total number of pending cases
EB3 are 30%

If the total number of case pending with USCIS is 833,141 (all I-485 including Family based) (based on 12/31 numbers), so EB3 ROW are only 137,468. This means that with the current trend of DOS to avoid wasting GC we should expect the cut-off dates for EB3ROW to be 2006/2007.


Even if I take your figures at face value, I see a shortage of 60000 visas. This is because we need to consider that each LC will use more than one EB visa (due to family members). If I take a conservative figure that there will be one dependent for each LC candidate, we will need 200,000 EB visas for the 100,000 LCs.

softcrowd
03-19-2008, 12:16 PM
85,000 PERM cases certified in 2007. 2007 is a typical heavy filing year still...
One year 140,000 EB based visas available. If some how some of the back logs are eliminated, the future looks good as 140K for a year and less than 100K labor certifications per year. If the USCIS process with maximum visa/year, it is possible.

http://www.usavisanow.com/perm07.pdf

see a chart
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg&gid=1

You can not just equate the number of certified labors to the Visa numbers as the former one does not include dependents in it.

kaisersose
03-19-2008, 12:21 PM
If Ron Gotcher's logic works, consular processing may be more quicker for India/China EB2.

He says USCIS does not work fast enough to adjudicate 140k cases a year. They only do about 85K. But DOS is clear that they want all 140k visas used up. The result is PDs will be advanced forward and the balance numbers will be used by consular posts.

abstractvision
03-19-2008, 12:31 PM
I called USCIS this morning and the lady took 3 mnute to explain me why the delay was happening. She mentioned that they will conduct a sweep on Fri Apr 4th to determine the I-485 cases in light of new visa bulletin and that cases will be assigned to IOs by Mon Apr 14th.
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.

webm
03-19-2008, 12:39 PM
I called USCIS this morning and the lady took 3 mnute to explain me why the delay was happening. She mentioned that they will conduct a sweep on Fri Apr 4th to determine the I-485 cases in light of new visa bulletin and that cases will be assigned to IOs by Mon Apr 14th.
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.

Thanks for the update!! dude...

ajju
03-19-2008, 12:40 PM
Urgh.. Here come the red s...Why do I even bother posting comments!

Same here...

HV000
03-19-2008, 01:53 PM
Question on AOS processing based on PD/RD - Currently, EB2 INDIA is Dec 03. Assuming May 08 VB goes to Jan 03 (EB2 INDIA) , will the EB2 INDIA AOS applications with Feb - Dec 03 PDs still get processed??

Any chance of EB2 India moving forward to April 05 by October 2008??

Michael chertoff
03-19-2008, 01:55 PM
Question on AOS processing based on PD/RD - Currently, EB2 INDIA is Dec 03. Assuming May 08 VB goes to Jan 03 (EB2 INDIA) , will the EB2 INDIA AOS applications with Feb - Dec 03 PDs still get processed??

Any chance of EB2 India moving forward to April 05 by October 2008??

Why not july 2006??

HV000
03-19-2008, 02:03 PM
Why not july 2006??

Well, atleast RIR/Pre PERM Backlog Applications can be processed. BPCs only closed in DEC 2007. So, some of them missed the Aug 07 deadline. I'm NOT against 2006 or 2007 applicants!

abstractvision
03-19-2008, 02:15 PM
Question on AOS processing based on PD/RD - Currently, EB2 INDIA is Dec 03. Assuming May 08 VB goes to Jan 03 (EB2 INDIA) , will the EB2 INDIA AOS applications with Feb - Dec 03 PDs still get processed??


My understanding is that at the time of approval, priority date of the petition must be in accordance with current visa bulletin for visa number availability.

In short, in my opinion..the answer is NO

HV000
03-19-2008, 02:26 PM
My understanding is that at the time of approval, priority date of the petition must be in accordance with current visa bulletin for visa number availability.

In short, in my opinion..the answer is NO

Wouldn't they atleast get pre-adjudicated if NOT approved??

Lasantha
03-19-2008, 02:30 PM
Thanks for the info!!

I called USCIS this morning and the lady took 3 mnute to explain me why the delay was happening. She mentioned that they will conduct a sweep on Fri Apr 4th to determine the I-485 cases in light of new visa bulletin and that cases will be assigned to IOs by Mon Apr 14th.
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.

willwin
03-19-2008, 02:36 PM
Question on AOS processing based on PD/RD - Currently, EB2 INDIA is Dec 03. Assuming May 08 VB goes to Jan 03 (EB2 INDIA) , will the EB2 INDIA AOS applications with Feb - Dec 03 PDs still get processed??

Any chance of EB2 India moving forward to April 05 by October 2008??

Not only EB2, EB3 India also will move to April 2005, atleast for couple of months before this FY ends, to use the 140K numbers.

Hassan11
03-19-2008, 02:43 PM
pmb76,

that was not my statement. if you read my post, you will understand that I clearly was quoting Ron Gotcher. I even put a link to that message where I got that quote from his forum. so in the future, you can say maybe Ron wasn't right instead.


Your statement about 27% limit holding does not make sense ! As per the visa bulletin if numbers are not filled up in a particular category they will go to unsubscribed countries. Here is the excerpt from the April Visa bulletin:

D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY

Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual “per-country” limit. It has been determined that based on the current level of demand being received, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices, there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category. As a result, numbers have once again become available to the India Employment Second preference category. The rate of number use in the Employment Second preference category will continue to be monitored, and it may be necessary to make adjustments should the level of demand increase substantially.

rc0878
03-19-2008, 04:24 PM
Let's hope the following happens....coz EB3 seekers like me are also waiting for a long time.

May be I am not aware, say the dates move to 2005, then whoever has a PD till 2005 and has a pending 485, is bound to get GC approved, or incase the dates move back, then he/she is stuck again?

RC


Not only EB2, EB3 India also will move to April 2005, atleast for couple of months before this FY ends, to use the 140K numbers.

webm
03-19-2008, 04:52 PM
May be I am not aware, say the dates move to 2005, then whoever has a PD till 2005 and has a pending 485, is bound to get GC approved,


Approval depends on luck again as you know sometimes they follow random process and by that time dates can go back or stand still or fwd..no wonders anything can happen..

WeldonSprings
03-19-2008, 06:02 PM
Can EB2 move to March 06?

I hope this happens. :)

same_old_guy
03-19-2008, 06:13 PM
Before EB2 moves faster, every EB3 guy will get a new LC and jump in to EB2 line. Then EB3 line will be little lighter and moves a little faster. Then people will start asking like this - "Can we go back to EB3 line ? Can we have 3rd EB3 LC ( like LC sells in walmart) and another 485 ?" . Pretty much everyone wants to have 2 LC , 2 I-140 and 2 I-485 at any time. That way whichever category moves faster they will beat the system.

Then we come to this forum and wonder why there is so much backlog or why USCIS is so slow ( my favorite one).

This madness has to stop !


Can EB2 move to March 06?

hasil
03-19-2008, 07:36 PM
Before EB2 moves faster, every EB3 guy will get a new LC and jump in to EB2 line. Then EB3 line will be little lighter and moves a little faster. Then people will start asking like this - "Can we go back to EB3 line ? Can we have 3rd EB3 LC ( like LC sells in walmart) and another 485 ?" . Pretty much everyone wants to have 2 LC , 2 I-140 and 2 I-485 at any time. That way whichever category moves faster they will beat the system.

Then we come to this forum and wonder why there is so much backlog or why USCIS is so slow ( my favorite one).

This madness has to stop !

:)

humdesi
03-19-2008, 08:09 PM
Any chance of EB2 India moving forward to April 05 by October 2008??

NO, no way.

There are tens of thousands of EB2 India applicants from 2000 to 2002. Add labor substituters, EB2 converters, and you'll be lucky to see EB-2 India at even Dec 2002. Most likely within a few weeks of Apr, all EB-2 India visas will get used up. Keep in mind the new EB-2 numbers are from EB-1 India flowover. So it's going to last even less time than Oct-Nov last year.

pmb76
03-19-2008, 08:14 PM
Before EB2 moves faster, every EB3 guy will get a new LC and jump in to EB2 line. Then EB3 line will be little lighter and moves a little faster. Then people will start asking like this - "Can we go back to EB3 line ? Can we have 3rd EB3 LC ( like LC sells in walmart) and another 485 ?" . Pretty much everyone wants to have 2 LC , 2 I-140 and 2 I-485 at any time. That way whichever category moves faster they will beat the system.

Then we come to this forum and wonder why there is so much backlog or why USCIS is so slow ( my favorite one).

This madness has to stop !

I agree with you man. These screwed up desi consulting firms sell LCs like it is walmart. And people who work for them don't care about the position offered or their qualifications. They just want to have multiple LCs and I-140s and then cut the line when it is convenient.

abstractvision
03-19-2008, 10:02 PM
Lets review this whole page. Assumptions...and inferences...not sure how many are true and helpful. I will abstain from commenting anything.

sabudanawada
03-20-2008, 10:34 AM
Tens of thousands? :eek:you kidding me? where did you get that number from? Please explain your logic/source or refrain from making unwarranted assumptions.

If they have made the priority date to 2003 now, what that should tell us is that they suspect only a few thousand applications pending before that deadline.

NO, no way.

There are tens of thousands of EB2 India applicants from 2000 to 2002. Add labor substituters, EB2 converters, and you'll be lucky to see EB-2 India at even Dec 2002. Most likely within a few weeks of Apr, all EB-2 India visas will get used up. Keep in mind the new EB-2 numbers are from EB-1 India flowover. So it's going to last even less time than Oct-Nov last year.

HOPE_GC_SOON
03-20-2008, 10:55 AM
Don’t do character assassination of EB3 applicants. EB3s who now have qualifications/job for EB2 should definitely try to convert over to EB2. EB3s don’t listen to people like these. It’s the same mentality which opposes eliminating country limits; more over this same mentality which opposes EB reforms.
Grow up……
Trying to stop an EB3 person who spent more time than you in GC queue and has qualification for EB2 is just insane.

Hi Coopheal:

With Due respects to your Seniority and Agony/ Frustration being retrogessed.

Standard Companies donot opt for having two I140s approved for a particular employees which is a "Logical Fallacy" of EB concept. Leave alone Rat Desi Companies.. They can do anything and turn the boards off..

If your arguement is right: first you have to stop L1s getting Gcs in less than 10 months.. (on an average). Porting EB3 to Eb2 is a big junk and disrepct to the EB2 Qualifier. Now, Qualifying Eb2, if you feel, is not a big deal, why the companies did not preferred it out for Eb3s in first place because lack of Job Requirements. (infact, this portings have to be highlighted to USCIS as Junk technique and illegal).

So the whole arguement doesnot workout. Soon, wait and see Portings would bestopped, with Desi companies messing itaround like Approved labors (infact, it isa refined version of approved labor scams).

Please donot jump on me.. its a waste of time.. But the logic holds good EB2 Vs. EB3. If allowed, People may even qualify for EB1, (People would work it out also sooner or later) Let's respect each other profiles.. and its a matter of time we are all there.

This is my Honest Advice.. Trust me. I am a 2003 eb3 victim.. No way to jump lines.. its inhuman.

Thanks,

dhesha
03-20-2008, 12:54 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/programs/editorial_0497.shtm

Can we all file a combined group problem here?

willwin
03-20-2008, 01:14 PM
NO, no way.

There are tens of thousands of EB2 India applicants from 2000 to 2002. Add labor substituters, EB2 converters, and you'll be lucky to see EB-2 India at even Dec 2002. Most likely within a few weeks of Apr, all EB-2 India visas will get used up. Keep in mind the new EB-2 numbers are from EB-1 India flowover. So it's going to last even less time than Oct-Nov last year.

If USCIS does not use over 100K VISA numbers by May 31st or june 15th, then DOS will 100% move the dates forward for both India and China (and for EB3 and EB2). That's the only way DOS can use close to 140K before FY ends.

Dates may or may not become current as DOS learnt a lesson or two last year. But, dates will move forward. I won't be surprised if EB3 goes to Dec 2005 (atleast) and EB2 goes to Dec 2006 (atleast) by july 2008 VISA bulletin.

If it does not happen, do not shoot me down. It means, USCIS has used most of the numbers from this FY and then people will get their GC based on their PD and per country quota and other norms.

Going by past history, USCIS will not use the numbers and dates will move. Less than 100 days, wait and see.

GooblyWoobly
03-20-2008, 03:09 PM
I have no idea why u guys get riled up about EB3->EB2 conversion? It's Not your Ration line FIFO. Are you trying to say someone who has 10 years of experience (5 years in the last company, so EB3) stands to get GC AFTER someone with no experience but a MS? There are many other loopholes through which EB3's can fall through. Just because you are frustrated with the wait, don't take it out on someone who is also on the same boat.

Also your assumption of "Reputed companies don't do EB3->EB2" is outright wrong. I work for one of the most reputed companies in the valley, and they do it on a selective basis (read, if you're good enough, they'll do it for you).

Remember this, someone can move to EB2 only if he qualifies to. It's not that you can just jump boat with no qualification. And if someone qualifies, I don't see why he/she should stay back!!

I'm a original EB2 filer (no EB3->EB2 conversion) and not a LC transfer. EB3->EB2 increases timeline for getting my GC. But I do not believe that's wrong.

Each one to his own!! My 2c.

Hi Coopheal:

With Due respects to your Seniority and Agony/ Frustration being retrogessed.

Standard Companies donot opt for having two I140s approved for a particular employees which is a "Logical Fallacy" of EB concept. Leave alone Rat Desi Companies.. They can do anything and turn the boards off..

If your arguement is right: first you have to stop L1s getting Gcs in less than 10 months.. (on an average). Porting EB3 to Eb2 is a big junk and disrepct to the EB2 Qualifier. Now, Qualifying Eb2, if you feel, is not a big deal, why the companies did not preferred it out for Eb3s in first place because lack of Job Requirements. (infact, this portings have to be highlighted to USCIS as Junk technique and illegal).

So the whole arguement doesnot workout. Soon, wait and see Portings would bestopped, with Desi companies messing itaround like Approved labors (infact, it isa refined version of approved labor scams).

Please donot jump on me.. its a waste of time.. But the logic holds good EB2 Vs. EB3. If allowed, People may even qualify for EB1, (People would work it out also sooner or later) Let's respect each other profiles.. and its a matter of time we are all there.

This is my Honest Advice.. Trust me. I am a 2003 eb3 victim.. No way to jump lines.. its inhuman.

Thanks,