ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries

Rate this Entry

The State Department has been warning about this. It's dealing with an unexpectedly large number of green card applications in the EB-2 category by retrogressing the processing dates back to January 1, 2009 effective July 1st. That means those of you non-Indians and non-Chinese with approved PERMS or who are otherwise ready to file I-140s, better do so in the next few weeks or you could be waiting awhile.

Submit "ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries" to Facebook Submit "ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries" to Twitter Submit "ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries" to Google Submit "ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries" to StumbleUpon Submit "ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries" to Reddit Submit "ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries" to Digg Submit "ALERT: EB-2 Retrogressing for All Countries" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. Chakademus's Avatar
    Not quite correct. It was not because of the large number of applications, at least not from ROW countries. They anticipated spillover that did not materialize and recklessly moved India and China forward, using up visa numbers in the process. When they realized that they had gone overboard and that the spillover was not going to happen, they had to cya, they made India and China unavailable and imposed a date for ROW.
    In other words they approved too many I/C at the expense of ROW. There seems to be a bias at USCIS in favor of India and China. How annoying that must be for ROWers.
  2. Sa's Avatar
    Looks like they implemented the HR3012 for EB2 before the bill was passed . All the people who oppose the 3012 have egg in their face now
  3. JoeF's Avatar
    They obviously miscalculated, and allocated more than the legally allowed numbers to EB2-I/C. That was already obvious from the earlier VBs.
    It may be that somebody is going to sue them about that.
    But in any case, that has nothing at all to do with HR3012. It has to do with incompetence at USCIS, which is not surprising...
    And Sa's claim of course doesn't make any sense at all...
  4. Another Voice's Avatar
    Maybe the I/C folks can get off the "is not fair" train now....everyone is misserable. As they say misery loves company, guess what folks it's a party now!!!
  5. Yet Another Voice's Avatar
    Well the 'misery' is only shortlived for EB2 ROWers once the numbers renew in Oct 2012. Compare a few months versus the years of waiting time for I/C. If you call this misery, surely I/C are in hell.....
  6. Paul W's Avatar
    >> It's dealing with an unexpectedly large number of green card applications in the EB-2 category by retrogressing the processing dates back to January 1, 2009 effective July 1st.


    Greg, do you seriously believe that?!? "An unexpectedly large number" of green card applications in the EB-2 category? Since when is 250 people (according to demand data for EB-2 ROW prior to Jan 2012) an "unexpectedly large number"???

    It is obvious even to little children that DOS and USCIS screwed the infamous pooch again. They gave close to 90% of the EB-1 and EB-2 visas (around 80,000 total) to India and China in clear violation of immigration law, and now they claim "an unexpectedly large number" of application is responsible for the shortage. Obviously they need to protect themselves from potential lawsuits from ROW and cannot outright admit the wrongdoing, but do you have to protect them too? Let's at least be intellectually honest and call a spade a spade...
  7. Sa's Avatar
    Lets see if some one from ROW does something about this . My guess is that no one will do anything because people from ROW get the residency in matter of months not years or decades.
  8. Tobias's Avatar
    Senseless bureaucratic paperwork based on anachronic laws...wait until the United States government officially declares that is bankrupt -by the end of this year- and immigration will turn into an issue similar to a credit card application (as long as the applicant doesn't have a bad credit, this person will be able to work and live in this country).
  9. Paul W's Avatar
    >> Lets see if some one from ROW does something about this . My guess is that no one will do anything because people from ROW get the residency in matter of months not years or decades.


    Of course not. Only people who are doing CP will be pissed because they have to wait 3 months (until October). The rest of ROW who go through USCIS won't care a bit. After all it's a standard procedure that if you call USCIS to ask them the time of day, they tell you to wait 90 days before they can answer
  10. JC's Avatar
    "Chakademus": There seems to be a bias at USCIS in favor of India and China. How annoying that must be for ROWers.

    Are you being sarcastic or are you serious? I have never heard of or seen favorable bias toward India or China, when it comes to immigration matters.

    It would be interesting to know why was there a sudden movement in I/C dates. I am not inclined to believe that it was a simple mathematical error.
  11. JoeF's Avatar
    @Sa: "Lets see if some one from ROW does something about this ."

    It is possible that somebody files a lawsuit.
    But that would mostly be wasted money, since it would take until after the end of the fiscal year for a court session. And USCIS has no legal obligation for anything in previous fiscal years.
    Here is what another lawyer (Ron Gotcher) said:
    "Most likely, the government wouldn't have to answer until late August. At that point, they would file their customary motion to dismiss. That motion would be heard in mid-September, at the earliest. Assuming the plaintiffs won, they would have less than two weeks to try to get something done. The government would then move to dismiss on the grounds that the whole thing would become moot on October 1st."

    As usual, your attempt at ridicule falls flat...
  12. Sa's Avatar
    "It is possible that somebody files a lawsuit.
    But that would mostly be wasted money, since it would take until after the end of the fiscal year for a court session. And USCIS has no legal obligation for anything in previous fiscal years.
    Here is what another lawyer (Ron Gotcher) said:
    "Most likely, the government wouldn't have to answer until late August. At that point, they would file their customary motion to dismiss. That motion would be heard in mid-September, at the earliest. Assuming the plaintiffs won, they would have less than two weeks to try to get something done. The government would then move to dismiss on the grounds that the whole thing would become moot on October 1st."

    As usual, your attempt at ridicule falls flat..."

    Excuses .......
  13. JoeF's Avatar
    @Sa: What a witty response... not.
  14. Paul Wilson's Avatar
    >> "Most likely, the government wouldn't have to answer until late August. At that point, they would file their customary motion to dismiss. That motion would be heard in mid-September, at the earliest. Assuming the plaintiffs won, they would have less than two weeks to try to get something done. The government would then move to dismiss on the grounds that the whole thing would become moot on October 1st."


    True, it will be moot in October, but somebody can still file a lawsuit for monetary damages, and that won't be moot. If somebody lives in the US and plans to visit their country for the summer (from August to September) and do Consular Processing there because they have a complete case, now they'll miss their chance and will be forced to travel again in October (thus having to buy another ticket, take time off work, etc.) It could be argued that people will incur extra travel costs because of the government's misfeasance--i.e. they broke the law regarding country caps and caused the EB-2 category to be retrogressed in the bulletin even though there were plenty of visas for ROW.
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: