AILA Blog

From Department of State, With Love–The Visa Numbers

Last month I blogged about my convoluted math–trying to figure out the wait times for various countries, in various categories for Employment Based visas. The January Visa Bulletin was just issued, with this explanation:

D. EXPLANATION OF THE NUMERICAL CONTROL SYSTEM AND CUT-DATE PROJECTIONS WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?

The Visa Office (VO)subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.

– If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.” For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are only 1,000 applicants, the category is considered “Current.”

– Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are 8,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 3,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.

Applicants entitled to immigrant status become qualified at their own initiative and convenience and upon the completion of various processing requirements. Therefore, it is extremely important to remember that by no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported qualified each month, and consideration of other variables. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to another, with an inevitable impact on cut-off dates.

HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?

Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.

– The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.

– INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.

WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?

Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop.

Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.

WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?

Many of the categories were “unavailable” at the end of FY-2009, which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.

WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL CUT-OFF DATES FOR FOREIGN STATES IN THE EMPLOYMENT FIRST OR SECOND PREFERENCE CATEGORIES?

At this time it is unlikely that there will be any cut-off dates in the Employment First preferences. It also appears unlikely that it will be necessary to establish a cut-off date other than those already in effect for the Second preference category. Cut-off dates apply to the China and India Second preference categories due to heavy demand, and each has the potential to become “unavailable” should demand cause the annual limit for that category to be reached.

INA Section 202(a)(5) 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 limits. For example, if it is determined that based on the level of demand being received at that time there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category, then numbers could be provided to oversubscribed countries without regard to per-country limitations. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.

Should Section 202(a)(5) be applied, the rate of number use in the Employment preference category would continue to be monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for oversubscribed countries. This action provides the best possible assurance that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while still ensuring that numbers remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.

WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?

Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:

Employment Second:

China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to
apply: China and India: October through December 2005

Employment Third:

Worldwide: April through August 2005
China: June through September 2003
India: January through February 2002
Mexico: January through June 2004
Philippines: April through August 2005

Please be advised that the above date ranges are only estimates which
are subject to fluctuations in demand during the coming months. The actual
future
cut-off dates cannot be guaranteed, and it is possible that some annual
limits could be reached prior to the end of the fiscal year.

So, there you have it. The “official” guesses for FY 2010! It would be terrific, however, if the Visa Bulletin would tell us, based upon its knowledge of pending cases, and estimates on time, how long a case would take in the given categories, if started today. When the Department of State releases THAT information, then perhaps Congress will sit up and take notice that we are facing a literal crisis in our employment based immigration program, and hurting ourselves as a result.

by Charles Kuck