Here is a break down of PERM data (certified and certified_expired only) that was processed each month for FY 2011 Q4. Data has been broken down among different PDs that were approved per month in Q4 FY 2011. Total 16,937 PERMs were approved in Q4- FY 2011. In addition to this, see PERM database based on PD that is updated until FY 2011.
In addition, please see distribution of PERM approvals segregated based on country of chargeability and category. Most of the PERMs filed in FY 2011- Q4 belonged to India and ROW. It is becoming apparent that with passing time, most of the individuals are filing their cases in EB2 category.
In addition, please see distribution of PERM approvals segregated based on country of chargeability and category. Most of the PERMs filed in FY 2011- Q4 belonged to India and ROW. It is becoming apparent that with passing time, most of the individuals are filing their cases in EB2 category.
Most
importantly it should be noted that the EB2-ROW-M-P demand is
progressing towards around 4000 PERMs per quarter, which if continued
through out the year may convert into 4000*2*4 Qtr = 32000 I-485 applications for the fiscal year. This means spillover expected from EB2-ROW-M-P at this rate is 3000-7000 depending upon I-485 denial rate of 0%-15%.
You Might Also Like :
6 comments:
CM, As usual, great work. Thank you for sharing your knowledge to immigration community.
Could I know why did you considered "certified_expired " category? Is it not who applied PERM and could not apply I-140 in 180 days? if so, which means PERM certification will be expired and would not be considered for I-485..right?
Can you look at this link and throw some light on I-140 plots on Page 6. Are filings that low? What am I missing? Can we expect 8-9 month movement for February visa bulletin for EB2 India?
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb-recommendation_extraordinary_ability_petitions.pdf
No that is not what it means. Let's start with considering that DOL takes care of PERM and USCIS takes care of I-140. These are two separate government identity and as much we like there are lot of communication gaps. There is no means for DOL to know whether USCIS has received I-140 for a particular applicant or not. Above all DOL is careless about who files and who does not. This is the reason that original PERM ETA 9089 is required while filing I-140.
So why does DOL have certified_expired tag in the released data? DOL system is programmed to automatically tag any 180 day old PERM approval to certified_expired. Reason for this is same system is used by USCIS Adjudicators to see if newly received I-140 application was submitted before ETA 9089 expiry. If it is expired before receipt date, application is rejected else if not then adjudicated form approval.
Now when data is published on DOL site, it depends when that data was pulled from the system. For eg data pulled for FY 2011 in December 2011 will show all PERMs approved before July 2011 certified_expired. If same data was pulled for publishing on October 2011, it will show all the approvals before May 2011 certified_expired. So you see it all depends when data was pulled for publishing. This does not mean those PERMs did not convert into I-140s. There may be few which do not but it will not be more than 5%. What is the exact amount only USCIS knows but not DOL and it's system.
CM, Got it. Thank you very much for the very detailed explanation.
Hi,
I am not sure if this is the right place to ask my question, But I need help.
I have filed my first labor through my current employer and it was hanged in audit case. So we started labor again from scratch, After 4-5 month DOL asked us that there are 2 labor pending and which should they consider, We selected second one and then within a week I got approval and after 6-7 month I got my I140 approval also. As I filed my second labor from same employer, is there any possibility to get my earlier labor filed date as my priority date? Please help me
Thanks,
Nile
That is not possible. you cannot retain PD from old unapproved LC. To retain PD, I-140 should be approved.
Post a Comment