February 2014 Visa Bulletin – EB India No Movement; EB-3 ROW, China and Mexico Advance Again; No Movement in FB-2A

The U.S. State Department has just released the February 2014 Visa Bulletin which is the fifth Visa Bulletin for the FY2014 fiscal year.   The major headline in the upcoming month’s Visa Bulletin is the expected lack of movement in EB India, the slowing forward movement in EB-3 ROW, China and Mexico and the fact that FB-2A remains unchanged with a (relatively) recent cutoff date.

Summary of the February 2014 Visa Bulletin – Employment-Based (EB)

Below is a summary of the February 2014 Visa Bulletin with respect to the employment-based categories:

  • EB-1 remains current across the board.
  • EB-2 for ROW, Mexico and Philippines are all current.    EB-2 India remains unchanged at November 15, 2004 and is expected to remain at this level for some time.  EB-2 China moves forward by one (1) month to January 8, 2009.
  • EB-3 ROW, China and Mexico move forward by two (2) months to June 1, 2012.  EB-3 Philippines moves forward by two (2) months to April 15, 2007, while EB-3 India  remains unchanged (again) at September 1, 2003.
  • The “other worker” moves forward by two (2) months to June 1, 2012 for ROW, China and Mexico.  It moves forward by two (2) months to April 15, 2007 for Philippines and remains unchanged at September 1, 2003 for India.

Summary of the February 2014 Visa Bulletin – Family-Based (FB)

Below is a summary of the February 2014 Visa Bulletin with respect to family-based categories:

  • FB-1 ROW, China and India all move forward by three (3) weeks to January 1, 2007.   FB-1 Mexico moves forward by only one (1) week to October 1, 1993 and FB-1 Philippines moves forward by six (6) weeks to August 15, 2001.
  • FB-2A remains unchanged (again) for all nationalities.  All categories (FB-2A ROW, China, India, Mexico and Philippines) continue to have a cutoff date of September 8, 2013.
  • FB-2B ROW, China and India all move forward by five (5) weeks to July 8, 2006.  FB-2B Mexico moves backwards by eleven (11) months to May 1, 1993 while FB-2B Philippines moves forward by three (3) weeks to May 22, 2003.

EB India Remains Unchanged

Earlier this fall, in October, we reported on the expected retrogression in the EB India categories due to high demand and the December 2013 Visa Bulletin, together with this February 2014 Visa Bulletin, confirm our predictions.    The last few Visa Bulletins showed that our expectations were absolutely correct even though many of our EB India clients and readers were disappointed by this news.    Unfortunately, since EB-2 India remains severely retrogressed, we expect that there would be no forward movement for at least several months (perhaps until Summer 2014).   The rationale behind this severe retrogression (in December 2013) and the lack of movement for the next several months in EB-2 India is that there is simply too much “demand” (number of pending cases caused by I-485 filings and EB-3 to EB-2 porting cases, plus adding dependents) in this category and the Visa Office has to “stop” the rate of new filings by moving back the cutoff date until USCIS and DOS are able to approve the pending cases and “clear” the demand.

EB-3 ROW, China and Mexico Move Forward Again, But Slowly

In contrast to EB India, we note that the EB-3 ROW, China and Mexico categories continue to move forward (again) but not as fast as they have been advancing over the past few months.   This month, the movement was only  by two months — compared to the forward movement of six months in the January 2014 Visa Bulletin.   This is another significant movement and would help many EB-3 applicants who are waiting for a visa number to either file their I-485 adjustment of status applications or process their immigrant visa at the U.S. Consulate abroad.

EB-3 China More Advanced than EB-2 China

Over the past month or so, our office has handled many inquiries from Chinese nationals who are EB-2 applicants and who try to find out whether it makes sense to refile under EB-3 to take advantage of the unique situation where the cutoff date for EB-3 China (June 1, 2012) is more advanced than for EB-2 China (January 8, 2009).

Very often, an EB-2 China applicant seeks to “downgrade” their preference category, while retaining their priority date, in order to have a current priority date and be able to file their I-485 application.   As a background, many EB-2 PERM Labor Certifications are drafted in a way allowing the subsequent filing of an EB-3 I-140 petition — thereby retaining the priority date under the EB-3 category.    While it is possible to use a PERM which has already expired if it has been used in support of a previous I-140, a new EB-3 I-140 filing may not be filed under premium processing.  Filing an I-140 under regular processing may take around four to five months and it is entirely possible that by the time an EB-3 I-140 is approved, the EB-3 China cutoff dates may retrogress.

We also caution our clients and readers, especially the China employment-based applicants, that the historic average for an EB-3 China priority date to become current and for a green card under this category to be approved is still significantly higher than the historic average wait time under EB-2.   As a result, even if it is possible that an EB-3 “downgrade” may allow the I-485 filing, we still believe that ultimately, an EB-2 China application would take less time to approve.

Our office is happy to consult applicants who are in this situation and are considering filing under EB-3 to take advantage of the more advanced EB-3 China cutoff dates.   Please contact us if we can help.

FB-2A Remains Unchanged

Another notable development (or lack thereof) is the fact that FB-2A cutoff date remains unchanged, after the introduction of a cutoff date in the October 2013 Visa Bulletin.   We expected the October 2013 FB-2A cutoff date to be introduced and the fact that it remains unchanged is not surprising since it appears that USCIS and the Department of State have seen increased number of filings in this category.

Current Priority Date?

Our office stands ready to assist in the applicable process to take advantage of a current (or close to current) priority date.   Those applicants whose priority dates are current as of the February 2014 Visa Bulletin (EB-3, specifically) may be eligible to process their (and their family members’) I-485 Adjustment of Status applications from within the U.S. or process their immigrant visa at a U.S. Consulate abroad.   Please do not hesitate to contact us if our office can help you take advantage of this significant forward movement in the cutoff dates.    We are also happy to provide a free quote for preparing and filing your I-485 application.

Further Updates and News

We invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to receive timely updates on this and related topics.  We also invite you to contact us if our office can be of any assistance in your immigration matters or you have any questions or comments about the February 2014 Visa Bulletin.  Finally, if you already haven’t, please consider our Visa Bulletin Predictions tool which provides personalized predictions and charts helping you understand when a particular priority date may become current and what are the movement patterns.

By | Last Updated: May 20th, 2017| Categories: Articles, EB-2, EB-3, I-485, News, Visa Bulletin|

About the Author: Dimo Michailov

Dimo Michailov
Dimo has over 15 years of experience in US immigration including employment-based immigration benefits, corporate compliance and family based immigration. He represents corporate and individual clients in a wide range of cross-border immigration matters including mobility of key foreign executives and managers, specialized knowledge workers, and foreign nationals with extraordinary ability.

The Capitol Immigration Law Group has been serving the business community for over 15 years and is one of the most widely respected immigration law firms focused solely on U.S. employment-based immigration.   Disclaimer:  we make all efforts to provide timely and accurate information; however, the information in this article may become outdated or may not be applicable to a specific set of facts.  It is not to be construed as legal advice.