why is there no updates for the priority dates family based in the visa bulletin?
anyone knows?
i noticed 2 updates for july and one for august.
usually on the 15th of the month, they show the new dates effective the next month.

Just be thankful it didn't retrogressed like the employment based one. USCIS is having real problem with processing.

Check again. There's a September update since yesterday, dated August 13, 2007.

Well, there is an August report but it's the same one issued last month. There is no August report for September dates, I should say.

It's been updated, however I have a question how is it that the 2nd preference for green card holders is in front of 1st preference - that doesn't make sense? Green card holders it seems have more priority over US citizens.

FB2 is in front of FB1 because there're more visa numbers allocated for them. Besides, FB2 also consists of unmarried children of LPR, over the age of 21.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: marmaduk,

i think we all know that. however, what i believe traveler is trying to say, is that is not fair for the FB2 to be ahead of the fb1, they should cut down on their visa numbers and give it to the fb1. because after all we should take care of our citizen first

So in your opinion, would you advocate FB3 and FB4 instead of FB2A? Afterall, they're families of USC.

Marmaduk, does that mean that if you are over 21 of a USC and have a priority date of say May 2002, dos that make you date current and a visa number is available? Thanks

i know my last statement could be miss leaded. i do respect and agree with the priorities for each category. however, it molest me to know that someone who is suppose to be behind the line, is ahead. because after all, thats why we have priorities for

for example
do you know that fb1 only gets 23,400 visa numbers per fiscal year while fb2 114,200, fb3 gets 234,00 and fb4 gets 65,00

now we might not have as many citizen petitioning for their children as we have residents petitioning for their spouses and children. But i still believe the system should cut some of their visas and give them to the FB1 until they catch up and become the real "first priority" so we can at least say that our government distinguish what the word priority means. (and let’s not to get about the subject that the immigration system is broken, because that whole another book)

traveler:
Is the child of said USC married or not?

daflyboy:
Fair enough. But looking at the grand schema of things, does it not occur to you that perhaps the lower limit is there for a reason? Afterall, there're more ways in which a USC children can be granted USC status, without having to utilize the FB1 status, while the FB2 are pretty much the only options available for spouses and children of LPR?

Unmarried over 21

Then their PD won't be current yet (FB1 PD is at 10/01/01).

Daflyboy, I'd like to know what other options are available child of a USC? Thanks

me again, I guess FB1 is not first priority then?

there is no other option for unmarried child over 21. i guess one must have to live with the fact that USCIS does not know what the word priority means.

i do have another question. as many of you know the VB has been moving constantly for the last 4 months. How many of you believe that the VB will keep moving forward after October especially for FB1. thats where the fiscal year ends for our government and many of the category will get stuck and some might get some backlog… any educated guess?

traveler thare is no other option, you must wait until the cutoff date goes over your priority date. so you can file for adjustment of status or cosular processing depending if you are in or outside the country.

Thanks, I figured that out but i think this needs to brought to someone's attention, I thought the reason becoming a USC was to give them priority (excuse the pun)? I can understand spouses or a child under 18, but to allow over 21 in front of USC children makes no sense.

well not really traveler and here is the reason

fb2 is devided in two
A and B
A is the one ahead of fb1 which current cut off date is 08/oct/02 and covers sposes and children under 21
B cut off date is currently 01/jul/98 and only covers unmarried children over 21

however we will go back to the same question, if CIS believes that FB2 A should get more priority then they should place it in top of FB1

well hope this anwser's your question

How long do you expect an 84 year old US citizen (WWII vet) who sponsored his children from the Philippines with 1992 priority date to be still alive when this becomes current? Why the delay?