Advertisement

June 18, 2013

Employment-Based Second Preference (EB-2) Unavailable for China and India

The Visa Bulletin for June 2012 has recently been published and shows unavailability of immigrant visas in the employment-based second preference (EB-2) category for individuals who are born in China or India. The EB-2 preference category is for prospective immigrants filling positions that require either an advanced degree or a bachelor’s degree and at least five years of experience. The immediate impact of this development is that natives of India and China in the EB-2 category may not be issued immigrant visas or granted adjustment of status. Additionally, qualified individuals from India and China who are in the EB-2 category will be unable to file an I-485 (Adjustment of Status) application until more visa numbers are available.

According to our latest information, the US State Department anticipates that green card numbers in the EB-2 category for China and India will be unavailable through the end of the fiscal year (September 30, 2012). At the beginning of the new fiscal year, we will likely see visa numbers available in the EB-2 category, but are uncertain about the priority date cut-offs for India and China. The State Department is optimistic that by early 2013 it can return the EB-2 cut-off dates to what they were immediately prior to the unavailability.

©1994-2013 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

We’ve earned our national and international reputation for excellence and innovation, and our Immigration Practice attorneys serve as trusted business advisors for top-tier companies with offices throughout the world.

Mintz Levin has a successful track record working with—and lobbying—government entities involved in immigration and naturalization matters, including the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the State Department (including consular offices abroad), and the Department of Labor.

(617) 348-4468

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.