December 2010 Visa Bulletin – Minor Forward Movement in EB, No Movement for EB India, Notable Forward Movement in FB2A

The U.S. State Department just released the December 2010 Visa Bulletin which is the third Visa Bulletin for the FY2011 fiscal year.   As anticipated and as we wrote recently, following our meeting with Charles Oppenheim, there is not much movement across the employment-based categories.  EB India, for example, does not see any movement this month.  Also, some family-based categories (FB2A) have notable forward movement.

Summary of the December 2010 Visa Bulletin – Employment-Based (EB)

Below is a summary of the December 2010 Visa Bulletin with respect to employment-based petitions:

  • EB-1 remains current across the board.
  • EB-2 ROW (Rest of World), Mexico and Philippines remain current, EB-2 China moves forward by one (1) week to June 8, 2006, while EB-2 India remains (again, for a number of consecutive months) unchanged at May 8, 2006.
  • EB-3 ROW moves forward by one (1) month to February 22, 2005, EB-3 China  moves forward by two (2) weeks to December 8, 2003, while EB-3 India  remains unchanged at January 22, 2002.  EB-3 Mexico moves forward by fourteen (14) months to July 1, 2002 and EB-3 Philippines moves forward by one (1) month to February 22, 2005.
  • The “other worker” category moves forward by three (3) weeks to April 22, 2003 for ROW and China and Philippines.  It remains unchanged at January 22, 2002 for India.  Mexico moves forward by fourteen (14) months July 1, 2002.

Summary of the December 2010 Visa Bulletin – Family-Based (FB)

Below is a summary of the December 2010 Visa Bulletin with respect to family-based petitions:

  • FB1 ROW, China, India and Philippines remain unchanged at February 15, 2006.  FB1 Mexico moves forward by one (1) week to January 1, 1993.
  • FB2A ROW, China, India and Philippines move forward by two (2) months to August 1, 2010, while FB2A Mexico remains unchanged at March 1, 2010.
  • FB2B ROW, China and India remain unchanged at June 1, 2005.  FB2B Mexico remains unchanged at June 22, 1992 and FB2B Philippines moves backwards by more than two years to March 1, 2000.

Slow Movement  for Employment-based Petitions and Notable Forward Movement in Family-based Petitions

The forward movement across many employment and family-based categories continues, although the movement in the employment-based categories may be very disappointing to many, especially in the the India category which did not move at all this month.   The December 2010 movement confirms the observations and the predictions which we published on September 23 after our meeting with Charles Oppenheim.  According to Mr. Oppenheim, the employment-based categories are expected to inch forward slowly — often by one or two weeks per month — while the family-based categories, especially FB2A is expected to make significant forward movement.

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 December 2010 Visa Bulletin.

By | Last Updated: May 20th, 2017| Categories: Articles, 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.