Which Service Center Handles Which State's I-129F Petitions

[I & B 273]

I've seen many posts recently made by soon-to-be petitioners who wonder which USCIS service center--the California Service Center or the Vermont Service Center--will ultimately process their I-129F petition. Here's a little history of the breakdown and the answer.

Since the USCIS changed their system a few years back to require that all I-129F petitioners send their petitions to the Texas Lockbox facility, it is understandable that the ultimate destination isn't readily apparent based on the current filing directions. Luckily for us, however, the Texas Lockbox still operates to divy up and forward the petitions based on the same state-by-state rules that existed when petitioners were required to directly send their petition to the appropriate service center for their state of residence. That list is hard to find online, but I happened to stumble upon it preserved in the book Fiance & Marriage Visas: A Couple's Guide to U.S. Immigration, and would like to pass it along here for posterity.

Per the book, the breakdown was as follows:

California Service Center States/Territories:

Alaska

Arizona

California

Colorado

Guam

Hawaii

Idaho

Nevada

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Michigan

Minnesota

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

North Dakota

Ohio

Oregon

South Dakota

Utah

Washington

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Vermont Service Center States/Territories

Alabama

Arkansas

Connecticut

Delaware

District of Columbia

Florida

Georgia

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Mississippi

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

Pennsylvania

Puerto Rico

Rhode Island

South Carolina

Oklahoma

Tennessee

Texas

US Virgin Islands

Vermont

Virginia

West Virginia

Edited April 9, 2013 by I & B

[Darnell 8,478]

Although the breakdown is useful,

the Dallas lockbox actually gets instructions where to send the I-129Fs, often, based on some load balancing stuff .

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=a10e4154d7b3d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD

[I & B 273]

Although the breakdown is useful,

the Dallas lockbox actually gets instructions where to send the I-129Fs, often, based on some load balancing stuff .

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=a10e4154d7b3d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD

Interesting. I wonder if that is just hot air (preserving flexibility in theory, but not in practice) or not. I did a cursory check on Igor's list and I could not find any case that conflicted with the list I provided. But it's definitely good to note that things can change.

[Bayareaguy 156]

Interesting. I wonder if that is just hot air (preserving flexibility in theory, but not in practice) or not. I did a cursory check on Igor's list and I could not find any case that conflicted with the list I provided. But it's definitely good to note that things can change.

I have seen a few exceptions to this, and looking at the petitions accepted numbers, I would tend to agree that some kind of load balancing occurs. I recall a NJ and a Fl VJ member stating their applications were sent to CSC.

And the funny (or not so funny) thing about it is why are they so concerned load balancing the applications, when they clearly aren't concerned about balancing the processing.

Edited April 9, 2013 by Bayareaguy

[I & B 273]

I have seen a few exceptions to this, and looking at the petitions accepted numbers, I would tend to agree that some kind of load balancing occurs. I recall a NJ and a Fl VJ member stating their applications were sent to CSC.

Ah, ok. Definitely good to know. I stand corrected--definitely not the first time I've been wrong.

If they really do "balance" the load, then I have to say that I am shocked at what a poor job they do at maintaining any semblance of consistency in actual processing times. There should be much, much less volatility if they can dynamically balance where apps go in a meaningful way. Just another thing the USCIS does incompetently, I suppose.

Edited April 9, 2013 by I & B

[Darnell 8,478]

sorry, DACA f'ed up everything for CSC, so load-balancing algorithms and Service Center Directors' gut feelings, no longer work.

[NinaD 6]

Interesting. I wonder if that is just hot air (preserving flexibility in theory, but not in practice) or not. I did a cursory check on Igor's list and I could not find any case that conflicted with the list I provided. But it's definitely good to note that things can change.

My husband lives in Ohio. According to the list our case should have gone to California. It went to Vermont. I suspect because the US Consulate that we would be using is in Montreal, on the East Coast...but who knows. So I am one case that does conflict with the list.

[I & B 273]

My husband lives in Ohio. According to the list our case should have gone to California. It went to Vermont. I suspect because the US Consulate that we would be using is in Montreal, on the East Coast...but who knows. So I am one case that does conflict with the list.

Good to note. And I think I saw 1-2 other Ohio residents bemoaning the fact that they were stuck at the CSC yesterday. It would be interesting to try to figure out exactly which states get split and why. I wonder if it could really be the case the the Texas facility sorts on the basis of where the consulate is, though. That would require them to actually open and examine the petitions to an extent, rather than just forward them. But it could definitely be true.

Edited April 10, 2013 by I & B

[Bayareaguy 156]

There might be some "swing" states perhaps.

[Alex&Amy 28]

This is not entirely accurate, we had a Texas petition sent to California.

[I & B 273]

This is not entirely accurate, we had a Texas petition sent to California.

Thanks. Duly noted. Haha, this has now turned into a little side project for me. If anyone else has a processing experience that differs from the list, please note so here. It'd be nice to compile some solid info on how petitions are divvied up.

[Darnell 8,478]

Please read all of this topic:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/220499-k-1-petition-information/

then take another stab at your research - you may want to refactor some things.

Good Luck !

[I & B 273]

Please read all of this topic:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/220499-k-1-petition-information/

then take another stab at your research - you may want to refactor some things.

Good Luck !

I've read that. I don't see how it is particularly relevant to how the texas service center divvies up filed I-129Fs, though...

[Darnell 8,478]

really? you read all of it? load balancing was mentioned there.

[I & B 273]

really? you read all of it? load balancing was mentioned there.

He talks only about two types of load balancing, though: balancing within the VSC and directly sending petition types from the VSC to the CSC. It would make sense if the latter was coordinated with the Texas Lockbox's sorting, but, given the incompetence of the USCIS, I'm not sure if that's even the case. In any case, that's a very good post and I've read it several times. I recommend all VJ readers do the same.