Robb&Ann

Whoever is against or doesnt like Tyler's data dont look at it or dont use it. Nothing else to say, I thank anonymous for their time and effort to get all the CSC info together.

I am a subscriber of Fred Wahl and his videos are very helpful too. He also gives updates if dealing with the Manila embassy which is helpful too..

I'm just curious. What kind of private information you don't want to share with public? That you applied for K1 Visa? That you have USCIS case number? We are on the public forum and everyone posts the dates when petition was submitted, NOA1 dates and the rest.
Everyone in the world can go to USCIS site and see that some cases was approved and some still in the process ( no names seen!!!)
Maybe I'm missing something. Sorry.

OMG guys! i can't hide my excitement!!! happy to those who got approved!!! getting approved in May is not "unrealistic" because it is now happening!!! some of us might get NOA 2 by the end of this month or early June (we never know!!!) we are 18 petitions away from the last WAC i saw who got approved! waaaaaa praying we all hear more good news in the next few days!!!!
congratulations!!! cheers!

omg! congratulations!!

congratulations!!! we have same noa date 1/25 . waaa applicants around us r getting their noa2 already!!!!! sooo happyyyyyyyy

congratulations!

why wait if it doesn't seems to be normal anymore.not unless they are sending it here through philpost (which is impossible). 5 days is normal.. 10 days is fine but 20 days is not... you're almost waiting for 7months now then the rfe is also delayed? there's something wrong there huh.. I hope your fiance receives it in few days sis.

WOW!!! That was an easy one to find out!!! Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects, blogs, forums etc. "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." So, merely giving someone a platform to say something does not make you responsible for what they say. Anyone can sue for anything, but for the protection to not apply, the administrators of the site would have to have been the ones to post it.

Would our founders such as Jefferson or Washington been of the same mindset as "BigDog"? Is that what this country was built on? Fear of upsetting the "Government"? They are rolling in their graves.....

at the same time, our fellow Jan filer Jojha, their file were touched last May 2, seems like they are working on with those recent filers or who are still within the timeframe and at the same time going back with those who are in black hole.. until they clear it and get back within the normal processing time. meaning, there r two patterns here that is going on. This is just my observation with CSC. I am also hoping it goes well with VSC. Overall, i am hoping that all of us here gets processed as soon as USCIS can whether CSC or VSC..so we can finally be with our loved ones..

If you think about it we are all anonymous.... Nobody on here post their full names and address.
Anonymous or not Anonymous .... I think the data is great! gives me an idea whats currently going on ... and thats a great feeling to have during this wait.
Would be great if the admins will explain their views on this .... maybe they did on another post? But I can only assume they don’t want the data on here just in case the Government comes back and says this data was taken illegally …. And the risk of this site getting shut down. I can assume and AGREE this is a chance the admins don’t want to take.
I also see what Tyler is saying too ….. Its public information!
I also find it humors before Tyler’s data everyone had their pitch forks pointing towards CSC and demanded to know WHY they are so behind and everyone speculating.
Now with the data showing what they are working on and why they are so behind ….
Americans needs to complain and ###### about something ….. so now the pitch forks are pointed at Mr Tyler.
Tyler THANK you for all the data ... but I dont think you'll be able to post on here until you have a email or signed letter from CSC saying its cool ... hahah
Also thank you to VJ site and members for all your help!!! with out this site .... ugh i would be thousnads of dollars in debt to a lawyer and in the dark ..... pitch black dark! hahah

So let me get this straight..
1. For months, everyone, including the admin of this site, has been complaining about CSC slowdowns and wondering what is causing it.
2. Finally someone with actual hard evidence comes in and offers conclusive charts answering this very question.
3. Admin prevents this person from doing so.
In my opinion, VJ has lost a lot of credibility in being a helpful site because of this.

This is an unfortunate turn of events for such an effective and creative use of publicly accessible data. I, for one, appreciate the effort you have made to make this data available to us. I still plan to create a web app to make this data available and manipulable to more people. Hopefully these efforts will empower others against such an opaque and unresponsive agency.
FWIW, yes I am a little concerned that I am not anonymous. However, I was raised to believe in the freedom of speech afforded by my native land. I still believe in the American dream and will continue to comport myself along those lines. I will face any adversity in a fighting stance and will employ all my connections and ability. I encourage everyone to maintain the same attitude.
May we all have the best of luck on our journeys and be reunited with our loved ones in the shortest time possible.

We will reiterate, it is useless from a predictive stand point. We are already have collected the majority of data filed prior to from 06/28/12 until the establishment of DACA. The reviews are primarily random, a predictive model cannot be established. The review of applications prior to November 1st, specifically those from July through September do not provide a significant data pattern. The ONLY thing the data from July through September can realistically expose is the volume of outstanding petitions for those months. But that data can already be extrapolated from the existing data on Igor’s list. Perhaps, if you clarify a question for the data to answer we could better target our analysis. Our intention was to provide useful data to CSC filers of I129F petitions. We do not intend to collect every possible iteration of data. This is an expensive and time consuming process and we receive nothing from providing this data. Nor can we meet the expectations or desires of every petitioner. If our efforts are only going to result in criticism or demands perhaps we were mistaken in sharing this data. The data is what it is.

This is an accurate statement. Keep in mind USCIS does not want you to have access to the totality of the data and they do take measures currently to prevent you from having it! It is public information, but that does not mean they want you to have it current or usable. This is why WE do not reveal OUR identity. This is why we do not detail the methods we use to collect the data. We have been careful to use only legal methods. Eventually we will not be able to collect the data that can be assured.

While we are collecting older data, and it is ‘nice to see’. However it is relatively useless for creating a productivity model. Why did we chose initially to collect to the start of the USCIS FY (OCT 1st)? On August 15 the DACA petitions (I821D) became active, increasing the workload volume by 28.45%. The slowdown in in petition reviews reflects this and has been proven numerous times prior to this data. The alteration in the priority of form types and volume renders the predictive nature of data prior to established reviews of I821D files moot. USCIS adjudication operates off of a mostly self-sufficient budget based on application fees. This means that USCIS personnel adapts after workload changes within this budget. Changes in budget and personnel would best be reflected by the established USCIS FY. It is unlikely that at accurate model of the prediction of NOA2 dates can be established for filers prior to February. Once November filers have a more review actions completed a model of December and January may be able to give some approximation. It is unrealistic to expect to gain any real insight from data prior to October, sorry. We didn’t create the changes at USCIS. Don’t kill the messenger. The data we are currently collecting shows a near random review pattern of petitions prior to November 1st. Additionally we are seeing a pattern change in the I821D petitions following February. We think you may be trying to see something in the data that it cannot provide.

also prefers the old logo with that (up and down) long bumpy road.. it signifies our long immigration journey to USA. and that, it might not gonna be easy and requires long waiting time to able to reunite with our loved ones in the US and even after getting in the US, it still don't stop until being a naturalized citizen.

Stating that the data is misleading implies that the data is “leading”. The data make no attempt to give any perception. The question is, what are you trying to infer from the data that is giving you a false perception? Each insight you are trying to determine will require a different view of the data. Ahh, so what is it you are trying to learn from the data so we can provide a more appropriate response.

We have not as of yet attempted to organize that data. We may, but we are unsure how the data would benefit I-129F filers. DACA petitions are handled significantly differently than I-129F petitions. While I-129F filers can expect to wait several months to be processed, DACA petitions can be processed in a matter of weeks. DACA qualified beneficiaries are technically in an illegal immigration status until approved, and as we understand DACA filers are given priority because of their current illegal status to prevent any issues for them. In simple terms, DACA filers go to the front of the line ahead of those already in the legal immigration system. The process itself of DACA petitions, their prioritization, and large volume is what causes I-129F delays. The final outcome of DACA petitions seems irrelevant.

For comparison this is the DACA reviews for the same period of time. This may not contain all approvals for 05/03/2013. Date Count ---------- ----------- 2013-05-03 65 2013-05-02 240 2013-05-01 306 2013-04-30 455 2013-04-29 795 2013-04-27 2 2013-04-26 839 2013-04-25 675 2013-04-24 652 2013-04-23 403 2013-04-22 495 2013-04-20 1 2013-04-19 580 2013-04-18 422 2013-04-17 461 2013-04-16 380 2013-04-15 487 2013-04-12 423 2013-04-11 460 2013-04-10 421 2013-04-09 488 2013-04-08 552 2013-04-06 1 2013-04-05 454 2013-04-04 467 2013-04-03 439 2013-04-02 498 2013-04-01 749 2013-03-29 550 2013-03-28 714 2013-03-27 514 2013-03-26 249 2013-03-25 177 2013-03-22 672 2013-03-21 730 2013-03-20 514 2013-03-19 601 2013-03-18 957 2013-03-15 614 2013-03-14 703 2013-03-13 628 2013-03-12 829 2013-03-11 993 2013-03-08 932 2013-03-07 864 2013-03-06 788 2013-03-05 792 2013-03-04 1124 2013-03-01 639 2013-02-28 761 2013-02-27 730 2013-02-26 812 2013-02-25 1210 2013-02-22 887 2013-02-21 756 2013-02-20 506 2013-02-19 1233 2013-02-15 686 2013-02-14 606 2013-02-13 537 2013-02-12 693 2013-02-11 689 2013-02-08 683 2013-02-07 655 2013-02-06 510 2013-02-05 783 2013-02-04 967 2013-02-02 2 2013-02-01 629 2013-01-31 494 2013-01-30 445 2013-01-29 460 2013-01-28 647 2013-01-26 1 2013-01-25 512 2013-01-24 658 2013-01-23 447 2013-01-22 1309 2013-01-18 602 2013-01-17 550 2013-01-16 505 2013-01-15 633 2013-01-14 1194 2013-01-12 637 2013-01-11 1 2013-01-10 498 2013-01-09 491 2013-01-08 437 2013-01-07 713 2013-01-05 1 2013-01-04 293 2013-01-03 434 2013-01-02 316 2012-12-31 491 2012-12-28 355 2012-12-27 383 2012-12-26 548 2012-12-21 476 2012-12-20 400 2012-12-19 614 2012-12-18 1013 2012-12-17 3 2012-12-14 353 2012-12-13 287 2012-12-12 211 2012-12-11 465 2012-12-10 784 2012-12-07 869 2012-12-06 5 2012-12-05 364 2012-12-04 493 2012-12-03 618 2012-11-30 605 2012-11-29 457 2012-11-28 445 2012-11-27 457 2012-11-26 623 2012-11-23 264 2012-11-21 367 2012-11-20 414 2012-11-19 525 2012-11-16 286 2012-11-15 188 2012-11-14 156 2012-11-13 362 2012-11-09 87 2012-11-08 47 2012-11-07 46 2012-11-06 32 2012-11-05 14 2012-11-04 3 2012-11-02 15 2012-11-01 14 2012-10-31 7 2012-10-30 9 2012-10-29 29 2012-10-26 2 2012-10-25 8 2012-10-24 5 2012-10-23 1 2012-10-22 1 2012-10-19 2 2012-10-17 1 2012-10-16 1

Based on collected data, CSC needs to review 72 petitions per day resulting in an Approval, Denial, or RFE in order to keep pace with the current backlog. As you can see the current processing over the past 3 days averages as 60 per day. There are currently 4413 files outstanding that require initial or REF review for the same period. For example this means, that unless CSC increases the daily review level to compensate, filers from February can expect normal reviews to begin 08/19/2013. We are still reviewing the data to have a more accurate analysis.

Brothers and Sisters For those who have been curious about the volume of DACA and other petitions. Form Description Count Percentage ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- ---------- I765 APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION 164905 42.79% I821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals 109643 28.45% I130 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR RELATIVE 45419 11.78% I821 APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PROTECTED STATUS 38844 10.08% I539 APPLICATION TO EXTEND OR CHANGE NONIMMIGRANT STATUS 8059 2.09% I129F PETITION FOR FIANCE(E) 6253 1.62% I526 IMMIGRANT PETITION BY ALIEN ENTREPRENEUR 2594 0.67% I131 APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT 2295 0.59% EOIR29 NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DECISION OF DISTRICT DIRECTOR 1341 0.34% I290B NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER 1279 0.33% I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS 1273 0.33% NA Unknown 1238 0.32% I102 APPLICATION FOR REPLACEMENT 782 0.20% I360 PETITION FOR AMERASIAN 773 0.20% I824 APPLICATION FOR ACTION ON AN APPROVED APPLICATION OR PETITION 609 0.15% I601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility 22 0.00%

Hello Brothers and Sisters

We have reviewed 385329 CSC petitions, dating from 09/27/2012 through 02/04/2013. This data is accurate as of 05/04/2013.

There have been 6253 I-129F petitions between those dates.

We have determined that the perceived slowdown at CSC is indeed accurate and the following data will support that fact.

We have determined that there is a clear line of activity focused on files filed prior to 11/01/2012. We will provide supporting data for this at a later date.

In the following data each date shows how many I-129F files were reviewed resulting in either a NOA2 approval, NOA2 Denial, or RFE. This ALL CSC I-129F petitions between 09/27/2012 and 02/04/2013 not just the ones present on this site.

We will present more data as we have the opportunity to review and discover patterns.

Date K-1 Files Reviewed
---------- -----------------
2013-05-03 60
2013-05-02 55
2013-05-01 65
2013-04-30 142
2013-04-29 262
2013-04-26 248
2013-04-25 281
2013-04-24 222
2013-04-23 144
2013-04-22 75
2013-04-19 51
2013-04-18 61
2013-04-17 86
2013-04-16 100
2013-04-15 155
2013-04-13 1
2013-04-12 119
2013-04-11 95
2013-04-10 70
2013-04-09 30
2013-04-08 57
2013-04-05 3
2013-04-04 3
2013-04-03 6
2013-04-02 4
2013-04-01 5
2013-03-29 5
2013-03-28 10
2013-03-27 4
2013-03-26 3
2013-03-22 2
2013-03-21 3
2013-03-20 5
2013-03-19 4
2013-03-18 5
2013-03-15 1
2013-03-14 3
2013-03-13 4
2013-03-12 1
2013-03-11 10
2013-03-08 6
2013-03-07 5
2013-03-06 7
2013-03-05 4
2013-03-04 12
2013-03-01 9
2013-02-28 6
2013-02-27 3
2013-02-26 3
2013-02-25 3
2013-02-22 2
2013-02-21 7
2013-02-20 12
2013-02-19 3
2013-02-15 7
2013-02-14 5
2013-02-13 4
2013-02-12 4
2013-02-11 2
2013-02-09 1
2013-02-07 3
2013-02-06 3
2013-02-05 10
2013-02-04 6
2013-02-01 2
2013-01-31 3
2013-01-30 6
2013-01-29 5
2013-01-28 4
2013-01-25 1
2013-01-24 1
2013-01-23 8
2013-01-22 8
2013-01-17 8
2013-01-16 1
2013-01-15 6
2013-01-14 9
2013-01-10 7
2013-01-09 4
2013-01-08 1
2013-01-07 5
2013-01-04 4
2013-01-03 3
2013-01-02 3
2012-12-26 2
2012-12-21 4
2012-12-20 7
2012-12-19 6
2012-12-18 3
2012-12-17 1
2012-12-13 1
2012-12-12 1
2012-12-11 1
2012-12-10 2
2012-12-05 1
2012-12-04 1
2012-12-03 2
2012-11-30 2
2012-11-29 7
2012-11-28 8
2012-11-27 2
2012-11-26 4
2012-11-21 4
2012-11-20 1
2012-11-19 1
2012-11-16 2
2012-11-15 2
2012-11-13 2
2012-11-09 1
2012-11-06 1
2012-11-01 2
2012-10-30 3
2012-10-26 2
2012-10-23 1
2012-10-18 1

I just resolved the same sort of issue. I KNOW they know about arrears without needing to run a report because I didn’t know about the arrears until the Department of State told me.
The state and support clearing house report an arrears to HHS who reports it to the department of state. The department of state oversees U.S. Embassies.
USCIS is where the final passport restriction occurs.
This is a quote from an internal USCIS guide.
(A) Policy Regarding Support .
You should also review Interpretations 316.1(f)(5) for a discussion of good moral character and the effect of support payments on a finding of good moral character. This discussion includes support of spouse and children; effect of unemployment or financial inability; attempts to comply with court ordered support.
A finding of good moral character is precluded where there is a willful failure or refusal to provide support unless extenuating circumstances exist (see 8 CFR 316.10(b)(3)(i) ). Unemployment and financial inability should be taken into account when examining the applicant on this issue. In considering such factors, you should also take into account the cause of the unemployment and financial inability to support dependents. For instance, if an applicant was unemployed because of incarceration, then the reason for incarceration must be determined as it may affect the applicant’s ability to establish good moral character.
Another factor to consider would be whether the applicant had the opportunity to support the children. Example: the spouse had custody of the children. He or she took the children to a new residence, prevented the applicant from learning of the children’s whereabouts, and made no provision for receiving support payments through a third party or financial institution. Depending upon the circumstances in this last example, it would be important to know why the spouse prevented contact between the applicant an d the children. You would need to consider if the applicant had in any way threatened the spouse or children, or defied a custody order. You would have to ask enough questions about the circumstances, on a case-by-case basis, to determine if the conduct of the applicant met the standards for a finding of good moral character.
If the documentation indicates that the applicant is in arrears for court-ordered child support, you will need to find out how long the applicant has failed to provide support and why. If the circumstances surrounding the applicant’s failure to provide support have already been reviewed by the court, and the court still continues to order payment, the application should be denied for lack of good moral character. If the applicant tells you that he or she cannot provide support and provides an explanation an d documentation to support that explanation, you will have to determine whether the applicant willfully refused or failed to support the dependents. An applicant who is unable to provide documents that establish that he or she did not willfully fail or refuse to support his or her child (children) has failed to establish good moral character. See 8 CFR 316.10(b)(3)(i) .