Andreea&Kevin

Congrats!!

I have a question, though, in reading through all this. Is Vermont really "stalled" or are the just processing slowly? And how did the CSC all of a sudden catch up and surpass VSC?

I'm still outside my 200 day window, but I really hope that this doesn't turn into a nightmare. Trying to keep our spirits up, we really want this year to be the year!

Vermont seems to processing at a rate similar to what they are receiving. Here on VJ it was about 7 approvals a day for the month of May. Which means they are at about 6-7 months and holding steady there. Hopefully this transfer of Dec. filers will get that back down closer to 5 months.

CSC had an insane amount of approvals from mid April through early May, and have now steadied out at a similar pace to VSC. So, CSC is around 4-5 months currently with the exception of a few July-Dec filers that were skipped over for some unknown reason.

Good luck with your journey and I hope it goes quickly for you.

Good luck to all you VSC/TSC filers. Hope it works out for everyone and it's not just more of the same at TSC.

I think jenafid's point was if you make statements about data you back it up with proof. I have questioned many people data about CSC in the past and will continue to do so if the data is not accurate.

Here are some numbers for you.

So far in the month of May up to the 22nd here on VJ, CSC = 201 approvals, VSC = 122 approvals. That's 16 working days. Therefore CSC is averaging 12.6 per day and VSC is averaging 7.6 per day.

Since you were comparing current VSC to CSC of the past. In the 5 months between November and March CSC had 103 approvals here on VJ. That's 20.6 per MONTH for 5 a month period.

Updated again with March data.

http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=6&office=2&charttype=1

Don't pay too much attention to what they say. If you called about CSC they would still say July 18th, since neither has updated their processing times since April 3rd.

Edit - Never mind they just updated it a few minutes ago.

New numbers came out on Friday. Significant drop in the number of approvals for April.

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/Static_files/2013-0516%20DACA%20Monthly%20Report%2005-09-13.pdf

Thank you for your comments...I am going to speak to my congressman soon and will continue trying to do something even after my approval... Its sad to see so many vocal CSC people disappear and not care now that they "got theirs"....guess it shows the true character of some....

That is a really unfair comment about people who waited at CSC and made the effort to do something about it. Do you expect us to write your congressman or contact the ombudsman for you? Because I don't think anyone at VSC helped cause change at CSC. It took a lot of people doing a lot of work through data collection, writing letter and emails, and phone calls to get CSC back on track. Not sure if we really helped, but I believe we did. So, my point is, do something about your situation and inspire others to do the same. Use our experience at CSC to your advantage with seeing who to contact and how to write letters to your representatives.

hey Kevin ..

I read what u said about Andreea a few weeks ago ...How is she ? ...I hope she is ok

Doing much better, but still dealing with a couple things. Luckily she is tougher than I am.

We are looking at getting back on track with the visa stuff next week. So, hopefully we don't have to file for an extension.

I'm curious, where is everyone from? Andreea is in Iasi and I'm in California.

One more!

_{Can the site administration just say how many levels of separation they need between this site and the data? Are they ok with a link that goes to another link or do we need 3 steps? If we need 8 steps, just say it. This discussion has gotten ridiculous and is only hurting those people waiting over 5 months and wanting to contact their representative or the ombudsman with hard evidence that is current.}

_{Times have certainly changed and everyone has been forced to be more patient. I remember the post of the protest outside TSC and someone holding a sign for 100 days. Now everyone would think 100 days would be an expedite. Scary part is what will happen with immigration reform. Will people from a few years from now be laughing at us, saying "they only waited 200 days"? I certainly hope not, but who knows what could happen.}

_{I just keep telling myself it will be worth it in the end.}

Now that it's been a couple months and they should be updating their processing times sometime soon. What would you guess now? Hopefully they move it enough for those people who are still stuck in the July - Sept. black hole to be able to easily file service requests.

My guess now is middle of August, but I still wouldn't be surprised if they left it at July 18th even now as they do some Jan 2013 cases.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/429684-uscis-service-centers-slowing-down/

It would seem VJ is looking for answers and when given the opportunity to come to a conclusion on the subject they are taking the easy way out.

The huge mass of data really doesn't need to be posted, it's just too much info to clearly communicate what is going on. I would like to see graphs and charts derived from the data which reveals the truth of how the USCIS is conducting business to be allowed here. I understand the data does need to be available to prove the validity of any information presented, but I also understand the concerns of the admin of the site.

The fact is a number of people have the info and hopefully they are people that can do something good with it. In time that info will work it's way back to this site whether the admin here likes it or not. It may be a link, to a link, to a link, but people here will not be denied the truth of what is going on.

It's not optimism, if you watch what happens close enough you can see it. The pace they were on in April is absolutely NOT a regular pace. They had to push aside other types of visas to prioritize the I29F applications to get that kind of pace. They are getting close to being within their stated goal again, and that is why you will see this back to a more normalized pace. A more normalized pace is closer to 100/month tops and not the 150/week we were seeing. If you think you can get them to keep that pace, you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

It always has been and will continue to be an up and down ride. They rotate through different types of applications to keep from falling TOO far behind in any one category. They got way behind in I-129F due to the DACA load that was unprecedented, so they got some pressure on them and they rearranged the priorities again to get caught back up.

I think you are correct.

Here is what a real slowdown looks like. If you see anything close to this, then by all means panic.

Igors list shows 9 approvals today, CSC slowly moving, how we can make it to move faster??????

You can wait till the day is over. It now shows 10 approvals plus 4 people got RFE's. So that's 14 people from VJ who got their case worked on. I'm not saying you should be totally satisfied with that amount, but they are certainly working on more cases than they are receiving. I understand your frustration with waiting, but be glad you get to see good progress from them everyday. Not like a few months ago, when 10 approvals on VJ was an entire month.

They have remove it pending advice of administration. It is only fair to allow them to decide. We had hoped to hear from them before we posted the data, but that option was taken out of our hands.

We have faith that the administration will operate in the interest of the members.

I hope they will allow the data to be posted here. I'm sure you have a plan B for a place to post the info after all the work your group has done. Are you planning on posting the raw data or something that has been condensed down like some graphs & charts?

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.

Maybe I wasn't clear about the "older data". I meant people who filed in July - September. These cases are far from useless, considering they make up a majority of the K1 workload they have done over the past couple months. So it's not really older data, it's current because CSC has taken so long to approve them. There are still many people who filed in those months waiting for their approval, so to ignore them would make any productivity model useless. If you are talking about looking at number of cases reviewed prior to Oct, I'm in complete agreement that data is useless.

When I was waiting for my NOA2 the problem I had with the ombudsman and congressman was providing up to date information that made CSC transparent. We all know USCIS doesn't publish current data. We only get to see this http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=6&office=2&charttype=1

and

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/All%20Form%20Types/DACA/2013-0412%20DACA%20Final%20Monthly%20Report.pdf

So, if I were somebody waiting longer than the USCIS posted wait time I'd be looking for data to fill in between what they publish and today. To present a better case of why my case should be looked at.

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.

First off I'm not arguing the validity of your data, just that it needs to be more complete to be useful. I know you have already said you are compiling more data.

I'd like to see a truer representation of how many cases were worked on in the past few months. Until you include July - September cases the numbers you have stated are going to be low.

Here is an example:

Your data states: 2013-04-17 86

However there were 30 people who reported getting NOA2's on the same date here on VJ, but only 4 are within your timeframe.

Once you include July - September cases your number would be considerably higher. I think this will more accurately show how bad CSC was from the month of Oct through March and also their capability to approve cases in April. Therefore illustrating a systematic problem with CSC, which is exactly what the Ombudsman office is there to correct. This is also good info for representative's staff when they make inquiries on a petitioner's behalf.

I really don't have a fight in this anymore as I got my NOA2 weeks ago, but if there is another slowdown I want people to be able to present accurate and complete data to the ombudsman or the representative.

My original comment was based on not realizing your timeframe of petitions of the data you presented, so this discussion is probably not worth having. I attached where I got the 22 NOA2's from for the period I referenced. Only 1 case is in your data's timeframe.

I look forward to your future posts with a larger timeframe of petitions.

I think this is where the data is a bit misleading.. please someone correct me if I am wrong.

They are only looking at petitions that are from 09/27/12 to 02/03/13 so basically those 9 NOA2 are only approvals from this timeframe only which would indicate that they all were expedites since they were processed so quickly.

At least this is my understanding.

You are correct and I did notice this after my first post. This data is misleading with only providing 7 months worth of cases when a majority are taking 8-9 months to get an approval.

I look forward to seeing the data when they go back to cases from 6/28/12. It will be much more complete and give a truer picture of the process.

This timeframe caught my eye in your data. How is it that 22 people here on VJ got their NOA2's in this timeframe, but you say only 9 cases were even looked at? I'll give you some amount of error with the VJ timeline data, but that's a big discrepancy.

Re read your post. Was this data only for NOA1's after 9/27/12? If that is true then your data makes a lot more sense.

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

---------- -----------------

2012-11-01 2

2012-10-30 3

2012-10-26 2

2012-10-23 1

2012-10-18 1

This timeframe caught my eye in your data. How is it that 22 people here on VJ got their NOA2's in this timeframe, but you say only 9 cases were even looked at? I'll give you some amount of error with the VJ timeline data, but that's a big discrepancy.

So I filed a I129F petition October of last year. I am still waiting for the news from USCIS but everything seems slow.

It's going to be 7 months of waiting now this coming May. The online status says INTITIAL REVIEW and it hasn't change yet. Every time I call them they are very short with answers. So I have no idea what's going on with my papers. Anyone filed around Oct 2012 here? or Filed it in Texas Center? Can you tell me if this is still normal?

First thing is your case is not at Texas Service Center. Check you case number on NOA1. WAC = CSC & EAC = VSC.

There are many people from October waiting, along with many from July - September. Click on "Immigration Timelines" above and then click on "Igor's List" to see who is still waiting from visajourney.

Finally, please fill in your timeline. It will help others out with more info being here on the site.

I count each one that comes through, I am not letting the dates confuse me, it was 24 for Tuesday..

Let's not forget the 9 RFE's. A few weeks ago that alone would have been cause for celebration.