BaBamSam

Lesson learned from this thread, do not try to be positive. Because someone with a worse timeline than you will inevitably tell you that your waiting meant nothing, theirs was longer so theirs means more, and you don't know what you're talking about because YOU didn't wait as long as THEY did.
Let people be miserable if they want to be miserable.
Let them check USCIS five times a day if they want to.
Let them draft letters and petitions if that makes them feel better, though chances are, they won't go anywhere.
Let people do whatever they need to do to get through their waiting period.
We all know the waiting sucks, but here on VJ, it's turned into a competition. So let the miserable ones "win" the title of Most Rightfully Irritated With USCIS and move on with your life and YOUR relationship.
They don't want advice. They don't want positive words of encouragement. They want to do exactly what they're already doing.
It was nice of you to try, though.

They've been playing this track nonstop on the radio since yesterday. It's a response to all the whining from Republicans about Jay Z's Cuba trip.
I like it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyUxCQt9T0E

It would be great if people just used the title of the article they're posting, rather than coming up with their own baiting nonsense.

How comical to see a conservative whining about losing a gov't benefit, due to Republican backed budget cuts. The icing on the cake is to then blame it on The Kenyan. Only in Murika!

EVERYTHING IS GUNS.

They will have abortion days at school. Free abortions for those who bring in a canned food item for the food drive!!

did you write this all by yourself?

Tell me where exactly in my post did I say "suck it up"? A waste of energy yes, because there is nothing to be done about the time frame, but I didn't devalue anyone's feelings or emotions. Christ you folks are gonna get aneurysms if you keep this up. I am merely trying to get people to keep a little perspective. And I am also waiting for my NOA2 so I have every right to post on these threads. I have also been in a long distance relationship for 2 years in which time I have only seen my fiance for a grand TOTAL of 2 months. So don't think I don't know what you are going through. Spare ME from the lack of reading comprehension.

Your file is submitted to a service center based on the state the USC resides in - it is not random. So, no, it wouldn't work.

Your file is submitted to a service center based on the state the USC resides in - it is not random. So, no, it wouldn't work.

I work in Hollywood in film production and my fiance is also in the film industry (currently in London, but joining me in Los Angeles obviously) and I think we'd both be willing to use our skills to help if there was enough interest. I'd be happy to coordinate and all that stuff and he is a director/editor and we have a very nice home editing suite as well as an office one on his end. If there's interest, I'd be willing to pitch in and I'm sure he'd do so as well.

if your fiancee is in manila, i don't think they accept co-sponsor for fiance visa

Sorry for jumping in, but this is actually wrong. It is not true that you must have known each other for at least two years. A lot of people on here file and get approved having known each other less than two years. The only requirement for the USCIS stage is that (no matter for how long you have known each other), you must have MET at least once within the last two years.
As for the OP, I think you will be fine since you have met within the two-year period. Good luck!

Doesn't matter to me whether it's genuine or not, really. The more public support, the better.

[Continued from the previous post due to limit on image embedding per post...]
4. Effects of Including the DACA Apps in the CSC Total Workload Stats

So let’s look more closely at what happens when we include the DACA application data to the other CSC data. The number of pending applications rises, the number of overall completions rises as the office starts turning out DACA approvals, the increase in the number of receipts is of course evident, the CPP decreases briefly before re-converging (note from the above graph how we know this decrease comes on the back of 129F and the subsequent convergence is improvements in DACA completions, not a fixing of the 129F completion figure), and the CPR does the same as the CPP (with the same underlying mechanism at work).

All Others Pending, Completions, and Receipts trends from above, but with percentage increase figures also included for perspective.

CPP and CPR from the first effects graph, but with percentage change figures added for perspective.
5. Comparisons of Pre-Aug., 2012 Stats with Post-Aug., 2012 Stats

We can see here that the slowdown in I-129F processing times isn’t being driven by an abnormal surge in the amount of I-129F petitions pending. In fact, there was, on average, fewer pending there than at times prior to the DACA applications. Moreover, all other apps at the CSC are similar down in terms of the number pending. But, when you add the DACA apps in, you can see how they are swamping the CSC, raising the total apps pending to 19% higher than its pre-DACA average.

Here we see the true weight of CSC processing choices on the I-129F completions. Compared to prior to the DACA apps, the average number of I-129F petitions completed at the CSC is down a staggering 33%, a change that stands-out from the other application types, and in stark contrast to how I-129Fs are being completed at the VSC.

This graph emphasizes that the slowdown in I-129F processing is not caused by some general surge in application receipts. To the contrary, even when you included the DACA applications, overall receipts are down across the board compared to the pre-DACA period. This is pretty damning for the USCIS’s handling of I-129Fs following the receipt of DACA applications. They have handled more filings in the past.

Again, we can see that the I-129F petitions are bearing a disproportionate reduction in completions per pending apps when compared to other application types, though all application types at the CSC have taken a bit of a hit. This is measuring how big the building backlog has gotten. No such slowdown at the VSC, however.

Again, we can see that the I-129F petitions s are bearing a disproportionate reduction in completions per pending apps when compared to other application types. This is how a backlog is born and perpetuated. No such slowdowns for other application types at the CSC, VSC, or even nationally. Do you need more evidence that I-129F petitions are being singled out for this current slowdown?
Linear Regression Analysis to Determine Statistical Significance of the Correlation
Going beyond what intuition and commonsense should tell us about the above data, we can find more evidence for the hypothesis that the DACA applications have causes a statistically significant slowdown in I-129F petition processing by breaking out the big econometric guns and turning to Gretl.
Given the time series nature of the data, I chose to model a linear AR1 regression to capture the interplay between the variables overtime. What this means in layman’s terms is that I measured the relationships between key variables, both within their current period and with a one month lag effect, to see which variables were correlating with which other variables. In particular, I wanted to ascertain the extent to which other variables were effecting the CSC’s I-129F completion numbers throughout the 24 month period. There are some limitations to making this type of equation with the data I have because related variables (such as receipts and all other pending) cause co-correlation problems; however, I do believe the results I was able to generate by carefully choosing key variables are pretty damn convincing.

What this basically says is that the numbers of DACA applications pending and completed have a statistically significant negative correlation with the completion of I-129F petitions at the CSC. Correlation is not causation, but, I think given the other analysis I provided above, we can pretty much call this one. Moreover, the model used ended up being surprisingly robust, explaining 88% of the variation in the dependent variable (completions of I-129F petitions at the CSC). For your reference, here is a mapping of the regression versus the actual trend line. The residual, a graph of which I cannot include due to the images per post requirements, decreases on average post-Aug., 2012, further giving validity to the notion that the regression is correctly capturing the influence of the DACA applications. I rest my case.

Conclusion
The DACA applications have caused a major slowdown in the processing of I-129F petitions at the CSC. The CSC has singled out I-129F petitioners to bear the brunt of these DACA filings. But it doesn't have to be that way. Let your representatives know that you do not deserve to be singled out for a delay in reunited with your loved one while DACA applicants jump the line to approval. Use this evidence in your complaints to them if you'd like. The USCIS is playing games with our petitions, but now we have the facts to call them out on it. So what are you waiting for?

I have seen people complain about the DACA cases, but not about the recipients of these cases. I do believe that the majority of the complaints are towards the way USCIS has handled this situation. I have not seen any personal attacks on "illegals", but I have seen complaints (and personally agree) that the influx of these cases by an agency that has significant resource constraints has caused unexpected delays in many people's lives. No one is blaming the "illegals"

I don't understand what you're saying because you are no better than anyone else, so the immigration process applies to you as equally as it does to anyone else. MsHogan, myself and many others on here are just trying to inform you of the reality of the time-consuming process that is immigration. We have no motive to make you feel worse or bad about anything - it is just reality.
And, to be honest, I am sorry you feel that you are so much more important. My case is most important to me sure, but not so important that I feel like I should be pushed to the front of the queue and everyone else should wait. It is a process and everyone who applied before me deserves to be processed first. This forum is a community for people to support each other and reward one another for patience. We celebrate when others are finally successful, and we empathize with those of us still waiting.

Danno, stop talking about yourself like that.
Personally, I would like to see the Catholic Church become more progressive and admit a lot of its wrongdoings. Will we see that, nah? A pope is a pope is a pope.

Exactly. It tells you that you did something wrong, so why would you talk about it? You should be ashamed of everything you did wrong!
Add critical thinking and open-mindedness and your list has doubled.

Danno, I have one last reply to you and then I am walking away from you on this topic.
No matter what I do or wear - no man, or woman, is entitled to touch me. My body is my body. No one else is entitled to it no matter what I do. If I am walking naked down the street, that is not me "asking for it".
We all live in a horrible rape culture where women, from the time we are girls, are taught to fear men. We are taught how to behave so that we lessen our risk of rape and assault. We are taught to live with a constant fear that our date might not listen to us say "no", that a guy we consider a friend might have his judgement impaired and will take it out on us. At least 1 in 4 women will be the victim of sexual assault. Guys have the privilege to not fear as we do.
Stop your victim-blaming because it is sick and unbelievably ignorant - not to mention offensive to those of us who have been in similar situations. By shaming the victim for a crime that she was a victim of, you are encouraging other girls to not speak out, but rather to question why it was their fault. You are encouraging a dangerous construct that fuels our rape culture. You are encouraging the oppression of a gender.

See, it's hard to discuss things with you because you imagine what the other person is saying or thinking. I did not say that the Catholic Church needs to change. It is my opinion that it should consider adapting certain things. And opinions, mind you, are a freedom awarded to everyone.
Do NOT tell me my opinions are wrong, OK? That is a horribly insulting and ignorant thing to say to anyone. Opinions are just that. They are not facts. They are subjective. They are based on individual experiences and understandings. Just because my Catholic education is different than yours does not mean that it is any less relevant. My reasons for separating from religion are personal and not because an entity "failed" me.
You can tease me on opinions, and you know I will do the same to you, but do not condescend me by telling me that I can't believe/think a certain way on a certain topic. I ask for your respect there.
I only brought up gay marriage, by the way, because 54% of American Catholics now support it (source) and only 38% oppose it, according to a recent study (the trend of increasing support can be seen for the last decade in various studies of different origins).
The Church has changed to adapt to a society that increasingly sees people as equal. Women are no longer punished as severely for their sins. Annulments are much more acceptable, with divorce approaching realization for Catholics. Adultery is no longer punishable by death. Etc. Some things are phased out over time. It is naive to believe that the Catholic Church of today is the same as it was 2000 years ago (when it wasn't even the "Catholic Church", mind you).
It might be impractical to say the Catholic Church accepts gay marriage - I for one see no need to force it on them. I am pro-gay marriage, but I do not believe that we need to force religious entities to change beliefs. For me, we only need to change the secular law.

First, we are not talking about Islam/
Second, everyone can have an idea on what something "should be". Even the most obedient and dedicated Catholics can have ideas or opinions on how the Catholic church handles itself. I was born and raised in the Catholic Church (since denounced) and many of my family members are practicing Catholics who can intelligently criticize certain aspects of the Church. In the last decade, Catholics as a whole have become much more progressive in their ideas on gay marriage, for example. Religion has its roots in society - created and upheld by society. When society changes, religion changes. Not in the same ways and not to the same rate, but it changes and transforms. I didn't say that the Church had to change, or even should necessarily change, but I believe it should be progressive in that it acknowledges a changing demographic and for its past mistakes (particularly with its excessive spending of Church funds on certain things and its cover up and continuance of child molestation).
I'm assuming you included that definition for your own benefit so as not to forget what it meant while changing tabs between dictionary.com and VJ to reply.

Danno, stop talking about yourself like that.
Personally, I would like to see the Catholic Church become more progressive and admit a lot of its wrongdoings. Will we see that, nah? A pope is a pope is a pope.

Exactly. It tells you that you did something wrong, so why would you talk about it? You should be ashamed of everything you did wrong!
Add critical thinking and open-mindedness and your list has doubled.

I know that he won't even attempt to comprehend it or let it sink in, but the overwhelming sense of nausea forced me to say something.