meladee

@Captain Ewok Here is an example of what @SneakyPete was referring to:

11 minutes ago, Rocio0010 said:

Completely unrelated to Andi B original post. I'm out before they close this thread.

 My bad, you had asked for it:

1 hour ago, Rocio0010 said:

Link? I have never, ever seen hatred in here, let alone towards certain communities. And I have been here every day for the last four years.

2 minutes ago, Redro said:

VisaJourney for whatever reason has kept CEHST up. If people don't report threads, how are mods supposed to know there is an issue? 

Because the posts are BY the mods. Thus it is not an issue in the technical way, and therefore they would do nothing. We're saying it's a bad look, it's disgusting content, and you all can decide whatever you want to do with your "free speech", but we find it ridiculous that the rules you choose to enforce are:

1. Don't post links to helpful sources, even if they aren't a competing website, even if they no longer have a page for donations, even if their content actually drives more traffic and discussion to VJ
2. Say all of the messed up hateful things you want to, just say it in the corner of the site so it only surfaces when people use the search function
3. It's okay to be a bit of a jerk because it's not worth the effort not to be

Like, cool, now I know, maybe you could sticky these? Would have saved me some time realizing this place is not somewhere I want to hang out.

2 minutes ago, Rocio0010 said:

Again, context

Please, we can hear the dog whistles. The use of "these people" when the article is about one person. The farcical lead in: "Normal people -- an oppressed minority -- to whom we owe love and respect." A trans person going to a spa? "I expect the police to be called to that spa to investigate charges of sexual assault."

24 minutes ago, Rocio0010 said:

Weird. I have been a very active user for four years now, and this is the first time I have ever seen your name.

I mostly stay in the K-1 forum, I can't recall seeing you there either. But as I said comment, I don't feel comfortable posting as much as I could have. Sometimes I put in the effort of researching an answer, finding a credible source, and drafting the comment, but then don't post to avoid the pile on or the oft-weaponised "confused" reaction.

25 minutes ago, Rocio0010 said:

Link? I have never, ever seen hatred in here, let alone towards certain communities. And I have been here every day for the last four years.

25 minutes ago, Rocio0010 said:

Can we not share different views on certain topics and have respectful debates?

There's nothing respectful about the content that's being posted, and I just don't think it belongs here in the first place. Obviously, Free Speech, yada yada yada --  it just means I don't want to be a part of it.

24 minutes ago, Crazy Cat said:

I think it is TOTALLY inappropriate to bring politics into this thread.    

I think it is TOTALLY inappropriate to bring politics into an immigration forum, and especially to expect us to read comments with a "brotherly arm around our shoulders" while they are constantly, actively spewing hate-filled rhetoric towards us and our communities.

@steve I never felt comfortable here, but I put a lot of time and effort into trying to help people here anyway. I would have done more if I felt like it was a truly open forum. I had spreadsheets and template letters and extensive notes on the Appropriations Act that I never expected I would dive so deeply into. And so much data, shared by other more technical users, until suddenly it was verboden. And once that was gone, I had no reason to stick around and tip toe through the mods to help new users, lest I get caught up in one of the classic VJ Power User Pile Ons™.  Then, finding "Current Events and Hot Social Topics" hurt me and made me angry that I contributed to a site with an underbelly of hate speech.

I am glad I have found a kind and helpful immigration community elsewhere, and I hope other people, particularly those near the beginning of their journey, are able to do the same.

12 hours ago, SalishSea said:

The OP is talking about providing banking info, which is not the same as evidence of INCOME.

A statement from an officer of the bank is supporting evidence that is specifically asked for in the form I-134 instructions.

Is the statement better evidence than tax transcripts? No, but no one was suggesting that.

Are petitioners still asked to provide such a letter if it "applies" or "is appropriate"? Yes, so we've provided answers to OPs question about the evidence they are providing as instructed.

14 hours ago, SalishSea said:

Bank statements are not evidence of income.

It's literally listed in the instructions as supporting evidence.

Quote

1. Statement from an officer of the bank or other financial institutions with deposits, identifying the following details
regarding the account:
A. Date account opened;
B. Total amount deposited for the past year; and
C. Present balance.

@Inc Not having that single piece of information should be fine, as long as you have the other supporting evidence (statement from your employer, tax transcript). They consider all of the evidence in whole. As a fail-safe, you could take his bank statements from the last year as evidence of the regular deposits if they ask, but it's unlikely they'd review them.

7 hours ago, Mello3 said:

So...not to question you but this is fantastic news...how do you know?

There is a lot of information available that is not allowed to be shared on VJ. You can possibly DM someone to get more information, but VJ moderates those as well.

7 hours ago, ivision413 said:

I was instructred to go to "https://ceac.state.gov/IV" to check the status. But, it asks me to enter the invoice ID provided by NVC. How did you receive that?

This this link: https://ceac.state.gov/CEACStatTracker/Status.aspx?App=NIV

49 minutes ago, madmanmike said:

Looks like they are about 50%. Now  I’m worried they will slow June and move to July. 

I've been tracking daily data for previous months. From what I've observed, this is what I expect to happen:

• This week (Jun 26-30) will be really good, and they will likely start touching July cases ~Friday.
• Next week (Jul 3-7) will be just as good, if not better, as they ease into July (for daily processing at least, the holiday will impact the weekly total)
• The following two weeks (Jul 10-21) will still be pretty good but begin to slow
• Processing will properly slow down around when August cases are started, ~July 24.

All that to say, I would give it until July 24 before you are too concerned about being in the "left behind" group.

22 hours ago, ss & mj said:

Saw two that went to my consulate but my status still says “at NVC”… how do I know if I am among them? 🫣🫣. Also very much appreciate you doing Google doc - gives me smth else to obsess over haha. 

Your case won't be inluded here until NVC has marked it as transit.

18 minutes ago, ss & mj said:

Thanks for the quick response. I only tried it today because I saw one went « off cycle » on 14 June to our consulate. Otherwise I expect us to be in this week’s batch as we already have a case number. Thanks again🙏🏾

Ah, got it -- so exciting! Fingers crossed for you this week then 🙂

16 minutes ago, ss & mj said:

How do you get the DHL tracking numbers? I’ve been trying the DHL « hack » all morning but can’t get any results.

DHL hack will usually only work once you're notified that your case is In Transit. Most cases are sent every-other Tue/Wed, with the next send being tomorrow & this Wednesday. They use sequential tracking numbers, so I just log every tracking number.

Case creation is taking 12 days, so if you were just received at NVC last week, I think you'll miss this week's send and will more likely be in the July 5 batch, but distribution depends on your embassy.

2 hours ago, Roy an Panitta said:

It seems that about 3 or 4 approvals a week is the norm for the last couple of weeks.

Not sure where you're getting this, but the good news is that over 400 May '22 cases were approved last week! We aren't allowed to post the link to the source on VJ, but I suggest you search other platforms for this information.

In the official technical instructions that the physician must follow, it says

Quote

• Influenza vaccine not available

Influenza vaccine is required when available in the country the panel physician is practicing. The influenza vaccine is usually given from fall (autumn) through early spring in temperate areas, and influenza vaccine is often not available in the summer months in these regions. If influenza vaccine is not available because it is not vaccination season in your region, document the “Flu vaccine not available” reason. Although influenza occurs throughout the year in tropical areas, panel physicians in tropical countries are not required to maintain stocks of both northern and southern hemisphere vaccine supplies.  CDC only requires panel physicians to provide influenza vaccine when vaccine is ordinarily available in that country.

So you're fine, no need to worry -- the doctor has instructions for this specific scenario.

@Elays Thanks for making time to update, I hope you had a nice visit from your bf!

3 hours ago, James121998 said:

Also, where did uscis even explicitly state to label photos.

They say it in the instructions to label the passport photos (no instuctions on labelling other photos thought):

Quote

Using a pencil or felt pen, lightly print your name and A-Number (if any) on the back of the photo.

19 minutes ago, Quimat said:

I’ve been checking the Spreadsheet and haven’t seen anything yet 😕

I don't want to sow any discord but it was mentioned on another platform that there's a delay. Consider looking for those updates.

19 minutes ago, When_Will_It_End said:

So have we been able to determine with any more clarity the likelihood of being "left behind" the further into the month you are?

I don't have enough data to get that granular unfortuntely, but it would definitely be interesting to look into. But seeing how the months stretch out, it might be good to temper expectations -- it looks like 50% get processed in 6 weeks once a month starts, but the next 25% can stretch out for a few months.

1 minute ago, FromMexico W/Love said:

What is the median processing time they are judging this against? Is it in the next 6 months to drop from current 16.5 month median wait time to 12 months or a different marker they are using?  

This is the median processing time: https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/historic-pt

Using an archive link, we can see that the value was 14.6 in January, so we'd expect it to get down to ~11 months.
 

That said, this might not be exactly which value they're measuring against (for example, this the value for the fiscal year, but they might have taken a snapshot view or used trailing 6 months or something), but it's a good guide.

10 minutes ago, FromMexico W/Love said:

I wonder if the strategy to blast through the first 50% will have the intended impact to shrink the wait time dramatically and that they end up moving the "goal posts" on what and how quickly they process cases. For example, will they change the reporting to be, we process 50% of cases within 6 months compared to 80%? 

I think the 50% is because they were asked by congress for "a detailed plan for reducing the aggregate median processing time for all applications at least 25 percent by not later than one year from the date of publication of the notice and each year thereafter until median processing times are fewer than six months" because they are increasing fees ("publication of the notice" being a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that impacts the fee level, which was published on Jan 3 -- so they have until January 2024 to reduce the median processing time by 25%)