How to Shake Your NOA2 Loose from the CSC

[bakofoil 27]

I don't know whether that's a rhetorical question or not. Smileys confuse things sometimes. So apologies if you meant 'that's a no brainer' or somepin.

The point I was trying to make, if it was in fact confused, was that people are currently reporting between 7 to 28 days between filing and NOA2 without any expedite circumstances. If people start expecting this to be the 'norm' and start badgering USCIS for touches and ultimately approvals then it's gonna get silly.

That wasn't rhetorical - I was VERY surprised to see that. When I look at the processing times on this site, the shortest time I saw was 102 days. So it seemed WAY premature to me for a January filer to already be expecting NOA2. Even if there are several being processed at that clip, I would still not call if I were in that position. Mainly because it'd be rare for ALL cases to experience the same thing.

Are these 'quickies' mainly through one service center, or is it happening at both?

Since the 22nd February, so less than a week, there have been 7 (not a 'couple')january filer approvals reported through VJ. All through VSC and with no expedite circumstances. In my experience (albeit only over the past six months) this is an unprecedented amount of quick approvals given that usually only Cuban or military expedites are seen so quickly.

My point was actually the same as yours, that I wouldn't be calling if I were in that position because I know this to be unusual. When I raised this point originally it was actually in reference to the idea that it was ok to call if you were seeing a number of approvals around your date. Who defines what this 'number' should be. On VJ 7 approvals in 5 days has been significant, therefore one might assume that January filers, unaware of the plight of some July and August filers might think that it is ok to use the RFE line.

So, what if they do? Well, each to their own but the context of my original post was in reference to the comments made by a July filer stuck in AP who finds it difficult to see people expecting their own approvals so soon in the game. I empathise with her, that's all.

[bakofoil 27]

I like Tbone's approach, if only for the thought that "It's doing something other than sitting around waiting" that can drive us to distraction. There's no way I would call before the end of May, however, it'd just be a waste of my time and the good folks over at CSC - who have better things to focus on like clearing up actual RFE's so those files can be adjudicated (which moves me closer to my goal, after all).

Totally agree with that.

LOL Thanks for clearing that up, BlakeandOhla. Our case went through CSC in 128 days when the VSCers were experiencing 3 week turnarounds as the norm. Sickening!!!

I figured the VSC would slow down some after the new filing rules -- more cases coming in = more time to adjudicate. If there have only been a few quick ones, then I wouldn't think a call using Tbone's suggestions would be warranted for a January filer.

FWIF, if the quick ones had beneficiaries from Cuba, then I'd completely write them off. They are routinely fast through the service center (because they are SLOW at the consulate).

*edited for clarity*

yep, Cuban approvals would not be counted in this instance, nor military expedites. These are 'normal' petitions. But time will tell whether it is the 'norm' at VSC. This is, after all, only the last 5 days.

[TracyTN 237]

Since the 22nd February, so less than a week, there have been 7 (not a 'couple')january filer approvals reported through VJ. All through VSC and with no expedite circumstances. In my experience (albeit only over the past six months) this is an unprecedented amount of quick approvals given that usually only Cuban or military expedites are seen so quickly.

My point was actually the same as yours, that I wouldn't be calling if I were in that position because I know this to be unusual. When I raised this point originally it was actually in reference to the idea that it was ok to call if you were seeing a number of approvals around your date. Who defines what this 'number' should be. On VJ 7 approvals in 5 days has been significant, therefore one might assume that January filers, unaware of the plight of some July and August filers might think that it is ok to use the RFE line.

So, what if they do? Well, each to their own but the context of my original post was in reference to the comments made by a July filer stuck in AP who finds it difficult to see people expecting their own approvals so soon in the game. I empathise with her, that's all.

I understand now - I missed that point in your previous post.

I DO hope that VSC is picking up speed again - but if these turn out to be exceptions rather than rules, well, I guess only time will tell that for sure.

[BlakeandOlha 0]

I DO hope that VSC is picking up speed again - but if these turn out to be exceptions rather than rules, well, I guess only time will tell that for sure.

Your right, time will tell. Babbles, sorry I hadn't checked the VSC approvals for a couple of days. I'm not sure what's going on at VSC, there's still 94 VSC filers from 2007 still waiting for approval going all the way back to August. Those are the people who are probably spitting nails right now. Now they should probably be calling!!

[Mike-Mely 0]

I was wondering if anyone who called and was told they would be called back happened to have spoken to Ann?

the description you have been giving sounds like the same person I talked to and Im getting the same result, although she does have another 3 hours to call me back as she promised, but I dont expect to get that call!

[bakofoil 27]

I DO hope that VSC is picking up speed again - but if these turn out to be exceptions rather than rules, well, I guess only time will tell that for sure.

Your right, time will tell. Babbles, sorry I hadn't checked the VSC approvals for a couple of days. I'm not sure what's going on at VSC, there's still 94 VSC filers from 2007 still waiting for approval going all the way back to August. Those are the people who are probably spitting nails right now. Now they should probably be calling!!

Yeah totally. Hey and no worries, it was a bit of a weird discussion because stuff got taken out of context a bit (no one's fault) - plus I didn't make myself terribly clear first time around.

[rebeccajo 14]

After some deep googling, I was able to find something you all might find interesting. Long but I thought it best to copy and paste it directly to the thread rather than just showing the link.

How To Get Through To a USCIS (Former INS) Service Center

USCIS recently expanded its toll-free customer service call routing network to include the 4 USCIS service centers. The following kinds of calls will be automatically routed to the SC’s during live assistance hours– Under Option 1 in the main menu:

♦ New permanent resident who received their welcome notice more than 30 days ago, but hasn’t yet received their new permanent resident card.

♦ Case already approved but customer didn’t receive associated post-approval documents within 30 days after the case is approved and all required biometrics have been collected (for example getting their new Permanent Resident card within 30 days after we approve their I-90 application.

♦ I-129 approved more than a week ago, but consulate or POE listed on petition hasn’t received notification.

Under Option 2 in the main menu.

♦ Pending case where there is reason to believe companion cases have been separated in processing.

♦ Pending I-129 where the petitioner wants to change information on the petition, such as change consulates or add or remove beneficiaries.

♦ Questions about a ‘Request for Evidence’ (RFE) received from the SC on a case. This includes – - questions trying to understand what is requested, - if the caller believes the material requested by the RFE was already submitted with the case, or - if an RFE response isn't shown in our system within 30 days after it was submitted.

Navigating the Local Service Center Phone System

Doing it Wrong Could End in Frustration

How do these calls get to the right service center?

-The USCIS has structured this as a self-service process. There is no gatekeeper that the caller needs to convince to transfer the call to someone else or somewhere else. The routing is embedded in the system and is based on the customer using the menus and selecting the appropriate options based on the circumstances that caused them to call. Each of the above circumstances is an identified option in the menus. Based on the options selected the call will automatically be routed to what the USCIS has determined is the appropriate location, whether that is one of the call centers or a particular service center.

Take the example of a new permanent resident seeking assistance – The first menu they hear asks them to identify where they are in the process.

The first option is to follow-up on a case that has already been approved or denied, or if the customer recently became a permanent resident, so a new permanent resident concerned that s/he hasn’t yet gotten their card would select this option.

- The next menu asks the customer to identify whether they are a new permanent resident, are calling about some other kind of approved case, or are calling about a denied case. Since the caller is a new permanent resident s/he would select that option.

- The caller then hears 6 options with relevant information and service options for new permanent residents. Option 4 is for where a new permanent resident received their welcome notice more than 30 days ago, but hasn’t yet received their card.

- The system then prompts them to input the receipt number from their welcome notice, and then gives them current status. For example, they may find that the card was just mailed.

- After the caller hears current case status, this call will automatically be transferred to the appropriate service center based on the receipt number the customer keyed in. To effectively use this service all a caller needs to do is to listen to the menus and make the appropriate selections depending on the circumstances that caused them to call.

USCIS systems will automatically provide a range of information and services, and will automatically route calls to the appropriate location for live assistance based on the menu options selected.

If a call is automatically routed to a service center will it always be answered there?

-The service centers offer live assistance from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. their local time. Customers calling from different time zones will be automatically rerouted to one of the USCIS call centers if calling outside the service center’s business hours.

Take the example of a caller from New York calling at 8 a.m. about a reentry permit application because they believe companion cases were separated. At 8 a.m. in New York it’s 7 a.m. at the Nebraska Service Center, where the reentry permit application was filed, and the NSC is not yet open. Since NSC isn’t open, the system will instead automatically route the call to one of the call centers. Personnel there will assist the caller, and take a service request just as NSC would, and will then ship the service request to NSC for analysis and response to the customer. This will also automatically happen if the service center is temporarily closed, such as due to weather. There is one other circumstance where the call will end up at one of the call centers. When the call is routed to the service center, the system automatically projects the customer’s wait time. If the projected wait time exceeds USCIS standards, the call will automatically be routed back one of the call centers, where, again, they will assist the customer and take the service request for the service center to handle.

Can I ask for a call to be transferred?

-No. This is a self-service process. The menus are designed to give customers direct access to various information and case services. Calls are automatically routed based on the options the customer selects.

Will other pre-existing procedures to raise issues to the service centers continue?

-The fax process to request that an SC consider expediting a case will continue. The procedures in place for unusual matters to be raised through regional chairs and other means will also continue.

Who will answer other questions, and deal with other problems?

-Live assistance will continue to be provided by USCIS call center personnel.

A Warning from the USCIS (Former INS)

The USCIS adds this important note of caution: The USCIS has expanded the criteria for case service requests in large part due to feedback from customers and their representatives. To make this process as simple as possible, they also created this self-service process to give customers direct access to SCs where they agree it is appropriate. However, they will continue to balance customer wants for access and updates with their need to focus resources on actual case processing.

Letting customers self-identify themselves and automatically routing them for service based on their selections will only work if customers use this service for the intended purposes. SC staff have been instructed to be very diligent with respect to only handling inquiries appropriate to the selections the customer made in the automated menu - which means the services listed above.

To the extent customers try to turn the automated menu selections into simply a routing PIN to get direct to the SC to raise other issues, either in the context of appropriate transfers or not, they will not find success. But by tying up the available lines trying to raise other issues direct with the SC’s instead of using the appropriate available procedure, customers will reduce USCIS capacity to handle calls that they feel should be routed direct to the SC’s, increasing the chance that a customer who everyone agrees needs to talk directly with a service center will be automatically routed back to the call centers because other customers trying to raise other issues are blocking their path.

The USCIS will continue to evaluate performance of this system. Their hope is to be able to add several kinds of service requests to the direct SC routing path. But if the volume of calls from customers attempting to raise other issues direct to an SC grows to the point where it hampers their ability to help customers they want to be able to get directly through to an SC, then in order to not reduce our commitment to case processing they will have to discontinue this program, and return to answering all calls at their call centers.

http://immigration.about.com/od/uscasestat...LocalCenter.htm

[LaL 418]

A Warning from the USCIS (Former INS)

...

To the extent customers try to turn the automated menu selections into simply a routing PIN to get direct to the SC to raise other issues, either in the context of appropriate transfers or not, they will not find success. But by tying up the available lines trying to raise other issues direct with the SC's instead of using the appropriate available procedure, customers will reduce USCIS capacity to handle calls that they feel should be routed direct to the SC's, increasing the chance that a customer who everyone agrees needs to talk directly with a service center will be automatically routed back to the call centers because other customers trying to raise other issues are blocking their path.

The USCIS will continue to evaluate performance of this system. Their hope is to be able to add several kinds of service requests to the direct SC routing path. But if the volume of calls from customers attempting to raise other issues direct to an SC grows to the point where it hampers their ability to help customers they want to be able to get directly through to an SC, then in order to not reduce our commitment to case processing they will have to discontinue this program, and return to answering all calls at their call centers.

http://immigration.about.com/od/uscasestat...LocalCenter.htm

I found these 2 paragraphs very well suited to the discussion at hand.

[TBoneTX 45,091]

How recent is that USCIS information, out of curiosity?

[rebeccajo 14]

How recent is that USCIS information, out of curiosity?

You can follow the link, TBone.

It's from the general immigration information provided by About.com.

[TBoneTX 45,091]

You can follow the link, TBone.

It's from the general immigration information provided by About.com.

Yes to both, and there is no date except "copyright 2008" by About, Inc. The question is, "how meaningful (fresh) is the advice NOW?" Of note is that USCIS does not mention that their NON-calling means (website, postal notifications, order of processing) are borked, as has been noted by Mox.

[mox 298]

VERY interesting, thank you rj.

I'm still digesting the article, possibly comments to follow later. I too wonder how old it is, but on first read it seems to address the system we're currently using.

[rebeccajo 14]

You can follow the link, TBone.

It's from the general immigration information provided by About.com.

Yes to both, and there is no date except "copyright 2008" by About, Inc. The question is, "how meaningful (fresh) is the advice NOW?" Of note is that USCIS does not mention that their NON-calling means (website, postal notifications, order of processing) are borked, as has been noted by Mox.

TBone - I don't like the misinformation line either. It sux. I'm not defending it, or making excuses for it's 'borkiness'.

The fact remains that USCIS is the only man in town with the bag of gold, and they can take that away any time they like.

[Mike-Mely 0]

TBONE - Did the Calll to the CSC. Got through to an Officer. What does it mean when the I/O I spoke with says "it was assigned to an officer on the 22nd"??

Not TBONE-but it means your case file or the box your case file is in was pulled from the pile of boxes of pending applications and assigned to an officer for adjudication.

[TBoneTX 45,091]

My concern regarding the About article, thorough though it is and authentic though it seems, is this:

Unless I completely missed it, there is no indication, let alone citation, of where the ORIGINAL information came from (or, of when). There is not one footnote or bibliographic citation.

It LOOKS official in parts, and some analysis seems to have been applied. However, without an original source, the information is unverifiable. From which official document(s) or press release(s) was the information directly quoted or excerpted? What are the publication dates of the source documents? Were any errata subsequently released? Who edited the information? How much paraphrasing was done by whoever edited the information? Was permission received in advance, from all original authors or from the source agency, to reproduce the original material (if it is official) in whole or in part? These questions are unanswered.

Lest anyone claim nitpickiness, these concerns are my business as part of helping to edit a professional journal. Any reviewer or staff editor or the editor-in-chief would be justified in pointing out these matters.

Again, the article appears thorough, but until someone points the way to verification of the material, certainty about the authenticity of the material is absent.

The article may very well be accurate enough to rely upon, but I would raise the identical concerns about ANY Internet article that fails to meet the above minimal criteria.