Timeline based on sent date rather than NOA1 date?

[mikelovesgracey 0]

Can someone please tell me why the adjudication date in the timeline is based on the I-129f sent date rather than the NOA1 date? It just seems to me that since the NOA1 date is when the petition is officially received that this is when all estimated adjudication dates should be based from. Is it possible that since it took over 1 month for us to get the NOA1 that somehow this time is counted?

Thanks,

Mike&Gracey

[Ban Hammer 13,283]

mbc

[Otto 83]

Can someone please tell me why the adjudication date in the timeline is based on the I-129f sent date rather than the NOA1 date? It just seems to me that since the NOA1 date is when the petition is officially received that this is when all estimated adjudication dates should be based from. Is it possible that since it took over 1 month for us to get the NOA1 that somehow this time is counted?

Thanks,

Mike&Gracey

Because when they (USCIS) got it and when they generate and send a NOA is two different things. When they got it is what matters since that's when they started processing it.

[cdneh 3,112]

Can someone please tell me why the adjudication date in the timeline is based on the I-129f sent date rather than the NOA1 date? It just seems to me that since the NOA1 date is when the petition is officially received that this is when all estimated adjudication dates should be based from. Is it possible that since it took over 1 month for us to get the NOA1 that somehow this time is counted?

Thanks,

Mike&Gracey

Because when they (USCIS) got it and when they generate and send a NOA is two different things. When they got it is what matters since that's when they started processing it.

If they start to process it as soon as they get it, you would think a NOA1 would be generated in less than 25 days.

Edited September 19, 2008 by cdneh

[janessnroland 0]

you should be seeing an NOA2 very soon!

[Ju&Ja 1]

I was wondering the same. I don't understand why the timeline on VJ is based on the sending part. For me, you send your petition, they receive it and then they work on it (give receipt number, barcode etc...) and put it in the queue... So I think that the date on the NOA1 is the good one for the timeline and NOT the date yu sent your folder...

[annax 0]

I was wondering the same. I don't understand why the timeline on VJ is based on the sending part. For me, you send your petition, they receive it and then they work on it (give receipt number, barcode etc...) and put it in the queue... So I think that the date on the NOA1 is the good one for the timeline and NOT the date yu sent your folder...

I can see it both ways. In some cases they receive the case earlier then the NOA 1 date but didn't for some reason get around to sending the NOA 1 till many days afterward. Then on the other hand, not everyone uses one day mail to send they applications so realistically the sent date doesn't work either, esp if they were sent from a foriegn country that takes a weeks worth of time for transit.

Realistically they would choose a median date between the sent + NOA 1 to base the timeline off of. In my case it doesn't make a difference as I one day mailed it so my sent date and NOA 1 are a day's difference.

[Coaster 0]

I was wondering the same. I don't understand why the timeline on VJ is based on the sending part. For me, you send your petition, they receive it and then they work on it (give receipt number, barcode etc...) and put it in the queue... So I think that the date on the NOA1 is the good one for the timeline and NOT the date yu sent your folder...

I agree and have wondered the same all along. I appreciate whoever did the programming for the list and is getting it hosted at no expense to us...but I always wondered why a totally arbitrary date should be the primary sort factor. NOA1 is the milestone. The difference between Sent Date and NOA1 can vary widely depending on the courier used--e.g. regular post vs. UPS Overnight--and on how long it sits before the petition is officially in the system. When it is entered into the system is the only thing we know for sure until some other update occurs.

I've basically ignored my actual position in the list, but pay a lot of attention to the movement up and down in it, so in the end it doesn't matter. It would be worth modifying if USCIS would actually work on a FIFO basis, but given that they obviously don't, I guess I wouldn't go through the trouble of changing it.

Other than that little thing, "Igor's List" and the derivative statistical analyses are all an awesome piece of work and I say that as a developer. Thanks Igor! If that is your name...

[annax 0]

Well, just do what I do and mentally bump yourself up a few places if there are people with NOA1 dates after yours listed above you. ;-)

Not that it makes a difference at all, they seem to do a chunk of dates around the same range, so people with dates after yours and before yours will be approved at the same time. Look at the general date range being approved and hope you get lucky.

[maliciant 7]

I think it probably comes down to the sent date being less arbitrary than the noa1 date... especially for VSC where people would routinely receive a noa1 2 months in followed almost immediately by the noa2 a couple weeks later. The noa1 date in those cases isn't even available until the process is almost over, you have the sent date immediately so it's a better date to gauge a prediction of when a NOA2 is likely to show up... for sorting on igor's list, it's probably for the same reasons, even a new case has a sent date.