How to Shake Your NOA2 Loose from the CSC

[mox 298]

It's about whether or not what one does - to make oneself feel better - can impact the entire system.

I do agree (and have agreed) that calling to "feel better" is...I don't know how I put it...not the best use of anyone's time or resources, to say the least. I could recommend a whole slew of other things to do to feel better, some of which do not involve lotion.

That ought to tell everybody something. Like - if the lines are clogged up by people trying to make themselves 'feel better' - what about the poor folks with a REAL problem? How would you like to be sitting there with a piece of paper in your hand that makes you feel like your entire case hangs in the balance, and you can't get through to a LIVE person because the lines are jammed?

I say using this line, when you are still inside the published processing times, is flat out irresponsible and smacks of entitlement.

It does not seem to have overwhelmed the system as of yet, but I do agree that it could become a problem. Which is why I would like to see USCIS provide a real avenue to real information. Wouldn't even have to be access to a case officer. A real web-based system that showed things like how many cases are in front of yours, when your case is in adjudication, etc, would be great. Imagine Igor's stats, but implemented at USCIS. How cool and useful would that be? The technology to implement such a system is ridiculously easy and inexpensive to come by. That would give the feel-gooders a reason to feel good, and the people who want a real status to get a real status.

I don't think it's a sense of entitlement. I think it's symptomatic of the opaqueness of the system.

Edited February 28, 2008 by mox

[TracyTN 237]

I sincerely don't get this. Some people think they should be able to call USCIS at their whim to make themselves feel better. Others disagree with the tactic.

To turn that into some sort of Constitutional debate is, frankly, silly.

Some of the problem is that some of us have been waiting six and seven months.......with no contact about what is going on......it eats at us and gets on our nerves..........but in reality the biggest problem is the system that does not answer any questions about our applications........and if they do depending on when u call if u have the need to call again u get a complete different answer than u did the first time .......... the system needs to be changed and made family friendly.....they increased our fees for applications to hire people so that cases could be dealt with better.......how ever when u have jan and dec people getting approvals while aug sept and even some july people are still waiting.......well as u can see tempers rise....from what i can see the system by passes many constitutional rights that citizens of the usa have.....but us getting into a fight over it is not going to change anything we should remember to always be polite and kind to each other we are here to support each other and give each other strength......a support system that in some cases is all that some people have while going thru this insane night mare that has turned wonderful loving people into bewildered zombies......

:)

I never said that anyone waiting six or seven months shouldn't be upset and want information. You absolutely should!

I was one of those whose I 129f was approved out of turn (meaning those who filed after me were approved before me) - believe me, I know how it sucks, and I know that all I wanted was either my approval or some kind of valuable information. No disagreements from anyone here that brick wall is VERY annoying.

The fee increase was to improve things, that's true; but to think those improvements would happen in a pace that resembles speedy is unrealistic - only because this IS the US govt we're talking about.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree that bringing over a spouse/fiance from another country is a 'right'. (It certainly is not a Constitutional right.) I see it more as a priviledge, but that's a debate that has famously gone nowhere on this board numerous times, and not one I wish to have again.

For the most part, I think people here HAVE been polite to each other while having the debate.

I just think going into it in the depths that this has is getting a bit nutty.

Edited February 28, 2008 by TracyTN

[rebeccajo 14]

It's about whether or not what one does - to make oneself feel better - can impact the entire system.

I do agree (and have agreed) that calling to "feel better" is...I don't know how I put it...not the best use of anyone's time or resources, to say the least. I could recommend a whole slew of other things to do to feel better, some of which do not involve lotion.

That ought to tell everybody something. Like - if the lines are clogged up by people trying to make themselves 'feel better' - what about the poor folks with a REAL problem? How would you like to be sitting there with a piece of paper in your hand that makes you feel like your entire case hangs in the balance, and you can't get through to a LIVE person because the lines are jammed?

I say using this line, when you are still inside the published processing times, is flat out irresponsible and smacks of entitlement.

It does not seem to have overwhelmed the system as of yet, but I do agree that it could become a problem. Which is why I would like to see USCIS provide a real avenue to real information. Wouldn't even have to be access to a case officer. A real web-based system that showed things like how many cases are in front of yours, when your case is in adjudication, etc, would be great. Imagine Igor's stats, but implemented at USCIS. How cool and useful would that be? The technology to implement such a system is ridiculously easy and inexpensive to come by. That would give the feel-gooders a reason to feel good, and the people who want a real status to get a real status.

I don't think it's a sense of entitlement. I think it's symptomatic of the opaqueness of the system.

I call it 'entitlement' with no sense of guilt whatsoever. Who am I to think my case is more important than someone elses? EVERYBODY in this system is at the mercy of it!

I was all bent out of shape and worried sick some days when my husband was caught in namecheck. I had nightmares that they were going to get him mixed up with some REAL irish terrorist/bomber/murderer who had invaded our shores - that they would pack him off in the middle of the night. I had a person I could call even - our adjudicating officer had given us the phone number to the Pittsburgh office. I had my AO's direct email even. And I used it because he said we could - but it didn't help one bit when I would call! All he could tell me was we were still stuck!

Wes got his card. Now look. I still have friends back in AOS, caught longer than us, with no greencard in hand. Was my case more special than theirs? NO. I abused nothing when I called the number I was given - but the calls were pointless. A case moves when it moves.

You really need to read "Building an Immigration Service for the 21st Century". I know it's USCIS gobbly-dee-###### to some extent, but it talks in that document about how technological systems WILL be improved. The service KNOWS they have to get away from the current paper-based system. They KNOW that the desktop PC's in their offices are ancient! They know all this. But it isn't going to change overnight.

Clogging up their phone system with feel-good phone calls isn't going to reinforce it to them one bit. They already know it.

[rebeccajo 14]

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree that bringing over a spouse/fiance from another country is a 'right'. (It certainly is not a Constitutional right.) I see it more as a priviledge, but that's a debate that has famously gone nowhere on this board numerous times, and not one I wish to have again.

[TBoneTX 44,674]

Everyone is kindly invited to re-read the first two pages of this thread.

[mox 298]

Well, when all is said and done, our opinions on the matter don't count for much. The genie is out of the bottle, and people will continue to call the RFE line as long as that avenue is available. As long as it is being used, I would hope people use it responsibly, but even the definition of "responsibly" in this case is up for debate, and even I find myself waffling. I do think some people call for selfish reasons, but I believe the majority of filers call out of sheer frustration and unmitigated anxiety. USCIS would only be helping themselves by providing a relief valve for those callers.

I certainly would never advocate a course of action that allows a filer to hop the queue, but whether someone sets out on that course of action or not is a moot point since USCIS are the gatekeepers of the queue. There is no evidence to indicate that anyone's discovered a way to leapfrog their case forward anyway. I'm going to set aside some time to read "Building an Immigration Service for the 21st Century". Not sure when that's gonna be, but I'm definitely interested to see where USCIS sees themselves going.

Oh and yeah, "sponsoring an immigrant: right or privilege?" Let's have that discussion again!

[rebeccajo 14]

Everyone is kindly invited to re-read the first two pages of this thread.

TBone - that's silly. Come on, man - give it a rest.

I'm not your enemy here. I feel for you and everybody else waiting. If I were in your shoes, I'd be frustrated and mad too! It's taking longer for petitions to be approved (right now) than I've seen in three years. It's bad, really bad. Luckily, I think we all can say we are starting to see the gridlock break up. There's a long way to go yet, but I see glints of daylight at the end of the tunnel.

In showing you any of the links I have put up, or talking about anything we have in the thread, it was never my intent to stop you or anyone else from feeling better about their case. It wasn't my intent to come in here as a 'big bad bully' either.

Knowledge is power. Power over yourself and your mind. Personally I have found the more I learned about the service and how it works, the better prepared I was to deal with my emotions. We 'old-timers' know that our emotions are our worst enemy in this journey. Either because we've experienced dark moments ourselves, or we've experienced those emotions vicariously through the journeys of our friends through their processes.

I urge you to keep researching and learning about the service. It can never, ever hurt you. But I truly truly believe that your best 'defense' for your immigration journey is realizing that the service is what it is; that they know it is broken; that they are working on mending it; and most importantly - it is the only legal way for us to be with our loved ones. There is simply no other alternative. We band together here and on other similar communities to find ways to help each other. Legitimate ways that work.

Sadly, I believe I would have been doing a disservice to the majority of readers here if I had encouraged you in this method. Needs of the many outweigh the wants of the few - and all that jazz. That's the ONLY reason I've continued our discussion here. Not to make you look bad or stupid, or put you down. Honest.

I wish you and everybody reading this thread peace in their journey as it progresses. Really I do.

Edited February 28, 2008 by rebeccajo

[TBoneTX 44,674]

RJ:

Thank you for your attempt to be sincere. I will largely accept it as such, although parts are obviously patronizing. Nothing is "silly" -- and, even if something IS "silly," there are more diplomatic ways to say things.

Reframing some realities, nonconfrontationally: Despite USCIS's intentions (sincere or not) to improve its operations (actively or not), the system is dysfunctional NOW. Recommendations to "wait for the new and wonderful world of USCIS to come" fail to help people NOW. My Congressman's aide described USCIS as was posted in one of my messages yesterday.

USCIS makes promises that are not kept. It flatly states "we process applications in the order we receive them." This is untrue. When petitioners are being bypassed in favor of later applications, or when processing times are being approached with no word or inadequate word, they have a right (they are "entitled") to know why.

The various avenues for learning "why" are (and some may be left out here):

1. Call the toll-free line to reach a front-line contract screener.

2. Call one's Congressman to have him/her submit an inquiry.

3. Call one's lawyer to have his/her office seek information.

3. Contact the CIS Ombudsman.

4. Wait for USCIS notifications or actions.

5. Use the "approach" (recommended by a USCIS employee) to reach someone who has real-time information.

Some of the advantages and disadvantages of the avenues are:

1. ADV.: Following the common procedure. DISADV.: Waiting on hold for 30 to 40 minutes; going through the screener's "script" of questions to answer about one's case and the reasons for one's call (when one KNOWS the reason for one's call); receiving canned or nonresponsive answers; receiving no information beyond what one saw on USCIS Case Status On-Line before investing 30 to 40 minutes in a fruitless call to learn more.

2. ADV.: The potential that an "influential" ally can procure more information from USCIS than a mere petitioner. DISADV.: Contrary to the procedures in place in 2003 (when the "former NSC adjudicator" posted his hints on VJ), USCIS no longer handles Congressional inquiries on a priority basis; a special "congressional contact" has 72 hours to reply; the information gained may be little different from what one already knows.

3. ADV.: The potential that an "influential" ally (perhaps not much more so than the petitioner) can procure more information. DISADV.: An attorney's sense of urgency in calling or responding is not always the same as ours; it may cost additional money (or may not); the information gained may be little different from what one already knows.

4. ADV.: "Patience is a virtue; trust the system; etc." DISADV.: One's file could be buried, misplaced, unhandled for an unduly long time even by USCIS's internal standards (without their knowledge until it's brought to their attention), etc.; notices (NOA1s, RFEs, NOA2s) may not be mailed on a timely basis; Case Status On-Line not updated (by admission of USCIS agents); lacking meaningful information and being unable to rely on revelations that may or may not be complete or current.

5. ADV.: Bypass front-line screeners who cannot or will not provide information other than what was obvious before; (optimally) learn the exact location of one's application within the Division (that it is not lost, etc.); (perhaps) influence the forward progress of one's file by gentle suggestion that the file be carried to its next station; learn these things EARLIER than other methods allow. DISADV.: Widespread irresponsible use of this avenue could risk its later closure (or, as an equally possible ADV, prompt its expansion or the development of an even better informational system).

---

We are each free to decide which of these approaches is appropriate for our individual situation. I realistically believe that the 5th approach -- volunteered to me by an immigration officer with USCIS, and passed along to you -- worked to get my file moving beyond where it had been sitting. On the basis of cautions expressed by others, your decision may be to proceed with another approach. For the occasional/periodic use of those whose circumstances make the approach reasonable, I consider it a "legitimate way that works."

After using your head in clear evaluation of your own circumstances, and after considering whether your call NOW would unduly hamper the interests of people who are perhaps in greater need, you opt for the 5th approach, and it works (or doesn't work) for you, report it here.

Si, man.

Edited February 28, 2008 by TBoneTX

[sara..... 371]

RJ:

Thank you for your attempt to be sincere. I will largely accept it as such, although parts are obviously patronizing. Nothing is "silly" -- and, even if something IS "silly," there are more diplomatic ways to say things.

Reframing some realities, nonconfrontationally: Despite USCIS's intentions (sincere or not) to improve its operations (actively or not), the system is dysfunctional NOW. Recommendations to "wait for the new and wonderful world of USCIS to come" fail to help people NOW. My Congressman's aide described USCIS as was posted in one of my messages yesterday.

USCIS makes promises that are not kept. It flatly states "we process applications in the order we receive them." This is untrue. When petitioners are being bypassed in favor of later applications, or when processing times are being approached with no word or inadequate word, they have a right (they are "entitled") to know why.

The various avenues for learning "why" are (and some may be left out here):

1. Call the toll-free line to reach a front-line contract screener.

2. Call one's Congressman to have him/her submit an inquiry.

3. Call one's lawyer to have his/her office seek information.

3. Contact the CIS Ombudsman.

4. Wait for USCIS notifications or actions.

5. Use the "approach" (recommended by a USCIS employee) to reach someone who has real-time information.

Some of the advantages and disadvantages of the avenues are:

1. ADV.: Following the common procedure. DISADV.: Waiting on hold for 30 to 40 minutes; going through the screener's "script" of questions to answer about one's case and the reasons for one's call (when one KNOWS the reason for one's call); receiving canned or nonresponsive answers; receiving no information beyond what one saw on USCIS Case Status On-Line before investing 30 to 40 minutes in a fruitless call to learn more.

2. ADV.: The potential that an "influential" ally can procure more information from USCIS than a mere petitioner. DISADV.: Contrary to the procedures in place in 2003 (when the "former NSC adjudicator" posted his hints on VJ), USCIS no longer handles Congressional inquiries on a priority basis; a special "congressional contact" has 72 hours to reply; the information gained may be little different from what one already knows.

3. ADV.: The potential that an "influential" ally (perhaps not much more so than the petitioner) can procure more information. DISADV.: An attorney's sense of urgency in calling or responding is not always the same as ours; it may cost additional money (or may not); the information gained may be little different from what one already knows.

4. ADV.: "Patience is a virtue; trust the system; etc." DISADV.: One's file could be buried, misplaced, unhandled for an unduly long time even by USCIS's internal standards (without their knowledge until it's brought to their attention), etc.; notices (NOA1s, RFEs, NOA2s) may not be mailed on a timely basis; Case Status On-Line not updated (by admission of USCIS agents); lacking meaningful information and being unable to rely on revelations that may or may not be complete or current.

5. ADV.: Bypass front-line screeners who cannot or will not provide information other than what was obvious before; (optimally) learn the exact location of one's application within the Division (that it is not lost, etc.); (perhaps) influence the forward progress of one's file by gentle suggestion that the file be carried to its next station; learn these things EARLIER than other methods allow. DISADV.: Widespread irresponsible use of this avenue could risk its later closure (or, as an equally possible ADV, prompt its expansion or the development of an even better informational system).

---

We are each free to decide which of these approaches is appropriate for our individual situation. I realistically believe that the 5th approach -- volunteered to me by an immigration officer with USCIS, and passed along to you -- worked to get my file moving beyond where it had been sitting. On the basis of cautions expressed by others, your decision may be to proceed with another approach. For the occasional/periodic use of those whose circumstances make the approach reasonable, I consider it a "legitimate way that works."

After using your head in clear evaluation of your own circumstances, and after considering whether your call NOW would unduly hamper the interests of people who are perhaps in greater need, you opt for the 5th approach, and it works (or doesn't work) for you, report it here.

Si, man.

another jan filer just got approved lol do u know of any way to move our cases to where all this is going on? seems csc really is stuck

[TBoneTX 44,674]

another jan filer just got approved lol do u know of any way to move our cases to where all this is going on? seems csc really is stuck

Depending on how recently you called before (last week?), wait a few days to see if a pattern of further approvals of "submissions after yours" continues, and consider calling again. That's one opinion!

[sara..... 371]

another jan filer just got approved lol do u know of any way to move our cases to where all this is going on? seems csc really is stuck

Depending on how recently you called before (last week?), wait a few days to see if a pattern of further approvals of "submissions after yours" continues, and consider calling again. That's one opinion!

awe i called this week..........again

[TBoneTX 44,674]

awe i called this week..........again

Call next week -- again! Your situation is exactly what this approach is for.

[Andres and Diana 0]

Ok....so now im wondering if I have my account on the website set up correctly to receive emails. I have changed the address due to some moves I have done twice and no touch....also I called..what day was it?...Monday?...and spoke to an officer that said she would get back to me...and still no touch or call..

Could it be the I have my account set up wrong? I did receive though the account set up verification letter...Has anyone else encountered this problem?

Let me know..

Diana

[rebeccajo 14]

RJ:

Thank you for your attempt to be sincere. I will largely accept it as such, although parts are obviously patronizing. Nothing is "silly" -- and, even if something IS "silly," there are more diplomatic ways to say things.

TBone -

I was sincere. Your retort here is unprovoked and condescending.

I don't speak in a PC manner in my posts. I speak to readers as if we were having a face-to-face conversation. It seems to me that your definition of 'diplomacy' has less to do with courtesy and more to do with you not having heard what you wanted from me.

I use the word 'silly' frequently. It means this It's not un-diplomatic.

Undiplomatic would have been - well - for me to have said you were being - oh, any number of things. Childish. Stubborn. THAT would have been undiplomatic.

Your attitude about your 'method' is approaching tantrum-like redundancy. Boo-hoo USCIS is not fixed RIGHT NOW and I want it fixed RIGHT NOW and I want my COOKIE! NOW!

Like I said a few pages back - if you can't handle this part of the process, you are ill-equipped for life with a foreign born individual. And that's experience talking. Undiplomatic or not.

Si.

[mox 298]

Ok....so now im wondering if I have my account on the website set up correctly to receive emails. I have changed the address due to some moves I have done twice and no touch....also I called..what day was it?...Monday?...and spoke to an officer that said she would get back to me...and still no touch or call..

Could it be the I have my account set up wrong? I did receive though the account set up verification letter...Has anyone else encountered this problem?

Let me know..

Diana

Easy enough to check. Change your password. You'll get an email verifying that you changed it. That will at least show your email is correct. Then login to your account. Next to the "Receipt number" field is an "Email" field. If it has a Y in it, you are set to automatically receive email.