Slow Down at CSC

[thelastpetitioner 218]

Yes, but the VSC is clearly working again and getting back on track.

Well look at it this way. If the reason for the CSC delay is due to a secret Democrat-led mandate on prioritizing other types of immigrant applications over ours because of the upcoming election, at least Election Day is only a few weeks away and, theoretically, they should be back to K visas in November (god, I can't believe it's nearly been another month without any approvals).

im not really worried about getting an approval before the five months mark anymore,im just waiting to be able to demand an answer.

[candn 17]

im not really worried about getting an approval before the five months mark anymore,im just waiting to be able to demand an answer.

I am only interested in knowing why we all pay the same amount for unequal service.

Edited October 15, 2010 by candn

[thelastpetitioner 218]

Just did and all I can say is :wow: :wow:

i know huh,i didnt know you can find drama in that level on an immigration website

[amykathleen2005 441]

Just because you haven't seen approvals from CSC recently doesn't mean that there have not been. People forget to update timelines on VisaJourney all the time. Plus VJ represents a very small amount of the petitions going through, it is possible that the few K-1's represented here just have not been approved amongst the thousands they have.

[thelastpetitioner 218]

I am only interested in knowing why we all pay the same amount for unequal service.

because in the end of the day,they do meet the five months time frame,usually in the last couple of weeks to that frame tho

[gap1 21]

Just because you haven't seen approvals from CSC recently doesn't mean that there have not been. People forget to update timelines on VisaJourney all the time. Plus VJ represents a very small amount of the petitions going through, it is possible that the few K-1's represented here just have not been approved amongst the thousands they have.

Sure, I suppose that's POSSIBLE...but it hasn't just been "recently". There has been basically no activity (reported here) in 3 months. That's a very long time. The odds of every single VJ filer in June/July simply forgetting to update their timeline (especially when reading about our frustrations with the CSC) are low.

[Nystu 2]

Just because you haven't seen approvals from CSC recently doesn't mean that there have not been. People forget to update timelines on VisaJourney all the time. Plus VJ represents a very small amount of the petitions going through, it is possible that the few K-1's represented here just have not been approved amongst the thousands they have.

It is a sample nontheless... You might not see it as significant, but most people check the data here to get an idea of how things are going. I am sorry, I just don't understand how some pleople can deny thing process is becoming painfully S L O W... As I said in another post (or this one, cant't remember anymore), only people who say the process hasn't slowed down are those whose applications were approved fast.

[amykathleen2005 441]

It is a sample nontheless... You might not see it as significant, but most people check the data here to get an idea of how things are going. I am sorry, I just don't understand how some pleople can deny thing process is becoming painfully S L O W... As I said in another post (or this one, cant't remember anymore), only people who say the process hasn't slowed down are those whose applications were approved fast.

Our K-1 took almost 10 months total last year, I do understand slow and frustration.

Edited October 15, 2010 by amykathleen2005

[pushbrk 13,001]

Does anyone out there on VJ have information on why the CSC has apparently slowed down so much recently?

NOA1: July 13, 2010

Petitions are filed into a black hole. While recent historical data may be used to set an expectation, that expectation should be subject to adjustment based on whatever happens. Processing times go in unpredictable cycles. Asking "Why?" is useless.

[Nystu 2]

Petitions are filed into a black hole. While recent historical data may be used to set an expectation, that expectation should be subject to adjustment based on whatever happens. Processing times go in unpredictable cycles. Asking "Why?" is useless.

I found the answer... If the petitioner, the beneficiary, or any of their relatives has a vowel in their first, middle or last name, the approval process could take more than the average processing time, or maybe not.

[SimplyMacy 4]

Ohhhh people I'm just keeping quiet but i keep checking the USCIS website to check my case status though I already requested to notify me in my email for any updates! How crazy is that? My Fiance said, the waiting is worse than going through his divorce 10 years ago. For now, let's just hope and pray that it won't take that long. We've been waiting long enough.

[Geode 3]

I am only interested in knowing why we all pay the same amount for unequal service.

candn, we do not all pay the same amount for unequal service. If I am understanding the posts that I read, some have paid and have actually received service. Others have paid and have received no service. I think that you cannot compare something to nothing as unequal.

It is the nothing that is the most troublesome. I cannot help but wonder if, in four months, I will be anticipating the arrival of the day I can call CSC and ask why I am still waiting. This is depressing

I found the answer... If the petitioner, the beneficiary, or any of their relatives has a vowel in their first, middle or last name, the approval process could take more than the average processing time, or maybe not.

Interesting. Should I change my name to Grg?

I found the answer... If the petitioner, the beneficiary, or any of their relatives has a vowel in their first, middle or last name, the approval process could take more than the average processing time, or maybe not.

Interesting. Should I change my name to Grg?

[Nystu 2]

Interesting. Should I change my name to Grg?

Sure, but you might get a RFE

[Tinaa 0]

That made me laugh so hard!

[Geode 3]

I-129F stats reported by USCIS for CSC for 2010

_______ Processed Pending Received Waiting

January 1932 8730 1814 832

February 3194 6685 2127 1050

March 2863 6657 2491 767

April 2919 6704 2301 757

May 1442 6689 1706 767

June 1949 7077 2274 754

July 1984 7323 2322 880

Notice that there is no information reported for August or September. There is no definition of the terms used for the column headings on the USCIS site. I have abbreviated them, but you will be able to match them easily if you care to look. On the average, CSC is processing 2326 I-129F per month. CSC is receiving and average of 2147 new petitions each month. (Well, that is what is reported at least.) These two numbers support the drop from 8730 pending in January to 7323 in July. The numbers do not quite "add up", however. Assuming that there were actually 8730 unprocessed petitions at the end of January and that there is at least some order-of-receipt structure to the processing, those petitions and about 200 more were processed by the end of April. During those three months an additional 6919 petitions were received. The reported number pending at the end of April is 6704. This is about 200 less than those received. The total number of petitions processed for May, June and July is 5375. Again, assuming there is an order to the processing, all but roughly 1500 petitions pending at the end of April should have been processed. Those should mostly be February, March and April petitions. I think these numbers can be extended so that it is possible to say that the actual processing time for a petition is around 3 to 4 months.

The problem is, the numbers do not "add up" (and do not match VJ statistics). Things within the USCIS reported numbers are close, but not close enough. It does not mean that USCIS is reporting bogus numbers. It just means that the numbers USCIS reports do not add up as reported. What is the significance of the missing data? It is pretty easy to count petitions processed, received, etc., each day and also easy to include them in data base for the USCIS web site. That makes it easy to think that USCIS has the numbers but does not want to publish them. My next question is, of course, "Why?".

Edited October 15, 2010 by Geode