Stuck cases at California Service Center

[psv57 88]

Although I am sure this topic might shock people since California has a good reputation for approving cases very quickly, I see a few from May at least that got stuck and are pending for almost 60 days. I am sure there are others in earlier months but I haven't had a chance to look at other month spreadsheets. For the cases stuck at California for over a month, can you share if you've had any luck finding out why and if you've taken any steps to get answers? It's great that they can approve in 2 weeks if they want yet some cases are being left behind and just trying to figure out why. Also I've noticed a higher trend in cases I've followed on USCIS of RFEs. If anyone at California has gotten RFEs, are they relevant ones or delay strategies like at Texas and Nebraska?

Hoping to see and hear from those stuck at California for over a month....

Edited January 15, 2014 by psv57

[aditya3245 113]

Although I am sure this topic might shock people since California has a good reputation for approving cases very quickly, I see a few from May at least that got stuck and are pending for almost 60 days. I am sure there are others in earlier months but I haven't had a chance to look at other month spreadsheets. For the cases stuck at California for over a month, can you share if you've had any luck finding out why and if you've taken any steps to get answers? It's great that they can approve in 2 weeks if they want yet some cases are being left behind and just trying to figure out why. Also I've noticed a higher trend in cases I've followed on USCIS of RFEs. If anyone at California has gotten RFEs, are they relevant ones or delay strategies like at Texas and Nebraska?

Hoping to see and hear from those stuck at California for over a month....

I doubt that they are "stuck"

Some might be provisional waivers, re-marriage after divorce, other peculiar unique aspects of cases that might be causing additional delays.

I think California is doing just fine.

Texas and Nebraska take their sweet old time because they do not have experienced adjudicators handling this stuff

[Darnell 8,478]

none of that stuff matters after adjudication.

[aditya3245 113]

none of that stuff matters after adjudication.

????

It matters AT adjudication though.

What if someone filed several i-130s prior to the one being processed.

Wouldnt that delay pre-adjudication at CSC ??

Where am I wrong here ?

[Kaylara 814]

I doubt that they are "stuck"

Some might be provisional waivers, re-marriage after divorce, other peculiar unique aspects of cases that might be causing additional delays.

I think California is doing just fine.

Texas and Nebraska take their sweet old time because they do not have experienced adjudicators handling this stuff

Texas and Nebraska do have experienced adjudicators handling these cases. That they'd stopped last year was not because no one knew how to process them. It's because they transferred that workload to the local offices temporarily. (Backlogs, DACA, Workloads, Et al.)

[Kaylara 814]

????

It matters AT adjudication though.

What if someone filed several i-130s prior to the one being processed.

Wouldnt that delay pre-adjudication at CSC ??

Where am I wrong here ?

It might make it longer to do the background checks. But as far as I understand it, you don't file the waiver inside of the I130 application, and divorces are not a rare thing, it would be part of the actual adjudication process. The multiple prior I130's would also show up during adjudication. There's a thread around here somewhere that you should read, where a former USCIS adjudicator explained the processes that they went through. It does shed some light on what exactly happens during the process. Of course, there are plenty of things that have changed since that information was (semi) current, but I think we can safely assume that the majority of what is discussed there is probably the same.

[aditya3245 113]

Texas and Nebraska do have experienced adjudicators handling these cases. That they'd stopped last year was not because no one knew how to process them. It's because they transferred that workload to the local offices temporarily. (Backlogs, DACA, Workloads, Et al.)

If we were to look at per petition processing time, California adjudicators are taking less time per case.

Forget about the backlogs, DACA whatever bs.... if were to look at per petition processing time in the monthly spreadsheets (compare two petitions that are being processed at different SCs for the same or consecutive PDs), the adjudicators at NE and TX are taking longer without a doubt.

This cannot happen unless the officers in California are more experienced.

Every petition has to be approved with national security concerns on their mind - you are telling me that NE and TX care more about securing the homeland than CA ?

[Kaylara 814]

It can also happen if there are more people processing I130's at CSC as opposed to NSC or TSC. We don't know how many people are working on these cases at any facility. I think that it's much more possible that California has more staff working on them and that has created the disparity in the processing times. If you'd seen the processing charts from months earlier, you'd have seen that California had been consistently processing more cases in a month than they received for some time, whereas the other Service centers were processing well under the number that they'd received. I130's had been processed at all of the Service Centers, previously.

Edited January 16, 2014 by Kaylara

[aditya3245 113]

It might make it longer to do the background checks.

But as far as I understand it, you don't file the waiver inside of the I130 application,

Yes. That may be the case but that does not mean that the individual does not go through excessive scrutiny. Just because it says "qualifying relationship" as its objective - does not mean that prior record of deportation and prior violations of law (adam walsh act etc) are not considered. Some of it requires extensive cooperation/feedback between local law enforcement and that increases turnaround time. That officer is not going to sit there and wait - he's gonna move on to the next case and come back to it later.

and divorces are not a rare thing, it would be part of the actual adjudication process.

Granted but an adjudicator is going to look at prior marital history of both the beneficiary and the petitioner and try to find material misrepresentations or prior records of sponsorship where there is a sliver of evidence that prior marriage was entered into the purposes of evading the laws of these united states. Ever heard of green card wives ?

The multiple prior I130's would also show up during adjudication.

I don't get it.

Is adjudication really a 20 minute quickie in the minds of most commentators on here ?

For every concern that I talked about prior to this one, until an adjudicator gets all the information he/she needs to convince himself that the alien represents no threat to the security of the homeland, he/she will not approve the petition. That draws out the 20 minutes to 60 days.

There's a thread around here somewhere that you should read, where a former USCIS adjudicator explained the processes that they went through. It does shed some light on what exactly happens during the process. Of course, there are plenty of things that have changed since that information was (semi) current, but I think we can safely assume that the majority of what is discussed there is probably the same.

Edited January 16, 2014 by aditya3245

[Kaylara 814]

We believe that straightforward cases take about 15 minutes because we have a former adjudicator who was on here explaining the process and yes, 15-20 minutes was about it for a straightforward case. These facilities are not just quality oriented, they are also volume oriented. They have access to the relevant databases that they need to search to see if there are obvious red flags raised or criminal activity. They get sent to a special unit if there are security concerns, and they stay there until those concerns can be cleared. (Or not.) If they are concerned that there is not enough evidence to prove a real marital relationship, then they can send an RFE. Or they can deny it because they strongly suspect fraud.

You can't just assume because of the amount of time since transfer, that there are security concerns or complications in the file. My case was straightforward as hell, and neither of us have criminal histories of any kind, and our names are most likely not going to raise security concerns based on their similarity to flagged names, no previous marriages, married 8 years, 2 kids, no over-stays, and it still took 58 days from the time I was transferred. The cases within 20 numbers of me were all completed between Dec. 3 and Jan. 3. The ones immediately surrounding me all either got approved or RFE's either the day before me, or the same day as me. I'm certain that we weren't all waiting on someone's desk for nearly 60 days. Someone grabbed our box that morning. That's it.

http://www.visajourney.com/content/adjudicator-q-and-a

[aditya3245 113]

We believe that straightforward cases take about 15 minutes because we have a former adjudicator who was on here explaining the process and yes, 15-20 minutes was about it for a straightforward case. These facilities are not just quality oriented, they are also volume oriented. They have access to the relevant databases that they need to search to see if there are obvious red flags raised or criminal activity. They get sent to a special unit if there are security concerns, and they stay there until those concerns can be cleared. (Or not.) If they are concerned that there is not enough evidence to prove a real marital relationship, then they can send an RFE. Or they can deny it because they strongly suspect fraud.

You can't just assume because of the amount of time since transfer, that there are security concerns or complications in the file. My case was straightforward as hell, and neither of us have criminal histories of any kind, and our names are most likely not going to raise security concerns based on their similarity to flagged names, no previous marriages, married 8 years, 2 kids, no over-stays, and it still took 58 days from the time I was transferred. The cases within 20 numbers of me were all completed between Dec. 3 and Jan. 3. The ones immediately surrounding me all either got approved or RFE's either the day before me, or the same day as me. I'm certain that we weren't all waiting on someone's desk for nearly 60 days. Someone grabbed our box that morning. That's it.

http://www.visajourney.com/content/adjudicator-q-and-a

This does not really explain why NSC/TSC are slower than CSC.

If it supposedly takes the same amount of time to process petitions -- and that time is less than 30 minutes -- and this is true for every service center, the spread ought to be consistent across the board.

Notwithstanding that California is getting a third of this large volume that you speak of.

Transfers to NE and TX are twice as many - by your logic, experience doesnt really matter and so they ought to be faster than CA dont you think ?

[Kaylara 814]

If the transfers to NSC and TSC are twice as many, and they each have half the number of adjudicators working on the I130's that CSC does, it would certainly account for the difference in the processing times.

[Kaylara 814]

Experience does matter, but it's not realistic to believe that the staff that processed I130's prior to the original workload shift would have all left the agency in the interim. They process other kinds of applications there as well. It's just not reasonable to think that it's inexperience that is causing the issues. If we were talking about the Overland Park office, I'd be right with there and have to assume that their processing times are that bad because they are (mostly) new to the job. But I think the more reasonable assumption is that the NSC, and TSC don't have as many adjudicators working on I130's at this time as the CSC has.

[psv57 88]

You can't just assume because of the amount of time since transfer, that there are security concerns or complications in the file. My case was straightforward as hell, and neither of us have criminal histories of any kind, and our names are most likely not going to raise security concerns based on their similarity to flagged names, no previous marriages, married 8 years, 2 kids, no over-stays, and it still took 58 days from the time I was transferred. The cases within 20 numbers of me were all completed between Dec. 3 and Jan. 3. The ones immediately surrounding me all either got approved or RFE's either the day before me, or the same day as me. I'm certain that we weren't all waiting on someone's desk for nearly 60 days. Someone grabbed our box that morning. That's it.

http://www.visajourney.com/content/adjudicator-q-and-a

Thank you Kaylara for understanding and explaining.

I knew that this post would get some's attention as "how can one complain about fast moving California, you are lucky, it must be your case". One forgets that there are good and bad employees in every agency/location. So I am sure even California has some that are just sitting on their cases. Just because a case is delayed in approval since transfer, please don't go blaming the case itself. You don't know if the case is complicated or not. I don't believe my case is complicated and I know speaking to some others who don't have complicated cases are still sitting and wondering why. I've already been through USCIS background checks so mine shouldn't be stuck in that as most blame "background checks" if nothing else. I've dealt enough with USCIS to know that sometimes they just sit and wait.

The post was not to compare California with others but to discuss any concerns when dealing with California. Yes even a functional center such as California can have issues going on. Until one is stuck in the situation itself, it's easy to say "you are lucky to be at California". I pray that people don't have to get stuck for no reason and wonder "why" because only then do you understand that sometimes there is no reason and you can be "unlucky" even at the good "California" center. I have seen a number of RFE's recently too. So looking to see what type of RFE's they are issuing as well.

In any case, trying to get congressional staff involved and hope to have some answers soon. Unfortunately dear hubby is very busy at work to be able to sit and call USCIS and be on hold for hours etc (he's the sponsor), but if in end, thats' what needs to be done, so it shall be. I know not to just sit and wait when it comes to USCIS.

[Dubecky 11]

Experience does matter, but it's not realistic to believe that the staff that processed I130's prior to the original workload shift would have all left the agency in the interim. They process other kinds of applications there as well. It's just not reasonable to think that it's inexperience that is causing the issues. If we were talking about the Overland Park office, I'd be right with there and have to assume that their processing times are that bad because they are (mostly) new to the job. But I think the more reasonable assumption is that the NSC, and TSC don't have as many adjudicators working on I130's at this time as the CSC has.

Also, the timelines right now on Visa Journey are pretty shocking. TSC is still approving March and April. NSC is approving April mostly. CSC is approving July's left and right. 5-6 months wait for I-130...not too shabby