Non transferred cases...

[psv57 88]

Although I am convinced the cases not transferred from Feb, March, April, May, June, and July are just due to USCIS not following any logic whatsoever in their transfer process and is just aimed to make their processing times appear more normal....I wanted to collect some data to see if there's any rationale being missed on cases that are not transferred from July and before.. we know August has not yet seen transfers so that being reason to look at July and before. As August gets well underway for regular transfers, then it seems logical to add August cases not transferred on there, cases left behind. So I am starting a chart to see what could be common factor.. Is it both sponsor/beneficiary are abroad, any expedites, did they file k-3 (together or right after...any thoughts?

So far the chart I created, I will let people fill it in themselves...If you think of any more ideas, share please and edit.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqbNd1-VjCT-dE90M3pYX0Q4NEZnUXhhSy1PRVlQY3c#gid=0

[dwheels76 5,468]

Although I am convinced the cases not transferred from Feb, March, April, May, June, and July are just due to USCIS not following any logic whatsoever in their transfer process and is just aimed to make their processing times appear more normal....I wanted to collect some data to see if there's any rationale being missed on cases that are not transferred from July and before.. we know August has not yet seen transfers so that being reason to look at July and before. As August gets well underway for regular transfers, then it seems logical to add August cases not transferred on there, cases left behind. So I am starting a chart to see what could be common factor.. Is it both sponsor/beneficiary are abroad, any expedites, did they file k-3 (together or right after...any thoughts?

So far the chart I created, I will let people fill it in themselves...If you think of any more ideas, share please and edit.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqbNd1-VjCT-dE90M3pYX0Q4NEZnUXhhSy1PRVlQY3c#gid=0

I am also curious how these K3's are playing out. Is it slowing down their process Or what? Since it seems no one is getting one since the I-130 and I-129F are approved together.

Wondering where USCIS is getting their data of 5 months for a K3. So bogus.

[JbTin 51]

Does it include cases that were already approved?

Edited January 16, 2014 by krispykreme

[BOS_LHR 829]

Great idea psv!

Does it include cases that were already approved?

I think the goal is to establish what non-transferred, unapproved cases might have in common. Individuals with approvals/expedites wouldn't be part of that data pool.

[JbTin 51]

Great idea psv!

I think the goal is to establish what non-transferred, unapproved cases might have in common. Individuals with approvals/expedites wouldn't be part of that data pool.

Oh ok, was just confused coz he/she mentioned expedite above. Thanks for clarifying

[BOS_LHR 829]

Oh, my mistake! That bit didn't stick in my brain when I read through the OP for some reason. From what I've seen Phils filers and other expedites were actually the first in a month to be transferred and approved, rather than held back and adjudicated at NBC, but maybe there are more of those individual cases than I realize and they're worth taking a look at.

[amysummer13 7]

Although I am convinced the cases not transferred from Feb, March, April, May, June, and July are just due to USCIS not following any logic whatsoever in their transfer process and is just aimed to make their processing times appear more normal....I wanted to collect some data to see if there's any rationale being missed on cases that are not transferred from July and before.. we know August has not yet seen transfers so that being reason to look at July and before. As August gets well underway for regular transfers, then it seems logical to add August cases not transferred on there, cases left behind. So I am starting a chart to see what could be common factor.. Is it both sponsor/beneficiary are abroad, any expedites, did they file k-3 (together or right after...any thoughts?

So far the chart I created, I will let people fill it in themselves...If you think of any more ideas, share please and edit.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqbNd1-VjCT-dE90M3pYX0Q4NEZnUXhhSy1PRVlQY3c#gid=0

psv57,

Please add me to this list - PD 06/26/13 NBC.

Sponsor in USA (Yes / No): Yes

Beneficiary In USA (Yes / No): No

Did Sponsor Upgrade from Green Card to US Citizen (Yes / No): Yes 5 years ago

Did You File a K-3 simultaneously? (Yes / No): No

Did you file a K-3 after filing I130? (Yes / No) Yes PD 7/1/13

Direct Consular Filing (DCF) (Yes / No): No

Thank you.

Still awaiting transfer or approval

[JbTin 51]

If it's of any significance, we're one of those few who remained and got approved at NBC. September filer, expedited.

[Kaylara 814]

I am also curious how these K3's are playing out. Is it slowing down their process Or what? Since it seems no one is getting one since the I-130 and I-129F are approved together.

Wondering where USCIS is getting their data of 5 months for a K3. So bogus.

It's an average. That's the problem. Too easy to manipulate averages.

[PD0729 12]

Although I am convinced the cases not transferred from Feb, March, April, May, June, and July are just due to USCIS not following any logic whatsoever in their transfer process and is just aimed to make their processing times appear more normal....I wanted to collect some data to see if there's any rationale being missed on cases that are not transferred from July and before.. we know August has not yet seen transfers so that being reason to look at July and before. As August gets well underway for regular transfers, then it seems logical to add August cases not transferred on there, cases left behind. So I am starting a chart to see what could be common factor.. Is it both sponsor/beneficiary are abroad, any expedites, did they file k-3 (together or right after...any thoughts?

So far the chart I created, I will let people fill it in themselves...If you think of any more ideas, share please and edit.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqbNd1-VjCT-dE90M3pYX0Q4NEZnUXhhSy1PRVlQY3c#gid=0

Ty for this chart psv. I think, maybe it is important which address is printed on NOA1 hardcopy - Overland park or Lee's Summit MO.

[psv57 88]

psv57,

Please add me to this list - PD 06/26/13 NBC.

Sponsor in USA (Yes / No): Yes

Beneficiary In USA (Yes / No): No

Did Sponsor Upgrade from Green Card to US Citizen (Yes / No): Yes 5 years ago

Did You File a K-3 simultaneously? (Yes / No): No

Did you file a K-3 after filing I130? (Yes / No) Yes PD 7/1/13

Direct Consular Filing (DCF) (Yes / No): No

Thank you.

Still awaiting transfer or approval

sorry was running errands and just got home. You did it yourself I see. Great Job

[psv57 88]

Great idea psv!

I think the goal is to establish what non-transferred, unapproved cases might have in common. Individuals with approvals/expedites wouldn't be part of that data pool.

Does it include cases that were already approved?

When I first posted in morning, I was thinking out loud lol on here....so I am open to what others think. I think the goal should be cases from February to July as that is already established that those cases have had regular active transfers happening (not just Philippine beneficiary ones). So for now sorry Krispykreme, yours seems like an exception with a September case and a Philippine beneficiary. You do bring up a good point though that some cases that were never transferred got approved as I've seen one on July spreadsheet also. So I am wondering what in common those cases have. Also if those cases that are not being approved will start to see approvals from NBC itself (or some may have seen approvals already). Why are they keeping certain cases at NBC and if so have any gotten approved..... Hope my thinking out loud makes sense lol. Need coffee for afternoon slump.

We can leave expedites for now too. I see a lot of people are confused usually about if theirs is expedited or not. For some it's a simple request that they get an answer for. Some never get an answer. Some may simply tell a congressional liason to ask for expedite on some ground or congressional staff may do so on their own...so sometimes expedites (granted or not) are not clear cut.

So I will add a column for expedite requested (whether granted or not can be added in additional comments column).

Just a bunch of possible scenarios.

Let's try and investigate and see if we can come up with some logic or find out it's all ####### lol (most likely).

What do you all think?

[nightingalejules 678]

I'm intrigued by all of this too. I mean, it makes sense to me that if there are 5 places adjudicating i-130s (including, presumably, NBC) that every time there are transfers, 1/5 of the transfers would go to each of the places adjudicating, and 1/5 would stay at NBC, for adjudication there.

That would help to explain why some of the filers never get transferred - they are the 1/5 who are going to be dealt with at NBC.

The troubles, of course, are the same, since some of the offices doing the adjudications are faster/better staffed/more efficient/more careful that they take the very next box of applications instead of grabbing one at random and out of order/etc so some petitions lag behind for what feels like 73 million years.

[psv57 88]

I'm intrigued by all of this too. I mean, it makes sense to me that if there are 5 places adjudicating i-130s (including, presumably, NBC) that every time there are transfers, 1/5 of the transfers would go to each of the places adjudicating, and 1/5 would stay at NBC, for adjudication there.

That would help to explain why some of the filers never get transferred - they are the 1/5 who are going to be dealt with at NBC.

The troubles, of course, are the same, since some of the offices doing the adjudications are faster/better staffed/more efficient/more careful that they take the very next box of applications instead of grabbing one at random and out of order/etc so some petitions lag behind for what feels like 73 million years.

It really would be interesting... What if they said they are transferring to reduce workload but they did not mean ALL were getting transferred.. that's why it would be interesting to see even the cases that did get approved from Feb to July without transfer.... It's baffling to see so many cases that are not getting transferred and we are all under impression that they were supposed to transfer all I130 cases...but maybe that is not what they meant

[aditya3245 113]

They are not adjudicating jack at the NBC (unless you are an expedite or dcf)

I really hope that they can stop this ludacris practice of sitting on petitions and doing nothing - that gives them reason to fudge the numbers and leave petitioners hanging willy nilly