FOIA Response from USCIS - Re Transfers of I-130

[thedude6752000 360]

These emails further confirm what we all knew: USCIS is grossly inept and has been playing with our lives. With immigration in the news, I think we need to get organizing again. Even if you've gotten your 2nd I-797, there's a hundred thousand right behind you who have not.

[waiting_______ 92]

That exaplains EVERYTHING! That also affirms my suspicion that people who adjust their status in the US (file the I-130 plus I-485) are processed much faster because they're paying an extra $1000. K-1 filers are processed faster because they will also adjust status plus get a conditional green card plus the 10 year green card. We I-130 filers are only paying for wither a conditional + green card or just green card. It's all about the money they make off of us. SMH

I didn't quite take that away from that..

Their point is that a processing a 130 for IR/CR1 takes certain amount of time and resources for which they charge a hefty fee for $420 currently. Now they also allow the same people to file a I129F for K3 at no additional charge. There issue is if they separate track the 129F and 130 it's twice the work for them for the same amount of money. I don't agree with it, they should either get it off the books completely or add a fee for the extra work that it incurs. Don't leave it in limbo as they are currently.

Remember, if one goes through the K3 route; they have to adjust status after the marriage as well which will incur the additional $1000 fee .

[waiting_______ 92]

These emails further confirm what we all knew: USCIS is grossly inept and has been playing with our lives. With immigration in the news, I think we need to get organizing again. Even if you've gotten your 2nd I-797, there's a hundred thousand right behind you who have not.

I agree, we need to remind USCIS and our representatives that no matter what they do for immigration reform... never again should it be at a cost of legal immigration. I have a letter pending to the staffers and my senator to thank them for their help and to update them on my case completion. I will be emphasizing that point one more time with them.

Edited April 16, 2014 by waiting_______

[Kaylara 814]

Look at all the lovely names and emails that folks will have at their disposal when their petition is out of processing time - what an arsenal of information! I love how they stated that it could be part of an "orchestrated letter writing campaign". Yep, at VJ, we don't sit on our asses - we take action and get things done.

Heh... Glad I wasn't the only one who looked at that and thought "Ooo, they forgot to black out the email addresses!"

[jayjayj 571]

I didn't quite take that away from that..

Their point is that a processing a 130 for IR/CR1 takes certain amount of time and resources for which they charge a hefty fee for $420 currently. Now they also allow the same people to file a I129F for K3 at no additional charge. There issue is if they separate track the 129F and 130 it's twice the work for them for the same amount of money. I don't agree with it, they should either get it off the books completely or add a fee for the extra work that it incurs. Don't leave it in limbo as they are currently.

Remember, if one goes through the K3 route; they have to adjust status after the marriage as well which will incur the additional $1000 fee .

I agree that it shouldn't be left in limbo, but disagree about adding a fee to the 129F when a I130 has already been submitted, but any and all ideas should be thrown onto the table and discussed.

Regardless, we all know the I-129 petitions are not being processed in those situations - maybe it could be replaced by a reasonable and valid route to the same end-state.

The intended purpose of that particular process is to alleviate the hardship to the USC petitioner because of long processing delays, thus the "no fee" route of the I-129 in that scenario is anticipated to somewhat compensate the I-130 petitioner. Of course many people would be willing to pay an additional fee for the I-129, if it meant having it processed quickly and then having their family reunited, but then we would be getting into the "pay to play" type of scenario, where people with more resources can jump the line. In fact, I am one person who has the resources and would be willing to do that, but I think it would be grossly unfair for many people.

A real fix for the process would require an overhaul of the core mission concepts at the USCIS.

First, the main focus should shift to keeping families together instead of preventing immigration fraud. While I consider it vitally important to prevent immigration fraud, I consider the well-being of families to be more critical. There are a couple reasons why I believe this change is warranted. First, we’ve already seen this shift in focus in regards to other immigration processes (both legally and illegally), to include DACA – so the precedence has already been set. Second, the I-130 process must by default involve a U.S. citizen (or permanent resident, not sure about that). Because of the involvement of a U.S. citizen, I propose that the “assumption of guilt”, which is essentially what is going on, be removed and replaced with a more common sense approach.

Additionally and unfortunately, we’ve also all seen that our current government is more than willing to not enforce current immigration laws and in some cases intentionally act in ways that are directly conflicting with those current laws. Using that situation for perspective and applying it to the I-130/I-129 process, the “perceived threat” from immigration fraud based upon marriage fraud, must be significantly reduced, at least from the government’s apparent viewpoint.

As it has been mentioned on here previously, a triage type classification approach to the petitions would probably make the process much more efficient and faster. This is all just a possible example, but they could develop procedures to place cases into different “fraud level” categories based on “red flags”, with a scale of 1 to 3 – one being highest level (multiple red flags popping up) and 3 being lowest level (no red flags).

Level 1 – Multiple Red Flags

• Case is routed to specific USCIS department for extra scrutiny.

Level 2 – Possible Red Flag

• Case is routed through normal processing at USCIS.

Level 3 – No Red Flags

• Case is “fast tracked” to either NVC or local U.S. Embassy – essentially cleared out of the USCIS, so they can use their resources more efficiently to prevent actual immigration fraud.

When I got to thinking of the “fast track” to local Embassies, I thought of something interesting. How many I-130 and I-129 petitions have been diverted to the USCIS after the ability to directly file at most overseas locations was reduced to only a few locations? I haven’t seen too much on VJ about that process change and how it could have also contributed to the delays at the USCIS. I believe this change happened in late 2011?

They could also add “green flags” to the process. For instance, maybe two people have a U.S. citizen child together and because they weren’t married, the U.S. Embassy required them to get DNA testing accomplished to confirm the biological relationships. Another example could be the length of time the two individuals have been married. There could be many things which could immediately overcome that presumed “guilt” and create a “green flag”.

Anyway, I’m just thinking out loud here, but I really believe the entire system is broken at its core. Who is responsible? Who should be held accountable? While I think those are important questions which need to eventually be answered, I really don’t care at this point. My first concern is trying to help fix the process. The more ideas we come up with and the more we push the USCIS, the more of a chance we have of improving the process for those coming after us.

[Hotter Otter 1,211]

These emails further confirm what we all knew: USCIS is grossly inept and has been playing with our lives.

Well it is what it is dude, it is what it is.

The email with that in it shows just how much they care about reuniting families!

[Collie 122]

Heh... Glad I wasn't the only one who looked at that and thought "Ooo, they forgot to black out the email addresses!"

Don't forget all the fax numbers too muwhahaha

[Kaylara 814]

I think we should submit a FOIA on their records about Visajourney.

[waiting_______ 92]

I think we should submit a FOIA on their records about Visajourney.

Now, that would be very interesting! I bet you they have lots of stuff over the last 6-8 months due to their debacle...

[Kaylara 814]

I'd probably ask for the past 2 years. But I'm sure that there are people who filed and dealt with this BS several years ago that would probably be interested in information on VJ.

[Hotter Otter 1,211]

I'd probably ask for the past 2 years. But I'm sure that there are people who filed and dealt with this BS several years ago that would probably be interested in information on VJ.

Not familiar with how FOI works in the US but can you actually request their info on VJ? That would be awesome if someone did it!

Edited April 16, 2014 by Hotter Otter

[Darnell 8,479]

During my time of frustration with USCIS I had initiated multiple inquires. I wanted to find out what they were doing to fix the issue with petitions at the NBC that weren't being adjudicated. I just got a response from USCIS of my FOIA request this morning. It's 412 page PDF file with all emails discussing their transfer program. I plan to go through it later and will post any good nuggets to this forum. If anybody is interested in the entire document let me know; i'll try to figure out a way to get it posted.

Btw, anybody from the VJ admin community is there a way I can upload a 14MB file to share with the community here.

I ask that you post it up in GoogleDocs and then post the url here [if you have not done that already]

Thanks so much, and Thanks in advance !

[Darnell 8,479]

Link to the entire document:

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/759470e4-b1ac-4325-aac0-15ebc2e9275b

Thank You.

[Ivy. 113]

It might help you to be less spiteful (It might help you read my timeline better as well). You have no idea what my mindset is so I would appreciate you not suggest how I should feel. I can care less what you find amusing, I have posted this here for people who have had the worst of this process and those who want to make a difference by understanding the inner workings of this opaque process and try to change it. There are many members who have done just that and continue to do so.

I have been supportive and understanding of everyone who's had it worse than me; my inquiry was initiated during the time when I saw how unfairly the Nebraska and Texas service centers were fairing compared to California.

In any case, if all you want do is belittle someone else, I suggest you find something better to do.

Spiteful implies malice, whereas I had none. Jealous, perhaps, but definitely not spiteful.

I do apologize for mistaking your file as September to February, when it was August to February. I am used to the European way so that was an honest mistake. As for belittling you, I really don't think telling someone to "Be happy" is belittling them.

Anyways, kudos for posting the file. I am sure many people will find it interesting.

[waiting_______ 92]

Thank You.

Very glad to do it!

Ok, time for my rant.

I haven't had a chance until now to do any kind of thorough review of they sent me. I am really upset at the redactions. Right at the end of document around May there was already discussion about workloads and issues. They've redacted everything in those areas! Really upsetting.

I should have posted this earlier for those who are reviewing this entire doc. The following are the exemptions claimed when they redact or withhold information. b4 and b6 are perfectly reasonable. However, they sure as hell have abused the b5!! If you go through the doc each redaction has the associated reason for it. All of the important stuff that could be damning to them have been redacted using b5. If i understand correctly they are withholding this info due to potential pending litigation or current litigation? Anybody here with a law background? Am I understanding correctly?

I wasn't planning to, but I might appeal some of the redactions.

Exemption (b)(4) protects trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged or

confidential. The types of documents and/or information we have withheld may consist of unit pricing,

business sales statistics; research data; technical designs; customer and supplier lists; profit and loss data;

overhead and operating costs; and information on financial condition.

Exemption (b)(5) provides protection for inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters, which

would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency. The types of

documents and/or information that we have withheld under this exemption may consist of documents

containing pre-decisional information, documents or other memoranda prepared in contemplation of

litigation, or confidential communications between attorney and client.

Exemption (b)(6) permits the government to withhold all information about individuals in personnel,

medical and similar files where the disclosure of such information would constitute a clearly unwarranted

invasion of personal privacy. The types of documents and/or information that we have withheld may

consist of birth certificates, naturalization certificates, drivers’ licenses, social security numbers, home

addresses, dates of birth, or various other documents and/or information belonging to a third party that are

considered personal.

Edited April 16, 2014 by waiting_______