February 2015 filers - Texas Service Center

[dmaven 7]

I did. but they will require you to pay to see the updates

" This content is for Bronze, Silver and Gold members (Silver, Bronze & Gold) only."

Yes, it's a subscription service, but is well worth the quality of the data the reports provide. It's way better than Igor's list for example... which only tracks <1000 timelines... ImmiFairy is like more than 10,000. Also, their forums are picking up. Getting good discussion going between only TSC K1 people. A lot of empathy that you don't get from CSC people here. Anyway, there's my two cents

Edited July 7, 2015 by dmaven

[ch3john 308]

I got an Immifairy subscription and have been viewing the daily reports. I'm curious how accurate they are and where they get the information. From what I've noticed, the approvals aren't matching up with Igors list. For instance, if you look at todays Igor's list, there are 4 NOA2's for 7/7 and Immifairy shows only 1 for February. The NOA1 date for that one is 2/27 whereas the 4 on Igor's list have NOA1 dates of October and January.

Anyone know where Immifariy gets their information? Their receipt numbers seem to make since and there is a lot of data there. Just curious as to why it doesn't match up with Igors. If this is public information then it seems anyone can access it. How does Immifairy have the "inside scoop"?

[Pennycat 880]

I got an Immifairy subscription and have been viewing the daily reports. I'm curious how accurate they are and where they get the information. From what I've noticed, the approvals aren't matching up with Igors list. For instance, if you look at todays Igor's list, there are 4 NOA2's for 7/7 and Immifairy shows only 1 for February. The NOA1 date for that one is 2/27 whereas the 4 on Igor's list have NOA1 dates of October and January.

Anyone know where Immifariy gets their information? Their receipt numbers seem to make since and there is a lot of data there. Just curious as to why it doesn't match up with Igors. If this is public information then it seems anyone can access it. How does Immifairy have the "inside scoop"?

They have managed to get live updates from the USCIS public site. Anyone can, but you'd have to just start typing thousands of numbers into the USCIS case status site, I guess. So Igor's list is *only* VJ members (who are probably less than 10% of the total K1 population. Probably less than 5%) and relies on the members to update their timelines to work. Immifairy is the full population of applicants, and is USCIS data.

I see on Igors that 4 TSC K1s were approved on 7/7, none from Feb. I see on immifairy that there were 45 TSC K1s, 10 from Feb and about 30some other actions including RFE responses and rejections etc. So really, only 4 of those 45 approvals are VJ members and also updated their timelines correctly.

[ch3john 308]

They have managed to get live updates from the USCIS public site. Anyone can, but you'd have to just start typing thousands of numbers into the USCIS case status site, I guess. So Igor's list is *only* VJ members (who are probably less than 10% of the total K1 population. Probably less than 5%) and relies on the members to update their timelines to work. Immifairy is the full population of applicants, and is USCIS data.

I see on Igors that 4 TSC K1s were approved on 7/7, none from Feb. I see on immifairy that there were 45 TSC K1s, 10 from Feb and about 30some other actions including RFE responses and rejections etc. So really, only 4 of those 45 approvals are VJ members and also updated their timelines correctly.

But today's Immifairy's report shows only 1 February approved on 7/7 with an NOA of 2/27.

I have just noticed that the approval dates and NOA1 dates are not anywhere close to what is on Igors on the majority of the cases. I can see if some people don't update their timeline correctly but very seldom do I see some that match.

[Pennycat 880]

But today's Immifairy's report shows only 1 February approved on 7/7 with an NOA of 2/27.

I have just noticed that the approval dates and NOA1 dates are not anywhere close to what is on Igors on the majority of the cases. I can see if some people don't update their timeline correctly but very seldom do I see some that match.

Right and Igors shows none from Feb today (or on 7/7), right? So that Feb person approved yesterday isn't on VJ.

In terms of the rest, VJ is all user imput. So some people call their NOA1 the day they received the text, others the day they got the letter, others the day that USCIS gave them etc. Probably the same thing with NOA2. USCIS and therefore immifairy goes only by USCIS dates.

[ch3john 308]

Right and Igors shows none from Feb today (or on 7/7), right? So that Feb person approved yesterday isn't on VJ.

In terms of the rest, VJ is all user imput. So some people call their NOA1 the day they received the text, others the day they got the letter, others the day that USCIS gave them etc. Probably the same thing with NOA2. USCIS and therefore immifairy goes only by USCIS dates.

I undertand VJ members represent a small percentage, is user input and user error plays a factor. But I would think the majority of VJ users would input the correct info instead of a very small percentage which the data represents when comparing the two over the past week.

[Pennycat 880]

I undertand VJ members represent a small percentage, is user input and user error plays a factor. But I would think the majority of VJ users would input the correct info instead of a very small percentage which the data represents when comparing the two over the past week.

Sorry I guess I'm not understanding the problem. Maybe ask the admins over there?

[dmaven 7]

But today's Immifairy's report shows only 1 February approved on 7/7 with an NOA of 2/27.

I have just noticed that the approval dates and NOA1 dates are not anywhere close to what is on Igors on the majority of the cases. I can see if some people don't update their timeline correctly but very seldom do I see some that match.

Hey ch3john - How can one expect a user generated list of <1,000 receipt numbers to be better than a list of +10,000 that pulls directly from USCIS?

The question you have to ask yourself is: Which data should be more trusted - Igor List's user generated data?, or ImmiFairy's data pulled directly from USCIS?

I would say that Igor's list, although most people are filling it out correctly to the best of their knowledge, is not as accurate as the ImmiFairy list pulling directly from USCIS due to 1) user-generated error (NOA1 filled out as received date or incorrectly, etc) and 2) the quantity of data (+10,000 provides a much clearer picture of processing speed than <1,000)

You'd be surprised by some of the trends one can find in the ImmiFairy data that VJ and/or Igor's list doesn't address or says the complete opposite. For example, VJ threads and mods have pretty consistently insisted no transfers occurred as of the 3/26 workload rebalance between TSC and CSC; however, the ImmiFairy data shows (albeit in a very small number of instances) transfers of K1s from TSC.

Why would Igor's list inherently be trusted as the best thing out there when it's clearly not?

[ch3john 308]

Sorry I guess I'm not understanding the problem. Maybe ask the admins over there?

My apologies, I was overthinking this and confused myself. I guess this LOOONG wait it driving me crazy

Also, thanks DMAVEN for your reply

[dmaven 7]

My apologies, I was overthinking this and confused myself. I guess this LOOONG wait it driving me crazy

Also, thanks DMAVEN for your reply

Ur welcome, bro

[AirConditioner515 15]

So, for us Feb. folks. When would be a good time to start contacting our Senators/Congressmen?

I see Jan. folks have already started contacting their Senators/Congressmen.

[Pennycat 880]

So, for us Feb. folks. When would be a good time to start contacting our Senators/Congressmen?

I see Jan. folks have already started contacting their Senators/Congressmen.

You can contact them whenever. Whether or not they will be willing or able to help you now depends entirely on the caseworker your congressman has. The "official line" is that they can't open an inquiry on hour behalf unless you are outside USCIS's published processing times seen here:

https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processingTimesDisplay.do;jsessionid=abcNxczBoTdiia9wc3Z5u

Yes, that is as of April 30 and yes now it is 5 weeks later and no, USCIS doesn't care. That is, in my opinion, how they buy themselves extra time before people are allowed to open inquiries. So according to the official line, you're only allowed an inquiry if you applied before Oct 8. Some congressional staffers take this seriously, others are willing to try anyway (and are told the same thing by the person on the phone). Some may manage to get something done for you if you're not pre-Oct 8, most won't. Can't hurt to try.

My plan would be to wait until the 5 month mark and use that for leverage. Say that the goal time is 5 months, it's not your fault there's a backlog, you want to open an inquiry. See what they do.

[CG&LGG 27]

I have actually been in contact with my senator about Texas and my case. I actually spoke to my caseworker today. She gave me an update and said she should have a final word from Texas next week and she will personally call me again. I don't know what good it will actually do, but I feel like its bringing some type of awareness to the issue.

[ucijeepguy 3]

I was in contact early on with my congressman, and his assistant replies back, and I have a feeling he will not be very helpful.. However it turns out that my Senator is Ted Cruz, which he has a bill to eliminate the fee that we pay for this shitty service we get (that's what my understanding is of the bill), so I'm hoping he'll be helpful.

From Cruz's website:

"S.1593 - Immigration Slush Fund Elimination Act of 2015

A bill to eliminate the offsetting accounts that are currently available for use by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services"

But this is the response I got from my congressman Sam Johnson's assistant.

"My name is Chance Watson, and I am the District Field Coordinator for Congressman Sam Johnson. I handle all casework matters pertaining to USCIS and the Department of State. Thank you for your email concerning your application to petition your fiancée to the United States. First off, I want to congratulate you on being engaged and wish you and your bride-to-be happiness. As someone who got married last week, I can completely understand your desire to want your fiancée to be here with you. Unfortunately, the current processing time for I-129F petitions at the Texas Service Center is about 7-8 months. Any petition that is filed can only be expedited if you can meet USCIS’ strict expedite criteria, which I have provided below:



· Severe financial loss to comp

blah blah blah..."

[Pennycat 880]

I was in contact early on with my congressman, and his assistant replies back, and I have a feeling he will not be very helpful.. However it turns out that my Senator is Ted Cruz, which he has a bill to eliminate the fee that we pay for this shitty service we get (that's what my understanding is of the bill), so I'm hoping he'll be helpful.

From Cruz's website: "S.1593 - Immigration Slush Fund Elimination Act of 2015

A bill to eliminate the offsetting accounts that are currently available for use by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services"

But this is the response I got from my congressman Sam Johnson's assistant.

"My name is Chance Watson, and I am the District Field Coordinator for Congressman Sam Johnson. I handle all casework matters pertaining to USCIS and the Department of State. Thank you for your email concerning your application to petition your fiancée to the United States. First off, I want to congratulate you on being engaged and wish you and your bride-to-be happiness. As someone who got married last week, I can completely understand your desire to want your fiancée to be here with you. Unfortunately, the current processing time for I-129F petitions at the Texas Service Center is about 7-8 months. Any petition that is filed can only be expedited if you can meet USCIS strict expedite criteria, which I have provided below:

· Severe financial loss to comp

blah blah blah..."

I think that that bill is to have our fees go to Treasury instead of USCIS. The issue I believe is that when there's an overage...when our fees add up to more than USCIS's operating budget, USCIS can keep it in a special fund that they can do with what they like. It was a big topic at the Senate hearing in February. Basically, they paid for a new building for DAPA (which is being held up in court). The Senators wanted to know where the money for an empty building for a program that's in questionable legal status came from....from this fund. Senator Cruz in particular was livid about that fact.