February 2015 filers - Texas Service Center

[desi123 21]

44 Jan and 16 feb approvals yesterday.There is light at the end of the black hole.???

[mal73 3]

Hello desi 123, which black hole is that you are referring to, please? Thanks.

[Pennycat 880]

Hello desi 123, which black hole is that you are referring to, please? Thanks.

Hi, I see you're new. This is a thread for people who applied in February and whose files were sent to Texas Service Center. You did not apply to Texas Service Center. You mailed your file to the Dallas Lockbox (which, yes, is in Texas). It will be routed to either California Service Center or Texas Service Center from here. TSC has had a very large backlog for over a year (and appears to have far fewer employees dedicated to K1s than CSC)., and we're just now starting to get approvals to move to the next phase of this process. People who applied and were routed to CSC in February are already living together US (and have been for quite some time).

It's been terribly unfair and stressful for most of us, and it's finally seeming like there's an end to it. That's the black hole.

Good news for you is that, because of the hard work on a lot of our parts, writing letters, attending meetings etc etc etc, USCIS directed the Lockbox to stop sending new applications to Texas Service Center. Since April, 100% of new filers are going to CSC (before that it was based on the state the petitioner lived in). This may change any day, if they're really trying to balance out the workload but we'll see. You'll know because they'll tell you. If your receipt number starts with SRC, you're at Texas if it is WAC, you're at California. Personally, if I were you, I'd still be hoping for CSC. I think they're already halfway through the June filers. Good luck.

[tm11216 0]

Congratulations to everyone who's starting to get their NOA2s. My NOA1 date is Jan 28 (exactly 6 months ago today). I wanted to share an update from my congressman:

"The TSC now knows of the Congressman’s interest on your file. They are currently reviewing K1 applications filed on or before October 2014. They expect that your application will be adjudicated sometime in September."

Not very helpful, as expected, but thought I would try. I assume they mean processing the NOA2 in September. I would hope they mean adjudicated ENTIRELY i.e., interview done and visa in hand, but it doesn't seem possible at this rate, since I hear consulates can take up to 2 months to schedule the interview appointment. Anyway, I'm very happy for those of you who are receiving notice. I hope the same for all of us shortly. Just thought I'd share this little insight!

[Pennycat 880]

Congratulations to everyone who's starting to get their NOA2s. My NOA1 date is Jan 28 (exactly 6 months ago today). I wanted to share an update from my congressman:

Not very helpful, as expected, but thought I would try. I assume they mean processing the NOA2 in September. I would hope they mean adjudicated ENTIRELY i.e., interview done and visa in hand, but it doesn't seem possible at this rate, since I hear consulates can take up to 2 months to schedule the interview appointment. Anyway, I'm very happy for those of you who are receiving notice. I hope the same for all of us shortly. Just thought I'd share this little insight!

Unacceptable (to me, that is, and I used to do that job so....). What they're feeding you is the line that they were fed from the "official processing times" website, which we all know is completely outdated and is manipulated to prevent us from getting congressional help and even THAT info is outdated. What day was that sent to you? Because as of 7/17, that date moved from October to November. So while it still doesn't help you, the "official line" is that "as of May 31, we were finished with everything up until November 10". So only people who applied before November 10 can get congressional action.

But...two problems. One, that was provably false (you can see it in the Immifairy data). Two, that was 8 weeks ago. So IN THEORY, if 8 weeks ago they were "done" with November 10....people who filed 8 weeks after November 10 should be allowed to call. Yeah. No. They don't play like that. Some Congressional reps "get" this, and push. Others don't. Others can't push because the congressman's politics aren't immigrant friendly. But the "unacceptable" part to me, is them being wrong on a date that is already wrong, and manipulated, and passing it on to you like "oh no big deal, here's what they said".

I'd get back and say to them "yes, I've seen that website too (link: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processingTimesDisplay.do;jsessionid=abcoAluGsrH8BbE4Mhv7u).It moved to November 10 on July 17. But please note that this data is "as of May 31"--as you can see in the gray box above the table--, which is 8 weeks ago. So they are not "currently" working on these files. They are claiming that they finished those files 8 weeks ago. I am reaching out to you for assistance, because I cannot get anywhere myself because of these dates. They don't seem to notice or care that they're horribly out of date, and I think that they do this to manipulate the situation to their advantage (mostly to avoid an influx of calls). Can you please look into this matter further?"

Oh, and it definitely moved on 7/17, so don't let them pretend like it happened yesterday. Right now it is showing "uploaded 7/27" but they must have changed something else. You can go here: http://www.aila.org/infonet/processing-time-reports/tscto see all the archived updates. You can see the 7/17 one reflected the change from October to November (and is something that I called about because when they did the July 2 update, they didn't change a single thing. It still said "as of April 30")

Edited July 28, 2015 by CatherineA

[tm11216 0]

Unacceptable (to me, that is, and I used to do that job so....). What they're feeding you is the line that they were fed from the "official processing times" website, which we all know is completely outdated and is manipulated to prevent us from getting congressional help and even THAT info is outdated. What day was that sent to you? Because as of 7/17, that date moved from October to November. So while it still doesn't help you, the "official line" is that "as of May 31, we were finished with everything up until November 10". So only people who applied before November 10 can get congressional action.

But...two problems. One, that was provably false (you can see it in the Immifairy data). Two, that was 8 weeks ago. So IN THEORY, if 8 weeks ago they were "done" with November 10....people who filed 8 weeks after November 10 should be allowed to call. Yeah. No. They don't play like that. Some Congressional reps "get" this, and push. Others don't. Others can't push because the congressman's politics aren't immigrant friendly. But the "unacceptable" part to me, is them being wrong on a date that is already wrong, and manipulated, and passing it on to you like "oh no big deal, here's what they said".

I'd get back and say to them "yes, I've seen that website too (link: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processingTimesDisplay.do;jsessionid=abcoAluGsrH8BbE4Mhv7u).It moved to November 10 on July 17. But please note that this data is "as of May 31"--as you can see in the gray box above the table--, which is 8 weeks ago. So they are not "currently" working on these files. They are claiming that they finished those files 8 weeks ago. I am reaching out to you for assistance, because I cannot get anywhere myself because of these dates. They don't seem to notice or care that they're horribly out of date, and I think that they do this to manipulate the situation to their advantage (mostly to avoid an influx of calls). Can you please look into this matter further?"

Oh, and it definitely moved on 7/17, so don't let them pretend like it happened yesterday. Right now it is showing "uploaded 7/27" but they must have changed something else. You can go here: http://www.aila.org/infonet/processing-time-reports/tscto see all the archived updates. You can see the 7/17 one reflected the change from October to November (and is something that I called about because when they did the July 2 update, they didn't change a single thing. It still said "as of April 30")

It's so frustrating. I will reply to them as you suggested. It's actually ridiculous. And they just sent me that reply yesterday -- so I'm amazed that they are SO out of date.

[Pennycat 880]

It's so frustrating. I will reply to them as you suggested. It's actually ridiculous. And they just sent me that reply yesterday -- so I'm amazed that they are SO out of date.

Yep, THIS is why TSC folks have been freaking out since forever. It's hard though because newbies don't understand and all the other people peace out once they get their approvals. But they have been pulling this act forever.

It is annoying that your congressman's office is just feeding you the official line (the one that's out of date on purpose), but some of them just do that because they have to. It is unacceptable that they're feeding you an *outdated* official line. That's on them. Try to explain to them, think that it's possible that they just don't realize. But make sure that you're clear on the current processing times being 8 weeks old, and that was the reason you're asking for help.

[tm11216 0]

Yep, THIS is why TSC folks have been freaking out since forever. It's hard though because newbies don't understand and all the other people peace out once they get their approvals. But they have been pulling this act forever.

It is annoying that your congressman's office is just feeding you the official line (the one that's out of date on purpose), but some of them just do that because they have to. It is unacceptable that they're feeding you an *outdated* official line. That's on them. Try to explain to them, think that it's possible that they just don't realize. But make sure that you're clear on the current processing times being 8 weeks old, and that was the reason you're asking for help.

Ok updates: the congressman's rep called me (wow, impressed) and was actually pretty sympathetic (apparently he's going through a similar visa scramble with his wife). He said there's no point in them sending an expedite request because USCIS will most likely reject it. He said what we REALLY should be worried about is the NVC which has "the biggest backlog" of all the government offices; now THAT is a scary concept. He said if you wanted to expedite it, that's probably the place to request is (after getting the NVC number from the NOA2). I didn't know it was going to be so much longer after the NOA2, I don't have much insight into these timelines. Does anyone know?

[Pennycat 880]

Ok updates: the congressman's rep called me (wow, impressed) and was actually pretty sympathetic (apparently he's going through a similar visa scramble with his wife). He said there's no point in them sending an expedite request because USCIS will most likely reject it. He said what we REALLY should be worried about is the NVC which has "the biggest backlog" of all the government offices; now THAT is a scary concept. He said if you wanted to expedite it, that's probably the place to request is (after getting the NVC number from the NOA2). I didn't know it was going to be so much longer after the NOA2, I don't have much insight into these timelines. Does anyone know?

Well, that's good then! Problem here is that he may not fully understand K1 (if he's doing CR1, plus K1s are very uncommon in the grand scheme of things). K1s get through NVC fairly quickly, and I think that's because K1s are technically "nonimmigrant" visas so we don't have to have the same sort of processing done there. We basically just pass through there on the way to the consulates. Looks like the current average is 9 days at NVC (but it can take a few weeks for the service centers to ship them out). And yes, NVC has a huge backlog for immigrant visas. That's one of the many reasons we chose K1.

http://www.visajourney.com/content/k1historical

Now, still technically you're not eligible for an expedite (officially, the congressman's staff has to go by those stupid dates, too), and it seems like you may not really need one as January seems to have really picked up. All that said, if you want to push this (without ruffling feathers), worth a shot and see if he'll work with you. This is a perfect example of what I mean about "every staff member is different". This guy seems like he's willing to help, but he doesn't totally get this process.

Just an aside take a look at the CR1 folks' Step 3 at NVC: http://www.visajourney.com/content/ir1cr1historical

Edited July 28, 2015 by CatherineA

[tm11216 0]

Well, that's good then! Problem here is that he may not fully understand K1 (if he's doing CR1, plus K1s are very uncommon in the grand scheme of things). K1s get through NVC fairly quickly, and I think that's because K1s are technically "nonimmigrant" visas so we don't have to have the same sort of processing done there. We basically just pass through there on the way to the consulates. Looks like the current average is 9 days at NVC (but it can take a few weeks for the service centers to ship them out). And yes, NVC has a huge backlog for immigrant visas. That's one of the many reasons we chose K1.

http://www.visajourney.com/content/k1historical

Now, still technically you're not eligible for an expedite (officially, the congressman's staff has to go by those stupid dates, too), and it seems like you may not really need one as January seems to have really picked up. All that said, if you want to push this (without ruffling feathers), worth a shot and see if he'll work with you. This is a perfect example of what I mean about "every staff member is different". This guy seems like he's willing to help, but he doesn't totally get this process.

Just an aside take a look at the CR1 folks' Step 3 at NVC: http://www.visajourney.com/content/ir1cr1historical

Ah, thank you so much! You know more than the rep does (probably because you've held the job and are living the horrible process personally). He also kept staying that Nov 10 was the EARLIEST date that they were processing K1s when we know it's the OLDEST date. And whenever I would say "no, seriously, there are people at TSC from Feb and March that are getting approved" his response was that it's a very small percentage of the total applicants and that they probably were transferred to California without being notified. I didn't buy all that.

That's really encouraging, I mean the distinction between nonimmigrant and immigrant visas at NVC. Here's to hoping that things keep picking up!

[Pennycat 880]

Ah, thank you so much! You know more than the rep does (probably because you've held the job and are living the horrible process personally). He also kept staying that Nov 10 was the EARLIEST date that they were processing K1s when we know it's the OLDEST date. And whenever I would say "no, seriously, there are people at TSC from Feb and March that are getting approved" his response was that it's a very small percentage of the total applicants and that they probably were transferred to California without being notified. I didn't buy all that.

That's really encouraging, I mean the distinction between nonimmigrant and immigrant visas at NVC. Here's to hoping that things keep picking up!

::shaking my head:: Ok. Well that's the best you'll get out of him, then. You can try to correct him for future callers' sake if you want but it may not be worth looking antagonistic. I'm confused by what you mean by earliest and oldest..... So, from what I understand, those dates are (and this is quoting from the instructions on how to read the chart) " filing date of the last case that the office completed before updating the chart. So, ok, *technically* all it means that someone in that building did a November 10 before May 31, not that they finished everything before Nov 10 by that date.

But, if you filed *before* that date, you are "out of normal processing times" and can call....so, it's in their best interest to publish the oldest date possible, thereby minimizing the number of people eligible to call. Also, though, I'm dead convinced that those numbers are totally made up, anyway. That they had finished nowhere near Nov 10 by May 31 but are just saying so because they know it'll be 6 weeks before the date gets published and no one will catch the lie. So they look faster than they are AND get to avoid people calling in. My theory, anyway.

He's probably wrong about people being transferred to CSC. Or, specifically, I HOPE he's wrong, for all our sakes. I don't think that they do transfers without telling anyone. And it would show up on Immifairy data. That might have been the brush-off.

Glad to clear it up on immigrant vs non-immigrant visas . I can understand how that's frightening to hear. *That* you may want to clear up with him, if you get the chance. Now, NVC isn't a breeze, and an average is an average---some are more some are less. Some people get mailed down there in a few days, others wait weeks (why they sit on applications before mailing them to NVC, I don't know), some get through in days, others take a few weeks. But at least, just know, that once you have NOA2, you'll be at the consulate in a month or so, possibly much quicker. And some consulates move like lightening.

[tm11216 0]

::shaking my head:: Ok. Well that's the best you'll get out of him, then. You can try to correct him for future callers' sake if you want but it may not be worth looking antagonistic. I'm confused by what you mean by earliest and oldest..... So, from what I understand, those dates are (and this is quoting from the instructions on how to read the chart) " filing date of the last case that the office completed before updating the chart. So, ok, *technically* all it means that someone in that building did a November 10 before May 31, not that they finished everything before Nov 10 by that date.

But, if you filed *before* that date, you are "out of normal processing times" and can call....so, it's in their best interest to publish the oldest date possible, thereby minimizing the number of people eligible to call. Also, though, I'm dead convinced that those numbers are totally made up, anyway. That they had finished nowhere near Nov 10 by May 31 but are just saying so because they know it'll be 6 weeks before the date gets published and no one will catch the lie. So they look faster than they are AND get to avoid people calling in. My theory, anyway.

He's probably wrong about people being transferred to CSC. Or, specifically, I HOPE he's wrong, for all our sakes. I don't think that they do transfers without telling anyone. And it would show up on Immifairy data. That might have been the brush-off.

Glad to clear it up on immigrant vs non-immigrant visas . I can understand how that's frightening to hear. *That* you may want to clear up with him, if you get the chance. Now, NVC isn't a breeze, and an average is an average---some are more some are less. Some people get mailed down there in a few days, others wait weeks (why they sit on applications before mailing them to NVC, I don't know), some get through in days, others take a few weeks. But at least, just know, that once you have NOA2, you'll be at the consulate in a month or so, possibly much quicker. And some consulates move like lightening.

Yeah, he was saying that in most cases only applications filed BEFORE Nov 10 were being processed (not after), which didn't make any sense to me. I tried to correct him on all those accounts, but he was very sure of himself, so I let it go; there was no point in arguing. Even if NVC takes weeks, it's better than the 60-90 days he quoted me!

[dmaven 7]

OMG some petitions with the same received date as mine have already been approved on ImmiFairy. Please let this be our week.

[ch3john 308]

OMG some petitions with the same received date as mine have already been approved on ImmiFairy. Please let this be our week.

I noticed that too....it's two days AFTER my NOA1. Watching TSC is like watching a wicked game of Whack A Mole.

Let's hope we are approved in the next week or two. Fingers crossed.

[ch3john 308]

Maybe we should get Larry & Monica to tell us our NOA2 date. Apparently they can see into the future LOL

Seriously people, how hard is it to fill out a timeline with correct dates (+/- a couple of months)??