I-129F Filers, March 2015 NOA1 date! TSC only!

[Tom and SooGyeong 87]

I might be mistaken, but I was under the impression it was illegal to add case numbes to your account that aren't your own. If I were you, I would remove those extra case numbers and be very cautious of doing so again.

I think there's a fundamental flaw to this line of reasoning: Statistically speaking, there is no reason why petitions at TSC should have more RFEs than those at CSC. While I don't know the exact state-by-state breakdown that's sent to each service center, any subset of 25 states should be reasonably similar to its complement, and unless there are extraneous (and unlikely) factors that distinguish the TSC applicant pool to the CSC applicant pool (such as availability of affordable attorneys, perhaps), I really can't see why TSC would receive more error-laden petititions than CSC. Additionally, and this perhaps may be the stronger evidence against your argument, the entire TSC applicant pool was merged with the CSC pool as of the end of March; if there were a disproportional amount of incorrect petitions being sent from states routed to TSC, there would be an increase of RFEs at CSC that would not only be noticeable, but would have had an impact on their processing times. To the extent of my knowledge (given I don't see daily data), this hasn't happened.

It seems more logical that if there is a difference in percentages of petitions receiving RFEs at the service centers, the fault belongs to the service centers: Either CSC is more lenient and unlikely to send out RFEs, or TSC is stricter and sends out more RFEs (possibly as a way to "touch" more petitions without actually doing the work to process them? This would fall back in line with the belief that it's mismanagement of the service centers causing the processing time discrepancies). If this is the case, then I hope I'm not the only one seeing the injustice in these processing practices: Not only could fraudulent or risky petitions make it through CSC, but applicants at TSC face harsher, unequal standards for approval.

Of course, I don't have enough raw data analysis to prove any of these claims, but I hope I've at least suggested enough possibilities for why your reasoning, which felt a lot like blaming the petitioners to me, doesn't seem to hold up against rational scrutiny.

Greetings Fellow Waiters-in-Line. Against my better judgment, I will chime in here. In so stating, I am accepting (in advance) any critical feedback or comments that come my way. I'm in a good mood today, and don't mind one bit, so if my 2~cents worth that follow ruffle your feathers, I apologize in advance. If they are easily ruffled, I invite you to 'not read' my response. I mean nothing in a negative way to fellow waiters dsldesch, or any who feel likewise, and appreciate their input. But, I still wanted to weigh in. ( you have been notified)

I agree with rms171.

As you clearly stated (above), you have not seen the IF data.

All files that are touched at TSC (or CSC) will fall about 95% into one of two categories:

Approved without any additional information required, and

Additional information required.

Each file will occupy a processor's time. Either it will process through and be approved, or

it will be determined to need more information.

In the latter case, it will have to be given an RFE number, have an RFE printed and mailed to the petitioner, and then stored in preparation for being reunited with the Reply to the REF when it eventually arrives.

The next wrinkle in the smooth flow of cases is when RFEs sent sometime in the past arrive back at TSC. They must be matched to and reunited with the original sidelined case file, and then re-evaluated.

From my observations of the data available, approximately 20% - 30% of the additional information that arrives for these 1st time RFEs is still inadequate, and a 2nd RFE must be sent to the petitioner, and the file must languish longer while RFE2 makes another loop out and back.

By way of example, here are some snapshot numbers from an 'undated' and 'unidentified' at TSC:

(85) files with RFEs /~/ (37)_1st RFE sent; (20)_2nd RFE sent; (24)_RFE answers; (4)_others

(under 20)_Case Files Approved

~~ so far, 82% of files 'touched' this day are stalled due to Lacking Data, or Improper Data

~~ so far only 18% of files approved.

In Addition to that, on this day, of those petitions approved over the past several days, more than 130 files were properly notated,. packaged and shipped to the NVC for the next stage in the Journey.

That is the image of a single day at the TSC. I for one do not blame for the processors, especially since I have seen the evidence listed showing how high a percentage of the files received have insufficient or incorrect information. From my days in the military, I remember how complex governmental paperwork can be, and how vague the instructions for processing through that paperwork. For that reason, my fiancée and I opted to pay an immigration lawyer to prepare our petition for us, and ensure that everything was absolutely correct. The cost was small, and the peace of mind is Priceless. Even SO, we must still wait in line behind the petitions that are less meticulously prepared.

Am I casting some blame on those petitioners with RFEs? In a Word, "Yes".

If a driver stops at a toll booth, and 'only then' begins scratching around in the floorboard for loose change to pay the toll, that driver is responsible for causing those in line behind them to wait.

Conversely, if a driver knows that they Must Pass through a toll booth, it is only courteous and responsible to have the exact change ready in advance, so that a stop is barely needed. (good shots into the basket can keep moving).

Unfortunately, there is no Speed-Pass lane that can be bought in this toll booth traffic jam known as the TSC.

Just my $0.02 worth.

[dsldesch 27]

Greetings Fellow Waiters-in-Line. Against my better judgment, I will chime in here. In so stating, I am accepting (in advance) any critical feedback or comments that come my way. I'm in a good mood today, and don't mind one bit, so if my 2~cents worth that follow ruffle your feathers, I apologize in advance. If they are easily ruffled, I invite you to 'not read' my response. I mean nothing in a negative way to fellow waiters dsldesch, or any who feel likewise, and appreciate their input. But, I still wanted to weigh in. ( you have been notified)

I agree with rms171.

[long post, shortened for convenience]

Just my $0.02 worth.

I appreciate your contribution, but I don't believe it really addresses the points I had been making in my previous post. As I said before, there is statistically no reason why there should be more RFEs at TSC than at CSC, so if there are a disproportionate number of RFEs at TSC, it would seem to me more likely that it's a result of how the center processes petitions rather than the petitions themselves. If this is not the case, we should see an increase in RFEs (with a subsequent delay in processing times) at CSC, but until this data is delivered, I cannot believe that TSC has any more error-filled petitions than CSC.

Additionally, many people file with attorneys and have RFEs and other errors, and many who don't file with attorneys don't have any errors at all. As far as I'm concerned, it's unrelated; probably that's an oversimplification, but until a thorough study is shown that one is better than an other, nothing credible can be concluded from personal peace of mind and the particular deep wallets necessary for some to use attorneys. Sadly, looking at econimic access to resources draws in a whole lot more issues than just immigration, and I'm sure for everyone sake (and to stay on topic) it's not necessary to go into any of that here.

Once again, though, until I see a comparison of data between service centers over time (until the end of March and afterwards) showing that the percentage of petitions at CSC requiring RFEs increased when all petitions began being routed to CSC, I don't feel there is sufficient data to say that TSC's case load has more mistakes than California's. As of yet, even with your comment, no evidence has been provided to test this claim, which is what both you and rms171 are asserting based solely on present-day TSC data. And until that comparative evidence is provided, I'm afraid it's simply illogical to blame TSC petitioners for the delays.

[rms171 20]

Receipt numbers, I am pretty sure are public domain, as part of the Freedom of Information act. That is the only reason why someone like Immifairy can get at them and produce data reports.

Bottom line here is for all of us, we're like a big family living in a small cabin and we're getting cabin fever already. We will all get there in time. If I am the last guy approved for March I will be no less happy, because I know that everyone on this thread has waited and suffered patiently and equally.

[Kyle and Linh 64]

Speed Pass Lane for TSC. I am all for it. Since we are paying the freight at the processing centers with our fees... why not charge more for Speed Pass service?

Oops I am sorry... that would be something a non-bureaucratic person would think of.... Carry on...

Good Luck to all

[dsldesch 27]

Speed Pass Lane for TSC. I am all for it. Since we are paying the freight at the processing centers with our fees... why not charge more for Speed Pass service?

Oops I am sorry... that would be something a non-bureaucratic person would think of.... Carry on...

Good Luck to all

Two immediate effects: those who can't pay extra would never have their petitions processed (since people in the speed lane would always outnumber them) and everyone in the speed lane would end up backlogged just the same. So for anyone to get approved, everyone would need to pay the speed lane costs.

So what you just described is a fee increase. 8-)

[naddy 14]

Interesting. Immifairy shows a small batch of march (looks like later march) petitions being transferred. Not sure if that is to California or not. Anyone here??

[Kana Anz 12]

March petitions being transferred? has anyone else heard about that?

[naddy 14]

It was only about 12... but they were all march and looked later in the month. I am March 3 and my case # starts with 159022 and these were all around 159026. So I am guessing closer to the dates that petitions were routed to CSC. At this point I would be happy to be transferred to CSC assuming that they will process March before the June that they are currently working on. I will be curious to see if they transfer more petitions.

[Kyle and Linh 64]

I saw that too. Interesting however the TSC numbers are from March but show receipt dates in June at another office. Could these be CSC sent to the Black Hole? Reverse of what we are thinking?

[Kyle and Linh 64]

ImmiFairy shows another March 2nd approval yesterday. 2 of about 130 people with NOA1 of March 2nd. Getting there.....

[rms171 20]

Not that I trust it much anymore, but the estimated adjudication dates here are bouncing around so much the last week. Crazy how much the date range is moving from a range of two weeks to know a full month. It might as well just say: "Some day" or " Eventually". Still I have hope of a NOA2 approval in the month of August even though this site now pegs the entire month of September. Gotta have hope.

[cook511 3]

We were just approved for our NOA2. So excited. Good luck everyone.

[dza 46]

We were just approved for our NOA2. So excited. Good luck everyone.

coongrats

cant wait for mine, you are a feb filler like me, try to put that news there

good luck with the rest

[Wors 19]

If people in that new August filers thread get NOA2 before me I could go mental.

[Tom and SooGyeong 87]

VJ friends, I have been slack in providing monthly averages, and I apologize.

Not many members here have updated their data in the past 9 days, so it did not seem worth the effort to change the numbers by 1 or 2 days average.

However, I should offer NEWS, and NOT excuses. I apologize to those of you anxious to hear something, and only hear my silence.

It is 10:30pm my time, and I have Skype chat scheduled with a Lovely Lady who exists +13 hours ahead of me on the chronometer. She waits, even now.

Tomorrow, (Wednesday August 5th), I will post some new numbers here, such as they are.

The Day Approaches Steadily. Prepare, and Encourage Each Other. Keep on Walking Day by Day. Time Marches Onward.

Thank you for your patience.

Tom