1st post former NSC adjudicator now petitioner

[Augustajim 0]

I bet I don't want to know this...but... How long does a "typical" non-RFE case require to adjudicate?

What types of things are "red flags" in someone's file?

Why types of things would someone be put on "additional review" for during the petition review process?

Does country of birth and residence for the beneficiary (and country of birth for the petitioner) play into this?

Well lets see how much I remember...

Maybe it might be easier if I just described what I would do to approve a petition - my process.

First, I would select a case file/folder. All petitions/files are kept in folders that a have a scanable bar code identifier. This folder has everything that a person submits on the left side of the folder and all the agency generated documents on the right side. They should be in date order, Petition and then most recent from top to bottom. The left side has the pictures on top.

You begin by looking at the petition for correctness by checking the information via several databases depending upon what type of petition you are adjudicating. Also if the form was complete and everything was in order. Descrepancies in peoples names from what the database had vs. what the petition said, birth dates, things like that all had to be resolved and could generate a RFE if the adjudicator couldn't figure it out with the tools he had.

There were some standard criminal and background type databases that were required for all petitions. A "hit" in any of these databases would flag the petition and it would be sent to a special group who worked to resolve why the "hit" occurred. Sometimes it could be something simple as a similar name of a bad guy, but every hit had to be resolved.

I remember that certain surnames would invariably cause a hit, but they could be resolved rather quickly by comparing the applicants background information with those of the "hit" name. There were various ways to do this of course, and it took time. Thats why some applications take longer to process because there are stumbling blocks along the way that must be worked through before approval. Consequently, all the other petitions that the officer was working get set to the side. or, the adjudicator/officer might set the difficult one to the side and work on less complicated ones. Remember it was a production environment where you had to be accurate but fast. Getting a petition kicked back for mistakes to be re-worked hurt your overall stats, so, you tried to be a thorough as you could, but also as quick as you could.

After clearing a applicant through the various mandatory database searches, then you could begin to review the various information on the petition. Sometimes there would be stupid mistakes like forgetting to sign it, or using a copy when an original signature was required etc... Kinda careless mistakes or from not really understanding the instructions type of thing. Anyway, these would generate an RFE, and the file's staus would be update in the computer as awaiting repsonse to RFE or something like that, I don't recall the exact terminology.

Anyway, instead of sending the newly RFE'd file back to the large file storage area, it would be kept at the officers desk in a holding cue. Then when an RFE reply would come in, I wpuld pull it (the file) off the shelf and rework it. I tried to clear all my answered RFE's out first thing every morning because it was "old" work as compared to the dates I was working at the time. If the RFE had the required information, it would continue to be processed and/or approved and sent on its way. If the RFE did not address the item, then another RFE would be generated and back on the shelf it would go.

A word about RFE's. It was my experience that no two officers would always see eye to eye on if an RFE was required. Some officers could or would spend some more time digging around the file or a database to find the information (if they thought it could be found) and others would just as soon rip off an RFE. So it varied. Then there were some times that an RFE was required because of the situation. Again, it depends a lot on who was looking at your case and what the question was / what information was needed. No hard and fast rule.

Also, each adjudicator/officer had a master list of RFE "phrases that they could pull off thier computer and plug into a standard RFE form depending upon the situation. Each of these "phrases" could be further "wordsmithed" to suit a particular situation. Again depends on the officer. Thats why you may see some RFE's that are similar but not exact. We would borrow each others RFE phrases to add to our list as we came across one that fit a particular situation.

It would be like "Hey, cube mate. I've got this situation, do you have anything in your RFE library that might fit?" answer "Sure, try this one. I'll email it to you". And thats how that worked.

You asked about country of birth etc.. Yes and no. There were "watch lists" of certain countries that meant that certain procedures had to be followed when processing petitions from these countries, but it was just a couple more things to check/verify along the approval process. It didn't slow things down dramatically. So, I wouldn't worry about that being a big factor.

Additional review. Mainly if you came up as a "hit" for a surname of a bad guy (or gal) that would have to be resolved. Marriage Fraud. Overstaying your visit. Lying. Criminal activity/organized crime, police reports, things that would be outside of a "normal" person's life you might say.

So back to the approval process. So if no RFE was needed then i would "approve' the petition, affix my stamp with my identifier # , sign and date it. I would then scan the file, update the status and send it on its wayto the next stop wherever that was. Actually, all the approved petitions/files were placed in a separate box and those were collected as you went along and taken for final disposition/processing.

Then you start all over again with the next case...

[HUSKERKIEV 8]

Welcome and good luck in your journey.

Hi HUSKERKIEV I have a question for you...I filed a I-129F with a request fro waiver of meeting requirement due to a hardship. I had a car accident when I was 17 years old and my fiancee lives in Indonesia I live in california and I used a wheelchair to move around. I got some letters from my doctores staying that I cannot fly for long hours due to I can suffers bedsores and they can get infect it...Also it will hurt my back badly because traveling there is almost like 20hours and I think it will be not fun for me traveling long and having a hard time to used restroom. Do you KNow if my case will be review by CIS manager or any worker will make the decision weaather my application is approve or denie? Also if my case is denie is there any think I can still do or my case will be closed and can not do anything about it.......Thank you....

PM me. Ok?

[rea 1]

wow! interesting to know these things..getting the process as detailed as this one makes us more understanding why it takes too long..

rea

[HUSKERKIEV 8]

I bet I don't want to know this...but... How long does a "typical" non-RFE case require to adjudicate?

What types of things are "red flags" in someone's file?

Why types of things would someone be put on "additional review" for during the petition review process?

Does country of birth and residence for the beneficiary (and country of birth for the petitioner) play into this?

Well lets see how much I remember...

Maybe it might be easier if I just described what I would do to approve a petition - my process.

First, I would select a case file/folder. All petitions/files are kept in folders that a have a scanable bar code identifier. This folder has everything that a person submits on the left side of the folder and all the agency generated documents on the right side. They should be in date order, Petition and then most recent from top to bottom. The left side has the pictures on top.

You begin by looking at the petition for correctness by checking the information via several databases depending upon what type of petition you are adjudicating. Also if the form was complete and everything was in order. Descrepancies in peoples names from what the database had vs. what the petition said, birth dates, things like that all had to be resolved and could generate a RFE if the adjudicator couldn't figure it out with the tools he had.

There were some standard criminal and background type databases that were required for all petitions. A "hit" in any of these databases would flag the petition and it would be sent to a special group who worked to resolve why the "hit" occurred. Sometimes it could be something simple as a similar name of a bad guy, but every hit had to be resolved.

I remember that certain surnames would invariably cause a hit, but they could be resolved rather quickly by comparing the applicants background information with those of the "hit" name. There were various ways to do this of course, and it took time. Thats why some applications take longer to process because there are stumbling blocks along the way that must be worked through before approval. Consequently, all the other petitions that the officer was working get set to the side. or, the adjudicator/officer might set the difficult one to the side and work on less complicated ones. Remember it was a production environment where you had to be accurate but fast. Getting a petition kicked back for mistakes to be re-worked hurt your overall stats, so, you tried to be a thorough as you could, but also as quick as you could.

After clearing a applicant through the various mandatory database searches, then you could begin to review the various information on the petition. Sometimes there would be stupid mistakes like forgetting to sign it, or using a copy when an original signature was required etc... Kinda careless mistakes or from not really understanding the instructions type of thing. Anyway, these would generate an RFE, and the file's staus would be update in the computer as awaiting repsonse to RFE or something like that, I don't recall the exact terminology.

Anyway, instead of sending the newly RFE'd file back to the large file storage area, it would be kept at the officers desk in a holding cue. Then when an RFE reply would come in, I wpuld pull it (the file) off the shelf and rework it. I tried to clear all my answered RFE's out first thing every morning because it was "old" work as compared to the dates I was working at the time. If the RFE had the required information, it would continue to be processed and/or approved and sent on its way. If the RFE did not address the item, then another RFE would be generated and back on the shelf it would go.

A word about RFE's. It was my experience that no two officers would always see eye to eye on if an RFE was required. Some officers could or would spend some more time digging around the file or a database to find the information (if they thought it could be found) and others would just as soon rip off an RFE. So it varied. Then there were some times that an RFE was required because of the situation. Again, it depends a lot on who was looking at your case and what the question was / what information was needed. No hard and fast rule.

Also, each adjudicator/officer had a master list of RFE "phrases that they could pull off thier computer and plug into a standard RFE form depending upon the situation. Each of these "phrases" could be further "wordsmithed" to suit a particular situation. Again depends on the officer. Thats why you may see some RFE's that are similar but not exact. We would borrow each others RFE phrases to add to our list as we came across one that fit a particular situation.

It would be like "Hey, cube mate. I've got this situation, do you have anything in your RFE library that might fit?" answer "Sure, try this one. I'll email it to you". And thats how that worked.

You asked about country of birth etc.. Yes and no. There were "watch lists" of certain countries that meant that certain procedures had to be followed when processing petitions from these countries, but it was just a couple more things to check/verify along the approval process. It didn't slow things down dramatically. So, I wouldn't worry about that being a big factor.

Additional review. Mainly if you came up as a "hit" for a surname of a bad guy (or gal) that would have to be resolved. Marriage Fraud. Overstaying your visit. Lying. Criminal activity/organized crime, police reports, things that would be outside of a "normal" person's life you might say.

So back to the approval process. So if no RFE was needed then i would "approve' the petition, affix my stamp with my identifier # , sign and date it. I would then scan the file, update the status and send it on its wayto the next stop wherever that was. Actually, all the approved petitions/files were placed in a separate box and those were collected as you went along and taken for final disposition/processing.

Then you start all over again with the next case...

Before I answer your question, I need to say this because I haven't said it already and I wouldn't want to mislead people. I worked other petitions besides the I-129's or (hunny-bunnies as they were affectionately referred to). But the process is the same, same databases, same checks etc... Everything in the system works the same as far as the processes and the flow of work. If you walked through the NSC it's a maze of cubes and everyone has the same type stuff in thier cubes, the same file folders etc.... It's just whats inside the folders that's different.

But everything is scanned and routed around the various Service Centers the same. So, Nebraska does itthe same way Vermont does or California or wherever. I can't speak to the District Offices or the Consulates. They may have thier own way of doing things, but as an organization/agency there were standard operating procedures for handling and processing cases. We all use basically the same "system" and "tools".

That having been said... I could crank out an "approval" in about 15 minutes depending upon the complexity of the petition. I recall that we'd love to see those large family petitions with the little kids. Why? Because once you clear the mom and dad, the kids went really fast and you could get several "credits" very quickly that way instead of having to do the equal number of "individual" petitions for the same amount of "credits". But you have to be fast and thorough, because its your job to be fast and thorough you might say...

[Augustajim 0]

I knew this 90 wait was really important!!!! lol

I bet I don't want to know this...but... How long does a "typical" non-RFE case require to adjudicate?

What types of things are "red flags" in someone's file?

Why types of things would someone be put on "additional review" for during the petition review process?

Does country of birth and residence for the beneficiary (and country of birth for the petitioner) play into this?

Well lets see how much I remember...

Maybe it might be easier if I just described what I would do to approve a petition - my process.

First, I would select a case file/folder. All petitions/files are kept in folders that a have a scanable bar code identifier. This folder has everything that a person submits on the left side of the folder and all the agency generated documents on the right side. They should be in date order, Petition and then most recent from top to bottom. The left side has the pictures on top.

You begin by looking at the petition for correctness by checking the information via several databases depending upon what type of petition you are adjudicating. Also if the form was complete and everything was in order. Descrepancies in peoples names from what the database had vs. what the petition said, birth dates, things like that all had to be resolved and could generate a RFE if the adjudicator couldn't figure it out with the tools he had.

There were some standard criminal and background type databases that were required for all petitions. A "hit" in any of these databases would flag the petition and it would be sent to a special group who worked to resolve why the "hit" occurred. Sometimes it could be something simple as a similar name of a bad guy, but every hit had to be resolved.

I remember that certain surnames would invariably cause a hit, but they could be resolved rather quickly by comparing the applicants background information with those of the "hit" name. There were various ways to do this of course, and it took time. Thats why some applications take longer to process because there are stumbling blocks along the way that must be worked through before approval. Consequently, all the other petitions that the officer was working get set to the side. or, the adjudicator/officer might set the difficult one to the side and work on less complicated ones. Remember it was a production environment where you had to be accurate but fast. Getting a petition kicked back for mistakes to be re-worked hurt your overall stats, so, you tried to be a thorough as you could, but also as quick as you could.

After clearing a applicant through the various mandatory database searches, then you could begin to review the various information on the petition. Sometimes there would be stupid mistakes like forgetting to sign it, or using a copy when an original signature was required etc... Kinda careless mistakes or from not really understanding the instructions type of thing. Anyway, these would generate an RFE, and the file's staus would be update in the computer as awaiting repsonse to RFE or something like that, I don't recall the exact terminology.

Anyway, instead of sending the newly RFE'd file back to the large file storage area, it would be kept at the officers desk in a holding cue. Then when an RFE reply would come in, I wpuld pull it (the file) off the shelf and rework it. I tried to clear all my answered RFE's out first thing every morning because it was "old" work as compared to the dates I was working at the time. If the RFE had the required information, it would continue to be processed and/or approved and sent on its way. If the RFE did not address the item, then another RFE would be generated and back on the shelf it would go.

A word about RFE's. It was my experience that no two officers would always see eye to eye on if an RFE was required. Some officers could or would spend some more time digging around the file or a database to find the information (if they thought it could be found) and others would just as soon rip off an RFE. So it varied. Then there were some times that an RFE was required because of the situation. Again, it depends a lot on who was looking at your case and what the question was / what information was needed. No hard and fast rule.

Also, each adjudicator/officer had a master list of RFE "phrases that they could pull off thier computer and plug into a standard RFE form depending upon the situation. Each of these "phrases" could be further "wordsmithed" to suit a particular situation. Again depends on the officer. Thats why you may see some RFE's that are similar but not exact. We would borrow each others RFE phrases to add to our list as we came across one that fit a particular situation.

It would be like "Hey, cube mate. I've got this situation, do you have anything in your RFE library that might fit?" answer "Sure, try this one. I'll email it to you". And thats how that worked.

You asked about country of birth etc.. Yes and no. There were "watch lists" of certain countries that meant that certain procedures had to be followed when processing petitions from these countries, but it was just a couple more things to check/verify along the approval process. It didn't slow things down dramatically. So, I wouldn't worry about that being a big factor.

Additional review. Mainly if you came up as a "hit" for a surname of a bad guy (or gal) that would have to be resolved. Marriage Fraud. Overstaying your visit. Lying. Criminal activity/organized crime, police reports, things that would be outside of a "normal" person's life you might say.

So back to the approval process. So if no RFE was needed then i would "approve' the petition, affix my stamp with my identifier # , sign and date it. I would then scan the file, update the status and send it on its wayto the next stop wherever that was. Actually, all the approved petitions/files were placed in a separate box and those were collected as you went along and taken for final disposition/processing.

Then you start all over again with the next case...

Before I answer your question, I need to say this because I haven't said it already and I wouldn't want to mislead people. I worked other petitions besides the I-129's or (hunny-bunnies as they were affectionately referred to). But the process is the same, same databases, same checks etc... Everything in the system works the same as far as the processes and the flow of work. If you walked through the NSC it's a maze of cubes and everyone has the same type stuff in thier cubes, the same file folders etc.... It's just whats inside the folders that's different.

But everything is scanned and routed around the various Service Centers the same. So, Nebraska does itthe same way Vermont does or California or wherever. I can't speak to the District Offices or the Consulates. They may have thier own way of doing things, but as an organization/agency there were standard operating procedures for handling and processing cases. We all use basically the same "system" and "tools".

That having been said... I could crank out an "approval" in about 15 minutes depending upon the complexity of the petition. I recall that we'd love to see those large family petitions with the little kids. Why? Because once you clear the mom and dad, the kids went really fast and you could get several "credits" very quickly that way instead of having to do the equal number of "individual" petitions for the same amount of "credits". But you have to be fast and thorough, because its your job to be fast and thorough you might say...

[~Chad~ 0]

hunny-bunnies???...LMAO

[Matt and Sarah 0]

...bump...please PIN THIS!

HUSKER I think you are getting more than you bargained for! But those of us who have chewed our nails to the bone waiting are glad you are here to shed some light.

Now, my question Since Texas and Nebraska are no longer servicing I-129F's, it all seems to be going to California, with CSC now handling 3/4 of the work load and taking 2.5 monts minimum. Yet, Vermont has them cranked out in a few days sometimes. Why did TSC and NSC quit processing those apps, and why on Earth did they shovel all the work disproportionately to CSC?

Thanks for your insight.

[jerrylee 0]

Careful everyone, she may be a spy!!

I'm a guy and the DHS has more important things to do than hang out in websites like this . Besides that the databases we used could glean more information about you than you could/would ever divoulge on VJ! Sorry, I'm not a spy.

I hope your comment was tongue in cheek

D.

Welcome aboard...

As a contractor for the USDA I know what you mean about the good and the bad of Federal employees...

[HUSKERKIEV 8]

I knew this 90 wait was really important!!!! lol

I bet I don't want to know this...but... How long does a "typical" non-RFE case require to adjudicate?

What types of things are "red flags" in someone's file?

Why types of things would someone be put on "additional review" for during the petition review process?

Does country of birth and residence for the beneficiary (and country of birth for the petitioner) play into this?

Well lets see how much I remember...

Maybe it might be easier if I just described what I would do to approve a petition - my process.

First, I would select a case file/folder. All petitions/files are kept in folders that a have a scanable bar code identifier. This folder has everything that a person submits on the left side of the folder and all the agency generated documents on the right side. They should be in date order, Petition and then most recent from top to bottom. The left side has the pictures on top.

You begin by looking at the petition for correctness by checking the information via several databases depending upon what type of petition you are adjudicating. Also if the form was complete and everything was in order. Descrepancies in peoples names from what the database had vs. what the petition said, birth dates, things like that all had to be resolved and could generate a RFE if the adjudicator couldn't figure it out with the tools he had.

There were some standard criminal and background type databases that were required for all petitions. A "hit" in any of these databases would flag the petition and it would be sent to a special group who worked to resolve why the "hit" occurred. Sometimes it could be something simple as a similar name of a bad guy, but every hit had to be resolved.

I remember that certain surnames would invariably cause a hit, but they could be resolved rather quickly by comparing the applicants background information with those of the "hit" name. There were various ways to do this of course, and it took time. Thats why some applications take longer to process because there are stumbling blocks along the way that must be worked through before approval. Consequently, all the other petitions that the officer was working get set to the side. or, the adjudicator/officer might set the difficult one to the side and work on less complicated ones. Remember it was a production environment where you had to be accurate but fast. Getting a petition kicked back for mistakes to be re-worked hurt your overall stats, so, you tried to be a thorough as you could, but also as quick as you could.

After clearing a applicant through the various mandatory database searches, then you could begin to review the various information on the petition. Sometimes there would be stupid mistakes like forgetting to sign it, or using a copy when an original signature was required etc... Kinda careless mistakes or from not really understanding the instructions type of thing. Anyway, these would generate an RFE, and the file's staus would be update in the computer as awaiting repsonse to RFE or something like that, I don't recall the exact terminology.

Anyway, instead of sending the newly RFE'd file back to the large file storage area, it would be kept at the officers desk in a holding cue. Then when an RFE reply would come in, I wpuld pull it (the file) off the shelf and rework it. I tried to clear all my answered RFE's out first thing every morning because it was "old" work as compared to the dates I was working at the time. If the RFE had the required information, it would continue to be processed and/or approved and sent on its way. If the RFE did not address the item, then another RFE would be generated and back on the shelf it would go.

A word about RFE's. It was my experience that no two officers would always see eye to eye on if an RFE was required. Some officers could or would spend some more time digging around the file or a database to find the information (if they thought it could be found) and others would just as soon rip off an RFE. So it varied. Then there were some times that an RFE was required because of the situation. Again, it depends a lot on who was looking at your case and what the question was / what information was needed. No hard and fast rule.

Also, each adjudicator/officer had a master list of RFE "phrases that they could pull off thier computer and plug into a standard RFE form depending upon the situation. Each of these "phrases" could be further "wordsmithed" to suit a particular situation. Again depends on the officer. Thats why you may see some RFE's that are similar but not exact. We would borrow each others RFE phrases to add to our list as we came across one that fit a particular situation.

It would be like "Hey, cube mate. I've got this situation, do you have anything in your RFE library that might fit?" answer "Sure, try this one. I'll email it to you". And thats how that worked.

You asked about country of birth etc.. Yes and no. There were "watch lists" of certain countries that meant that certain procedures had to be followed when processing petitions from these countries, but it was just a couple more things to check/verify along the approval process. It didn't slow things down dramatically. So, I wouldn't worry about that being a big factor.

Additional review. Mainly if you came up as a "hit" for a surname of a bad guy (or gal) that would have to be resolved. Marriage Fraud. Overstaying your visit. Lying. Criminal activity/organized crime, police reports, things that would be outside of a "normal" person's life you might say.

So back to the approval process. So if no RFE was needed then i would "approve' the petition, affix my stamp with my identifier # , sign and date it. I would then scan the file, update the status and send it on its wayto the next stop wherever that was. Actually, all the approved petitions/files were placed in a separate box and those were collected as you went along and taken for final disposition/processing.

Then you start all over again with the next case...

Before I answer your question, I need to say this because I haven't said it already and I wouldn't want to mislead people. I worked other petitions besides the I-129's or (hunny-bunnies as they were affectionately referred to). But the process is the same, same databases, same checks etc... Everything in the system works the same as far as the processes and the flow of work. If you walked through the NSC it's a maze of cubes and everyone has the same type stuff in thier cubes, the same file folders etc.... It's just whats inside the folders that's different.

But everything is scanned and routed around the various Service Centers the same. So, Nebraska does itthe same way Vermont does or California or wherever. I can't speak to the District Offices or the Consulates. They may have thier own way of doing things, but as an organization/agency there were standard operating procedures for handling and processing cases. We all use basically the same "system" and "tools".

That having been said... I could crank out an "approval" in about 15 minutes depending upon the complexity of the petition. I recall that we'd love to see those large family petitions with the little kids. Why? Because once you clear the mom and dad, the kids went really fast and you could get several "credits" very quickly that way instead of having to do the equal number of "individual" petitions for the same amount of "credits". But you have to be fast and thorough, because its your job to be fast and thorough you might say...

The adjusdication process can be fairly quick. Looking back, what I see now as an applicant and not a worker is the sheer volume of people who are in line ahead of me! I remember working the phones and people would call and ask what dates we were processing, we would tell them and they couldn't believe it! Well, its sad but true that I think the sheer volume of work has backlogged and slowed down the process to the point where it has been for sometime now.

I mean its really a numbers game. You have a finite number of adjudicators and X number of backlooged files, with more new files added to the system everyday. The finite number of adjudicators can only process so many cases per day, thus its like a drain that back up but the water is never shut off. Eventually it will overflow. The good news is that I see that the BCIS is in a hiring mode for adjudicators and immigration officers! Thats where the delays come in IMO.

[HUSKERKIEV 8]

...bump...please PIN THIS!

HUSKER I think you are getting more than you bargained for! But those of us who have chewed our nails to the bone waiting are glad you are here to shed some light.

Now, my question Since Texas and Nebraska are no longer servicing I-129F's, it all seems to be going to California, with CSC now handling 3/4 of the work load and taking 2.5 monts minimum. Yet, Vermont has them cranked out in a few days sometimes. Why did TSC and NSC quit processing those apps, and why on Earth did they shovel all the work disproportionately to CSC?

Thanks for your insight.

Not a problem, I'm happy to share what Iknow.

As for your question - I don't have an answer for that. I would imagine some pinhead in Washington did that.

Then again you could always file a Congressional because those get pulled and worked right away. But you didn't hear that from me

(usually)...

[Augustajim 0]

Understanding how it works is awesome. Knowing that we are waiting 90 days for a fifteen minute (in some cases) approval is still very frustrating. At least those guys have job security.

I bet I don't want to know this...but... How long does a "typical" non-RFE case require to adjudicate

I mean its really a numbers game. You have a finite number of adjudicators and X number of backlooged files, with more new files added to the system everyday. The finite number of adjudicators can only process so many cases per day, thus its like a drain that back up but the water is never shut off. Eventually it will overflow. The good news is that I see that the BCIS is in a hiring mode for adjudicators and immigration officers! Thats where the delays come in IMO.

[HUSKERKIEV 8]

...bump...please PIN THIS!

HUSKER I think you are getting more than you bargained for! But those of us who have chewed our nails to the bone waiting are glad you are here to shed some light.

Now, my question Since Texas and Nebraska are no longer servicing I-129F's, it all seems to be going to California, with CSC now handling 3/4 of the work load and taking 2.5 monts minimum. Yet, Vermont has them cranked out in a few days sometimes. Why did TSC and NSC quit processing those apps, and why on Earth did they shovel all the work disproportionately to CSC?

Thanks for your insight.

Not a problem, I'm happy to share what Iknow.

As for your question - I don't have an answer for that. I would imagine some pinhead in Washington did that.

Then again you could always file a Congressional because those get pulled and worked right away. But you didn't hear that from me

(usually)...

[HUSKERKIEV 8]

Understanding how it works is awesome. Knowing that we are waiting 90 days for a fifteen minute (in some cases) approval is still very frustrating. At least those guys have job security.

I bet I don't want to know this...but... How long does a "typical" non-RFE case require to adjudicate

I mean its really a numbers game. You have a finite number of adjudicators and X number of backlooged files, with more new files added to the system everyday. The finite number of adjudicators can only process so many cases per day, thus its like a drain that back up but the water is never shut off. Eventually it will overflow. The good news is that I see that the BCIS is in a hiring mode for adjudicators and immigration officers! Thats where the delays come in IMO.

As I said, IMO it's a manpower and work/backlog issue not neccessarily because the petitions are complex. Just not enough people. Some (petitions) like the 485's are more involved which would take longer than 15 minutes, but the 129F is a simple petition again IMO.

[Augustajim 0]

Would be interesting to know the divorce rate of Honey Bunnies.

[s2convt 0]

Thanks Husker!! The info you have provided is priceless....