August 2017 I-129F Filers

[MandW 310]

Aug 7 14 and 21 are big, guess because Mondays. I wonder if they check the lockbox in the morning on Friday and all the petitions that come in on Friday and Saturday and Monday morning are all in the lockbox thus making those days with a lot of petitions.

[shalyn 48]

They need to do some August 8 filers 😂 

[Elisa B 0]

Anyone know the number I need to call about expediting a case? Or how to go about it? My case is currently at California service center 

[Billandlhay 25]

3 minutes ago, shalyn said:

They need to do some August 8 filers 😂 

Agree.. August 8 here too.. still waiting in vain 😣

[shalyn 48]

15 minutes ago, Billandlhay said:

Agree.. August 8 here too.. still waiting in vain 😣

Feels like my case will be one of those that end up going 240 days 😂😒 im inpatient at this point 😕

[Jason32903 2]

Hello to all August filers. We’re August 14 filers and are just now getting involved in the forum after having read all postings very closely.

 

I have a question for @Naes regarding the privacy issues in including WAC numbers: Did VJ legal team advise that you can not include WAC numbers in Scan Postings on VJ or has that been your self-imposed practice to protect VJ members’ privacy?

 

I ask this because, although there may be a privacy issue with the disclosure of personal information within a petition, case numbers are generally public information. That said, because of my very limited time on VJ, I am not privy to any VJ members expressing concern with their WACs being included in Scan Postings.  I am interested in your input regarding recontinuing the inclusion of WACs in Scan Postings going forward.

 

Thanks for reading!

 

Jason

[Majesty 72]

56 minutes ago, blenheim said:

I called USCIS just now for the hell of it since I've never called before, mostly wanted to see if they could tell me if my case was assigned or not yet, and was told the usual by a kind woman that they haven't touched a case after June 27th yet and they haven't looked at August 😂 So thankful I have this forum to be less in the dark.

I was told the same thing....That they were working on June and that August would not be touched for another 2 months! I got so sad about that then came on the forum an saw that people were actually getting August approvals. Ughhh not sure why they would say that.

[ChuAni 1,191]

7 minutes ago, Jason32903 said:

Hello to all August filers. We’re August 14 filers and are just now getting involved in the forum after having read all postings very closely.

 

I have a question for @Naes regarding the privacy issues in including WAC numbers: Did VJ legal team advise that you can not include WAC numbers in Scan Postings on VJ or has that been your self-imposed practice to protect VJ members’ privacy?

 

I ask this because, although there may be a privacy issue with the disclosure of personal information within a petition, case numbers are generally public information. That said, because of my very limited time on VJ, I am not privy to any VJ members expressing concern with their WACs being included in Scan Postings.  I am interested in your input regarding recontinuing the inclusion of WACs in Scan Postings going forward.

 

Thanks for reading!

 

Jason

@Naes

@JSCGPV

[gomes + MF 3]

Where do I check when were the last approved Filers in August?

I'm NOA1 on Aug 8th.. just trying to get a sense on how things are moving and what day of august they are already processing.

[NICK & PAULA 1,097]

7 minutes ago, gomes + MF said:

Where do I check when were the last approved Filers in August?

I'm NOA1 on Aug 8th.. just trying to get a sense on how things are moving and what day of august they are already processing.

You might want to check page 149. There was a full day scan posted by amazing @Naes that shows the dates being touched as of yesterday. 

[JSCGPV 1,903]

29 minutes ago, Jason32903 said:

Hello to all August filers. We’re August 14 filers and are just now getting involved in the forum after having read all postings very closely.

 

I have a question for @Naes regarding the privacy issues in including WAC numbers: Did VJ legal team advise that you can not include WAC numbers in Scan Postings on VJ or has that been your self-imposed practice to protect VJ members’ privacy?

 

I ask this because, although there may be a privacy issue with the disclosure of personal information within a petition, case numbers are generally public information. That said, because of my very limited time on VJ, I am not privy to any VJ members expressing concern with their WACs being included in Scan Postings.  I am interested in your input regarding recontinuing the inclusion of WACs in Scan Postings going forward.

 

Thanks for reading!

 

Jason

 

21 minutes ago, ChuAni said:

@Naes

@JSCGPV

Although it didn't happen too me at the start, but in earlier months, many posts containing WAC numbers were deleted. The members were warned by VJ moderators that we are Not to post WAC numbers due to Terms of Service (TOS) and privacy issues.

[CaptainAmerica 115]

40 minutes ago, Majesty said:

I was told the same thing....That they were working on June and that August would not be touched for another 2 months! I got so sad about that then came on the forum an saw that people were actually getting August approvals. Ughhh not sure why they would say that.

It has to be to cover their own backsides... It allows them another two months of 'normal processing times' before they're seen to be outside of their targets. I'm sure it's very calculated on their behalf to keep moving their own goalposts in order not to be seen to be slacking. I long for the supposed glory days of 180+ days being acknowledged as processing for too long.  By their admission, they think 8 months is acceptable just to get to NOA2. It's obscene and so very, very frustrating not to be able to formally complain anywhere. 

Edited February 13, 2018 by CaptainAmerica

[Taden 44]

Hi guys! Kinda confused a bit... do they go by received dates or NOA1 dates? Sorry for my ignorance 

[Jason32903 2]

1 minute ago, JSCGPV said:

 

Although it didn't happen too me at the start, but in earlier months, many posts containing WAC numbers were deleted. The members were warned by VJ moderators that we are Not to post WAC numbers due to Terms of Service (TOS) and privacy issues.

I read the TOS again in closer detail, although, as yet, have not contacted VJ legal counsel directly on the matter. With all due respect for our wonderful moderators, I see nothing in the TOS that would prohibit under its terms or current law the disclosure of WACs. Remember that Moderators are members of VJ, not employees. If a moderator made a decision without consulting VJ legal and that decision is wrong, based on the TOS, this decision is reversible.

 

There is language in the TOS that states:

 if a member disagrees with a Moderators use of these "moderation" abilities they may contact VisaJourney and request that the Moderators actions be reviewed. The final decision on whether to reverse or alter a Moderator's action(s) will be decided at the sole discretion of VisaJourney.

 

My initial thought is this: If USCIS did not want the WACs disclosed publicly they would not include them in publicly-accessible data (of course, USCIS terms also apply). But again, there is no specific language in the TOS that prohibits posting WAC numbers.

 

The only issue that many VJers have with the Scan Postings currently is that it is generally hard to decipher which cases surrounding their own are being touched and how to anticipate their approvals.

 

I will dig deeper if necessary to confirm.

 

Jason

[Taden 44]

4 hours ago, JSCGPV said:

Received Date

here I was thinking it was NOA1 dates! I was watching the wrong date in d scans then... sigh

Edited February 13, 2018 by Taden