Do USCIS phone agents have outdated info?

[Jusmaxxin 4]

I submitted my 3 cases (wife and stepdaughters) in mid April 2020 to USCIS Online. After seeing a few update date changes online I decided to call on July 2nd for status merely out of curiosity. The phone agent told me that everything was normal and my case remained in Nebraska. However when I looked online on July 6th, I saw I had RFE's from the California Service Center dated July 1st. The RFE's were for our marriage certificate and birth certificates, because the ones I sent were stamped and certified by the National Court office,  however they weren't issued at the National Court office in the capital. 

 

Which leads me to 2 questions:

1. Why are my RFE's from a center that my case doesn't supposedly reside?

2. Do the phone agents not have the most recent information? The RFE's were from the day before I called, why did she tell me that everything was fine when it wasn't?

 

 

[Quarknase 1,072]

The hotline is called "un-information" hotline by many, I'll let make your own interpretation why this could be the case

 

Monitoring the activity of online filed petitions, my theory is that the service center is irrelevant - the seem to linger in a centralized pool, and the IO's (regardless of center) pull it out of the pool when the number reaches the top of the queue. I have no proof or official statement for this, but seeing that service centers for online cases change very, very often (often multiple times) and no "transfer notice" is sent, I'm pretty set on my opinion by now.

[geowrian 22,337]

14 minutes ago, Quarknase said:

The hotline is called "un-information" hotline by many,

I always preferred "misinformation line", actually.

 

=====

It's possible they just read a field off the computer screen for original SC and didn't look at any further notes. idk what exactly their screens show. It could be a lack of info or just a mistake.

Edited July 13, 2020 by geowrian

[Quarknase 1,072]

9 minutes ago, geowrian said:

I always preferred "misinformation line", actually.

 

=====

It's possible they just read a field off the computer screen for original SC and didn't look at any further notes. idk what exactly their screens show. It could be a lack of info or just a mistake.

Now that I say it out loud the misinformation makes so much more sense 🙄😁

 

[B&ANZ 134]

I had called to ask about our case since we were approaching 60 days of sending our RFE stuff without an update. The agent said we are still within the processing time of 32 months (when Potomac had the big glitch jumping from 7-9 months processing time to 32 months). Not even an hour later we were approved. From the time we filed our I-130 to DQ, it only took us less than 5 months with no expedite. They have no idea what is going on within the organization.

Edited July 13, 2020 by B&ANZ
typo

[Quarknase 1,072]

37 minutes ago, B&ANZ said:

I had called to ask about our case since we were approaching 60 days of sending our RFE stuff without an update. The agent said we are still within the processing time of 32 months (when Potomac had the big glitch jumping from 7-9 months processing time to 32 months). Not even an hour later we were approved. From the time we filed our I-130 to DQ, it only took us less than 5 months with no expedite. They have no idea what is going on within the organization.

Our timeline was very similar to yours - and then Trump decided that LPRs don’t matter and banned our spouses. Throughout all immigration matters I always found the NVC hotline very decent and USCIS hotline varying levels of misinformed/not helpful. Can’t recall a single call to USCIS that answered a question I had.

[Mollie09 1,543]

21 hours ago, geowrian said:

I always preferred "misinformation line", actually.

 

=====

It's possible they just read a field off the computer screen for original SC and didn't look at any further notes. idk what exactly their screens show. It could be a lack of info or just a mistake.

"Disinformation" is my personal favorite.

 

I have a strong suspicion that the first people you talk to just look at the same website we all see. So basically only useful for people who can't use the internet.

[ohcoffeeeyes 120]

23 hours ago, Quarknase said:

The hotline is called "un-information" hotline by many, I'll let make your own interpretation why this could be the case

 

Monitoring the activity of online filed petitions, my theory is that the service center is irrelevant - the seem to linger in a centralized pool, and the IO's (regardless of center) pull it out of the pool when the number reaches the top of the queue. I have no proof or official statement for this, but seeing that service centers for online cases change very, very often (often multiple times) and no "transfer notice" is sent, I'm pretty set on my opinion by now.

My experience says otherwise, when my online petition was transferred I got approved straight away.

[Quarknase 1,072]

2 minutes ago, ohcoffeeeyes said:

My experience says otherwise, when my online petition was transferred I got approved straight away.

So you received a transfer notice?

[ohcoffeeeyes 120]

1 minute ago, Quarknase said:

So you received a transfer notice?

No but as soon as I was transferred, my case clearly went to that service center and I was at the PD (forgot what the term was) of that service center, which subsequently they approved me. 

 

If they're picking from a centralized system then that wouldn't have happened.

Edited July 14, 2020 by ohcoffeeeyes

[geowrian 22,337]

2 hours ago, ohcoffeeeyes said:

No but as soon as I was transferred, my case clearly went to that service center and I was at the PD (forgot what the term was) of that service center, which subsequently they approved me. 

 

If they're picking from a centralized system then that wouldn't have happened.

Actually, I think if there was a centralized system (albeit different in function from the one explained previously ITT), that makes perfect sense.

Once ready to take on more cases, the next batch are transferred to the new SC. Barring a reason for delay (background checks, document verification, RFE, legal review, etc.), it would be approved not long afterwards.

[ohcoffeeeyes 120]

5 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Actually, I think if there was a centralized system (albeit different in function from the one explained previously ITT), that makes perfect sense.

Once ready to take on more cases, the next batch are transferred to the new SC. Barring a reason for delay (background checks, document verification, RFE, legal review, etc.), it would be approved not long afterwards.

Yes that actually makes sense, wonder why they would get transferred to different SC's instead of just one main one?

[geowrian 22,337]

5 minutes ago, ohcoffeeeyes said:

Yes that actually makes sense, wonder why they would get transferred to different SC's instead of just one main one?

My complete guess is that the workflow requires assignment to an IO and the IOs are at a specific SC. Hence it needs to be transferred to that SC first (keep in mind IOs likely don't handle only online sourced and entirely electronically  captured cases).

Edited July 14, 2020 by geowrian