VJ Timeline Estimated Approval Calculation Method Updated

[Captain Ewok 1,871]

Previous to today the VJ system used the "filing date" versus the "NOA1" date when calculating an estimate on approval dates. While this worked well, there was variability in the data due to the fact that "mailing time" can vary from one person to the next when sending in paperwork.

To improve the system we now look at the NOA1 date for various forms and use that instead. This should not impact anyone and the only change you will see is improved estimate accuracy.

UPDATE:

I have reverted the estimation method to the "sent on" date for the time being. I agree after seeing the sent-->NOA1 graphs above that this method provides a better estimation when compared to the "NOA1" date. A further improvement of the system would be to allow people to enter the "receive date" from the NOA into the timeline system. I will probably add this soon. Until then the data above suggests that there is only a 2-3 day amount of error when using the "sent by date". There was considerably less variability than I initially thought in the sent-->NOA1 times. I guess regular US mail takes 3-5 days which means that variability is quite low using that time versus using the NOA1 date which the USCIS has admitted to having problems with (late in printing notices).

As a note, I will be adding links in the timeline entry page that will show members how to find their "NOA1" and other dates on Action Notices sent to them from the USCIS .

Feedback is welcome!

Edited September 4, 2007 by Captain Ewok
UPDATE

[Captain Ewok 1,871]

I have added a link to this image in the timeline entry page to describe how to find the NOA1 or NOA2 date:

I hope this helps make things more user friendly . Fingers crossed!

[Jigi 0]

hey Captain,

Thanks for putting out this info .. i was confused when i joined VJ what does NOA mean.... Now i know it clearly what it means... Thanks very much Man...

You are great

Jigi

[Sinergy 3]

Looks good captain

[Mari_S 1]

Hi Captain Ewok,

Good job man! Kudos to you! I'll be updating my timeline as i have inputted the wrong dates.

To all VJers,

Please update your timelines as well so that it will be more accurate.

Thanks!

[Zee Bee 61]

Thanks for making it clear and simple

[Chris Parker 11]

I don't really think using the NOA1 date makes your estimates more accurate. Quite the contrary actually, especially since the USCIS service centers have experienced a number of data entry frontlog delays a number of times already this year. It some cases, it has been in excess of 2 months according USCIS announcements!

For example, my I130 NOA1 from CSC had a "Received Date" of 4/9/07 but a "Notice Date" of 5/7/07. I mailed the I130 on 3/30/07. While I agree that using the mailing date of 3/30/07 is not helpful in estimating processing time, since USCIS can't be responsible for processing the petition until they have accepted it and stamped its received date, to use the NOA1 date unfairly gives them credit for not being responsible for processing until they generate the NOA1. Under your new system, it would be saying that USCIS was not responsible for processing my petition between 4/9/07 and 5/8/07, which I strongly disagree with, because that one month delay was entirely their fault.

My conclusion: The NOA1 notice date is really meaningless. The delay between the Received Date and the NOA1 date can be substantial, it varies from service center to service center, from filing season to filing season, and this period is a meaningful delay period for which USCIS should be considered responsible. My suggestion is you reconsider this new policy, and rename or clarify that the NOA1 date means the RECEIVED DATE, not the notice date.

Edited September 4, 2007 by Chris Parker

[Steph1973 0]

This actually hurt me. My estiamted date was October 3rd and now it is the 15th.

Previous to today the VJ system used the "filing date" versus the "NOA1" date when calculating an estimate on approval dates. While this worked well, there was variability in the data due to the fact that "mailing time" can vary from one person to the next when sending in paperwork.

To improve the system we now look at the NOA1 date for various forms and use that instead. This should not impact anyone and the only change you will see is improved estimate accuracy.

As a note, I will be adding links in the timeline entry page that will show members how to find their "NOA1" and other dates on Action Notices sent to them from the USCIS .

Feedback is welcome!

[chloe 1]

Hmm,

Id rather not rely on any estimated time personally.

My NOA1 date was 28th August 2007, but received date 24th July.

I received RFE's on the 23rd August and Biometrics letter on the 10th August, so someone, somewhere was processing my case before it was entered into the system?

Baffling....

Im just resigning myself to the fact that they'll do it , when they do it, how they do it is beyond me.

Thanks for the info though, I'll update my timeline anyhows, so not to throw out any estimates.

[bszoom42 0]

Captain,

Thanks for the change.

Please don't use NOTICE date - use RECEIVED DATE. As per USCIS - Notice date is the date they printed the notice; and is irrelivant to the process. RECEIVED DATE is the date they file your applications by.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/Re...Times082407.pdf

The actual received date will be honored and recorded on the receipt notice. This date will appear in the “Received Date” box on Form I-797, Notice of Action. The received date on Form I-797 is different from the “Notice Date,” which also appears on the Notice and identifies the date the receipt notice was actually generated.

[Captain Ewok 1,871]

I will look into the recieved date as the dat to use. Give me a few to research it . In the past this was always the date to use because there were no data entry delays. If this has changed of course there may be reasons to worry. What I may do is somehow use "both" the NOA date and the sent date to catch cases where data enty was late.

Any other suggestions?

[Mags 112]

I have added a link to this image in the timeline entry page to describe how to find the NOA1 or NOA2 date:

I hope this helps make things more user friendly . Fingers crossed!

I before E except after C!!

Mags,

who has her grammar/spelling head on today.

[Captain Ewok 1,871]

Oops! I will fix it later! :-p

Can someone validate what I am thinking... Since the USCIS has "temporarily" had some lags (which they have corrected now for most forms) in data entry of the forms (late NOA dates versus received date) I should account for this in the estimation algorithm. One possible way is that if the NOA1 date is greater than two weeks after the "sent" date then to fall back on the algrithm that used the "sent" dates. This would probably catch most of the situations where the NOA1 date was delayed and and provide a way to maintain accuracy is those events.

Thoughts? Since the NOA dating will be returning to normal (and historically and in the future I assume) they track processing off the NOA1 date themself, it seems like the right thing to do. This seems like a good stop gap measure. The two week figure is just off the top of my head. Any other conditions you think may help to refine this are appreciated .

[journeyman 0]

Captain,

Thanks for the change.

Please don't use NOTICE date - use RECEIVED DATE. As per USCIS - Notice date is the date they printed the notice; and is irrelivant to the process. RECEIVED DATE is the date they file your applications by.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/Re...Times082407.pdf

The actual received date will be honored and recorded on the receipt notice. This date will appear in the “Received Date” box on Form I-797, Notice of Action. The received date on Form I-797 is different from the “Notice Date,” which also appears on the Notice and identifies the date the receipt notice was actually generated.

I too agree that it should be the receipt date that should be taken into consideration for all calculations.

[Captain Ewok 1,871]

Please read my above post and tell me what you think. The delay in NOA date printing was temporary and not how the USCIS always works. Historically they tracked case processing time off the NOA date. The receipt date being honored policy is a temporary phenominon since applications temporarily had late NOA print dates. To correct for this see my post above where I suggest that people with NOA1 dates greater than two weeks after the Sent date have the algorithm default back to using the "sent date" method which would likely be as or more valid.

Thoughts?