Letter to House Judiciary Committee on delays of I-130

[JA_Martinez 81]

I'm in...please help me understand how to sign the petition.

[NickD 202]

Do you mean if you just send in the I-130 with the corresponding evidence, instead of taking about two weeks to receive the NOA, it is now taking over a year?

With the I-485, G-325A, etc. that always took about a year.

[Blueberry Pancake 311]

I'm in...please help me understand how to sign the petition.

The idea is to fax, email or mail the letter.

Do you mean if you just send in the I-130 with the corresponding evidence, instead of taking about two weeks to receive the NOA, it is now taking over a year?

With the I-485, G-325A, etc. that always took about a year.

You mean a year for the whole process of concurrent filing? We are talking about stand-alone I-130 filing here.

It takes about a year just for NOA2 now.

[NickD 202]

The idea is to fax, email or mail the letter.

You mean a year for the whole process of concurrent filing? We are talking about stand-alone I-130 filing here.

It takes about a year just for NOA2 now.

This is terrible, must be something new, because this is the very start. Followed by the NVC to get that visa, then that AOS process. Claim immigration is a privilege, but is it really. When a US citizen that starts this process should have some rights to keep his family together.

And the entire processed is based on where that person is born, something that none of us has any choice of in a world that is separated by artificial borders. And not our relationship with these great people we can find, but the relationship between the leaders of these countries.

Learned when I first met my wife, her grandparents only lived 500 miles from mine. While I couldn't talk to them, dead already, sure they came here for the same reason my grandparents did, to get the heck out of war torn Europe. They were welcomed here then, have their original immigration papers when the Statue of Liberty stated we will accept your poor. One day at Ellis Island, and six weeks two night a week for learning out to become a US citizen, then citizenship.

Only difference is my grandparent ended up in North, where hers ended up in South America. Can only imagine which boat was available to them they could take to get the heck out of there.

Sure has changed since then and the US only wants their rich with guarantees in writing that you can support them. Then those long delays and not just one INS, but now a bunch of different agencies to deal with. Then as a honorable veteran of a foreign war, being treated like some kind of crook, until I proved myself innocent. And yes, they demanded to see all of my assets before approval.

[naam_2013 72]

Here is the updated letter (V1.1):

{

To: The Honorable Bob Goodlatte – Chairman House Judiciary Committee

From: US Citizens unfairly treated by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

Subject: Failure of the USCIS Executive Leadership - Separation of US citizens from their foreign spouses for almost 1.5 years

Date: November 19, 2013

Mr. Chairman:

Due to the failure of executive leadership at the USCIS, I and several thousands of US Citizens have been separated from our spouses for many months, and unless House Judiciary Committee takes swift action now, we will remain apart for an unbearable length of time.

The USCIS is now reporting that the average national processing time for petitions for spouses of US Citizens’ green cards, the I-130s, is 13 months. Please note that this length of time does not include the US Department of State’s processing time for a visa. Adding that time, we are now facing separation from our spouses, for almost year-and-a-half.

Misleading statements like the following, from USCIS, falsely led us to believe that applying for the K-3 would not be necessary:

The K-3 visa was intended to reunite families separated due to a backlog in I-130 adjudications. However, I-130s are no

longer backlogged and are currently being processed in under 6 months. Therefore, USCIS does not, at this time plan to

implement a new policy on the K-3 visa petition process. (pp. 8-9, “USCIS-AILA Meeting”)

This statement was made on April 11, 2013 when USCIS had already drastically slowed I-130 adjudications.

On the surface, our government appears to support family unification. We note, that upon announcing the “Provisional Waiver” program, then-Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano said:

This final rule facilitates the legal immigration process and reduces the amount of time that US citizens

Are separated from their immediate relatives who are in the process of obtaining an immigrant

visa. (January 2, 2013).

But in fact, the policy that she announced has produced an effect opposite to the goal that Secretary Napolitano proudly cites.

We maintain that our government is maltreating our spouses and us, and is probably not meeting its legal obligations. According to federal law, adjudicating residency petitions of US citizens, for their foreign spouses who are living abroad, must be a top priority of USCIS, in the interest of unifying our families. Our government's recent actions do not accord with this requirement.

We have suspected that I-130 petitions routed to the new NBC Division 8 facility, in Overland Park, Kansas, have been stockpiling, with few exceptions. We knew that adjudications of our petitions slowed considerably since the beginning of this year.

We knew this because many hundreds of us have reported our petitions' filing and adjudication dates (initial review [aka NOA1] and final approval [aks NOA2]) to each other.

At least until our cohort of January 2013 filers, the median number of days between an NOA1 and NOA2 for adjudicated I-130s, had consistently been 90 days. Our data showed that something significant had changed after January. By June we saw that fewer and fewer of our petitions were being adjudicated within those 90 days. As of today – nine months since March – a vast majority (around 88%) of our I-130 petitions filed in March remain un-adjudicated.

We humbly request that the House Judiciary Committee looks into this matter and take swift action against those in the management of USCIS who allow these petitions to keep piling up, month after month, keeping us from our families.

Sincerely,

<first name last name of petitioner> (Citizen of the United States separated from his beloved spouse)

}

Please remember to fax/email this on Tuesday, 11/19.

I am also adding the "Senate subcommittee on immigration" to the list of recipients; I will update the list of recipients by weekend.

Thanks.

[Blueberry Pancake 311]

Great job, naam!

Could we maybe revise the letter yet again and add some of this stuff? http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/464883-i-130-workload-transfer-linked-to-daca-foia-finding/

[naam_2013 72]

Great job, naam!

Could we maybe revise the letter yet again and add some of this stuff? http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/464883-i-130-workload-transfer-linked-to-daca-foia-finding/

BBPC: Thanks; the letter can definitely be revised, we just need to keep it 1-page. Can you take the lead to revise it further with your suggested URL, then post it here?

The reason to keep it 1-page is that if this goes beyond 1 page, the reader will lose focus, might not be interested in reading the letter at all, etc; so in order to make the letter most effective we need to give the message in 1 page.

[JA_Martinez 81]

Did this thing go yesterday?

[naam_2013 72]

Did this thing go yesterday?

No, we decided to send it on Tuesday, 11/19.

[twin810s 23]

We're in!

[kerran 4]

I'm in!

[lucybelle 453]

I'll send it! Although I'm not living apart from my spouse, I live in Costa Rica with him. But they don't know that.

Also- just fyi- you wrote "aks" instead of "aka" in one part "We knew this because many hundreds of us have reported our petitions' filing and adjudication dates (initial review [aka NOA1] and final approval [aks NOA2]) to each other."

[Salo&Romashka 83]

I don't want to step on anybody's toes but I was inspired by your letter to draft one of my own using some of your wording and mainly US government documents and data and broadening the aim to include all Immediate Relative I-130 Petitioners. I did not mention Legal Permanent Residents in this letter but it could be easily edited to include their plight as well. I also omitted mention of Visa Journey statistics and K-3 process in hopes of keeping it focused.

The Honorable Bob Goodlatte – Chairman House Judiciary Committee

November 19, 2013

Mr. Chairman:

Due to the failure of executive leadership at United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the average national processing time for I-130 petitions for immediate relatives of US Citizens has increased to 13 months. I have found that contrary to its stated core values of Inegrity, Respect, and Igenuity, USCIS is ignoring delegated legal reponsibilities, mistreating US citizen families, and purposely accruing case backlogs. I am writing you with the hope that the House Judiciary Committee will realize the need to take swift action to remedy the failures of leadership at USCIS.

The I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, is the first step immediate relatives of US Citizens must complete in order to obtain legal resident visas. Approved beneficiaries still must be vetted by the National Visa Center as well as embassies and consulates around the world before a visa is issued. Bureaucratic delays have directly affected adjudication of petitions for which there is no statutory limitation. 201(b)(2)(A)(i) [8 U.S.C. 1151] Working for family unification should be the first priority of all USCIS decisions. Upon announcing the “Provisional Waiver” program, former Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano claimed:

This final rule facilitates the legal immigration process and reduces the amount of time that US citizens are separated from their immediate relatives who are in the process of obtaining an immigrant visa. (January 2, 2013).¹

Despite pilot programs and workload transfers tried in the past, USCIS has never been able to provide I-130 petitioners a transparent process or definite processing times for immediate relative petitions. Documents obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request show that since September 17, 2012 USCIS has taken adjudicators off the processing of I-130 petitions at USCIS service centers (California, Texas, Vermont) and designated all petitions to be routed through the National Benefits Center.² This decision was made knowing that the National Benefits Center was not properly staffed to adjudicate I-130 petitions and was made without a definite timeframe to resume work. Multiple requests for assistance made to Congressmen and Senators by petitioners have shown that USCIS still has no definite timeframe for adjudication of pending I-130 petitions.

According to the most recent USCIS I-130 Petition Performance report, the National Benefits Center completed the processing of only 2,755 petitions in the first two quarters of the 2013 Fiscal Year (October 2012-March 2013). In the same reporting period, the National Benefits Center received 254,890 petitions and has now accrued a backlog of 523,874 pending cases.³ I believe the few petitions that the National Benefits managed to process to be limited to expedited cases. Despite announcements of USCIS efforts to dedicate staff to process I-130 petitions in Overland Park, KS, USCIS has failed to train or re-assign staff needed to process this caseload in a timely manner.⁴ After a year of indecision, the I-130 workload is only now being transferred from the National Benefits Center to regional service centers.⁵

If USCIS Processing tables are correct, there are pending I-130 petitions with priority dates as old as October 1, 2012 which have yet to be processed.⁶ There are substantial costs involved in storing and retrieving applications as well as the resources expended for follow-ups, customer inquiries, address changes, etc. (AR 2006 -- 03)⁷ These financial costs, however, will never compare to the human cost of lost time with loved ones separated by USCIS' continuing inefficency.

I request that the House Judiciary Committee investigates the needless backlog of pending I-130 Immediate Relative Petitions and direct USCIS to re-evalutate its current adjudication priorities.

Sincerely,

<first name last name of petitioner>

1 http://www.dhs.gov/news/2013/01/02/secretary-napolitano-announces-final-rule-support-family-unity-during-waiver-process
2 http://www.scribd.com/doc/145514197/2013-HQFO-00304-Combined-Redacted-Part1
3 http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/Employment-based/I130_performancedata_fy2013_qtr2.pdf
4 http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Outreach/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements/2013/May%202013/NBC-AILA-QA-2013-05-01.pdf
5 http://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/workload-transfer-national-benefits-center-service-centers
6 https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processingTimesDisplay.do
7 http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOmbudsman_AnnualReport_2006.pdf

Edited November 14, 2013 by Salo&Romashka

[lucybelle 453]

Excellent, Salo.

[naam_2013 72]

I don't want to step on anybody's toes but I was inspired by your letter to draft one of my own using some of your wording and mainly US government documents and data and broadening the aim to include all Immediate Relative I-130 Petitioners. I did not mention Legal Permanent Residents in this letter but it could be easily edited to include their plight as well. I also omitted mention of Visa Journey statistics and K-3 process in hopes of keeping it focused.

The Honorable Bob Goodlatte – Chairman House Judiciary Committee

November 19, 2013

Mr. Chairman:

Due to the failure of executive leadership at United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the average national processing time for I-130 petitions for immediate relatives of US Citizens has increased to 13 months. I have found that contrary to its stated core values of Inegrity, Respect, and Igenuity, USCIS is ignoring delegated legal reponsibilities, mistreating US citizen families, and purposely accruing case backlogs. I am writing you with the hope that the House Judiciary Committee will realize the need to take swift action to remedy the failures of leadership at USCIS.

The I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, is the first step immediate relatives of US Citizens must complete in order to obtain legal resident visas. Approved beneficiaries still must be vetted by the National Visa Center as well as embassies and consulates around the world before a visa is issued. Bureaucratic delays have directly affected adjudication of petitions for which there is no statutory limitation. 201(b)(2)(A)(i) [8 U.S.C. 1151] Working for family unification should be the first priority of all USCIS decisions. Upon announcing the “Provisional Waiver” program, former Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano claimed:

This final rule facilitates the legal immigration process and reduces the amount of time that US citizens are separated from their immediate relatives who are in the process of obtaining an immigrant visa. (January 2, 2013).¹

Despite pilot programs and workload transfers tried in the past, USCIS has never been able to provide I-130 petitioners a transparent process or definite processing times for immediate relative petitions. Documents obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request show that since September 17, 2012 USCIS has taken adjudicators off the processing of I-130 petitions at USCIS service centers (California, Texas, Vermont) and designated all petitions to be routed through the National Benefits Center.² This decision was made knowing that the National Benefits Center was not properly staffed to adjudicate I-130 petitions and was made without a definite timeframe to resume work. Multiple requests for assistance made to Congressmen and Senators by petitioners have shown that USCIS still has no definite timeframe for adjudication of pending I-130 petitions.

According to the most recent USCIS I-130 Petition Performance report, the National Benefits Center completed the processing of only 2,755 petitions in the first two quarters of the 2013 Fiscal Year (October 2012-March 2013). In the same reporting period, the National Benefits Center received 254,890 petitions and has now accrued a backlog of 523,874 pending cases.³ I believe the few petitions that the National Benefits managed to process to be limited to expedited cases. Despite announcements of USCIS efforts to dedicate staff to process I-130 petitions in Overland Park, KS, USCIS has failed to train or re-assign staff needed to process this caseload in a timely manner.⁴ After a year of indecision, the I-130 workload is only now being transferred from the National Benefits Center to regional service centers.⁵

If USCIS Processing tables are correct, there are pending I-130 petitions with priority dates as old as October 1, 2012 which have yet to be processed.⁶ There are substantial costs involved in storing and retrieving applications as well as the resources expended for follow-ups, customer inquiries, address changes, etc. (AR 2006 -- 03)⁷ These financial costs, however, will never compare to the human cost of lost time with loved ones separated by USCIS' continuing inefficency.

I request that the House Judiciary Committee investigates the needless backlog of pending I-130 Immediate Relative Petitions and direct USCIS to re-evalutate its current adjudication priorities.

Sincerely,

<first name last name of petitioner>

1 http://www.dhs.gov/news/2013/01/02/secretary-napolitano-announces-final-rule-support-family-unity-during-waiver-process

2 http://www.scribd.com/doc/145514197/2013-HQFO-00304-Combined-Redacted-Part1

3 http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/Employment-based/I130_performancedata_fy2013_qtr2.pdf

4 http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Outreach/Notes%20from%20Previous%20Engagements/2013/May%202013/NBC-AILA-QA-2013-05-01.pdf

5 http://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/workload-transfer-national-benefits-center-service-centers

6 https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processingTimesDisplay.do

7 http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOmbudsman_AnnualReport_2006.pdf

Thanks for taking time to revise the letter, I like your letter and leaning to use it instead of the one I have previously. I hope you do not mind.

BBPC: I think you [and others] would also like the revised letter by Salo&Romashka.

On another note, I went to the KC USCIS office today (infopass) to get some answers; it was a useless trip.