Another April approved per AVM

G

GCwait1

New Member
Just check the AVM, my case ad.
RD 4/9 or 4/10 ( forgot which day)
ND 6/16 (around 16th)
AD 1/26

EAC 01-200-5****
 
Seems Genuine

The person\'s RD is 2 days before mine and his ND is 4 days ahead of mine. I do think VSC started processing April cases. Howvever as we are already aware, approval rate depends upon the work laod of the individual officer. On an encouraging note, April has only 1/3 of normal case load. Good Luck to all of us.
 
Hello Krishna, I may sound stupid, but

How did you know April has 1/3 case load. Do You know What are the case loads for May, June, July. I am asking these because My Rd is in August, Just speculating when will VSC even look at August RD dates.
Thanks
 
AVM message for FP

GCWait1,
Congratulations on your GC. Can you please let us know on what date, the AVM message changed to "...processing resumed..."

Thanks,
bazi
 
April Cases.

The case load was based on the folks who provided their data at immitracker and is purely an estimate. Immitracker is pretty accurate though. Hope this helps.
 
Thank God April started moving finally!!!

Okay guys, looks like there is some definite movement now. Any idea guys on when they will reach June? My RD is June 2nd. Good luck to all my buddies with RD in April/May/June!!!
 
I think you are talking about April ND.

However, the folk who just got approved has an April RD but June ND. If this posting is true, then VSC is working by RD, in which case there are as many cases filed in April as in any other months.
 
They will reach June this month, my guess!

Since VSC frozen all I140 from 9/2000 to 5/2001, maybe not many people filed I485 during this time.
 
Hey GC_Kool Come on

You got to believe people. I can understand your frustration, but we are all in a very good position compared to guys applied in August, 1999. So, let us keep a high spirit guys.
 
I don\'t think it has anything to do with trust.

I want this posting to be true and I have no reason to believe otherwise. However, my statement was correct. You can\'t prove otherwise, either. I made my comment based on the assumption that the posting was true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top