observation on recent approvals.........if you have different observation please post here.

B

bbad

Registered Users (C)
it looks to me that recent approvals are based on PD (date they filed an application with DOL)

PD = date when one has filed his/her LC for first time with dept. of labor

           Most of the people who got their approvals from this board their Priority dates were earlier than 2001. either 1998,99 or 2000. very few people may be 1 or 2 got approved with pd in-2001.

           I called my attorney last week and asked if he got any approvals from any other clients with JULY RD and his answer was "he\'s getting plenty of approvals from July RD\'s", but than he added all these approvals were with older PDs(2000 and earlier).he hasn\'t got any approvals from july RD whose PD falls into 2001. july-2001 was the month when all PDs became current. Based on his experience in the past and present, nowadays INS is moving faster. So he hopes that within 2 months or so we\'ll start seeing approvals with PD-2001 Also INS changes it\'s priorities every now and then.
-------------------------------

wac-01-264-5xxxx
PD-january-9th-2001
RD-07/16/01
ND-08/22/01
fp-11/23/01 done as scheduled.
avm updated-12/13/01 process resumed.
still waiting for approval..

Thanks,
bbad
 
my observation

My PD was May 2001 and I know a lot of ppl in my company who are in the same boat with PDs around that time frame and nearly all them have received their approval.
 
sandpa, are you sure you are ...

talking about PD-May 2001 and not RD-May 2001. Please confirm.
 
yeah

I just checked my correspondence with my lawyer.
If PD = Priority Date then my PD was indeed in May 2001 . My RD was
July 3rd. and ND was Aug 23rd
 
sandpa

the GC process for most employment based candidates is in three steps

a) Labor Certification
b) I-140
c) I-485

The date when Labor certification was filed is the date being talked about it is this which is being referred to as PD in the above discussion.

It looks unlikely that your Labor certification was started in May 2001 because labor certification takes 2-3 months and I-140 takes 3-6 months.

Please reply
 
PD defn

I am sorry DeeRod. I just read your definition of PD. According to that my LC was filed sometime in the second half of 2000. I just assumed the normal definition of PD when I wrote my previous response.
 
I agree with bbad

My WAC is 01-262 with FP done about 4 months back, but no approval in sight. People with WAC\'s much higher than mine and FP dates later than mine have got approved.
My PD is 01.22.01

soi
 
No Title

rsrgc, Dee Rod & bbad,

I know sandpa mistaken PD with some thing else but with same explanation rsrgc gave to sandpa, here is a question for bbad: "How many cases your attorney filed that has 2001 PD and July 2001 RD"? Note that some one need to get their LC and I-140 cleared inbetween 01/2001- 06/2001 to file in July with 2001 PD.

Yes, one will seee several cases that has old PDs (if one calls 2000 PDs old) in recent approvals because there will be very very few people (lucky ones) who got their LC, I-140 cleared in 6 months in CSC.

Also note that since all EB cases became current in July there are several people with very old PDs.

- PCee
 
Hello Pcee .....

hello Pcee...

   I really don\'t know how many cases my attorney has filed with 2001 pds in july-2001. but I\'ll sure try asking him tomorrow.

like in my case i filed my LC in January 9th 2001 and i got approval from DOL (California)on Jan 29th 2001 (RIR filling).

and then my attorney filed I-140 with RD on February 16th 2001.
which i got approved from CSC on June 5th 2001.

then i mailed I-485 /I-765 on 07/13/02 with following info. IN which all PDs were current by july-2001.

wac-01-264-5xxxx
PD-january-9th-2001
RD-07/16/01
ND-08/22/01
ED-11/17/01
fp-11/23/01 done as scheduled.
avm updated-12/13/01 process resumed.
still waiting for approval..

Thanks,
bbad
 
here is another example from friend of mine.....

When CSC started approving MAY RDs my friend\'s application with PD-janary-98 got adjudicated within a first week of wave of approval of MAY RDs.

While i was looking at Pcee\'s spread sheet many people with pd-2000 and 99 were waiting for their approval..

thanks,
bbad
 
Well Old PD not approved yet

My Pd is Feb 99 and RD July 31st I have sen peoplewith later PDs and RDs getting approved
 
observation

I am sure that INS considers country as a factor.
Also I feel that type of case namely Employment based,family based and asylum based cases is also considered as a factor

But is priority date considered as a factor ?

And if so what is the criteria

is the sort done based on

rd,pd

or pd,rd

or pd,nd

or nd,pd

or some other criteria

we do not have enough data to be sure

I am quite sure about the above two factors

a) Country
b) type of case.

I hope someone can contact his lawyer and get some information.

I am not able to get any information from my lawyer

I have tried and all he answers is
Your case will be done within 6-12 months of receipt date hopefully

I liked the ending word \'hopefully\'

So no answer from my attorney

Hence I request others to ask from their attorney\'s

Hopefully we get some information
 
Observation

we can do analysis based on some data

We do not have enough data about the following factors

a) Priority Date
b) Country
c) EB category

So my feelings are that I am not able to come to any conclusion either to agree or disagree that the above 3 are factors to be considered or not in the queue for approval.
 
I am not sure PD matters looking at the current approvals...

This is my info: PD - June, 1999
RD - July 31st, 2001
ND - Sept 10, 2001
WAC-01-280-5****
EB2 - RIR
AVM - still playing Jan 12th Processing Resumed.
If it is based on PD, based on what you are saying I should have got my approval. But I see people who applied after me... WAC (285-292) are getting approvals...
I think FP location also matters to certain extent(may be 15%)... May be files are sorted based on location... and in the July PCee list, I see there still a bunch of Oakland cases which are pending... Also I guess these guys just pick the file that is on the top (Last in First Out)... Thinking more about it... I think there is no fixed criteria that INS follows... it varies from month to month or week to week or day to day... who knows... but one thing is sure... they get the people waiting for approvals *FRUSTRATED* barring few lucky people.
 
If it\'s based on PD then people who have receipt date as PD are screwed up

For ex. my actual PD is April 2000 but it was left blank in my 485 receipt notice. But in my FP notice the PD was mentioned as Aug 23 2001.

So, which one is my PD? of course a million dollar question!!!

I was trying to compile data from rsgrc & pcee lists and come out with a theory. But I don\'t know, cases like mine, what would be their real PD? There are so many variables and no way we can come out with a meaningful data for analysis. So I give up....
 
milli

No one can give up with analysis

What happens is that for a small period of time u decide to be on hold (coasting along) till another thought occurs.

I am sure that there is a computerised method of working at CSC. However their systems are old and fragmented. They do not have an enterprise wide system.

Hence the glitches.

The PD aspect that you are referring to is the field on the receipt notice. Now it is very possible that though the information is present in the database they do not print all the information and print on the receipt notice only relevant information. This is the reason why the PD field is blank.

Now It has been noticed that many cases slip through the cracks at CSC. Also there is mention of crews at CSC who work to bring cases back on track. All this points to multiple systems at INS.

Because of all these reasons I am sure that regularly there are debates at INS on how to improve things and changes are made regularly. This is the reason why a set pattern is not evident. Many cases get by and other cases get rfe.

I do feel that country/priority date/type of case are important criteria but I do not have any data to support my theories.
 
rsrgc!! I agree with you and we don\'t have enough data for our analysis

FYI, Checking(RD 08/07/01 ND 09/13/01) who got approved recently had

* blank PD in his receipt notice
* Aug 7 2001(his RD) as PD in his FP notice
* his actual PD is May 2000
 
No Title

bbad,

I am sorry if my comment in note (1.1.1.1.1) sounded like questioning your case. I didn\'t mean to say or question your PD/RD/ND. My point is that there will be very very few people who got LC, I-140 cleared with in six months like yours and that number is very small compared to people with old PDs who filed for I-485 in July 2001.

You know how many cases approved in July and you can find yourself (to prove that some recent PDs also got approved and some very old PDs are still waiting) that one cannot come to some conclusion about sorting order on PDs.

Let me say this, in case of FPs I am very sure that they are issued based on RD, and ASC location. they did follow very predictable order. Also on FP notices RD is printed as PriorityDate (I took it as FP priority not as I-485 priority).

But in AOS case apart from putting them on basis of ND month I don\'t think INS is sorting those cases on any basis once is ready for adjucation! Not on ND, not on WAC#, not on RD or PD and not on country either! By looking into approval data I can conclusively say that only once majority cases are approced in current month (based on ND) INS is moving on to next month. If one thinks that it depends on any exact date (RD, ND, PD, WAC#, or Country) then I am very sure that there is enough data to prove that it is wrong. For e.g. if one thinks that it depends on PD then there are several cases where a case with older PD is adjucation ready but not yet assigned to the officer and and a case with newer PD is alredy approced in that corresponding month of ND.

One thing I can accept to some extent is on that monthly self (based on ND) cases are some times ordered based on when they became adjucation ready (if people return cases to that shelf in that order then to some extent they are sorted in that order). In any particuler month I saw cases which got adjucation (AVM message resumed) ready early are having some edge in approvals in that month. Also note that any sorting order can matter only upto when the case is assigned to an officer, but once the case is assigned to an officer it may take any where between couple of days to couple of weeks, and this beats any predictability of sorting order to some extent.

-PCee
 
milli, Don\'t worry about the PD...

Both your I485 Receipt and the FP notice(especially) are wrong. INS has your correct PD on their system. It shows up on your I485 approval notice. Strangely, the RD on the approval notice had the ND (8/29 in my case) in it.
Now, I always believed, nay, knew that they hold adjudication-ready cases in shelves by month of RD pending assignment. Then assignment happens according to what is on the earliest of the shelves. But, in the last couple of months we have seen what seems to be processing by ND/WAC#. If you remember, starting Mid April 2001 there was this contractor dispute in the mailroom and starting from April 30, 2001 there was this avalanche of 245(i) applications. Consequently, all applications starting from that timeframe till maybe end of Sept, 2002 had a gap of almost 2 months between their RD and ND. Since essentially the time between a case\'s RD and ND is time lost to INS, they may have started viewing ND as a de-facto RD. So, they may have used the ND in lieu of RD to populate the adjudication-ready shelves.
This processing by PD question rears its head every now and then. But, I am willing to bet my bottom dollar that PD is not considered while adjudicating. Folks post selective examples to prove PD is a criteria. One could post innumerable examples to prove the opposite. For example, my PD is 10/99. There were dozens of July RD cases on PCee\'s list that had greater PD than mine and were approved before me. We have also seen approvals of cases with 12/00 and 01/01 on this board. So, lets give up this ghost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top