w*****g
发帖数: 3922 | 1 from http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/704855099/-meetin
g-with-ombudsman-senators-office
Meeting with Ombudsman @ Senators Office
Yesterday I was invited to participate in a meeting with the USCIS Ombudsman
as a constituent at my local senator’s office.
Debra Rogers, Ombudsman Deputy Director was present. She started the meeting
by describing what her office does. The Ombudsman’s responsibility is one
part to be a mediator between USCIS and an applicant with a pending or denie
d case who has exhausted every other resource available to him/her; the othe
r part is to advise USCIS on process and procedures. Annually, the Ombudsman
’s office handles about 3,000 cases, and USCIS handles about 1 million case
s. Even though the ombudsman’s office can present a different perspective/a
rgument on a case, USCIS is not obliged to agree with the Ombudsman.
Ms. Rogers went on to say that the process to communicate with USCIS offices
has improved significantly over the past years, and that they now can conta
ct personnel at the Service Centers and/or District offices, instead of just
going to USCIS customer service liaison like they did before.
I brought up a few issues regarding USCIS and EB procedures:
? Case Status Online
I actually was able to present my spouse’s EAD renewal (received just the d
ay before) approval along with a screen shot of what is still showing as “I
nitial Review." Moreover, the case status online indicates is an I-140 appli
cation not an EAD renewal.
The Ombudsman took notes, as I was second by every attorney in the room (I w
as the only one present who wasn’t an attorney).
They also confirmed that USCIS is still working with actual paper files off
the shelves and that they are implementing a transition to digital files at
the end of 2011 starting with some non-immigrant applications, and throughou
t 2012 for the rest. They stated that USCIS receives about 12 million phone
calls every year, and the number keeps increasing every year.
I suggested that if the case status online worked properly, I could assure t
hem the number of calls would decrease, every attorney in the room nodded.
? I-140 linked to respective I-485
I brought up to their attention the fact that I have been seeing a trend of
USCIS asking for I-140 receipt numbers when pending I-485 applications are d
elayed. Whether through congressional inquiries, or an inquiry through mail
or phone, it seems that several current I-485 are not being processed as the
PDs are only printed on I-140, and if they are not linked, the system doesn
’t know about I-485 being current, hence the delays. I asked if the AILA TS
C streamline procedure works as planned, but they were not familiar with it.
They did say that the follow up email does work as planned.
? USCIS vs DOS Inventory
I brought up to their attention that if you look at their reports and put th
em together, they don’t add up. Moreover, that there seems to be a signific
ant amount of invisible cases that ends up showing up and affecting VB movem
ent.
They said that they have been trying to deal with this issue every month for
the last couple of years, and as their computer system get upgraded and fil
es become digital, it will help them release more accurate figures, and may
even include CP cases. Also, most CP cases are actually handled by the USCIS
NSC, right here in the US.
? Priority Mail for mailing of EAD and GCs
I told them that it is great (I actually said AWESOME) to have such document
s sent by Priority Mail, and that hopefully in the future, when USCIS goes d
igital, the USPS tracking information can be included on the case status onl
ine, so when we are notified, we can actually get a tracking # along with th
e CPO email/sms; especially since it is printed right on the notice, meaning
the computer is generating the USPS bar code along with the approval notice
on the same page.
? Quality Control when issuing RFEs, NOIDs and NODs
An attorney brought up the fact that she has been getting a slew of RFEs and
even complete cases back from USCIS by error, USCIS’s error. I seconded th
at, explaining how in my own experience, USCIS had issued RFEs in my case fo
r documents that were originally filed with the petition, and even a nonsens
e NOD that was completely full of inaccuracies. I asked them to see if there
is a way to implement a procedure to prevent such nonsense to keep occurrin
g. They took notes.
? TSC getting all the pending I-485s from District Offices
They confirmed that TSC did get all the pending cases from DOs for final adj
udication and that their workload increased significantly, hence the delays
we are experiencing right now.
? Preadjudication
The Ombudsman confirmed that preadjudication exists, and that there are plan
s to have it be part of the case status online information.
? USCIS Processing Times
I asked if we could go back to the way it used to be when we got new process
ing times every two weeks in real time, instead of once a month with a two-m
onth delay.
They said that they may be able to get more accurate up-to-date information
once they go completely digital, but not right now, as they need to compile
the data from different sources and match it to their database along with ot
her checks and balances.
I asked them how were they able to do it before; they replied that the dates
were actually also months old, and never represented real time.
? Opening lines of communication
I asked them to be more transparent and keep us (the applicants) posted on c
hanges of implementation/legislation that may affect our case. I gave the ex
ample of the new spillover interpretation, it was changed overnight, and it
caught some of us off guard. I told them that it would have been useful to b
e notified so that we can get an idea of how much faster/slower cases will b
e processed moving forward.
Other topics were discussed, such as U visas and aging out while cases are b
eing processed and delayed by RFEs or denials on fee waivers. Asylum cases b
eing told their cases is at one office, when it is at another; as well as ge
tting notices to appear, going to court just to be told that they don’t hav
e jurisdiction over the case, when no other entity seems to have jurisdictio
n anyway as per USCIS. Also, removal of minors who never got their RFEs or N
TAs.
Overall, I must say, compared to some of the aforementioned cases, EBs are f
airing pretty well. Even though I have dealt with the system for nearly 18 y
ears, I consider myself lucky to not have to deal with even more USCIS nonse
nse.
I was happy my senator’s immigration field staffer invited me to participat
e. I hope you find something useful for your case.
PS. When we were leaving, one of the attorneys asked me if I had my own priv
ate practice!!! I should have said that it is not private, but public @ trac
kitt!!! | l****y
发帖数: 561 | | w***7
发帖数: 5568 | 3 USCIS 有提高效率的意愿是好事。不过， 我对于他们在短期内（2012年）实现全数字
化管理持怀疑态度。 |
|
