MDUdall: TSC news
Feb 13th 2001, 9:14 pm
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here is a little news about the TSC that I thought might be of interest to the news group.
Recently I received an RFE for a fiancée case at the TSC. With this RFE, they asked for
things that I had originally submitted along with the fiancée petition package. Of
course, when the RFE arrived, I immediately resent the things asked for with the RFE.
I also drafted a separate letter and sent it to Kathy Vaughn, the TSC supervisor who is in
charge of the product line that adjudicates fiancée petition. My letter was not so much
to complain (even though I did a little), but instead to bring this problem to her
attention in case additional training or modification of their procedures was warranted.
In my letter to Ms. Vaughn, I also identified what was asked for with their RFE and I
included copies of all of those things that had been originally submitted with the
fiancée package.
About an hour ago I received a call from Ms. Vaughn in reference to the letter I had sent
to her. She said that after reading my letter she personally went and found the file, and
that the materials I had originally sent with the petition must have been separated from
the file and lost somewhere during the processing. She mentioned that she had been
receiving other complaints from other attorneys and petitioners lately for RFE'S where the
requested information had been originally submitted. She said that she identified this as
a problem that needed correction and looked into the matter. She said that the contract
workers eventually put all of the materials in "file jackets" but that this was happening
too late in the process so many items were becoming lost before this event occurred. She
mentioned that many of the fiancée cases were pretty bulky with ticket stubs, photos,
that sort of thing (if these items are loose, they would be easy to lose before they are
placed in "file jackets"), and that she has now instructed (she gave them this instruction
about 2 months ago) her contract workers to start placing all materials into "file
jackets" much earlier on in the process. She said this should remedy this situation for
future cases.
MDUdall here: This really does not explain how my client's materials were lost, as I had
not sent any loose materials. Everything I had sent was attorney certified copies that
had been two-hole punched and fastened together with an ACCO clip to the INS forms. Same
for the ADIT photos, which were also lost. They most likely pull everything loose from
the ACCO clips before the file is assembled and put into a "file jacket". That would
explain it.
She also said that the copies of things I had sent to her with my letter were just what
they needed, and that she would personally take them to the adjudicating officer and give
them to her so she could get started on the case again (of course, by now the adjudicating
officer would probably have my reply to the RFE anyway).
Since I had her on the phone, I took the opportunity to confirm a few things with her.
I mentioned to her the conversation I had with the TSC'S director, Jim Burzynski. I met
with him, I believe it was 3 years ago, at the national AILA conference in Houston (or it
was at the national AILA conference 2 years ago in Seattle, but if memory serves me
correctly, it was at the conference in Houston). At that conference, I asked Jim why the
TSC was apparently not sending cable anymore when I submitted an "informal" request for
them to do so. His answer was that the fee for the I-129f did not contain any fee
component to cover his staff's time in processing the cables, and that if I wanted cable
from the TSC I must submit an I-824 and pay the INS filing fee.
I asked Ms. Vaughn to confirm if this was still the policy at the TSC and she said "yes,
if you want us to send cable, it is still our policy that an I-824 must be submitted and
the filing fee paid" (MDUdall here…of course, remember that if you want to submit an
I-824 you must do so AT THE SAME TIME you file the I-129f, not anytime after filing the
I-129f or it won't receive priority processing).
But Ms. Vaughn also went on to say that the TSC now ships all fiancée petitions to the
U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila (ONLY these two U.S. Consulates) via Federal Express,
so for cases processing through those two U.S. Consulates there really might not be any
advantage to having cable sent as Fed-Ex gets the shipments to those Consulates very
quickly. She also mentioned that when she was an adjudicator (now she is a product line
supervisor) she would process I-824's, and she mentioned that they require a significant
amount of staff time to perform this work and there is much more to the procedures that go
along with processing an I-824 than simply sending a fax (the reason they charge the fee
to cover the staff time to do this work).
Finally, I mentioned to her the CSC'S policy that all I-129f's are shipped to the U.S.
Consulates via the diplomatic pouch process, and I asked her to confirm their policy in
this regard (with the exceptions for the U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila). She
confirmed that indeed, all I-129f's are shipped from the TSC to the other U.S. Consulates
via the diplomatic pouch process.
Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm Copyright
2001 Matthew Udall
Recently I received an RFE for a fiancée case at the TSC. With this RFE, they asked for
things that I had originally submitted along with the fiancée petition package. Of
course, when the RFE arrived, I immediately resent the things asked for with the RFE.
I also drafted a separate letter and sent it to Kathy Vaughn, the TSC supervisor who is in
charge of the product line that adjudicates fiancée petition. My letter was not so much
to complain (even though I did a little), but instead to bring this problem to her
attention in case additional training or modification of their procedures was warranted.
In my letter to Ms. Vaughn, I also identified what was asked for with their RFE and I
included copies of all of those things that had been originally submitted with the
fiancée package.
About an hour ago I received a call from Ms. Vaughn in reference to the letter I had sent
to her. She said that after reading my letter she personally went and found the file, and
that the materials I had originally sent with the petition must have been separated from
the file and lost somewhere during the processing. She mentioned that she had been
receiving other complaints from other attorneys and petitioners lately for RFE'S where the
requested information had been originally submitted. She said that she identified this as
a problem that needed correction and looked into the matter. She said that the contract
workers eventually put all of the materials in "file jackets" but that this was happening
too late in the process so many items were becoming lost before this event occurred. She
mentioned that many of the fiancée cases were pretty bulky with ticket stubs, photos,
that sort of thing (if these items are loose, they would be easy to lose before they are
placed in "file jackets"), and that she has now instructed (she gave them this instruction
about 2 months ago) her contract workers to start placing all materials into "file
jackets" much earlier on in the process. She said this should remedy this situation for
future cases.
MDUdall here: This really does not explain how my client's materials were lost, as I had
not sent any loose materials. Everything I had sent was attorney certified copies that
had been two-hole punched and fastened together with an ACCO clip to the INS forms. Same
for the ADIT photos, which were also lost. They most likely pull everything loose from
the ACCO clips before the file is assembled and put into a "file jacket". That would
explain it.
She also said that the copies of things I had sent to her with my letter were just what
they needed, and that she would personally take them to the adjudicating officer and give
them to her so she could get started on the case again (of course, by now the adjudicating
officer would probably have my reply to the RFE anyway).
Since I had her on the phone, I took the opportunity to confirm a few things with her.
I mentioned to her the conversation I had with the TSC'S director, Jim Burzynski. I met
with him, I believe it was 3 years ago, at the national AILA conference in Houston (or it
was at the national AILA conference 2 years ago in Seattle, but if memory serves me
correctly, it was at the conference in Houston). At that conference, I asked Jim why the
TSC was apparently not sending cable anymore when I submitted an "informal" request for
them to do so. His answer was that the fee for the I-129f did not contain any fee
component to cover his staff's time in processing the cables, and that if I wanted cable
from the TSC I must submit an I-824 and pay the INS filing fee.
I asked Ms. Vaughn to confirm if this was still the policy at the TSC and she said "yes,
if you want us to send cable, it is still our policy that an I-824 must be submitted and
the filing fee paid" (MDUdall here…of course, remember that if you want to submit an
I-824 you must do so AT THE SAME TIME you file the I-129f, not anytime after filing the
I-129f or it won't receive priority processing).
But Ms. Vaughn also went on to say that the TSC now ships all fiancée petitions to the
U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila (ONLY these two U.S. Consulates) via Federal Express,
so for cases processing through those two U.S. Consulates there really might not be any
advantage to having cable sent as Fed-Ex gets the shipments to those Consulates very
quickly. She also mentioned that when she was an adjudicator (now she is a product line
supervisor) she would process I-824's, and she mentioned that they require a significant
amount of staff time to perform this work and there is much more to the procedures that go
along with processing an I-824 than simply sending a fax (the reason they charge the fee
to cover the staff time to do this work).
Finally, I mentioned to her the CSC'S policy that all I-129f's are shipped to the U.S.
Consulates via the diplomatic pouch process, and I asked her to confirm their policy in
this regard (with the exceptions for the U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila). She
confirmed that indeed, all I-129f's are shipped from the TSC to the other U.S. Consulates
via the diplomatic pouch process.
Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm Copyright
2001 Matthew Udall
Feb 13th 2001, 10:01 pm
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
thanks, matt...that was very good and helpful info, and perhaps you stopped further RFE's
dead in their tracks! alvena
MDUdall wrote:
>
> Here is a little news about the TSC that I thought might be of interest to the
> news group.
>
> Recently I received an RFE for a fiancée case at the TSC. With this RFE, they asked for
> things that I had originally submitted along with the fiancée petition package. Of
> course, when the RFE arrived, I immediately resent the things asked for with the RFE.
>
> I also drafted a separate letter and sent it to Kathy Vaughn, the TSC supervisor who is
> in charge of the product line that adjudicates fiancée petition. My letter was not so
> much to complain (even though I did a little), but instead to bring this problem to her
> attention in case additional training or modification of their procedures was warranted.
> In my letter to Ms. Vaughn, I also identified what was asked for with their RFE and I
> included copies of all of those things that had been originally submitted with the
> fiancée package.
>
> About an hour ago I received a call from Ms. Vaughn in reference to the letter I had
> sent to her. She said that after reading my letter she personally went and found the
> file, and that the materials I had originally sent with the petition must have been
> separated from the file and lost somewhere during the processing. She mentioned that she
> had been receiving other complaints from other attorneys and petitioners lately for
> RFE'S where the requested information had been originally submitted. She said that she
> identified this as a problem that needed correction and looked into the matter. She said
> that the contract workers eventually put all of the materials in "file jackets" but that
> this was happening too late in the process so many items were becoming lost before this
> event occurred. She mentioned that many of the fiancée cases were pretty bulky with
> ticket stubs, photos, that sort of thing (if these items are loose, they would be easy
> to lose before they are placed in "file jackets"), and that she has now instructed (she
> gave them this instruction about 2 months ago) her contract workers to start placing all
> materials into "file jackets" much earlier on in the process. She said this should
> remedy this situation for future cases.
>
> MDUdall here: This really does not explain how my client's materials were lost, as I had
> not sent any loose materials. Everything I had sent was attorney certified copies that
> had been two-hole punched and fastened together with an ACCO clip to the INS forms. Same
> for the ADIT photos, which were also lost. They most likely pull everything loose from
> the ACCO clips before the file is assembled and put into a "file jacket". That would
> explain it.
>
> She also said that the copies of things I had sent to her with my letter were just what
> they needed, and that she would personally take them to the adjudicating officer and
> give them to her so she could get started on the case again (of course, by now the
> adjudicating officer would probably have my reply to the RFE anyway).
>
> Since I had her on the phone, I took the opportunity to confirm a few things with her.
>
> I mentioned to her the conversation I had with the TSC'S director, Jim Burzynski. I met
> with him, I believe it was 3 years ago, at the national AILA conference in Houston (or
> it was at the national AILA conference 2 years ago in Seattle, but if memory serves me
> correctly, it was at the conference in Houston). At that conference, I asked Jim why the
> TSC was apparently not sending cable anymore when I submitted an "informal" request for
> them to do so. His answer was that the fee for the I-129f did not contain any fee
> component to cover his staff's time in processing the cables, and that if I wanted cable
> from the TSC I must submit an I-824 and pay the INS filing fee.
>
> I asked Ms. Vaughn to confirm if this was still the policy at the TSC and she said "yes,
> if you want us to send cable, it is still our policy that an I-824 must be submitted and
> the filing fee paid" (MDUdall hereâ€|of course, remember that if you want to submit an
> I-824 you must do so AT THE SAME TIME you file the I-129f, not anytime after filing the
> I-129f or it won't receive priority processing).
>
> But Ms. Vaughn also went on to say that the TSC now ships all fiancée petitions to the
> U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila (ONLY these two U.S. Consulates) via Federal
> Express, so for cases processing through those two U.S. Consulates there really might
> not be any advantage to having cable sent as Fed-Ex gets the shipments to those
> Consulates very quickly. She also mentioned that when she was an adjudicator (now she is
> a product line supervisor) she would process I-824's, and she mentioned that they
> require a significant amount of staff time to perform this work and there is much more
> to the procedures that go along with processing an I-824 than simply sending a fax (the
> reason they charge the fee to cover the staff time to do this work).
>
> Finally, I mentioned to her the CSC'S policy that all I-129f's are shipped to the U.S.
> Consulates via the diplomatic pouch process, and I asked her to confirm their policy in
> this regard (with the exceptions for the U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila). She
> confirmed that indeed, all I-129f's are shipped from the TSC to the other U.S.
> Consulates via the diplomatic pouch process.
>
> Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
> Copyright 2001 Matthew Udall
dead in their tracks! alvena
MDUdall wrote:
>
> Here is a little news about the TSC that I thought might be of interest to the
> news group.
>
> Recently I received an RFE for a fiancée case at the TSC. With this RFE, they asked for
> things that I had originally submitted along with the fiancée petition package. Of
> course, when the RFE arrived, I immediately resent the things asked for with the RFE.
>
> I also drafted a separate letter and sent it to Kathy Vaughn, the TSC supervisor who is
> in charge of the product line that adjudicates fiancée petition. My letter was not so
> much to complain (even though I did a little), but instead to bring this problem to her
> attention in case additional training or modification of their procedures was warranted.
> In my letter to Ms. Vaughn, I also identified what was asked for with their RFE and I
> included copies of all of those things that had been originally submitted with the
> fiancée package.
>
> About an hour ago I received a call from Ms. Vaughn in reference to the letter I had
> sent to her. She said that after reading my letter she personally went and found the
> file, and that the materials I had originally sent with the petition must have been
> separated from the file and lost somewhere during the processing. She mentioned that she
> had been receiving other complaints from other attorneys and petitioners lately for
> RFE'S where the requested information had been originally submitted. She said that she
> identified this as a problem that needed correction and looked into the matter. She said
> that the contract workers eventually put all of the materials in "file jackets" but that
> this was happening too late in the process so many items were becoming lost before this
> event occurred. She mentioned that many of the fiancée cases were pretty bulky with
> ticket stubs, photos, that sort of thing (if these items are loose, they would be easy
> to lose before they are placed in "file jackets"), and that she has now instructed (she
> gave them this instruction about 2 months ago) her contract workers to start placing all
> materials into "file jackets" much earlier on in the process. She said this should
> remedy this situation for future cases.
>
> MDUdall here: This really does not explain how my client's materials were lost, as I had
> not sent any loose materials. Everything I had sent was attorney certified copies that
> had been two-hole punched and fastened together with an ACCO clip to the INS forms. Same
> for the ADIT photos, which were also lost. They most likely pull everything loose from
> the ACCO clips before the file is assembled and put into a "file jacket". That would
> explain it.
>
> She also said that the copies of things I had sent to her with my letter were just what
> they needed, and that she would personally take them to the adjudicating officer and
> give them to her so she could get started on the case again (of course, by now the
> adjudicating officer would probably have my reply to the RFE anyway).
>
> Since I had her on the phone, I took the opportunity to confirm a few things with her.
>
> I mentioned to her the conversation I had with the TSC'S director, Jim Burzynski. I met
> with him, I believe it was 3 years ago, at the national AILA conference in Houston (or
> it was at the national AILA conference 2 years ago in Seattle, but if memory serves me
> correctly, it was at the conference in Houston). At that conference, I asked Jim why the
> TSC was apparently not sending cable anymore when I submitted an "informal" request for
> them to do so. His answer was that the fee for the I-129f did not contain any fee
> component to cover his staff's time in processing the cables, and that if I wanted cable
> from the TSC I must submit an I-824 and pay the INS filing fee.
>
> I asked Ms. Vaughn to confirm if this was still the policy at the TSC and she said "yes,
> if you want us to send cable, it is still our policy that an I-824 must be submitted and
> the filing fee paid" (MDUdall hereâ€|of course, remember that if you want to submit an
> I-824 you must do so AT THE SAME TIME you file the I-129f, not anytime after filing the
> I-129f or it won't receive priority processing).
>
> But Ms. Vaughn also went on to say that the TSC now ships all fiancée petitions to the
> U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila (ONLY these two U.S. Consulates) via Federal
> Express, so for cases processing through those two U.S. Consulates there really might
> not be any advantage to having cable sent as Fed-Ex gets the shipments to those
> Consulates very quickly. She also mentioned that when she was an adjudicator (now she is
> a product line supervisor) she would process I-824's, and she mentioned that they
> require a significant amount of staff time to perform this work and there is much more
> to the procedures that go along with processing an I-824 than simply sending a fax (the
> reason they charge the fee to cover the staff time to do this work).
>
> Finally, I mentioned to her the CSC'S policy that all I-129f's are shipped to the U.S.
> Consulates via the diplomatic pouch process, and I asked her to confirm their policy in
> this regard (with the exceptions for the U.S. Consulates in Moscow and Manila). She
> confirmed that indeed, all I-129f's are shipped from the TSC to the other U.S.
> Consulates via the diplomatic pouch process.
>
> Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
> Copyright 2001 Matthew Udall
Feb 15th 2001, 12:20 pm
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Matt Is it safe to assume that NSC also uses express mail to Moscow and Manila ?
Thanks ! Mike
Thanks ! Mike
Feb 15th 2001, 6:07 pm
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
>Matt Is it safe to assume that NSC also uses express mail to Moscow and Manila ?
No it is not safe to assume this. The CSC does not do this (they send ALL fiancée cases
via the consular pouch process), and I was surprised the TSC does this now for those two
Consulates. You would have to find out from the NSC to know for sure.
This is one of the reasons I go to the CSC meeting every 3 months (although I have to miss
the next one which is in a few days), so I can find out the answers to these sort of
things that come into play with my cases.
There have been recent tours of the TSC and NSC offered to the first 40 or so AILA members
who signed up for them, but I could not justify flying across the country to tour these
facilities especially in light of the fact that I get the minutes from these meetings when
they happen. Most of the time those minutes cover the questions I would have asked if I
had been there.
But one of these days, I will visit those facilities, as this is something I definitely
want to eventually do. Just haven't been able to afford it, or rather justifying the
expense for airline tickets, rental car, and hotel, that sort of thing. Those continuing
education expenses every year for the national AILA conferences (which also includes a few
hundred dollars for the registration fee, more for books and other publications I pick up
at the conferences, and a few hundred more dollars for lecture cassette tapes) take most
of the extra funds I have allocated for this sort of business expense.
Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm Copyright
2001 Matthew Udall
No it is not safe to assume this. The CSC does not do this (they send ALL fiancée cases
via the consular pouch process), and I was surprised the TSC does this now for those two
Consulates. You would have to find out from the NSC to know for sure.
This is one of the reasons I go to the CSC meeting every 3 months (although I have to miss
the next one which is in a few days), so I can find out the answers to these sort of
things that come into play with my cases.
There have been recent tours of the TSC and NSC offered to the first 40 or so AILA members
who signed up for them, but I could not justify flying across the country to tour these
facilities especially in light of the fact that I get the minutes from these meetings when
they happen. Most of the time those minutes cover the questions I would have asked if I
had been there.
But one of these days, I will visit those facilities, as this is something I definitely
want to eventually do. Just haven't been able to afford it, or rather justifying the
expense for airline tickets, rental car, and hotel, that sort of thing. Those continuing
education expenses every year for the national AILA conferences (which also includes a few
hundred dollars for the registration fee, more for books and other publications I pick up
at the conferences, and a few hundred more dollars for lecture cassette tapes) take most
of the extra funds I have allocated for this sort of business expense.
Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm Copyright
2001 Matthew Udall
Feb 16th 2001, 10:01 pm
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
OK, I vote we all chip in $1 for Mr. Udall to go and visit TSC.
Really
He is always helpful in this NG.
Robyn and Evelyn (formally a lurker)
> >Matt Is it safe to assume that NSC also uses express mail to Moscow and Manila ?
>
> No it is not safe to assume this. The CSC does not do this (they send ALL fiancée cases
> via the consular pouch process), and I was surprised the TSC
does
> this now for those two Consulates. You would have to find out from the NSC
to
> know for sure.
>
> This is one of the reasons I go to the CSC meeting every 3 months
(although I
> have to miss the next one which is in a few days), so I can find out the answers to
> these sort of things that come into play with my cases.
>
> There have been recent tours of the TSC and NSC offered to the first 40 or
so
> AILA members who signed up for them, but I could not justify flying across
the
> country to tour these facilities especially in light of the fact that I
get the
> minutes from these meetings when they happen. Most of the time those
minutes
> cover the questions I would have asked if I had been there.
>
> But one of these days, I will visit those facilities, as this is something
I
> definitely want to eventually do. Just haven't been able to afford it, or rather
> justifying the expense for airline tickets, rental car, and hotel,
that
> sort of thing. Those continuing education expenses every year for the
national
> AILA conferences (which also includes a few hundred dollars for the registration fee,
> more for books and other publications I pick up at the conferences, and a few hundred
> more dollars for lecture cassette tapes)
take
> most of the extra funds I have allocated for this sort of business
expense.
>
> Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
> Copyright 2001 Matthew Udall
Really
He is always helpful in this NG.
Robyn and Evelyn (formally a lurker)
> >Matt Is it safe to assume that NSC also uses express mail to Moscow and Manila ?
>
> No it is not safe to assume this. The CSC does not do this (they send ALL fiancée cases
> via the consular pouch process), and I was surprised the TSC
does
> this now for those two Consulates. You would have to find out from the NSC
to
> know for sure.
>
> This is one of the reasons I go to the CSC meeting every 3 months
(although I
> have to miss the next one which is in a few days), so I can find out the answers to
> these sort of things that come into play with my cases.
>
> There have been recent tours of the TSC and NSC offered to the first 40 or
so
> AILA members who signed up for them, but I could not justify flying across
the
> country to tour these facilities especially in light of the fact that I
get the
> minutes from these meetings when they happen. Most of the time those
minutes
> cover the questions I would have asked if I had been there.
>
> But one of these days, I will visit those facilities, as this is something
I
> definitely want to eventually do. Just haven't been able to afford it, or rather
> justifying the expense for airline tickets, rental car, and hotel,
that
> sort of thing. Those continuing education expenses every year for the
national
> AILA conferences (which also includes a few hundred dollars for the registration fee,
> more for books and other publications I pick up at the conferences, and a few hundred
> more dollars for lecture cassette tapes)
take
> most of the extra funds I have allocated for this sort of business
expense.
>
> Best Regards, Matthew Udall Attorney http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
> Copyright 2001 Matthew Udall
Feb 17th 2001, 4:45 am
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yeah really... and when you get there, tell them that Alexander and Yin are this really
cute couple who are suffering badly while waiting for our approval! Sigh.
--Alexander
> OK, I vote we all chip in $1 for Mr. Udall to go and visit TSC.
>
> Really
>
> He is always helpful in this NG.
>
> Robyn and Evelyn (formally a lurker)
cute couple who are suffering badly while waiting for our approval! Sigh.
--Alexander
> OK, I vote we all chip in $1 for Mr. Udall to go and visit TSC.
>
> Really
>
> He is always helpful in this NG.
>
> Robyn and Evelyn (formally a lurker)
Feb 17th 2001, 12:13 pm
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thanks Matt for your reply .
It sure would be nice if the I.N.S. would have a person for each service center that could
answer public questions via this news group, and a web page ! It seems like they don't do
enough for the public when someone is in need of information.
Mike
It sure would be nice if the I.N.S. would have a person for each service center that could
answer public questions via this news group, and a web page ! It seems like they don't do
enough for the public when someone is in need of information.
Mike
