Xie Law Offices, LLC

CSC Written Answers to AILA Liaison Questions (8/7/02)

Cite as "Posted on AILA InfoNet at Doc. No. 02080842 (Aug. 8, 2002) ."


General Questions and Responses


  1. Personnel Changes: What, if any, personnel changes have been implemented at the Service Center since our last meeting?

    The California Service Center is continuing to recruit and train new employees to keep up with the ever-increasing workload; however, the CSC is still experiencing staff shortfalls. Corinna Luna-Benavides is now serving as the Acting Assistant Center Director for Division I and Nancy J. Alby has moved to the Assistant Center Director position for Division XII, Congressional & Community Relations.
  2. IBIS: Please provide us with an update on the IBIS check and the effect it is having on adjudication processing times of the various applications? How have things changed since the first implementation of the IBIS check? What particular identity documentation can be submitted with a filing to help expedite the processing of an IBIS check?


The national security checks have impacted our adjudications completions per hour, a working group has been formulated to assist in creating a more efficient system. Please ensure that all applications are filled out properly and completely. Attaching a copy of the biographical page of the passport would be helpful as well as a driver's license.

  1. Change of attorneys: What is the most effective way to notify the CSC of a change of attorneys? When submitting a new G-28 to the CSC, how can attorneys ensure that the G-28 will be matched up to the proper file and not thrown in the general correspondence pile? Attorneys understand the importance of filing an original G-28 but in practice it is taking numerous months before a G-28 is placed in the file. This is a serious problem because if the CSC does not recognize a new G-28, attorneys are unable to inquire about the cases and do any follow ups. 

    To submit a request to change attorney, please mail a complete G-28 and a cover letter to P.O. Box 30111, Laguna Niguel, CA 92608-0111. It is essential to have the WAC number on the G-28. It will be helpful for the cover letter to have in large bold lettering "change of attorney." The new attorney's name and address will be updated in the computer, then forward to the WAC file for inter-filing.
  2. Address changes: What is the proper procedure to notify INS of an applicant’s or a petitioner’s address change? Can the change be done by telephone by the attorney? If a change of address fax is sent, can one fax be used for a multiple family members or should a separate fax be sent for each individual? We realize that this subject has come up repeatedly at the last few meetings but members continue to be confused as to the best way to handles these situations.


Once the attorney has an approved Form G-28 on file for the applicant and/or petitioner, a letter from the attorney is the proper way to effect a change of address for the client. Again, if a Form G-28 is on file, the attorney may also call or fax the Division V, (formerly the Customer Service Line). A change of address fax for multiple family members is also acceptable by CSL, provided the attorney is approved/on record for all the family members.

  1. RFE: Attorneys are reporting a record number of RFE (request for additional evidence) in support of all types of applications. This has been an ongoing issue of concern. While the requests may often be justified, there are an increasing number of instances where there does not appear to be any basis for the RFE. We understand in the past this has been a training issue but again there has been an increase in burdensome RFEs as well as RFEs that do not relate directly to the underlying application/petition. What measures are being taken to ensure quality assurance and proper review of RFEs?

    Since September 11th and with the calls for tighter homeland security, officers are exercising great care in carrying out their duties.

As AILA may be aware, the CSC continues to expand its staff to meet ever-increasing workload demands. This means our staff is in a continual state of training. We receive cases with voluminous amounts of evidence where little, if any, goes to establishing eligibility for the benefit sought. We train our officers to send RFEs when they encounter cases that require additional evidence to render a proper decision.

Despite these factors, our records indicate that RFE rates have remained relatively consistent. RFEs are reviewed prior to issuance.

  1. Centralizing fax inquiries: At the last meeting, the Service Center reported that it is working on centralizing fax lines and fax inquiries. What, if any, progress has been made in that regard?

    The CSC is currently developing a two-step inquiry process. When operational, the first step will include a fax to the appropriate Division. The next step, after a reasonable response time, will be a fax, telephone call or e-mail to Division XII. There no longer will be multiple levels involved. Due to the concerns with implementing one fax number (the CSC receives thousands of faxes a day), and other logistical issues, development is forthcoming. Division XII will be responsible for inquiries above a first divisional inquiry. In addition, Division XII will include, the Congressional Liaison Team, Ombudsman duties, ACD and Second Level faxes, the “front-office IIO,” public affairs, outreach activities and Director’s Office inquires. The Division will be responsible for the appropriate case resolution as related to the inquiry.
  2. A-files: Can you please explain when is it necessary for the INS to consolidate an A-file with a pending application/petition? What is the procedure of retrieving an A-file?

    If an alien has an existing A-file with the Service, every effort will be made to consolidate immigrant petitions/applications. 

    INS has internal procedures for retrieving A-files when necessary.
  3. Response to NOID (notice of intent to deny): When a response to a NOID is filed, does the INS automated line acknowledge receipt of a response as it does for RFE?

    Yes, the response to a Notice Of Intent to Deny is updated as "evidence received" and is updated to the electronic, automated system to reflect the receipt of the evidence.
  4. Ombudsman: When is it appropriate to contact the ombudsman and what is the response time? What is the ombudsman’s phone number?

    Please see #10 for fax procedures and when to contact the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman accepts all calls and will research each inquiry to ensure that action has been taken on your case. You may not always receive a response from the Ombudsman, however, an inquiry to the Division or ACD has been done. You should receive a response from the CSC within 7-10 days. The Ombudsman phone number is (949) 389-3252. Fax # (949) 643-1538.
  5. Fax inquiry procedure: What is the current fax inquiry procedure?

    Currently, the procedure is to fax to the correct Division and allow 15 business days for a response. If you do not receive a response, you may send a fax to the ACD of the Division (again, allow 15 business days). After this level, you may choose to complete a Level II form and fax your inquiry to (949) 389-3441. 

    The Ombudsman will accept inquiries after the above has been completed. However, you may call the ombudsman any time to discuss an urgent situation or to obtain clarification of our inquiry procedures.
  6. Forwarding files to the AAO: How long does it take the CSC to forward a file to the AAO? When is it appropriate for attorneys to send an inquiry if a file has not yet been sent – after 30 days?

    After appeals are received and related files retrieved appeals are forwarded to the originating Adjudications Officer. In the event a file has already been forwarded outside of the CSC, there may be a delay in retrieving a file. Time needs to be allowed for Officer review, Supervisory review, Clerical processing and mailing to AAO. It is advised that this process may, and in many cases does, take more then 30 days. It is suggested that you wait at least 45 days or longer prior to making an inquiry

 DIVISION I (I-131, I-140, I-485, I-526, and I-529)


  1. Fingerprint Scheduling

    a. Fax inquiries: At the last meeting, the CSC indicated that attorneys can fax an inquiry to Division I at (949) 389-3055 if an I-485 applicant has not received a fingerprint appointment within 120 days of filing the I-485 (120 days from the notice date). Please review the inquiry process for overdue fingerprint appointments.

    The process is as you have indicated. If you have specific examples please bring to the attention of the ACD.

    b. If you are sending a fax inquiry sheet for fingerprint appointments, and there are several family members, can attorneys include the information for all family members on one fax sheet or should a separate fax inquiry be sent for each individual?

    It is suggested that you keep family groups together; therefore, one fax is acceptable.

    c. If a child turns 14 AFTER the I-485 is filed, what is the best way to notify INS that the child needs to be fingerprinted? Will the CSC on its own issue a request for the fingerprint fee?

    The CSC will notify the applicant with an RFE.

  2. I-485 processing: Please provide us with an update on I-485 processing and how large the current backlog is? 

    Labor hours dedicated to I-485's has increased dramatically in the past nine months. The CSC currently has 11,346 cases pending on the JIT Ready shelf. This does not include the cases that are pending visa availability, fingerprint issues, file matching or other issues. 

  3. RFEs on I-485 applications: Many attorneys are reporting that they are now routinely receiving RFEs in support of I-485 applications, where the RFE is requesting documentation and information in support of the underlying I-140 petition. The I-485 RFE resembles an I-140 RFE. It appears that the CSC is readjudicating the I-140 petition at the I-485 stage. For example on Multinational Manger (E13) cases, the RFEs are requesting organizational charts and detailed description of the person’s managerial duties; or for outstanding professor, the I-485 RFE requests documentation of the alien’s receipt of major prizes or award for outstanding achievement in the academic field, amongst other requests. Is this a training issue or is this a change in the CSC’s policy? This applies to recently approved I-140 petitions as well as old ones.

    Petitions and applications are adjudicated on a case-by-case basis. On occasion, representatives, company structures or other factors may have changed; documentation that was thought to be in an original I-140 may in fact, not have been included. This is not re-adjudicating a case, rather looking at evidence in its entirety. At the time the I-485 is adjudicated, eligibility must be proven and clearly documented in the record.

  4. Derivative I-485: When family members file an I-485 application at the same time, the principal’s case is approved, and the other members have been separated, when is an appropriate time to inquire about the family members’ pending cases? Do they still have to follow the date on the JIT report or can they inquire earlier, since the principal’s application has already been approved?

    It is appropriate to notify Division I of this issue when the principal alien or a family member receives notification of an action and others do not.

  5. Children who turn 14 AFTER filing for I-485: If a child turns 14 AFTER the I-485 is filed, what is the best wait to submit a G-325A in support of the I-485 application? Should attorneys wait for an RFE, or be proactive in sending it as soon as the child turns 14? Also how does the INS track when a child turns 14 and when does it issue a notice for the difference in filing fee?

    It would be best to wait for an RFE. When the I-485 is filed and the child is close to the age 14, you can submit it at that time. The filing fee is based upon the age of the child at the time the application is receipted; therefore, no additional filing fee would be required.

  6. Forwarding I-140/I-130 Petitions to NVC: Can you please provide us with an update how long is it currently taking the CSC to forward I-140 and I-130 petitions to the NVC once a case is approved?

    Currently, it only takes a few days to forward I-140 and I-130 petitions to the NVC once a case is approved; petitions have been forwarded continuously since May. Although the CSC sends the petitions, we have no control over the length of time until the NVC acknowledges receipt. 

  7. Retrieving files from the NVC or Consulate: If an I-140 petition is forwarded to the NVC or a consulate, what is the procedure for the CSC to retrieve the file and how long does it take? 

    color=#ff0000>As stated in the previous AILA meeting, it is critical for petitioners to consider the adjustment or consulate processing prior to submitting the form. The retrieval of an I-140 related to an I-485 is a lengthy process. It is even longer if the petition has been forwarded to a consulate. Until the I-140 petition is returned, the related I-485 will remain pending.

  8. Premium processing of I-140 petitions: What is the status of premium processing for I-140 petitions? When does the CSC plan on beginning this program? 

    The CSC will begin the program as directed by HQ. At this time, we have not been advised of a start date.

  9. Successor in interest I-140 petitions: Please clarify the CSC’s policy on whether or not a new I-140 petition is required in successor in interest cases. Recently attorneys have received RFEs indicating that there is no need to file a new I-140 once the successor in interest has been established, and have been requested to withdraw the successor in interest I-140 petition.

    A new I-140 petition should be submitted along with the following: 
    • A copy of the notice of approval for the initial Form I-140. 
    • A copy of the labor certification submitted with the initial I-140. 
    • Documentation to establish ability to pay. 
    • A fully executed uncertified labor certification (Form ETA 750, Parts A &B) completed by the petitioner. 
    • Documentation to show how the change in ownership occurred: buyout, merger, etc.
    • Documentation to show the petitioner will assume all the rights, duties, obligations, and assets of the original employer. 

  10. EB13 I-140 petitions for small companies: There are reports of a high number of EB 13 (intra-company managerial transferees) I-140 denials for small companies (for example 20-30 employees) by ruling that the CEOs of such companies are nothing more than "first line" supervisors despite multi-layered levels of management. Cases of companies with 20 - 30 employees and multimillion-dollar sales are routinely being denied by the CSC while similar cases are being approved at other Service Centers. Members report that they are starting to see denials of L-1 petitions on these grounds as well. What is the CSC’s policy regarding distinguishing between a manager and a “first line” supervisor? How many employees must a "small company" have (assuming there are no "professionals" on the payroll) in order to allow the senior manager to qualify for EB-13 treatment? Congress intended the law regarding L-1s and EB-1s to apply equally to small companies as well as large companies. 

    The CSC does not make decisions on immigrant petitions based solely upon the size of a company, rather the evidence submitted in support of the benefit sought. Does the evidence clearly support the requested benefit? The issue of appropriate documentation is addressed on a case by case basis. There is no CSC policy regarding this matter; adjudication is based on law, regulations, guidance gleaned from official agency policy and precedent decisions.

  11. I-140 petitions on behalf of registered nurses: If the petitioner is located in California but the alien will be residing and working in a state that is not within the CSC’s jurisdiction, will the CSC adjudicate the I-140? 8 CFR Section 204.5(b), and the instructions to form I-140, both refer to the intended place of employment; part 6 of the I-140 form itself asks for the address where the person will work.

    The regulations concerning this are clear. The petition should be filed based on where the alien will be employed.

  12. EB 5 cases: EB 5 cases involving adjustment of status from “conditional” to “permanent’ residence are not currently being adjudicated at the CSC but remain pending indefinitely. Is there an INS policy to not adjudicate such cases? If so, why and when are they expected to be adjudicated?

    These cases continue to be adjudicated at the CSC. Because of the complexity, these cases take a significant amount of time to process. Currently, we have officers assigned to adjudicate these cases.

DIVISION II (I-102, I-129, I-539)


  1. H-1B for consulting companies: Has the CSC received new guidelines on the processing of H-1B cases for consulting companies? If so, please share what the guidelines require. If not, please explain how such cases are currently adjudicated.

    No, we are not aware of any new guidelines on processing H-1B cases for consulting companies. Such cases are currently adjudicated on a case by case basis.

  2. H-1B quota: How close is the INS to reaching the H-1B quota for this fiscal year?

    This question should be addressed to HQ.
  3. Leave of absence for H-1B holders: What is the CSC’s position on the following: if an H-1B nonimmigrant takes extensive (for example 4 months) but voluntary personal leave under the FMLA, is he still considered to be in valid nonimmigrant status for purposes of adjustment of status?

It is difficult to answer this question without additional specific information. However, if the FMLA (for example, maternity leave) is taken while an individual is a nonimmigrant and the employer views the H-1B holder as an employee of the petitioning company, they could be viewed as maintaining valid status. Therefore, this time would count as part of their stay as a nonimmigrant. If they "lose" their non-immigrant status, they are "out-of status.

  1. L-1A petitions for small or start up companies: In cases where the US subsidiary or branch office of a foreign company employs one individual to run the entire US start-up operation (including managing operations, evaluating financial and budgetary needs, review and conduct research and development, making personnel decisions and formulating long-term US business plans), what documentation should a petitioner provide to obtain approval?

    The petitioner should provide sufficient documentation to establish the qualifying relationship between the US and foreign company and that the beneficiary qualifies for the position. Please refer to the regulations for guidance. Given the scope and variety of businesses in the global market, we are unable to provide comment on a set of documents that would result in an approved case. Each case is adjudicated based on its own merits.

  2. Denials and RFEs for L-1A executive/manager cases: As well as EB-1 Priority Worker cases when the US company is a small office with few employees. The boilerplate denial indicates that the petitioning entity does not have a reasonable need for an executive and that it is contrary to common business practice and defies standard business logic for such a company to have an executive, as such a business, does not possess the organizational complexity to warrant having such an employee?  Although we are aware that INS may take into consideration staffing levels of the petitioner, are not the staffing levels also a factor for the petitioner in demonstrating its need for this executive's or manager's employment at the US company for future growth and development?

    Staffing levels are one factor that may be considered in determining the need for an executive. Denial templates have been clarified regarding this issue.

  3. Change of status from B-2 to F-1 for minors: What is the CSC’s policy on a change of status petition from B-2 to F-1 for minors? What documentation does the CSC require for an approvable case?

    The CSC’s policy is to comply with the regulations. Please refer to the interim final regulations published in the Federal Register on April 12, 2002. The CSC is complying with the new regulations. The CSC has not changed any documentary requirements, but we have asked that applicants requesting change of status to F-1 submit an additional copy of the I-20 to facilitate the new regulatory requirements.
  4. B extensions: Will the CSC follow the Texas Center and other Centers' policy of approving B extensions with 30 days' departure time? There appears to be conflicting policies in different regions.

    The question is unclear; however, the CSC is unaware of any conflicting policies for B extensions.

  5. B-2 extensions: Traditionally applicants can mail (postmark) their B-2 extension request at any time prior to the current expiration date of their I-94 card. Recently, however, the CSC has denied cases that were received by the CSC beyond the expiration date, even though they were properly mailed and filed a few days before the expiration date of the current stay. Please explain the basis for such denials.

    Please refer to 8 CFR 214.1(c)(4) for guidance on this matter. The CSC complies with this regulation. Requests to excuse the late submission of a request for extension are considered on a case by case bases at time of adjudication.

  6. New F-1/COS and B2/EOS rules: When does the CSC expect to implement the new rules?

    The CSC complies with and implements new rules (regulations) as they are published in final or interim form in the Federal Register.

  7. E2 petitions: 8 CFR 214.2(e)(8)(v) provides for an E-2 employer to request “advice” in one I-129 for multiple employees as to whether a change in ownership of the E-2 enterprise is a “substantive” change requiring amended petitions for all employees. What are the CSC’s guidelines and policies when adjudicating such petitions:
    a. Who is considered the lead beneficiary in such cases?
    b. What is the processing time?
    c. What form does the INS decision take in such cases?

    The cited regulation applies to E-1 as well as E-2 employees. In polling our senior officers, none recall experiencing an I-129 filed to seek advice on whether a change is substantive.
    a) There is no “lead" beneficiary; however, the regulations suggest any E employee’s is sufficient.
    b) We will have to submit this issue to Headquarters.
    c) We will need to address what form the advice should take to HQ.

    NOTE: When we submit the issues to HQ, we will ask for clarification on the submission of multiple jurisdiction inquiries to the NSC, which no longer adjudicates E nonimmigrant cases.

DIVISION III (I-129F, I-130, I-751)


  1. Processing times for immediate relative I-130 petitions: What is the current processing time for I-130 petitions for immediate relatives (visa number available) other than mother/child (for example, parents of USC)? When sending an inquiry, should attorneys rely on the JIT report or the processing time indicated on the I-130 receipt for such cases?

    As of 7/16/02, the processing time for IR petitions is 6/29/01. All available division resources are currently adjudicating IR petitions. With the Center’s initiative to reduce the IR backlog as well as the focus that will be given to preference petitions that become current with visa availability; it is preferred that you rely on the JIT report when making an inquiry.

  2. I-130 processing times on JIT report: Why does the JIT report no longer breakdown the different I-130 categories for both immediate relative and preference cases? Please explain.

    The center is in the process of resorting I-130 petitions into the following categories all in date receipt order:

IR , 
1st pref, 
2nd pref (2A & 2B), 
3rd pref, 
4th pref.

This breakdown will allow the center to more efficiently identify visa available petitions and provide greater customer service.

  1. Upgrades of I-130 petitions from preference to immediate relative classification: What is the best way to inform the Service Center that an I-130 petition needs to be upgraded from a preference to immediate relative classification? To what fax number should these requests be sent? How long after an upgrade request is submitted, can the petitioner expect an approval of the I-130 petition? How long does an attorney have to wait before following up with a regular inquiry?

    To upgrade an I-130 preference petition fax a copy of the naturalization certificate with a letter requesting the upgrade attached to the upgrade cover sheet. The letter should indicate who is requesting the upgrade and the relating receipt number. These requests may be sent to (949) 389-3219. 

    Once the request is received, it is processed in the following manner: 
    The division will identify the petition in CLAIMS; complete a screen print; attach it to the request and route to the contractor for inter-filing. The contractor will relocate the petition to the IR shelf in date-receipt order. Once an officer retrieves the petition for processing, CLAIMS will be modified to indicate the upgrade. Please note, upon initial receipt of the request, the division will acknowledge receipt if a return fax number is provided. Refer to the most current JIT report prior to making a status inquiry.

Can attorneys contact the AILA-CSC Committee directly to identify petitions that need to be upgraded, and that have a visa immediately available?

It is preferred that the procedure outlined in the first part of question #37 be followed. The division must have a copy of the naturalization certificate to substantiate the upgrade request.

  1. I-751 petitions: What is the current processing time for I-751 petitions? Are they being processed within one year? 

    As of 7/16/02, the processing time for I-751 petitions is 1/9/02. We have identified 2,607 pending. There are three officers assigned to this form-type.

  2. I-751 receipts: Many attorneys report, their clients are not receiving an I-751 receipt. Can you please explain what can a person do if an I-751 receipt is not received?

    This problem is known to the Center. The Center’s computer systems division has made HQ aware as well. If a receipt is not received, a fax inquiry may be made following standard inquiry procedures outlined in the center’s guideline booklet.

    Nebraska Service Center now issues a new I-797 receipt notice and approval notice for I-751 cases. Is the CSC issuing such new receipts for I-751? If so, does the new system allow a duplicate approval notice to be sent to the attorney of record?

    We are unaware of the Nebraska process, but will inquire with them and HQ to determine feasibility in adopting the process.

DIVISION IV (I-90, SAW, I-765, I-817, TPS, N-400, Legalization)


  1. Processing of I-765 applications: What is the current processing time of I-765 applications? What is causing such a lengthy delay of 5 months to issue EAD cards in employment based cases? I-131 applications that are filed concurrently with the I-765 are being processed within 2 months.

    I-765 applications are being processed within four months at this time. The applications are processed in a first in first out manner. The most significant factor in processing delays is IBIS. Ten percent of the staff normally allocated to I-765 adjudication has been reassigned to conduct IBIS checks. The CSC is working hard to bring the I-765 processing time down to 90 days.
  2. Scanning of EAD cards: Previously the CSC indicated that all EAD cards would be scanned when an I-765 application is feed in so as to save time. In such cases, once an I-765 application is approved the card will have already been produced and there is no delay in mailing the card. Is this still the practice? What is the current backlog in scanning EAD cards?

    Previously, the CSC indicated that all EAD cards would be scanned when an I-765 application is feed in so as to save time. In such cases, once the I-765 application is approved, the card will be produced and there is no delay in mailing the card.

    Biometrics information is scanned when an I-765 application is feed in.

    It appears that it is taking up to two weeks for the card production facility to print and mail out the EAD card after approval. As of July 15, 2002, the backlog for scanning EAD cards is 9,550. Of the 9,559 cases, 9,474 are Mitch TPS Extensions.

  3. Where a 20-year-old child of a legalized alien is applying for an initial grant of Family Unity benefits, may her application be approved if she turns 21 while the I-817 is pending at the CSC? If not, what is the procedure for seeking expedited adjudication to avoid the age-out? Once an initial application is approved and the applicant turns 21, may she renew her status under the Family Unity Program?

    There is no age-out disqualification for I-817 applicants. Expedited adjudication is not necessary based on age. The applicant must have been eligible for the benefit at the time the application was filed, not at the time the application is adjudicated. After turning 21, an applicant may renew their status under the Family Unity Program as long as they meet other requirements, such as being unmarried.

  4. Family Unity cases: What is the best way to inquire about a family unity case? What is the current processing time for such cases?

    Faxing an inquiry is the best process. The fax number is 949/389-3484. Family Unity cases vary in processing time depending on fingerprint scheduling. We are currently processing renewal cases filed in May of 2002.

DIVISION V (I-90, Waivers I-212/612, I-824, I-881, NACARA, Customer Service)


  1. 212 waivers: What is the processing time for 212 waivers? Just in time reports do not coincide with the reality of adjudications on this subject matter. Some applications have been pending for 4 years. 

    Division 5 is currently working on I-212 cases that have a receipt date of November 14, 2000. Please fax an inquiry to 949/389-3485 for those cases older then this date.

  2. What is the CSC's position on the adjudication of 212 waivers while the applicant is in the United States; while deportation is defined in case law as the physical act of banishment, the instructions on the form indicate the application is to be filed with the DD if person remains in the United States. Is this only for advance permission to reapply or in the event the 212 are favorably adjudicated, can the applicant adjust status even though overstayed deport?

Please elaborate on this question. In many cases, aliens have re-entered the United States after Deportation, which carries a 10- year bar from the time of re-entry EWI, (no waiver). Another scenario is that a pending adjustment of status with an I-212 "not required" may apply.

  1. 612 waivers: What is the processing time for 612 waivers? 

The I-612 waivers are adjudicated within 60 days of the receipt from the State Department. Please make a fax inquiry with a copy of the NOL, (No Objection Letter) and the Data Sheet for any cases that are over a 60-day period.

  1. NACARA: Please advise of status of NACARA (El Salvador) cases. Is the CSC still adjudicating TPS applications for Salvadorans?

    The NACARA Cases are processed at the Center; then they are transferred to the appropriate Asylum Office for adjudication. The CSC is still adjudicating TPS applications for El Salvadorans.

  2. Permanent Residence Card Production: How long does it take the CSC to scan a card once they receive the I-89 from the local INS office?

If the I-181 with an I-89 is sent to the CSC for card production, the actual scanning takes a few days; however, the full process of reviewing, scanning, and production can take several months.

Copyright© Xie Law Offices LLC. 2000-2005 A Member of American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA)