Call Today: (361) 883-8900

What do those letters and numbers mean in your receipt number?  Let’s use the following example:  WAC-15-123-12345.

The first three letters (WAC) reference which USCIS Service Center was initially assigned to process your petition.  I say “initially assigned” because sometimes, due to processing backlogs, etc., USCIS can “transfer” your case to a different location.  If this happens, the Receipt Number will not change.  The first three letters represent the following Service Centers:

  • Vermont Service Center                 EAC, VSC
  • California Service Center               WAC, CSC
  • Nebraska Service Center               LIN, NSC
  • Texas Service Center                     SRC, TSC
  • National Benefits Center                MSC, NBC
  • ELIS (Efiling)                                  IOE
  • Potomac Service Center                YSC

The next two digits (two numbers) represent the fiscal year in which the USCIS application was filed.  In our example above,  “15” means that it is received by USCIS in the 2015 fiscal year.  USCIS’ fiscal year starts in October of the previous year.  In other words, the above application was filed sometime between October 2014 and October 2015. 

The three digits represent the business workday that the application was actually logged into the system.  In other words, the 123rd business workday.  The last five digits simply serve to make the application number unique and do not serve any other function.

See our upcoming article about understanding the function and importance of Priority Dates

We hope you have found this helpful!

As we continue to monitor the situation regarding the future of the DACA program, below are some key talking points about the Supreme Court's recent decision to decline to hear the DACA case without first being heard by the lower courts. 

  • The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the Trump administration's appeal of a federal judge's ruling that requires the government to keep the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program open for renewals.
  • Under lower court orders that remain in effect, the Department of Homeland Security must continue to accept applications from the roughly 700,000 young people who are currently enrolled in the program, known as DACA, as well as individuals whose DACA grant has expired.
  • The lower court's decision does not allow Dreamers to apply for DACA if they have never before applied for the initiative, including Dreamers who are aging into eligibility, couldn't afford the filing fees, or are newly eligible for the initiative. These Dreamers remain at risk of deportation, as do the DACA recipients whose protections have expired while they wait for USCIS to process their renewal applications.
  • In a brief order, the court said simply, "It is assumed the court of appeals will act expeditiously to decide this case."
  • While Monday's denial gives Dreamers a breath of relief while the case works its way through lower courts, Congress must still act immediately to pass the Dream Act.
  • Congress needs to stop kicking the can down the road and move forward on the Dream Act now.
  • A bipartisan Dream Act was first introduced in 2001. It is shocking that nearly 20 years later, while Dreamers are still making America a better and stronger nation, Congress has not found the courage to provide them with protection from deportation, and secure for them the promise of a better life as Americans.
  • Dreamers across the country deserve the certainty that only permanent legislative protections can bring.
  • While some thought the Supreme Court would take up the case, in practice, the justices rarely accept appeals asking them to bypass the lower courts if there is no split in view among the circuits. The justices rejected the Trump Administration's effort to bypass the lower courts.
  • DACA allows children of undocumented immigrants, known as Dreamers, to remain here if they were under 16 when their parents brought them to the U.S. and if they arrived by 2007. DACA recipients can renew their applications every two years.
  • Monday's action by the Supreme Court leaves the DACA challenge pending, expected to be taken up by the 2nd and 9th Circuit courts.
  • Truly, Congressional action, and a permanent fix for Dreamers is the only solution that makes sense both pragmatically and morally.

BACKGROUND ON THE CASE IN QUESTION

  • On Jan. 9, a federal judge in San Francisco, William Alsup, ruled in favor of the University of California and its president, former Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano. They sued to keep the program going after the Trump administration said in September that it would end it within six months. Alsup said Attorney General Jeff Sessions had wrongly concluded that DACA was put in place without proper legal authority.
  • The Justice Department immediately said it would contest that ruling before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California. But government lawyers also asked the Supreme Court to take the highly unusual step of agreeing to hear the case, bypassing the appeals court.
  • The Supreme Court has agreed only about a dozen times in the past century to immediately take a case and bypass the federal appeals courts, and those case usually involve a national emergency, such as nationwide strikes in the steel and coal industries.
  • In asking the court to take the case, the Justice Department took another unusual step in declining to ask the justices to block the lower court order in the meantime, which would have allowed the government to shut DACA down as planned. Such a start-and-stop approach, the government said, would frustrate the goal of winding the program down in an orderly way.

AILA Doc. No. 18022632

From the U.S. Department of Homeland Security: 

Release Date: 

September 5, 2017

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

En español

WASHINGTON – Today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated the orderly wind down of the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

“This Administration’s decision to terminate DACA was not taken lightly. The Department of Justice has carefully evaluated the program’s Constitutionality and determined it conflicts with our existing immigration laws,” said Acting Secretary Elaine Duke. “As a result of recent litigation, we were faced with two options: wind the program down in an orderly fashion that protects beneficiaries in the near-term while working with Congress to pass legislation; or allow the judiciary to potentially shut the program down completely and immediately. We chose the least disruptive option.”

On June 29, the attorneys general of Texas and several other states sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions asserting that the DACA program is unlawful for the same reasons stated in the Fifth Circuit and district court opinions regarding an expansion of the DACA program and the now-rescinded program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). The letter noted that if DHS did not rescind the June 2012 DACA memo by September 5, 2017, the states would seek to amend the DAPA lawsuit to include a challenge to DACA.

Yesterday, Attorney General Sessions sent a letter to Acting Secretary Duke articulating his legal determination that DACA “was effectuated by the previous administration through executive action, without proper statutory authority and with no established end-date, after Congress' repeated rejection of proposed legislation that would have accomplished a similar result. Such an open-ended circumvention of immigration laws was an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the Executive Branch.” The letter further stated that because DACA “has the same legal and constitutional defects that the courts recognized as to DAPA, it is likely that potentially imminent litigation would yield similar results with respect to DACA.” Nevertheless, in light of the administrative complexities associated with ending the program, he recommended that the Department wind down the program in an efficient and orderly fashion, and his office has reviewed the terms on which the Department will do so.

Based on guidance from Attorney General Sessions, Acting Secretary Elaine Duke today issued a memo formally rescinding the June 15, 2012 memorandum that created DACA, and initiating an orderly wind down of the program. This process will limit disruption to current DACA beneficiaries while providing time for Congress to seek a legislative solution. The details are contained in Acting Secretary Duke’s September 5 memorandum, and in our Frequently Asked Questions.

DAPA ImageThusday, Jun 23, 2016

Washington D.C. – Today, the Supreme Court issued a 4-4 decision in United States v. Texas, the case challenging expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA).  This means that the Fifth Circuit’s decision upholding the preliminary injunction against these initiatives will stand. This ruling does not impact the original DACA program launched in 2012. The decision is a huge disappointment for immigrant families and their defenders. It’s bad for American communities, workers and the economy. We will continue to explore all available legal avenues and will urge the government to do the same. Ultimately the nation needs a permanent solution to our outdated immigration system, and that must come from Congress. The fight will continue. 

Original Story: http://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/newsroom/release/supreme-court-issues-disappointing-split-decision-united-states-v-texas

Learn More

Learn More

Learn More

Learn More

Learn More

Contact Us

Site Map

Follow Us on Twitter  Like Us on Facebook

Contact Us

Rodriguez & Moretzsohn, P.L.L.C.

713 Ayers Street
Corpus Christi, TX 78404

Phone: (361) 883-8900
Toll Free: (866) 261-8980
Fax: (361) 883-6609
Emergencies: (956) 740-8472

Location Map