nooneufo

Based on everyones experience it is best not to make certain plans as anything can happen. Your schedule sounds possible if there are no delays, which includes mailing delays. Below are all the people from CFL and 001 who went through VSC for the past year. Oldest first to most recent of K1's only. Total number of days from NOA1 to Interview 256 315 494 233 364 367 255 251 258 422 302 268 420 400 361 257 224 218 250 335 247 365 269 229 243 297 357 198 194 245 278 249 166 286 563 220 584 603 268 58 (From 001, unknown if pregnancy involved) 245 Average number of days from NOA1 to Interview at VSC is 303 days.

A useful addition to your time line would be the date of when your file arrived at Guangzhou ( in the mail) from NVC and was entered into the computer . Timing appears to matter at that point based on other CR1's of when a P4 could be expected. Based on current times (barring problems and changes), an interview could be expected as early as November based on you information. It will be interesting to hear if you can change mid-stream, and be done quicker. The accuracy is suspect for some of the "number of days" below, but this is what I have collected over the past year for Name Check times, from P3 returned to stated Name Check is complete. The top is the oldest, the bottom is most recent. 103 43 26 63 37 49 11 88 43 47 34 24 40 28 26 4 10 48 124 45 54 30 32 26 99 68 85 48 66

We do know that the evidence so far is that the wait time from P3 to P4 is about the same as it has been for almost a year. We know that the wait time from P3 to Interview is at the higher end of the average for the past year for this months P4's. We know the amount of variation in the notification time from P4 to Interview is the same as well. Based on one persons post, DOS says nothing is being done different, which the data can support, as the very few people who post on CFL can skew the appearance of data easily. (less than 2% of total interviews, which is why I apply a sort of smoothing to my chart). Another reported DOS told them they assign all the Interviews at once. My opinion is this is more likely based on the similarities over time of P3 dates to P4's, and P3 dates to Interviews dates. (I think this happens back during the P3 letter date. When I was at Guangzhou, I got to see three other P3 dated letters that match our own for the interview date). When everything is computerized, this makes sense. It appears as if only when there is some problem do you fall out of this system (line up) and get delayed. One could not expect thousands of applications to get personal attention for interview assignment.

Historically for each month of interview assignments they appear to work backwards off the stack. Previously, those who get around 40 days notice of the P4 before their Interview are then followed by those who get around 30 days notice. A P4 next week puts you at the longer end of the scale, but within past wait times. A P4 two weeks before the Interview is not unknown either. Most people who have the namecheck problem usually got a clear indication that they are waiting for a namecheck, and were not in line waiting for an interview to be scheduled. Since you are becoming a little longer than average on the wait, an email to Guangzhou in addition to calling DOS might be worthwhile to see what their response is to the question of when you can expect an Interview.

I suppose it is all in how you calculate it. I have down the P3 probable letter dates (since no one posts them) for those who got their P4s today, which comes out to the following number of days for P3 to P4. 152 Corrected to 111 due to P3 delay 129 123 122 122 122 121 111 I think if the pattern holds true, which it has for nearly a year, a reasonable expectation of you seeing it next week at 117 days is possible, but the following week at 122 would match it. In the past, at the start of a new sequence of P4's, the number of days wait gets reduced. Usually around 14 days. Since the essentials of all we have seen is simply business as usual, this seems likely. I also make note, that if we look at the actual date printed on the P4s, if it is not 07/28/05, that perhaps next week is likely. But this week is not over yet either. I had DOS tell me there was no Interview scheduled, yet the P4 arrived. I would expect we would not see any real change at all, until the move is completed. Then could we realistically expect that the hype we have heard for so long about bigger/better/more at the consulate will result in sooner Interviews? I think we may not see that for another month, the next sequence of interviews, if this is going to happen. Don't give up yet Mengxin. Congratulations to you all.

This is incorrect. The data is clear that the most important dates are the ones in the upper right hand corner of the P3 letter and on the P4 letter.

I am all for a form to enter the data in by the users. Unfortunately, look at every other site that does this, and look more specifically at the data compared to manually compiling the data at CFL, you will have even less accuracy for (in my opinion) the most critical thing people want to know, which is when will their interview be scheduled. For example, there are at least four different interpretations for what is the proper P3 date that is entered on 001, and this is reflected in the averages. Will a form include this, and will people enter the right information into the right block. Based on what I see, the answer will be no. I wish the answer was yes, because it would be a lot easier.

If we took the last two sets of data, which were two weeks of P4s, two weeks of nothing, two weeks of P4's and now this is the second week of nothing, then I would think next week for new wave of P4's with September Interview dates. But I would be only speculating based on a very vague impression, that is really an alternate theory that still fits the data for the old theory, which is nothing has changed, just there is no one whose time has come up who is posting, and this fills the time for everyone to write posts to speculate why their turn has not happened before now, or why there seems to be no P4's, when really there are P4's, just no one is telling.

We have about 20 people who provided the date of the package arriving at Guangzhou, and most of them report getting a P3 within a week of that date. Only one person do I have a P3 letter date, which is three days after that package arrival. (What arrival means when a person posts it is not clear). But I think based on this the person you spoke to is practically verifing that the real start date is the date on your P3 letter since these numbers are very close to the package arrival. We know that once the package arrive at Guangzhou and is entered into the computer, a P3 quickly follows within a week. At least I would take the information you got to mean this. On the other hand, as has been said a million times here, need more data in peoples timelines and from the lurkers. His statement that it takes nine months from that arrival, is not reflected in the CFL or 001 total number of wait days from P3 to Interview from what I can see. However, if we were to instead average out the longer unusual wait times, for name check delays, then this would probably average out this way. If I were a government worker, I would probably do it this way. But since we are more interested in predicting when one will get a P4 and subsequent Interview, we discard the data that is out of average range, and usually try to verify the reason for why it is out of range. Consistantly, the person is not responding, or they have had a delay. But lets take a look at the real numbers from everyone from April 2004 to now of who has had an Interview. The shortest time was 122 days, and the longest 228 days, with a total average of 175 days. Even if we added an extra month or two, it still would not add up to 270 days. But if I worked there, and fielded calls all day long, I probably would add a month or two as well. Lets also use some data form 001. From July 2004 to now of who has had an Interview. Shortest time was 67 days and longest was 289 days. Average of 187 days. Of course this data is much more suspect and without the checks that are applied to CFL data. However, as a comparison it still averages out. Still close to six months AG.

Simply put, with the exception of those delayed for reasons unknown, there is no data to fill the gaps. This makes it appear as if there is nothing happening. Alternatively, because the last two flurrys of P4's were on a two week on/off basis, new procedures, or a reflection of the move is changing the schedule. (While I include it as a possibility, too many past similar data gaps have done the same thing as we see today. Then the schedule would resume the usual pattern). While I think it is possible there could be a change, I think based on the numerous past events of similar nature, we simply don't have the many, many CFL lurkers since January posting their good news. Too bad for everyone else who does post. (However, important to note that I usually use the 001 postings to compare, and since a full month schedule was posted in two weeks, this leads me to think there is an indication of a possible change. Again, this change could simply be a time slip backwards towards 180 days.) Here is a quick print of my this week projection chart using this week as a P4 date. Since the last recent average number of days from P3 to Interview is around 170 days, you can see the problem. (Please note that pkfops P3 return was much later than average, so it is a question on whether his P3 letter date will count, or a new wait time will be from the P3 computer entry date. Name--------------- P3-letter--P3-GUZ---P4proj---Interview--- P3-to-P4---P3-to-Interview Projected mild bill------------ 02/07/05 03/08/05 07/19/05 08/10/05 162 184 pkfops--------------- 02/26/05 04/08/05 07/19/05 08/29/05 143 143 baogg---------------- 03/01/05 03/01/05 07/19/05 09/01/05 140 184 benfanfan------------ 03/03/05 03/03/05 07/19/05 09/01/05 138 182 Steve and Qingqing--- 03/07/05 05/18/05 07/19/05 09/07/05 134 184 dailyview------------ 03/12/05 03/18/05 07/19/05 08/11/05 129 152 Barey Jones---------- 03/14/05 03/14/05 07/19/05 08/15/05 127 154 riki3742------------- 03/21/05 03/26/05 07/19/05 08/22/05 120 154 huang---------------- 03/22/05 03/22/05 07/19/05 08/23/05 119 154 buffalopaul---------- 03/26/05 04/15/05 07/19/05 08/25/05 115 152 impatient------------ 03/27/05 04/06/05 07/19/05 08/25/05 114 151 Chinashawn----------- 03/28/05 03/28/05 07/19/05 08/26/05 113 151 billv---------------- 03/28/05 04/02/05 07/19/05 08/29/05 113 154 ngatl15-------------- 03/28/05 04/04/05 07/19/05 08/29/05 113 154 DavidZixuan---------- 03/28/05 04/08/05 07/19/05 08/29/05 113 154 Annie Ray------------ 03/29/05 04/01/05 07/19/05 08/30/05 112 154 xulei601--------------03/30/05 03/31/05 07/20/05 08/31/05 112 154

Why don't I use the averages for this data? Because the evidence shows that the high numbers appear to mean that those are people who have a delay of some sort in the process where there are many places where a delay can happen. Since we don't have a lot of numbers, it is harder to extrapolate out a bell shaped curve to get the mean average. Which is why, I think one can say, expect a year, be happy if it is less.

In my opinion having studied all the sites listed for the past year, only the data from CFL has any accurate usefulness. I could go into a long explination for each site, but basically, it is only on CFL where members post specific dates, or on specific dates, dates written on certain documents, and other related events that has allowed for the most accurate prediction data. There is also a general greater understanding from its members of what to post for the time line information, in turn driven by the desire to know more of when the process will be finished, which by collecting over time and by studying the posts of those members during the periods in question, allows for a more accurate assessment of the time. A simple post your time data into a chart for any other site has so far not provide the same useful data. Only comparative data. The data is gathered from all CFL members who posted a time line with the neccesary data from April 2004 to now. Why April 2004? Because before that, Biometrics was waiting to be implemented, and before that, the Interview wait time was much shorter.Before whatever happened before that, there was some other wait time. Before that, there was what oldest members here refer to as the "Black Hole" While things have changed, and usually things changing means a longer wait, in general since that time the wait times from P3 to Interview have been fluctuating from 180-124 days from P3 to Interview. Variable up/down on a per month basis. Wait times per service center, per visa type, is a much larger set of variables, which it is hard to include coffee factor. This is why we can only see a general spread, which is why we can easily say, expect a year start to finish, if you are going to end up at Guangzhou. (Maybe this will change again, but don't rely on that either). Six month BG and six month AG. A CFL member has an appropriate tagline something about what a service center gives, Guz will take away. An accurate observation. Here is the same data in Interview order, oldest to latest. I had left the previous data sort by the amount of time, because as you can see by this sort list, there is no speed up or slow down. At the bottom is my data from 001 for comparison, which is why I only use it for a check. Total number of days from NOA1 to Interview, oldest to most recent for CFL. CSC 369 528 377 420 557 371 277 392 311 314 461 286 346 398 MSC 431 NSC 404 359 409 302 344 351 325 332 295 TSC 336 300 330 VSC 315 256 364 233 245 367 403 364 251 255 302 361 268 DCF 223 177 203 Unknown 344 219 389 471 357 350 415 368 440 383 211 274 310 354 542 462 229 422 257 420 466 235 322 401 304 Data collected from 001 site from July 2004 to now total number of days from NOA1 to Interview, oldest to most recent K1 CSC 680 K1 CSC 556 K1 CSC 375 K1 CSC 370 K1 CSC 665 K1 CSC 440 K1 CSC 367 K1 CSC 321 K1 CSC 386 K3 CSC 372 CR1 CSC 485 CR1 CSC 397 K1 CSC 363 K3 CSC 282 K1 CSC 280 K1 CSC 243 K1 CSC 712 K3 CSC 371 K1 CSC 302 K1 CSC 285 K1 CSC 418 CR1 CSC 420 K3 CSC 490 K3 CSC 495 K1 CSC 305 K1 CSC 354 CR1 CSC 383 CR1 CSC 332 K1 CSC 398 K1 CSC 385 CR1 CSC 453 CR国内 CSC 286 CR1 CSC 377 K1 CSC 377 CR国内 CSC 403 CR1 CSC 455 K3 CSC 449 K3 CSC 196 K1 CSC 274 K3 CSC 422 K1 CSC 406 K3 CSC 509 K1 CSC 465 K3 CSC 330 CR国内 CSC 456 K3 CSC 331 K1 CSC 551 K1 CSC 116 K3 CSC 278 K3 CSC 435 K1 CSC 505 K1 CSC 378 K1 CSC 418 K3 CSC 179 K1 CSC 289 K1 CSC 281 K1 CSC 435 K3 CSC 137 K1 CSC 515 K1 CSC 417 K1 CSC 385 K1 CSC 524 K1 NSC 550 CR1 NSC 468 K3 NSC 380 K1 NSC 354 CR1 NSC 413 K1 NSC 372 CR1 NSC 403 K1 NSC 442 K1 NSC 328 K1 NSC 321 K1 NSC 287 CR1 NSC 316 CR1 NSC 402 K1 NSC 283 K1 NSC 241 K1 NSC 309 K1 NSC 317 K1 NSC 334 K1 NSC 376 CR1 NSC 203 CR1 NSC 387 K1 NSC 326 CR1/DCF? NSC 366 K1 NSC 318 CR国内 NSC 215 K3 NSC 371 K1 NSC 333 K3 NSC 319 K1 NSC 341 K1 NSC 286 CR1 NSC 456 K1 NSC 304 K1 NSC 431 K1 NSC 331 K1 NSC 325 K1 NSC 363 K1 NSC 298 K1 NSC 470 K1 NSC 307 CR1 NSC 590 CR1 NSC 343 K1 NSC 504 K1 TSC 432 CR1 TSC 429 K1 TSC 522 K1 TSC 609 CR1 TSC 309 K1 TSC 222 K1 TSC 281 K3 TSC 407 K1 TSC 486 K1 TSC 288 K1 TSC 452 K1 TSC 253 CR1 TSC 332 K3 TSC 404 CR1 TSC 302 K1 TSC 472 K1 TSC 243 K1 VSC 570 K3 VSC 301 K1 VSC 246 K3 VSC 233 CR1 VSC 429 CR1 VSC 351 K1 VSC 232 K1 VSC 214 K1 VSC 356 K1 VSC 237 K1 VSC 241 K1 VSC 229 CR1 VSC 208 CR1 VSC 212 CR1 VSC 304 K1 VSC 435 K1 VSC 406 CR1 VSC 424 K1 VSC 401 CR1 VSC 328 CR1 VSC 445 K1 VSC 246 K1 VSC 210 CR1 VSC 231 K1 VSC 336 K1 VSC 303 K1 VSC 229 CR1 VSC 322 K3 VSC 390 K1 VSC 213 K1 VSC 185 CR1 VSC 514 K1 VSC 239 K1 VSC 215 K3 VSC 254 K1 VSC 226 K1 VSC 248 K1 VSC 550 K3 VSC 219 K1 VSC 563

Yes. In my opinion, it is a fact that once your papers arrive at Guangzhou (barring a problem) you are in a que, and your turn comes in a sequence based on your P3 letter date, if it is returned within a set amount of time (unknown). The data collect so far supports this. (The question of CR1's without K3 is still being monitored to find if this is an exception, two verified data points say yes, two say no.) I provide the hard numbers below, make your own conclusion, but mine has always been the same as fitnlivly and frank1538. The variations of time for mail, delays, service centers, and 30 days paid vacation every year evens it all out. If you are very lucky and you get the car built on a Wednesday, your time is shorter. If you get the Friday or Monday car, sorry, no lemon law for you, go to the back of the complaint line. Total number of days from NOA1 to Interview CSC 277 286 311 314 346 369 371 377 392 398 420 461 528 557 MSC 431 NSC 295 302 325 332 344 351 359 404 409 TSC 300 330 336 VSC 233 245 251 255 256 268 302 315 361 364 364 367 403 DCF 177 203 223 Unknown 211 219 229 235 257 274 304 310 322 344 350 354 357 368 383 389 401 415 420 422 440 462 466 471 542

Congratulations on the fast P3. Proof again that if you can get your fiance moved to Hong Kong, or get married there to file for K3, that this would be the way to go to get things done in a more timely manner.

I too, had researched this subject long and hard back when I was looking for one of these (8 months ago or so), and also found that the site warpbored posted seemed to have the best prices for translators. I ordered it from them without a problem. I got the Besta model CD-75 which it appears they no longer offer. However, I got it for myself to help with Chinese, although it seems to be much more useful to be used to learn English. Originally I was going to go with either the MD7250 or MD8300 or GD128 because I saw them in Hong Kong demonstrated. I ended up getting the one I got, because when talking with the people at Aim High, they were very helpful in trying to understand the features I wanted, and were knowledgable about all the models they sold at the time, and could clearly explain to me the advantantages and disadvantages of each one ( While taking into account my budget). This is one of those times I have come across a business that I can easily recommend to do business with.

I think that we can say based only on the past very sparse CFL data that a CR1 without a K3 seems to take longer by around 20 days compared to a K1 or K3 alone. Those who are CR1 and K3 seem to take about the same time as a K3 or K1, if they get a P3. Based on a mix of CFL and 001 data for CR1's so far, it does appear that the real start of the count down is when the actual papers arrive in Guanzhou and are entered in to the computer there. Not the computer transfer from NVC, but when someone opens the papers, looks at it and does whatever they do, and then re-enters the data, or verify or whatever. I make the following assumption: The documents they get for CR1 are different enough, or few enough, that they might initially get handled differently which causes the additional time delay. Or they arrive in a different colored box. If we look specifically at the last two CR1's on CFL, we see that from the time that Jgrier5 and Bahan got their papers entered in the Guz computer until their interview date, it was 173 and 175 days( which was 20 days average longer than their K1/K3 same Guz computer peer dates). The number of days to interview from their NVC receipt of the DS-230, was 207 and 210 days. If we then take the data from 001 for CR1's, from which we can not tell exactly which date they are inputting for their CR1, date at NVC, date completed at NVC or date at Guz, we see the numbers range within the numbers from CFL, 170 to 210 range, plus or minus. This is how the numbers are guestimated for the CR1's right now, based on Jgrier5 and Bahan, because it appears that this is the best currrent estimate that is reasonable. So for example, if we add 173 days from the date of 06/04/05 we get an interview date of 11/24/05. Subtract the recent average low numbers of days notice people get and a P4 could be in the week of 10/25/05. If you get lucky, and get the high end of notice of two months, the P4 could be around the week of 09/27/05. Thats if everything were to happen as it has been happening without change. I am hopeful that after the new water cooler is installed in the new consulate next month, we will see shorter wait times.

Please....... You can not get clearer than the law to tell you you need this. I even walked into my local UCSIS office and they had a helpful sample of the "Letter of intent to marry". If you do not do this, and UCSIS passes you on to the Consulate without asking for it, and then the Consulate does ask for it, I would not be at all surprised if they got a blue slip. Read section 1184(d) Immigration and Nationality Act which I have provided below. (d) Issuance of visa to fiancee or fiance of citizen A visa shall not be issued under the provisions of section 1101(a)(15)(K) of this title until the consular officer has received a petition filed in the United States by the fiancee and fiance of the applying alien and approved by the Attorney General. The petition shall be in such form and contain such information as the Attorney General shall, by regulation, prescribe. It shall be approved only after satisfactory evidence is submitted by the petitioner to establish that the parties have previously met in person within 2 years before the date of filing the petition, have a bona fide intention to marry, and are legally able and actually willing to conclude a valid marriage in the United States within a period of ninety days after the alien's arrival, except that the Attorney General in his discretion may waive the requirement that the parties have previously met in person. In the event the marriage with the petitioner does not occur within three months after the entry of the said alien and minor children, they shall be required to depart from the United States and upon failure to do so shall be deported in accordance with sections 1252 and 1253 of this title. The UCSIS office helpfully tells you how to provide the "bona fide" intention to marry without you having to get RFE'd for it later on the 1-129f instructions under instructions section 5 titled What Documents Do You Need to Prove That You Can Legally Marry? and here is the text under "b" as follows: Provide original statements from you and your fiancé(e) whom you plan to marry within 90 days of his or her admission, and copies of any evidence you wish to submit to establish your mutual intent; Yes you don't have to do a letter, but you need some kind "bona fide" intent to be shown (as the law states), and they are telling you outright the kind of "bona fide" intent they will easily accept.

Good for you, and hope you hear more good news soon.

The priority date on our P3 letter, was the date of the arrival of my initial I-129f as shown on our NOA-1. I assumed it was just another way to keep things sorted. Not a priority at all, except in the sense of doublespeak.

Was just looking at the list and thinking you should be hearing something soon. Congratulations!

Wishing you well and it is over soon.

Congratulations. Thanks for providing the date information so that everyone else waiting can see that scheduling appears to be ....on schedule.

Actually there is no indication as of yet of any change in anyway. This is because we do not have any CFL member listed with P3 letter dates to fill in the missing weeks. No doubt there is a large number of lurkers out there who could fill in this missing data for us, but they choose not to. Based on the latest short list of previous interviews, I will give some explanation. The method that Mark is using for this post is conservative, but not that conservative. If you look at some recent posts of charts, you saw that the start of the interview month is always the longest time waiting people. While we are close to July, if we go with the previous higher percentage of people who got two week notices, assuming they are notified on their P4 letter date of June 28th, they could get interviews July 11th through July 15th, and still fit the previous pattern. If we then take those at the top of the P3 letter dated list (Or closest estimate), we can see that for example, mildbill if he got a interview for the 11th, that would be154 days. Kind of high compared to the recent last few interviews, but well within reason. More importantly, the last person on CFL, had 153 days. While I usually refer to K1's for a bench mark, the next one that I would use would be F & L, and if they got a P4 next week, and an Interview July 20th, they would be 135 days P3 to Interview. The last three people on CFL to get an Interview average out at 130 days. What we really have with the available data at this moment in time, is missing people. Until the time passes, and the people who are listed get a P4, we don't know what , if any change has occurred. ( I did not use pkfops as an example, because of the longer time period between P3 recieved and P3 entered date, so is a test case for verification.)

All data that is provided is collected, unfortunately, not all people provide data. Too bad, because we can know a lot more if people would provide all their dates. All possible permutations are considered with the data collected. As repeated before, the data appears to show that your P4 comes sequentially with others in your P3 letter date group, barring delays like a name check. Here is some historical data of name check times. My own opinion based on this data has long been that the name check is not done by Guz (and so therefore one can not hold them responsible for this part of the wait), and Guz just simply has a time set for the name check to be done, of around 3 or 4 months (We can hold them responsible for this). I see no relationship concerning name checks except for one; if it is not completed within a certain amount of time, you are going to be delayed. Other wise, you are waiting in the same line as everyone else. The data appears to show that your P4 comes sequentially with others in your P3 letter date group. Based on this data, if you were calling to DOS to find out about your name check, and it was not completed within 60 to 100 days from when your P3 returned and entered into the computer, a little worry might be in order. P3 return date to name check completed 103 43 26 63 37 49 11 88 43 47 34 24 48 People waiting for P4 with a name check completed 40 45 26 32 26 99 68 Number of days from name check to P4 40 86 106 63 91 63 101 23 70 61 83 57 73

Welcome to CFL. Historically in the past 12 months, no person who is DCF, that has gotten their interview or P4 before others in the K1/K3/CR1/IR1 class for the same return month, once their P3 has been returned to Guangzhou. Normally we would count you into the group of P3 dates for when you received it. However you waited a longer than average time to return it, so your wait time probably did not start until it was returned to Guangzhou. We would now place you into the March P3 group. Currently they are only assigning interviews to the February P3 group. No March P3 has received a P4 or Interview date. I would say it is not time to worry yet. Monitor CFL, and the Interview/P4 list posted by Timeline each week for the current status. Current list is here: http://candleforlove.com/forums/index....c0c9990b02d1b86 You can find out when your P3 was entered into the computer by calling DOS and asking them (1-202-663-1225 press 1, then 0, then 0, have your GUZ number and Wife's name/birthdate and other information available). You can also ask them the status of your name check. Until the name check is complete, you won't get the Interview. Running average time for Interview is around 150 days from P3 letter date. However, you have returned it later, so at least 150 days from the computer entry date is probably the best reasonable guess today. If it was entered March 28th, expect an interview no sooner than August/September. Also expect the unexpected. The Consulate is moving, to make things faster and better. Does this mean you could expect it sooner, or later? Only the Guz knows. But right now, all you can do is monitor the situation, because there is no indication that you are not in within the expected wait times. If everyone who has a P3 date of March has gotten their P4's and it is well into April P3's, that is the time I would say to worry, unless you have indications that you are stuck in a name check, or lost paperwork. Based on your information, everything sounds normal, sad to say.