Fianc?e) I-129F Petitions Recalled by DHS

[MikeandRong]

SUBJECT: FIANC?E) I-129F PETITONS RECALLED BY DHS

 

http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_2927.html

[frank1538]

It guess it's official now. We had heard about this which is as a result of the new International Marriage Broker law. I'll reiterate what Mick said in another thread about this law. I hope it doesn't create another black hole.

[LeeFisher3]

Sounds like anyone who wasn't approved before March 1 is getting an RFE.

 

This really presents a problem since the USCIS has not updated their I-129F on their web site and all new filings will generate an RFE for the specific information they want.

 

If someone gets one of these, hopefully they will post the requirements.

[Kalli and Greg Oveson]

217514[/snapback]

 

My guess is that this will create another group of people that are victims of Katrina. I am sure that DHS could have gotten a temporary waiver if they had wanted to ask. But with all the adverse publicity for DHS and Chertoff since Katrina, I'm equally sure they did not want to attract attention to another DHS failure. Besides, they aren't the ones who are being hurt!

[RLS]

Well, that hits me right in the guts - right where it hurts. I do not want to tell my SO about this. She will be devastated.

[MikeandRong]

Well, that hits me right in the guts - right where it hurts.  I do not want to tell my SO about this.  She will be devastated.

217543[/snapback]

You and me are in the same boat now. I told her a little bit about it a few weeks ago, but now that it is official I'll just tell her what I know, and that is really nothing at this point. Just wait and see. Hope for the best. It's out of our hands for now until we hear something else, or get something in the mail.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Any current history on K-1 timelines is now out the window. My only hope is that USCIS doesn't screw up this law change like DOS did and created the black hole.

217544[/snapback]

While this new law had good intentions, it's like so many laws that create more problems than they solve. I'm a firm believer that it's not the responsibility of the government to keep people from making bad decisions. This law will delay processes for everyone and help virtually no-one.

[Guest pushbrk]

Well, that hits me right in the guts - right where it hurts.  I do not want to tell my SO about this.  She will be devastated.

217543[/snapback]

Ron, Relax. Lee's post represents a misunderstanding. You're ok. Only cases "received" after March 5 are impacted. Your was received a few days before the deadline.

 

" If posts have any question about the correct

priority date of the K1 case, they should use the priority

date (receipt date) written or stamped on the original

petition. DHS has not requested return of K3 or K4 I-129F

petitions."

 

I never saw my priority date until it showed up on the P3. It is the actual date the package was stamped received by the service center. In my case that's two days earlier than the NOA1 was issued from the service center mine was transferred to. Fortunately K3s are not impacted by this new law.

 

Only K1 petitions "delivered" to the service center address AFTER March 5, 2006 are impacted. Unfortunately that does impact some of our members.

Edited May 23, 2006 by pushbrk (see edit history)

[Guest pushbrk]

Sounds like anyone who wasn't approved before March 1 is getting an RFE. 

 

This really presents a problem since the USCIS has not updated their I-129F on their web site and all new filings will generate an RFE for the specific information they want.

 

If someone gets one of these, hopefully they will post the requirements.

217522[/snapback]

NOT "approved after March 1"

 

RECEIVED after March 5. The "priority date" is the date the petition was delivered to the service center.

 

If posts have any question about the correct

priority date of the K1 case, they should use the priority

date (receipt date) written or stamped on the original

petition. DHS has not requested return of K3 or K4 I-129F

petitions.

[Stephen]

Any current history on K-1 timelines is now out the window. My only hope is that USCIS doesn't screw up this law change like DOS did and created the black hole.

217544[/snapback]

While this new law had good intentions, it's like so many laws that create more problems than they solve. I'm a firm believer that it's not the responsibility of the government to keep people from making bad decisions. This law will delay processes for everyone and help virtually no-one.

217553[/snapback]

It said K3/K4 petitions were not affected… Ha! what a joke… It’s going to take consulate time to figure out which petitions to send back… USCIS time to re-process petitions that were already processed. It will probably slow down the whole process by 2 or 3 months… as if it wasn’t bad enough already..

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Only K1 petitions "delivered" to the service center address AFTER March 5, 2006 are impacted.  Unfortunately that does impact some of our members.

217554[/snapback]

It's important to distinguish between:

 

1. Petition mailed date

2. Petition received date

3. Notice date

 

All K1 applicants should look carefully at their I-797C forms (NOA1) documents as these bear the date that will determine those that are affected by this crazy legislation, and those that are not.

 

a ) The petition mailed date is of no consequence to anyone but the one mailing it.

 

b ) The petition RECEIVED DATE; as indicated on the I-797C, IS the date used to determine when your petition was received and entered in to the USCIS system.. This date will also reflect the priority date after paperwork is received by the NVC.

 

c ) The NOTICE DATE - indicates the date that processing commenced on your petition and the I-797C was mailed to your home.

 

So, if your "b" date, as indicated on your I-797C is on or before March 5, 2006, your petition will be affected.

[Stephen]

Any current history on K-1 timelines is now out the window. My only hope is that USCIS doesn't screw up this law change like DOS did and created the black hole.

217544[/snapback]

While this new law had good intentions, it's like so many laws that create more problems than they solve. I'm a firm believer that it's not the responsibility of the government to keep people from making bad decisions. This law will delay processes for everyone and help virtually no-one.

217553[/snapback]

It said K3/K4 petitions were not affected… Ha! what a joke… It’s going to take consulate time to figure out which petitions to send back… USCIS time to re-process petitions that were already processed. It will probably slow down the whole process by 2 or 3 months… as if it wasn’t bad enough already..

217556[/snapback]

Now we know why the dates at Vermont Service Center went from 4/9/06 on May 8 to 3/6/06 on todays posting ...

[Guest pushbrk]

Only K1 petitions "delivered" to the service center address AFTER March 5, 2006 are impacted.  Unfortunately that does impact some of our members.

217554[/snapback]

It's important to distinguish between:

 

1. Petition mailed date

2. Petition received date

3. Notice date

 

All K1 applicants should look carefully at their I-797C forms (NOA1) documents as these bear the date that will determine those that are affected by this crazy legislation, and those that are not.

 

a ) The petition mailed date is of no consequence to anyone but the one mailing it.

 

b ) The petition RECEIVED DATE; as indicated on the I-797C, IS the date used to determine when your petition was received and entered in to the USCIS system.. This date will also reflect the priority date after paperwork is received by the NVC.

 

c ) The NOTICE DATE - indicates the date that processing commenced on your petition and the I-797C was mailed to your home.

 

So, if your "b" date, as indicated on your I-797C is on or before March 5, 2006, your petition will be affected.

217557[/snapback]

I think Jesse meant to type "after" instead of "before".

 

Petitions received before March 6, are NOT effected.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

http://i4.tinypic.com/10gh9aq.jpg Edited May 23, 2006 by ShaQuaNew (see edit history)

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Petitions received before March 6, are NOT effected.

217562[/snapback]

I think Mike meant to use "affected" vs "effected"