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

[Juette]

This is very depressing news! Especially since I have been expecting a NOA2 any day now.

[longstrangetrip]

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.

217554[/snapback]

has anyone heard this from the horse's mouth? I believe (and hope and hope) this is the case, but I would like to get confirmation before I remove this lump, which is my heart, from my throat.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

has anyone heard this from the horse's mouth?  I believe (and hope and hope) this is the case, but I would like to get confirmation before I remove this lump, which is my heart, from my throat.

217570[/snapback]

Scott,

 

this is as noted on the DOS website...

 

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

 

According to your timeline, you will NOT be "affected."

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

[longstrangetrip]

thanks,

 

yeah I was so "tunnel-visioned" at first I couldn't read clearly.

[Guest pushbrk]

Petitions received before March 6, are NOT effected.

217562[/snapback]

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

217567[/snapback]

Yes, that's why I prefer "impacted"

 

Decades of error are difficult to overcome.

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

[yuan fen]

So what about the dates that met the deadline? You suppose they will process faster or slower? If it turns into a " Hole " , please no, there will be a gap in the process possibly. Will GUZ speed up or slow down? Strive for a small break, or make the current material last?

 

It is a bummer to wait, but I will wait as long as it takes. Hahaha ..... No Choice I suppose.

[stacato]

So what about the dates that met the deadline? You suppose they will process faster or slower? If it turns into a " Hole " , please no, there will be a gap in the process possibly. Will GUZ speed up or slow down? Strive for a small break, or make the current material last?

 

It is a bummer to wait, but I will wait as long as it takes. Hahaha ..... No Choice I suppose.

217588[/snapback]

Logic would tell me that things should speed up due to less petitions in GUZ, but I don't know how logical they are over there...

[Guest pushbrk]

So what about the dates that met the deadline? You suppose they will process faster or slower? If it turns into a " Hole " , please no, there will be a gap in the process possibly. Will GUZ speed up or slow down? Strive for a small break, or make the current material last?

 

It is a bummer to wait, but I will wait as long as it takes. Hahaha ..... No Choice I suppose.

217588[/snapback]

You are not affected by this change because your receipt date is before March 6, 2006. However, I wish to use your case as an example. Since you mailed your petition to TSC and then transferred to CSC, your "receipt" date is probably different from your "priority date" even though your I-797 NOA1 may not show a priority date. The "telegram" clearly indicates that the "priority date" is to be used and explains this is the date "stamped" on the petition at the service center.

 

I am K3 but my "priority date" (per the P3 just received) is two days earlier than the "received date" on my NOA1. It matches the date my petition was actually delivered to Chicago.

 

Anybody with a "receipt date" (per NOA1) of March 6 or 7 may actually have a priority date of March 3 or 4. This is most likely if your case was transferred from the service center to which it was mailed, to the center that sent the NOA1 and processed the petiton. I would check with NVC or DOS to determine whether your case is on the list for return or not.

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

[yuan fen]

So what about the dates that met the deadline? You suppose they will process faster or slower? If it turns into a " Hole " , please no, there will be a gap in the process possibly. Will GUZ speed up or slow down? Strive for a small break, or make the current material last?

 

It is a bummer to wait, but I will wait as long as it takes. Hahaha ..... No Choice I suppose.

217588[/snapback]

You are not affected by this change because your receipt date is before March 6, 2006.

217596[/snapback]

That was how I read it.

 

 

 

So I guess that an RFE would either request the petitioner to acquire police documents like the beneficiary, or they will run the petitioners name through a database for the check.

 

I feel they will want the petitioner to do the legwork.

 

 

Recalled

 

" Approximately 1100 cases at 95 IV Units " ?

 

There is only GUZ for China, that may narrow down the numbers on those cases past DOS.

[yuan fen]

So what about the dates that met the deadline? You suppose they will process faster or slower? If it turns into a " Hole " , please no, there will be a gap in the process possibly. Will GUZ speed up or slow down? Strive for a small break, or make the current material last?

 

It is a bummer to wait, but I will wait as long as it takes. Hahaha ..... No Choice I suppose.

217588[/snapback]

Logic would tell me that things should speed up due to less petitions in GUZ, but I don't know how logical they are over there...

217591[/snapback]

I would elaborate on the logic, but it would get deleted.

[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.

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.

217554[/snapback]

Mike, I have not changed my timeline and it is accurate. I looked at my NOA1 and it has a "Received Date" of 03/06/06. It was "delivered" to USCIS on 3/1/06. So, I guess it's right there on the cusp so to speak. Is there any way to find out? If they would just let us know what they want, we could send it to them and get the show on the road. I'm very confused and bewildered at this point. Now this is what CFL is all about.

[ryleeys]

I am screwed on this one. We sent our petition in a month ago and had a few forms sent back that I forgot to sign (yeah, my mistake, quadruplicates suck). Now, haven't heard for nearly two weeks since the new packet was sent in. Obviously, this situation will hit us hard.

 

I suppose if I'm in the United States with my fiancee before 2184, I should call the Vatican and have it declared a miracle.

 

Anyhoo, I guess it all makes perfect sense that they are trying to make it easier for illegal immigrants and more difficult for those of us that follow the steps (the ever frickin' changing steps). I'm doing my best to contain my anger at this, but I must say, I'm tempted to go down to the market and find some bunnies to kick around.

[hunter]

Wonder if one could go to the local police department and request a police record. Then one could address it to NVC with the NVC number or GUZ number and name etc. I wonder if they go deeper than police record check. /ponder.

[johnxiaoying]

May be time for the affected K1's to grab their honey and head to Hong Kong for a wedding.

[Kalli and Greg Oveson]

[

217514[/snapback]

As I understand it, the purpose of this law is to protect foreign nationals from US citizen sexual predators. Other than something general like, "Obey the laws of countries you visit", financial restrictions, or something that only applies to military personnel, can anyone think of another case like this where our government requires specific actions by US citizens solely for the benefit of people living in other countries?