IMBRA Multiple Petition Waivers

[ellis-island]

Something that has bothered me about IMBRA is the Multiple Petition Waiver requirement. The law specifically states it is required "...with respect to two or more applying aliens...". But USCIS has interpreted this to mean it's required for the same beneficiary.

 

I wrote an article about it. There are some editing errors I hope they fix. But those C4L members to whom California Service Center is sending out letters stating they need to apply for a waiver to sponsor the same beneficiary, might benefit by reading it.

 

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0206-ellis.shtm

 

I think USCIS blew it on this part of the law.

 

This problem is compounded at the California Service Center and the TSC, which sends K-1's to CSC for processing. Unlike Nebraska or Vermont, CSC does not send out NOID letters to returned K-1's.

 

So CSC petitioners find themselves in the position of being unable to prove the consulate was wrong in sending back the petition and being forced to apply for a discretionary waiver, without ever having a chance to respond to the consulate's allegations.

 

CSC at least, should change the way it handles the return of K petitions from consulates.

[LeeFisher3]

We also had one member who was refused by the TSC shortly after IMBRA went into affect.

 

The initial petition was canceled because they sent an RFE to him the day before New Orleans was closed and the USCIS no forwarding policy was blindly followed by the postal service, then when he reapplied TSC refused him to file a second petition for the same beneficiary.

[chilton747]

This doesn't surprise me in the least bit. A totally innocent petitioner and beneficiary does not get the chance to face their accuser. Instead they are unlawfully subjected to resort to other means (waiver). This only adds to the workload of the USCIS and therefore gives a means for the USCIS to raise their fees.

Myself, I have always followed the letter of the law in every way. But when the letter keeps changing and becomes ambiguous, then what kind of chance do we really have?. Thanks Marc for pointing this out and trying to help us understand. Perhaps the CSC will change their ways. I think that prayer is the only tool we can use to make them understand.

[bx26]

Something that has bothered me about IMBRA is the Multiple Petition Waiver requirement. The law specifically states it is required "...with respect to two or more applying aliens...". But USCIS has interpreted this to mean it's required for the same beneficiary.

 

I wrote an article about it. There are some editing errors I hope they fix. But those C4L members to whom California Service Center is sending out letters stating they need to apply for a waiver to sponsor the same beneficiary, might benefit by reading it.

 

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0206-ellis.shtm

 

I think USCIS blew it on this part of the law.

 

This problem is compounded at the California Service Center and the TSC, which sends K-1's to CSC for processing. Unlike Nebraska or Vermont, CSC does not send out NOID letters to returned K-1's.

 

So CSC petitioners find themselves in the position of being unable to prove the consulate was wrong in sending back the petition and being forced to apply for a discretionary waiver, without ever having a chance to respond to the consulate's allegations.

 

CSC at least, should change the way it handles the return of K petitions from consulates.

 

Wow! I am getting to the point where i am considering getting a TEFL teaching certificate and just moving to China so we can be together, Zou is a nurse and together, we might have a nice life . I do like China alot especially the people. Has anyone ever done this? thanks!

[LGR_WEI]

 

Wow! I am getting to the point where i am considering getting a TEFL teaching certificate and just moving to China so we can be together, Zou is a nurse and together, we might have a nice life . I do like China alot especially the people. Has anyone ever done this? thanks!

 

Come Nov 2007, if my Lao Po does not have the K-3 visa, or the CR1 visa, I will be moving to China in 08. I have already been offered 3 jobs teaching, and like your SO, my wife is a nurse also.

 

I dont think I face this multiable visa problem since my first k-1 was in 2000, and my 2nd failure was a i-130 for a chinese girl already here in the USA on a F-1 ( student visa ). However, that was in 2004 we filed.

 

>L