The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Several Embassy Immigrant Visa websites are announcing the end of overseas filings of I-130 petitions. There are various reasons given.

I haven't enough regarding the explanation yet, but maybe one of you will have seen something that can bring I-130 petitions together with what Tokyo says is the reason- The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act.

"Important Change in I-130 Filing Procedures
Effective immediately, in accordance with the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, overseas consular posts are no longer authorized to accept or adjudicate all I-130 petitions. Persons seeking to file an I-130 petition should submit it directly to the appropriate USCIS office. American citizens and U.S. legal permanent residents residing in Japan or present in Japan likewise must file for an immigrant visa petition (I-130) or K visa with with the appropriate USCIS office. The USCIS maintains an office locator page, based on place of residence, on its website.
Please check back on this website for further details and updates as we are expecting more details on these new procedures soon."
http://tokyo.usembassy.gov/e/visa/tvisa-important.html

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

What is the Adam Walsh Child blah, blah, blah Act? And whatever would it have to do with immigration. Adam Walsh was not killed as a result of immigration but by a depraved male in Florida.

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Got the answer ... it includes child sex traffiking

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Would that not require a work visa rather than a marriage visa?

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

The Act changes the immigration law to prevent child sex offenders from filing the I-130. This is done through an IBIS check and then RfE/fingerprinting.

Do the overseas embassies not have the capabilities to do these checks?

DCF's future?
 

I just read this thread on another forum. I haven't checked anything yet but it seems that DCF is coming to an end. The Immigrant Visa page of the website of the Embassy in The Hague is "currently under construction"......

I really feel for all those who are caught in this sudden change.

Re: DCF's future?
 

The website of the embassy in Paris, France says that:

"EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY consular officers at the United States Embassy in Paris can no longer accept I-130 petitions for family-based immigration to the United States. All I-130 petitions must be filed with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the United States."

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Hi:

I just looked at the 8 CFR 204.1(e). That regulation has NOT been changed and I've seen no notices of intent to change it.

So it seems that, if the petitioner resides in Japan, the I-130 must be filed with the DHS overseas office in Bangkok. I note that Bangkok does have a sub-office in Seoul. I know that, in the past, the I-601 waivers from Japan were adjudicated in Seoul.

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Thank you for posting the correct piece of the CFR, and for clarifying what I didn't say in my OP. "Appropriate USCIS office" would be the key phrase.

Some of the Embassy websites have language similar to Paris', which does create more confusion, particularly for USCs who are resident abroad.

Reports at VJ are that scheduled visa interviews are being cancelled while petitions are being sent to the various Field Offices for review and final adjudication. It seems similar to the implementation of the IMBRA requirements in the backdated treatment of petitions/applications in the works.

Creates a bit of a hardship to travel to a Field Office in another country to file in person--might the result be that all petitions will be funneled through the SC/NVC system?

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Recent legislation has led to changes in the procedures American citizens resident abroad will follow if they wish to sponsor an immediate relative (spouse, parent or minor child) for an immigrant visa. Effective immediately, the immediate relative petition (I-130) must be filed with the USCIS office responsible for the petitioner's place of residence (that is, the place of residence of the American citizen who is filing the petition). Consular offices at U.S. embassies and consulates are no longer authorized to accept I-130s, although they will continue to provide guidance to American citizen petitioners and their family members. Responsibility for acceptance and approval of immigrant visa petitions rests solely with USCIS. American citizens should submit their I-130 at the CIS office responsible for their place of residence.

This procedural change may result in a processing delay for some applicants. The Department of State recognizes and sincerely regrets the inconvenience this may cause.

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services office servicing the Netherlands is that in Frankfurt, Germany.

This is what's on the website of the The Hague embassy today.
( http://thehague.usembassy.gov/immediate_relatives.html )

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but does this mean that if the USC resides in The Netherlands, you file through Frankfurt? ( http://tinyurl.com/23y5lg )

Elaine :)

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Hi:

That is what it sounds like to me.

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Why do this?

How will it affect the speed and ease of application processing?

Isn't the country in which the beneficiary resides, best able to determine whether the beneficiary has a history of ANY criminal activity, because they have proximity to that country's law enforcement, knowledge of the language, etc?

This just shoehorns the applications into fewer, but still overseas, offices and increases the hardship on the petitioner and beneficiary.

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

It's the petitioner they're checking out for this one.

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

The only thing they need to check apart from income is whether the petitioner is truly a citizen or resident. And they don't trust the consulates to be able to verify this?!

Re: The End of DCF Worldwide?
 

Thank you, mr. F.

Snow, they are supposed to check now if the petitioner is a registered sex offender. Apparently the consulates do not have the means to access this information.

Elaine :)