ndv

Hi Everyone,

I am Indain citizen marrried to US Greencard holder.

So what actul time the process will take for my visa?

After how much time i will be able to get Visa?

And Can i visit USA during this Process time as a visitor visa??

Please help me out regarding this

Thanking you
ND

Ingo Pakleppa

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 08:58:30 -0700, ndv wrote:


    > Hi Everyone,
    > I am Indain citizen marrried to US Greencard holder.
    > So what actul time the process will take for my visa?

The processing is not your main concern, but rather the quota backlog in
the Family 2A category. It currently is about five years.

The processing currently takes around three years or so, but since that
would happen during the five years or so, the actual time doesn't matter.

    > After how much time i will be able to get Visa?
    > And Can i visit USA during this Process time as a visitor visa??

If you are granted one, yes. But chances are you would not be granted one.

Note that Richard Gephart just introduced a new bill in Congress. If it
becomes law, then you would be eligible for a Green Card immediately, just
like spouses of US citizens.

Ingo

PRESIDENT

You have not indicated how long your spouse has been a permanent resident. If he is close to completely is reesidency requirement for US Citizenship, he may want to apply for Naturalization. That will elevate your petition to the category of an immediate relative.

Good Luck

groe0033

I hope the legislation benefitting spouses of permanent residents is passed, but people should not be too optimistic, at least not in the short-term. The following is posted on the House's Judiciary web site:

Link: http://www.house.gov/judiciary/news101002.htm

Text: “With a few weeks before the elections, Rep. Gephardt today shamelessly introduced immigration amnesty legislation, knowing it stands no chance of passage with only a few days remaining in this Congress. I’m disappointed Rep. Gephardt saw this as an opportunity to needlessly raise the hopes of many by proposing legislation that, in reality, would only result in stuffing millions of amnesty petitions on the bottom of the INS’s five-million-case backlog pile. Rep. Gephardt’s amnesty plan would promise benefits that the INS - with its massive backlog of cases - can’t deliver. This effort would recklessly add more responsibilities to an already overburdened INS awash in paperwork.

“Rep. Gephardt’s efforts would be better channeled toward getting his Democratic colleagues in the Senate to stop blocking the Homeland Security Department legislation that includes INS restructuring or the bipartisan INS overhaul legislation the House overwhelmingly passed six months ago (H.R. 3231 by a 405-9 margin on April 25, 2002). Both would overhaul the INS so it can provide the professional, compassionate, and efficient services deserved by those patiently following our immigration laws.�

Ingo Pakleppa

On Sun, 20 Oct 2002 09:56:19 -0700, groe0033 wrote:


    > I hope the legislation benefitting spouses of permanent residents is
    > passed, but people should not be too optimistic, at least not in the
    > short-term. The following is posted on the House's Judiciary web site:
    > Link: http://www.house.gov/ju-
    > diciary/news101002.htm
    > Text: “With a few weeks before the elections, Rep. Gephardt today
    > shamelessly introduced immigration amnesty legislation, knowing it
    > stands no chance of passage with only a few days remaining in this
    > Congress. I’m disappointed Rep. Gephardt saw this as an opportunity to
    > needlessly raise the hopes of many by proposing legislation that, in
    > reality, would only result in stuffing millions of amnesty petitions on
    > the bottom of the INS’s five-million-case backlog pile. Rep. Gephardt’s
    > amnesty plan would promise benefits that the INS - with its massive
    > backlog of cases - can’t deliver. This effort would recklessly add more
    > responsibilities to an already overburdened INS awash in paperwork.
    > “Rep. Gephardt’s efforts would be better channeled toward getting his
    > Democratic colleagues in the Senate to stop blocking the Homeland
    > Security Department legislation that includes INS restructuring or the
    > bipartisan INS overhaul legislation the House overwhelmingly passed six
    > months ago (H.R. 3231 by a 405-9 margin on April 25, 2002). Both would
    > overhaul the INS so it can provide the professional, compassionate, and
    > efficient services deserved by those patiently following our immigration
    > laws.â€?
    > --

One more reason to go to vote, those of us who are eligible!

PRESIDENT

Dear Ingo:

I have a lot of respects for your posts and your knowledge of immigration laws. However, to be a spouse of a green card holder can be a very streesful time. Everybody sort of puts their life on hold.

I am a USC and I suffered those pangs of separation while my spouse was waiting for her immigration visa. To talk about pie-in-the-sky immigration reform in the time of elections will give false hope to this spouse of a GC holder.

You know that the proposed legislation may never be passed or even discussed. Bottom line, it is not the law of the land today. This proposed legislation is not proposing tinkering with the F2A or F2B provision, it is talking about demolishing it. That is radical and I would never suggest to someone to pin their life's hopes on it.

If you were this poster's attorney, you could not possibly pin your hopes on a legislation that may be passed .

Again, please do not misunderstand the intent of my post. I believe that you are appealing to the "dreamers" in us with the legislation news not the "realist". I would rather give this poster a dose of reality.

Ingo Pakleppa

On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 07:23:48 -0700, PRESIDENT wrote:


    > Dear Ingo:
    > I have a lot of respects for your posts and your knowledge of
    > immigration laws. However, to be a spouse of a green card holder can be
    > a very streesful time. Everybody sort of puts their life on hold.
    > I am a USC and I suffered those pangs of separation while my spouse was
    > waiting for her immigration visa. To talk about pie-in-the-sky
    > immigration reform in the time of elections will give false hope to this
    > spouse of a GC holder.
    > You know that the proposed legislation may never be passed or even
    > discussed. Bottom line, it is not the law of the land today. This
    > proposed legislation is not proposing tinkering with the F2A or F2B
    > provision, it is talking about demolishing it. That is radical and I
    > would never suggest to someone to pin their life's hopes on it.
    > If you were this poster's attorney, you could not possibly pin your
    > hopes on a legislation that may be passed .
    > Again, please do not misunderstand the intent of my post. I believe that
    > you are appealing to the "dreamers" in us with the legislation news not
    > the "realist". I would rather give this poster a dose of reality.

You are absolutely right, and I apologize if this was how it came across.
I did not mean to say "go vote and this problem will be fixed". I meant to
say "the actions of these two men (Gephart introducing the bill,
Sensenbrenner denouncing it) indicate who are our friends and who aren't."

All that aside, I would not be surprised to actually see something like
that become law. The F2A category has been a sore spot for years, and
politicians have been tinkering with it for quite a while without effect.
First, they excempted much of it from the per-country quota (that's why
the F-2 category is now split into A and B). Then they introduced the V
visa. Both were, of course, inadequate attempts to resolve the problem.
Since the pressure remains, I would expect that at the very least, the V
visa will be made generally available and extended indefinitely. Even such
a change as Gephart proposes is, in my mind, not out of the question.