Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
Oct 25th 2004, 4:02 pm
#1
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Waukee, Iowa
Posts: 1,583
Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
My situation is this:
I entered on a K3 in July and filed for an EAD in that month based on (a)(9). Recently I received notice that my I-130 has been approved, which now allows me to file for AOS.
On Wednesday I am scheduled to receive an interim EAD based on my original EAD application. However, Norfolk only issues interims for 90 days, taking me into January. Based on NBC's current processing times, my EAD will still not have been approved by the time the interim expires in January.
So, I am envisaging one of the following options:
(1) File a NEW (c)(9) EAD after filing for AOS. This would allow me to pick up a new interim EAD in January based on this application.
(2) Somehow contacting the NBC and having them redesignate my existing application from an (a)(9) to a (c)(9) and transferring it to Norfolk. But would Norfolk then put it at the bottom of the (c)(9) pile or process it according to the date it was initially filed as an (a)(9).
I have no idea whether either of these options is possible. Thoughts?
I entered on a K3 in July and filed for an EAD in that month based on (a)(9). Recently I received notice that my I-130 has been approved, which now allows me to file for AOS.
On Wednesday I am scheduled to receive an interim EAD based on my original EAD application. However, Norfolk only issues interims for 90 days, taking me into January. Based on NBC's current processing times, my EAD will still not have been approved by the time the interim expires in January.
So, I am envisaging one of the following options:
(1) File a NEW (c)(9) EAD after filing for AOS. This would allow me to pick up a new interim EAD in January based on this application.
(2) Somehow contacting the NBC and having them redesignate my existing application from an (a)(9) to a (c)(9) and transferring it to Norfolk. But would Norfolk then put it at the bottom of the (c)(9) pile or process it according to the date it was initially filed as an (a)(9).
I have no idea whether either of these options is possible. Thoughts?
Oct 26th 2004, 12:20 am
#2
Forum Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 268
Re: Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
Originally Posted by CalgaryAMC
My situation is this:
I entered on a K3 in July and filed for an EAD in that month based on (a)(9). Recently I received notice that my I-130 has been approved, which now allows me to file for AOS.
On Wednesday I am scheduled to receive an interim EAD based on my original EAD application. However, Norfolk only issues interims for 90 days, taking me into January. Based on NBC's current processing times, my EAD will still not have been approved by the time the interim expires in January.
So, I am envisaging one of the following options:
(1) File a NEW (c)(9) EAD after filing for AOS. This would allow me to pick up a new interim EAD in January based on this application.
(2) Somehow contacting the NBC and having them redesignate my existing application from an (a)(9) to a (c)(9) and transferring it to Norfolk. But would Norfolk then put it at the bottom of the (c)(9) pile or process it according to the date it was initially filed as an (a)(9).
I have no idea whether either of these options is possible. Thoughts?
I entered on a K3 in July and filed for an EAD in that month based on (a)(9). Recently I received notice that my I-130 has been approved, which now allows me to file for AOS.
On Wednesday I am scheduled to receive an interim EAD based on my original EAD application. However, Norfolk only issues interims for 90 days, taking me into January. Based on NBC's current processing times, my EAD will still not have been approved by the time the interim expires in January.
So, I am envisaging one of the following options:
(1) File a NEW (c)(9) EAD after filing for AOS. This would allow me to pick up a new interim EAD in January based on this application.
(2) Somehow contacting the NBC and having them redesignate my existing application from an (a)(9) to a (c)(9) and transferring it to Norfolk. But would Norfolk then put it at the bottom of the (c)(9) pile or process it according to the date it was initially filed as an (a)(9).
I have no idea whether either of these options is possible. Thoughts?
i have no idea either...lol...but now...i don't think they will let you apply for another EAD if one is already pending and also...i'm not sure if they can redesignate the existing application to a (c)(9)...it'd be great if they did though...it's worth a try to call the misinformation line.
let us know any updates!
rukhie
Oct 26th 2004, 3:00 am
#3
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,049
Re: Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
Calgary,
My thought is, don't try to 2nd guess what someone at the NBC might do with your EAD application. Let me tell you what's happened to my K3 wife. I'll try to keep it simple, but I it won't be easy. My speculative comments will be enclosed in square brakets [...].
- Arrived in April 2004 and immediately submitted EAD application to the NBC.
- May 2004 did biometrics at the local Sub Office.
- August 2004 submitted AOS application to local Sub Office, which sent it on to the NBC.
- September 2004 received e-mail from the Online Status Notification that EAD application has been transferred to NSC. [Why?]
- Early October 2004 went to local Sub Office for interim EAD. Informed that it couldn't be issued because the Receipt Date had been changed to date of the AOS application, 90-day counter is re-set and time is not up yet. USCIS:"You filed as C9, right?" Wife:"No, I filed as A9 - here's a copy of my application." USCIS: "I'll call Missouri and find out what's going on." [Good luck, the case has been sent to Nebraska. I think someone at Missouri changed the basis for the application from A9 to C9 when the AOS application came in.] USCIS: "OK, all straightened out, here's your interim EAD good for 3 months."
- 18 October 2004 received e-mail that EAD application has been transferred to the NBC.
- 19 October 2004 received e-mail that the EAD application "was reopened on a BCIS motion." [WTF? The case had been closed? Why? Never notified of this! In any event thank goodness we went to the Sub Office and the person there had indeed been able to correct a problem.]
- 21 October received e-mail that the EAD application has been approved and a card has been ordered.
- 22 received a form letter by post from NBC saying that EAD had been denied, but the case had been re-examined, denial was incorrect, case now approved. Interstingly, the words 'denied' and 'approved' throughout the letter were written in by hand - the unaltered form letter had said approval of case was incorrect and on re-examination was denied. [Confirmation again that, whatever the problem was, the USCIS official at the local Sub Office had been able to correct it.]
One conclusion I can draw from this is that your EAD application will not be transferred to Norfolk. It will be handled exclusively from Missouri. Unless they decide to close it or transfer it to a Service Center.
Regards, JEff
My thought is, don't try to 2nd guess what someone at the NBC might do with your EAD application. Let me tell you what's happened to my K3 wife. I'll try to keep it simple, but I it won't be easy. My speculative comments will be enclosed in square brakets [...].
- Arrived in April 2004 and immediately submitted EAD application to the NBC.
- May 2004 did biometrics at the local Sub Office.
- August 2004 submitted AOS application to local Sub Office, which sent it on to the NBC.
- September 2004 received e-mail from the Online Status Notification that EAD application has been transferred to NSC. [Why?]
- Early October 2004 went to local Sub Office for interim EAD. Informed that it couldn't be issued because the Receipt Date had been changed to date of the AOS application, 90-day counter is re-set and time is not up yet. USCIS:"You filed as C9, right?" Wife:"No, I filed as A9 - here's a copy of my application." USCIS: "I'll call Missouri and find out what's going on." [Good luck, the case has been sent to Nebraska. I think someone at Missouri changed the basis for the application from A9 to C9 when the AOS application came in.] USCIS: "OK, all straightened out, here's your interim EAD good for 3 months."
- 18 October 2004 received e-mail that EAD application has been transferred to the NBC.
- 19 October 2004 received e-mail that the EAD application "was reopened on a BCIS motion." [WTF? The case had been closed? Why? Never notified of this! In any event thank goodness we went to the Sub Office and the person there had indeed been able to correct a problem.]
- 21 October received e-mail that the EAD application has been approved and a card has been ordered.
- 22 received a form letter by post from NBC saying that EAD had been denied, but the case had been re-examined, denial was incorrect, case now approved. Interstingly, the words 'denied' and 'approved' throughout the letter were written in by hand - the unaltered form letter had said approval of case was incorrect and on re-examination was denied. [Confirmation again that, whatever the problem was, the USCIS official at the local Sub Office had been able to correct it.]
One conclusion I can draw from this is that your EAD application will not be transferred to Norfolk. It will be handled exclusively from Missouri. Unless they decide to close it or transfer it to a Service Center.
Regards, JEff
Originally Posted by CalgaryAMC
My situation is this:
I entered on a K3 in July and filed for an EAD in that month based on (a)(9). Recently I received notice that my I-130 has been approved, which now allows me to file for AOS.
On Wednesday I am scheduled to receive an interim EAD based on my original EAD application. However, Norfolk only issues interims for 90 days, taking me into January. Based on NBC's current processing times, my EAD will still not have been approved by the time the interim expires in January.
So, I am envisaging one of the following options:
(1) File a NEW (c)(9) EAD after filing for AOS. This would allow me to pick up a new interim EAD in January based on this application.
(2) Somehow contacting the NBC and having them redesignate my existing application from an (a)(9) to a (c)(9) and transferring it to Norfolk. But would Norfolk then put it at the bottom of the (c)(9) pile or process it according to the date it was initially filed as an (a)(9).
I have no idea whether either of these options is possible. Thoughts?
I entered on a K3 in July and filed for an EAD in that month based on (a)(9). Recently I received notice that my I-130 has been approved, which now allows me to file for AOS.
On Wednesday I am scheduled to receive an interim EAD based on my original EAD application. However, Norfolk only issues interims for 90 days, taking me into January. Based on NBC's current processing times, my EAD will still not have been approved by the time the interim expires in January.
So, I am envisaging one of the following options:
(1) File a NEW (c)(9) EAD after filing for AOS. This would allow me to pick up a new interim EAD in January based on this application.
(2) Somehow contacting the NBC and having them redesignate my existing application from an (a)(9) to a (c)(9) and transferring it to Norfolk. But would Norfolk then put it at the bottom of the (c)(9) pile or process it according to the date it was initially filed as an (a)(9).
I have no idea whether either of these options is possible. Thoughts?
Last edited by jeffreyhy; Oct 26th 2004 at 3:04 am.
Oct 26th 2004, 5:01 pm
#4
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Waukee, Iowa
Posts: 1,583
Re: Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
Thank you both. Your wife's experience is truly bizarre, JEff. I don't really know what to make of it.
I am going to argue for a 150 day interim in Norfolk on the grounds that it is reasonably justified by NBC's processing times. Norfolk is a small center and I have witnessed the supervisor emerge to consider other people's cases before -- it costs nothing to ask although I rate my chances somewhere close to zero.
Realistically, I suppose I am simply on the hook for getting a second interim in January.
I am going to argue for a 150 day interim in Norfolk on the grounds that it is reasonably justified by NBC's processing times. Norfolk is a small center and I have witnessed the supervisor emerge to consider other people's cases before -- it costs nothing to ask although I rate my chances somewhere close to zero.
Realistically, I suppose I am simply on the hook for getting a second interim in January.
Oct 26th 2004, 10:38 pm
#5
Sursum corda
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Richmond Hill, GA USA
Posts: 38,860
Re: Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
Originally Posted by CalgaryAMC
Thank you both. Your wife's experience is truly bizarre, JEff. I don't really know what to make of it.
I am going to argue for a 150 day interim in Norfolk on the grounds that it is reasonably justified by NBC's processing times. Norfolk is a small center and I have witnessed the supervisor emerge to consider other people's cases before -- it costs nothing to ask although I rate my chances somewhere close to zero.
Realistically, I suppose I am simply on the hook for getting a second interim in January.
I am going to argue for a 150 day interim in Norfolk on the grounds that it is reasonably justified by NBC's processing times. Norfolk is a small center and I have witnessed the supervisor emerge to consider other people's cases before -- it costs nothing to ask although I rate my chances somewhere close to zero.
Realistically, I suppose I am simply on the hook for getting a second interim in January.
Good luck, they CAN do an interim for up to 240 days. Perhaps you can convince them to do that and save everyone alot of hassle.
Oct 27th 2004, 3:37 am
#6
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Waukee, Iowa
Posts: 1,583
Re: Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
I got the interim, good for 240 days.
Oct 27th 2004, 3:55 am
#7
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,049
Re: Possibility of concurrent EAD applications
Calgary,
Congratulations.
Regards, JEff
Congratulations.
Regards, JEff
Originally Posted by CalgaryAMC
I got the interim, good for 240 days.
