MDUdall: New MSC, NSC and VSC numbers are out
Dec 18th 2002, 1:22 am
#16
Just Joined
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 29
Re: processing at NSC
Sorry I posted a lot of msgs at other forums so I tried to shorten my msg.
I have filed a I-130 IR for mom and dad, I was wondering with the current freeze for the I-130 at the NSC, do you think my parents will be able to be in the USA by 08-15-03? My I-130 was recvd at NSC on 09-16-02. Basically how long does it take to immigrate parents of USC, even if INS is very slow. Thanks, Matt, I know you deal mostly with Fiance visas but I was wondering what is your experience with I-130 IR at NSC
I have filed a I-130 IR for mom and dad, I was wondering with the current freeze for the I-130 at the NSC, do you think my parents will be able to be in the USA by 08-15-03? My I-130 was recvd at NSC on 09-16-02. Basically how long does it take to immigrate parents of USC, even if INS is very slow. Thanks, Matt, I know you deal mostly with Fiance visas but I was wondering what is your experience with I-130 IR at NSC
Dec 18th 2002, 1:36 am
#17
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: !-129F -TSC
Originally posted by angeles73
David, before you get too upset about what you've been told... let me describe one scenario:
In Argentina for example, divorces are retroactive to the separation date. Don't know about London, but in my fiance' s case, his divorce FINALLY came through in November 2002 but the divorce date is December 18, 2000 so when we filed in TSC he was actually divorced teo years, even though the judge had just signed the document two days before. According to the document we submitted which is a type of NISI divorce decree since Argentina does not give Final Divorce Decrees until several months AFTER, he was divorced two years ago. (Yes, it doesn't make sense but that's Argentina for you...)
A lawyer here in the US told me the same thing, and the consulate in Buenos Aires corroborated what you were told: submit the petition with the NISI decree and get in the loop until the final decree arrives which shows the original divorce date as way before the 1rst NOA date. Of course, they knew how Argentina works... and that is not applicable to everyone. If your divorce date is after your NOA date... you are SOL...
David, before you get too upset about what you've been told... let me describe one scenario:
In Argentina for example, divorces are retroactive to the separation date. Don't know about London, but in my fiance' s case, his divorce FINALLY came through in November 2002 but the divorce date is December 18, 2000 so when we filed in TSC he was actually divorced teo years, even though the judge had just signed the document two days before. According to the document we submitted which is a type of NISI divorce decree since Argentina does not give Final Divorce Decrees until several months AFTER, he was divorced two years ago. (Yes, it doesn't make sense but that's Argentina for you...)
A lawyer here in the US told me the same thing, and the consulate in Buenos Aires corroborated what you were told: submit the petition with the NISI decree and get in the loop until the final decree arrives which shows the original divorce date as way before the 1rst NOA date. Of course, they knew how Argentina works... and that is not applicable to everyone. If your divorce date is after your NOA date... you are SOL...
This is what us lawyer types call a "nunc pro tunc" decree. And the law on whether INS is obligated to follow these is quite murky. In a related arena, there is a doctrine called "relation-back" in regards to annullment judgments -- an annulled marriage is treated as if it never existed in the first place. For those of you are who so inclined, look up a BIA case called "Astorga" in the www.usdoj.gov/eoir site in the "virtual library" section.
Another tricky situation arises from Texas law. Lets say you have H who is married to W#1. He then "marries" W#2. THEN he gets divorced from W#1. Are H & W#2 lawfully married? If the "marriage" took place in Califonria, they are NOT married. If the "marriage" took place in Texas, they ARE married -- but as of the date of the divorce from W#1.
I haven't experienced the Argentinian situation you mention -- but I would caution that the need for speed can trip you up at times.
Dec 18th 2002, 2:33 am
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MDUdall: New MSC, NSC and VSC numbers are out
What states does that new Missouri Service Center Service (for
I-129Fs)?? Looks like it just came 'online'.
Thanks
I-129Fs)?? Looks like it just came 'online'.
Thanks
Dec 18th 2002, 2:54 am
#19
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: MDUdall: New MSC, NSC and VSC numbers are out
Originally posted by Steve
What states does that new Missouri Service Center Service (for
I-129Fs)?? Looks like it just came 'online'.
Thanks
What states does that new Missouri Service Center Service (for
I-129Fs)?? Looks like it just came 'online'.
Thanks
MSC does K-3 I-129F's for the entire country.
Dec 18th 2002, 4:44 am
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MDUdall: New MSC, NSC and VSC numbers are out
"KHW" wrote in message news:...
> What are they doing at the NSC? Last report of November 15 said they are
> working on petitions received up till August 8. Now, with the December 17
> report, they are working on petitions received up till July 15?
>
> Continuing the meditation....
I am almost in tears over this myself - but then some folks with
August dates were approved yesterday.... what is this? some sort of
test on my psychological state???
first NOA 8-30-02
still hoping for second NOA by 1-10-02 so we can proceed with April
wedding plans.
> What are they doing at the NSC? Last report of November 15 said they are
> working on petitions received up till August 8. Now, with the December 17
> report, they are working on petitions received up till July 15?
>
> Continuing the meditation....
I am almost in tears over this myself - but then some folks with
August dates were approved yesterday.... what is this? some sort of
test on my psychological state???
first NOA 8-30-02
still hoping for second NOA by 1-10-02 so we can proceed with April
wedding plans.
Dec 18th 2002, 1:42 pm
#21
Forum Regular
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 46
I have a question for Matthew Udall. Do you know why at VSC some petitions got approved which are at the end of October. I got my First NOA on 8 October 2002 and have heard nothing yet. The consulate is Hong Kong. Thanks.
Dec 18th 2002, 2:01 pm
#22
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 472
What is the deal with NSC. Why are people from 8/6 and 8/7 getting their approvals, yet they say they are still working on July? I think you must have no further than a 3rd grade education to have worked at this place. The administration sure doesn't have a clue... if I were to do so poorly ay my job, I would be fired straight away...
Just letting out the frustration... thought I should get excited when I hear 8/7... who that means only 20 more days, but obviously they are trying to kill us even more.
Just letting out the frustration... thought I should get excited when I hear 8/7... who that means only 20 more days, but obviously they are trying to kill us even more.
Dec 18th 2002, 2:05 pm
#23
Forum Regular
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: Memphis
Posts: 57
Re: !-129F -TSC
Originally posted by Matthew Udall
David, I believe Folinskyinla has a valid point, however let me state that you will just have to wait to see if that first submission gets denied. My hunch is that it will, but you never know.
I recall taking on a new fiancée client sometime within the past year. I can't remember who it was, so I can't remember what Service Center he used the first time on his own (I could try to figure it out, but I don't see how spending the time to nail down the identity of this client to find out which service center is "that" important... but I think it might have been the TSC).
Anyway, he was a do-it-yourselfer who had received bad information (or perhaps on his own simply jumped to an incorrect conclusion) that he could file his I-129f before his divorce was final. He figured it would be final by the time the case hit the consulate (and I honestly can't remember if he submitted a Nisi decree at the outset, or simply provided the final decree with his RFE). Yes, he too received an RFE for the divorce decree, and when he sent it to the Service Center they flatly denied his I-129f because he was not legally free to marry on the date he signed his I-129f and sent it to the Service Center (the date on the final decree clearly showed that).
He came to me after his case was denied, and I helped him get the next one approved without an RFE.
There are not "that" many qualifications a petitioner must meet, but being legally free to marry is definitely one of them.
And not to rag on you here, but why did you rely on the Department of State to give you advice about Department of Justice processing? I doubt anybody at that Consulate has ever worked for INS and adjudicated an I-129f in their lives. I'll concede that it would be logical to assume that since the Consulate and the INS both deal with "immigration", that it might be reasonable to rely on the Consulate for your INS advice, but as you now know that was a foolish decision.
The INS and/or Consulate are "not" your immigration law advisor any more than I am or your Congressman is (or anybody on this news group, or your barber or accountant). In fact, in a very real sense, the INS and Consulate are on the "opposite" side of the fence of immigration as its their job to enforce immigration law when it comes to approving petitions and visa applications.
Even though both the Bank of America and Wells Fargo deal with banking, I would not go to Well's Fargo to ask them about the B of A's policies or the best way to structure my B of A accounts.
Sorry for ragging, and relying on the wrong people for your immigration advice is a very common do-it-yourselfer's mistake so don't beat yourself up too much about it (hey, even a beginner attorney might make that same mistake). Nothing you can do about it now anyway.
Good luck with this case. I'm afraid there is a pretty good chance that you are going to need it.
M.U.
David, I believe Folinskyinla has a valid point, however let me state that you will just have to wait to see if that first submission gets denied. My hunch is that it will, but you never know.
I recall taking on a new fiancée client sometime within the past year. I can't remember who it was, so I can't remember what Service Center he used the first time on his own (I could try to figure it out, but I don't see how spending the time to nail down the identity of this client to find out which service center is "that" important... but I think it might have been the TSC).
Anyway, he was a do-it-yourselfer who had received bad information (or perhaps on his own simply jumped to an incorrect conclusion) that he could file his I-129f before his divorce was final. He figured it would be final by the time the case hit the consulate (and I honestly can't remember if he submitted a Nisi decree at the outset, or simply provided the final decree with his RFE). Yes, he too received an RFE for the divorce decree, and when he sent it to the Service Center they flatly denied his I-129f because he was not legally free to marry on the date he signed his I-129f and sent it to the Service Center (the date on the final decree clearly showed that).
He came to me after his case was denied, and I helped him get the next one approved without an RFE.
There are not "that" many qualifications a petitioner must meet, but being legally free to marry is definitely one of them.
And not to rag on you here, but why did you rely on the Department of State to give you advice about Department of Justice processing? I doubt anybody at that Consulate has ever worked for INS and adjudicated an I-129f in their lives. I'll concede that it would be logical to assume that since the Consulate and the INS both deal with "immigration", that it might be reasonable to rely on the Consulate for your INS advice, but as you now know that was a foolish decision.
The INS and/or Consulate are "not" your immigration law advisor any more than I am or your Congressman is (or anybody on this news group, or your barber or accountant). In fact, in a very real sense, the INS and Consulate are on the "opposite" side of the fence of immigration as its their job to enforce immigration law when it comes to approving petitions and visa applications.
Even though both the Bank of America and Wells Fargo deal with banking, I would not go to Well's Fargo to ask them about the B of A's policies or the best way to structure my B of A accounts.
Sorry for ragging, and relying on the wrong people for your immigration advice is a very common do-it-yourselfer's mistake so don't beat yourself up too much about it (hey, even a beginner attorney might make that same mistake). Nothing you can do about it now anyway.
Good luck with this case. I'm afraid there is a pretty good chance that you are going to need it.
M.U.
Well at first I thought from the group responses that we had messed up big style, However maybe we found the happy worker at the INS because I checked with them and it seems that they "suspended" the application until the Decree absolute was recieved as long as it appeared within 90days of the RFE(which it did). This meant that we do not have to file a new application and that our time runs fron the 2nd receipt date. Many thanks and on with the wait. thanks to all for the advice . I learn more each day. The info to go ahead came from the london embassy helpline
David
Dec 18th 2002, 3:17 pm
#24
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: !-129F -TSC
David:
Sorry to say, the response you got from the SC is perfectly consistent with what I said earlier. The INS AO did not have the Decree Absolute, so they did not know if you had a final divorce, NOR when it was issued. While an RFE is out, processing is suspended until they get the response.
So the AO will now see that you ARE free to remarry. If that's all they want, fine and good -- you get an approval. As I mentioned, I personally think that is legally permissible. However, if the AO fixates on the "eligible when filed" rubric, then you will get a denial.
Sorry to say, the response you got from the SC is perfectly consistent with what I said earlier. The INS AO did not have the Decree Absolute, so they did not know if you had a final divorce, NOR when it was issued. While an RFE is out, processing is suspended until they get the response.
So the AO will now see that you ARE free to remarry. If that's all they want, fine and good -- you get an approval. As I mentioned, I personally think that is legally permissible. However, if the AO fixates on the "eligible when filed" rubric, then you will get a denial.
Originally posted by pondhopper
Hi Matthew
Well at first I thought from the group responses that we had messed up big style, However maybe we found the happy worker at the INS because I checked with them and it seems that they "suspended" the application until the Decree absolute was recieved as long as it appeared within 90days of the RFE(which it did). This meant that we do not have to file a new application and that our time runs fron the 2nd receipt date. Many thanks and on with the wait. thanks to all for the advice . I learn more each day. The info to go ahead came from the london embassy helpline
David
Hi Matthew
Well at first I thought from the group responses that we had messed up big style, However maybe we found the happy worker at the INS because I checked with them and it seems that they "suspended" the application until the Decree absolute was recieved as long as it appeared within 90days of the RFE(which it did). This meant that we do not have to file a new application and that our time runs fron the 2nd receipt date. Many thanks and on with the wait. thanks to all for the advice . I learn more each day. The info to go ahead came from the london embassy helpline
David
Dec 18th 2002, 4:01 pm
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MDUdall: New MSC, NSC and VSC numbers are out
"pondhopper" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Well at first I thought from the group responses that we had messed up
> big style, However maybe we found the happy worker at the INS because I
> checked with them and it seems that they "suspended" the application
> until the Decree absolute was recieved as long as it appeared within
> 90days of the RFE(which it did). This meant that we do not have to file
> a new application and that our time runs fron the 2nd receipt date. Many
> thanks and on with the wait. thanks to all for the advice . I learn more
> each day. The info to go ahead came from the london embassy helpline
> David
I think the point the attorneys were trying to make is that the law is the
law, and just because some government worker tells you "this is fine", it
doesn't mean that it is. INS and Consular employees make mistakes and give
incorrect advice all of the time. However, a mistake on their part does not
grant you relief from having to follow what the law says.
Even if you were granted the visa, you could get into trouble at the POE or
at AOS time. The INS employees most certainly do NOT have to accept a visa
that was issued incorrectly by DOS employees.
If I were you, I'd take the advice of the attorneys here!
Paulgani
news:[email protected]...
> Well at first I thought from the group responses that we had messed up
> big style, However maybe we found the happy worker at the INS because I
> checked with them and it seems that they "suspended" the application
> until the Decree absolute was recieved as long as it appeared within
> 90days of the RFE(which it did). This meant that we do not have to file
> a new application and that our time runs fron the 2nd receipt date. Many
> thanks and on with the wait. thanks to all for the advice . I learn more
> each day. The info to go ahead came from the london embassy helpline
> David
I think the point the attorneys were trying to make is that the law is the
law, and just because some government worker tells you "this is fine", it
doesn't mean that it is. INS and Consular employees make mistakes and give
incorrect advice all of the time. However, a mistake on their part does not
grant you relief from having to follow what the law says.
Even if you were granted the visa, you could get into trouble at the POE or
at AOS time. The INS employees most certainly do NOT have to accept a visa
that was issued incorrectly by DOS employees.
If I were you, I'd take the advice of the attorneys here!
Paulgani
Dec 18th 2002, 6:07 pm
#26
Forum Regular
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: Memphis
Posts: 57
Re: !-129F -TSC
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
David:
Sorry to say, the response you got from the SC is perfectly consistent with what I said earlier. The INS AO did not have the Decree Absolute, so they did not know if you had a final divorce, NOR when it was issued. While an RFE is out, processing is suspended until they get the response.
So the AO will now see that you ARE free to remarry. If that's all they want, fine and good -- you get an approval. As I mentioned, I personally think that is legally permissible. However, if the AO fixates on the "eligible when filed" rubric, then you will get a denial.
David:
Sorry to say, the response you got from the SC is perfectly consistent with what I said earlier. The INS AO did not have the Decree Absolute, so they did not know if you had a final divorce, NOR when it was issued. While an RFE is out, processing is suspended until they get the response.
So the AO will now see that you ARE free to remarry. If that's all they want, fine and good -- you get an approval. As I mentioned, I personally think that is legally permissible. However, if the AO fixates on the "eligible when filed" rubric, then you will get a denial.
Just to clarify things a little
The original "send it all in now" information came from the INS office at Memphis when we explained everything before collecting the forms.The London embassy confirmed this to us.
When we sent the I-129f to TSC in Sept we sent a covering letter explaining the timeline of expected Decree nisi, Decree absolute and a certificate from the court confirming these dates (all of which that would be later than the filing date.) My question is this,
Would they not have sent it back at that time or rejected it. The RFI asked for the Decree to be sent "when it is final" and they would hold the application open for 90 days. this date we beat easily.
So do we cancel what they have or wait or send it all again with a new cheque? What a crazy system?
David
Dec 18th 2002, 6:26 pm
#27
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: !-129F -TSC
Originally posted by pondhopper
Hi
Just to clarify things a little
The original "send it all in now" information came from the INS office at Memphis when we explained everything before collecting the forms.The London embassy confirmed this to us.
When we sent the I-129f to TSC in Sept we sent a covering letter explaining the timeline of expected Decree nisi, Decree absolute and a certificate from the court confirming these dates (all of which that would be later than the filing date.) My question is this,
Would they not have sent it back at that time or rejected it. The RFI asked for the Decree to be sent "when it is final" and they would hold the application open for 90 days. this date we beat easily.
So do we cancel what they have or wait or send it all again with a new cheque? What a crazy system?
David
Hi
Just to clarify things a little
The original "send it all in now" information came from the INS office at Memphis when we explained everything before collecting the forms.The London embassy confirmed this to us.
When we sent the I-129f to TSC in Sept we sent a covering letter explaining the timeline of expected Decree nisi, Decree absolute and a certificate from the court confirming these dates (all of which that would be later than the filing date.) My question is this,
Would they not have sent it back at that time or rejected it. The RFI asked for the Decree to be sent "when it is final" and they would hold the application open for 90 days. this date we beat easily.
So do we cancel what they have or wait or send it all again with a new cheque? What a crazy system?
David
There is a published precedent decision from 1998 called Matter of Izumi which involved a employment based immigrant visa. On appeal, the petitioner argued that you gave us prior guidance that our program was OK and you previously approved 95 similar petitions. The precedent dedesion stated that the advice was wrong, could not be relied on and just because we made a mistake 95 times before doesn't obligate us to make the same mistake on the 96th time. IOW, we can do anything we damn well please, we're the INS.
I hope you case goes through just fine. As **I** said, I think it is legally approvable, but as a **I** also said, I'm not the INS.
Good luck.
Dec 18th 2002, 6:53 pm
#28
Forum Regular
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: Memphis
Posts: 57
Re: !-129F -TSC
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
David:
There is a published precedent decision from 1998 called Matter of Izumi which involved a employment based immigrant visa. On appeal, the petitioner argued that you gave us prior guidance that our program was OK and you previously approved 95 similar petitions. The precedent dedesion stated that the advice was wrong, could not be relied on and just because we made a mistake 95 times before doesn't obligate us to make the same mistake on the 96th time. IOW, we can do anything we damn well please, we're the INS.
I hope you case goes through just fine. As **I** said, I think it is legally approvable, but as a **I** also said, I'm not the INS.
Good luck.
David:
There is a published precedent decision from 1998 called Matter of Izumi which involved a employment based immigrant visa. On appeal, the petitioner argued that you gave us prior guidance that our program was OK and you previously approved 95 similar petitions. The precedent dedesion stated that the advice was wrong, could not be relied on and just because we made a mistake 95 times before doesn't obligate us to make the same mistake on the 96th time. IOW, we can do anything we damn well please, we're the INS.
I hope you case goes through just fine. As **I** said, I think it is legally approvable, but as a **I** also said, I'm not the INS.
Good luck.
If nothing else maybe someone else will learn by our mistakes, oops,
keep up the good work
David
Dec 18th 2002, 7:30 pm
#29
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3,825
Re: !-129F -TSC
Originally posted by pondhopper
Hi
Just to clarify things a little
The original "send it all in now" information came from the INS office at Memphis when we explained everything before collecting the forms.The London embassy confirmed this to us.
When we sent the I-129f to TSC in Sept we sent a covering letter explaining the timeline of expected Decree nisi, Decree absolute and a certificate from the court confirming these dates (all of which that would be later than the filing date.) My question is this,
Would they not have sent it back at that time or rejected it. The RFI asked for the Decree to be sent "when it is final" and they would hold the application open for 90 days. this date we beat easily.
So do we cancel what they have or wait or send it all again with a new cheque? What a crazy system?
David
Hi
Just to clarify things a little
The original "send it all in now" information came from the INS office at Memphis when we explained everything before collecting the forms.The London embassy confirmed this to us.
When we sent the I-129f to TSC in Sept we sent a covering letter explaining the timeline of expected Decree nisi, Decree absolute and a certificate from the court confirming these dates (all of which that would be later than the filing date.) My question is this,
Would they not have sent it back at that time or rejected it. The RFI asked for the Decree to be sent "when it is final" and they would hold the application open for 90 days. this date we beat easily.
So do we cancel what they have or wait or send it all again with a new cheque? What a crazy system?
David
First let me start be repeating what I said before in that you will just have to wait and see if they end up denying the petition. I personally hope they approve it for you. If you have already sent them the reply to the RFE, then I’ll bet you won’t have that long to wait until you find out what they are going to do (and please let us know).
Next, the INS district office in Memphis does not process or approve I-129f's either. I don't think it was wise to rely on their advice about how to document an I-129f any more than it was to rely on the Consulate's advice (well... perhaps "a little" more reasonable to rely on their advice since they “are� an INS office, but again as Paul pointed out Immigration and Consular officers can and do give inaccurate advice... they are not lawyers, they usually don't have experience with that particular type of case, etc.).
Most RFE (RFI) letters I see are simply template letters. I believe they have these on a word processor and simply pick and choose from the pre-written paragraphs available to them, then hit "print". But your point about them saying to send the final decree "when it is final" might indicate they thought this situation through (when preparing the RFE letter) and perhaps offers a glimmer of hope (however I think they are not thinking it through and instead simply inserted a template paragraph someone wrote long ago to cover situations related to, or similar to this).
And they can insert a name or two or other language into a template paragraph that appears on an RFE letter. For example, I recall one of the few RFE's I've ever received for a fiancée case. It came from the NSC, and they ended up asking me send them the birth record for the U.S. petitioner. Of course, I “had� included that plus a copy of his 10-year U.S. passport when I originally filed the submission, but they lost it and issued the RFE. But when I got the "first" RFE letter; in one of the paragraphs it said something to the effect of, "Please send us the _____ of Mr. X" [they had inserted my clients name]. They didn't actually use the underscore, however I put that here to show that there was a gap in the sentence for them to insert what it was they wanted us to send. Yes, that's right. They sent us an RFE but they forgot to insert into the paragraph "what it was that they wanted us to send"! That "really" pissed me off, and I raised holly hell with them and got them to send another RFE letter right away (after all, I needed to be sure what it was that they wanted, I had to send back the RFE letter with the materials, and that RFE letter needed to say what it was that they wanted so the INS could see what it was that they wanted).
You asked if they would have sent the submission back at that time or rejected it (I assume by “that time�, you mean when they received it). Probably not. Your case must first go through the mail room, presorting, sorting, data entry, go to the file room to wait its turn, "and then" its given to an INS officer for the first time. It’s only the INS officer (who is adjudicating your case) who decides whether or not it should be approved, denied, or an RFE sent. Contract workers in the mail room, presorting, sorting, data entry and the file room don’t read over your submission and they don’t make any judgment calls about it (with one exception that I know of, and that is where a contract worker in presorting or sorting notices someone did not send a check for the filing fee… in that case, the case is rejected early on in the process).
Now Ange did bring up an interesting point about the date of the divorce relating back in time to the date of the nisi decree or perhaps the date of filing for divorce.
I missed it, but what court issued the nisi decree? Was it from a state in the U.S., or in another Country (UK)? I suppose a closer look at the law of that state or country is in order to see if it will relate back to an earlier date.
And again, good luck.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
