I know its more complicated than just USCIS, hence the etc.

There would seem to be quite a few people on this thread not 100% happy with the Act.

I would hope that if the Consulates had advanced notice of this, they would have been more helpful, everything I have read suggests that it was dumped on them at short notice.

The Politicians are the ones to be held accountable.

The politicians passed the law back in July, and it is a good law to protect woman and children to immigrate into an abusive relationship. However, the ball was dropped by the people who were to follow the laws back in July. They applied the law to everything but DCF's, and it should apply. I am not at all angry with the law, just how it was handeled.

And actually we should not waste energy on complaining, but to tell congressman, USCIS and the Department of State on how disatisfied how our officials handled this and ask how are they going to expedite and make this better. We all know its going to add a long delay, especially those of us that showed up on January 23rd and the days to follow, to find out we are delayed further. My heart goes to all of us, but even more to the poor people who were getting ready to file their I-130's and now have to file in the US and will be delayed for months longer than the DCF process. At least us who already had our I-130 petitions approved, will only be delayed for a couple months, maybe even less if USCIS decides to put more resources on this injustice.

I agree with the prior posts, everyone needs to sit back, relax, nothing can be done today. Lets see what happens over the next week. Keep in touch with your embassy, they have been instructed to still support us. My understanding is people with approved petitions already, will be sent to a USCIS post located near their embassy, such as my wife is in Ukraine, so our petition will goto Moscow. At Moscow they will check my background, then send back to Ukraine. We will get a new Packet 4 and a new interview date. But soon we will know exactly what we are to do. Good luck to all!!

John and Sonya,

Excellent idea - just when they have new additional work to do to sort out the I-130 mess, load them up further with a batch of B2 visa applications.

Yodrak

Well,

I am part of the group that hadn't filed the I-130 yet, but I was counting on the DCF to expedite my process...

Now I am in doubt of which could be the best path to take, can someone shed some light on this issue ?

I am not married yet, my marriage license will be ready in a couple of days, here in Brazil, but now I don't know if I should try going for the K1 or K3 route. My main goal is to be away from my respective other for the least amount of time possible. From what I gathered from this forum and from the Gov. sites the K3 seemed promising because you already begin the immigration process, however the K1 route seems to be faster at first sight.

The Embassy/Consulate in Brazil hasn't even updated their website yet. They are as clueless as some of us at this time.

Please post your opinions.

Thank you.

Andre

Most people do not seem to have a problem travelling with the VWP or a B if an I-130 is pending.

Applying for a B might be tricky, you are not by definition going have that many ties.

I can not imagine it will have much impact of processing times. The potential numbers are tiny compared to the whole.

KI usually has the edge, but much of that is that you can start immediately rather than wait to get married. That seems not an issue in your case.

I would not at your stage let it be the deciding factor. So many other variables.

Basically the way it looks, the consulates can no longer approve I-130 petitions themselves. All I-130 petitions must be approved by USCIS either in the US or through their Foreign Field Offices. Most foreign field offices only will take I-130 petitions that are filed by those resident in the countries that they serve. Whether the Consulate will still collect the I-130 and fee and forward the I-130 to the local USCIS foreign field office for adjudication or the I-130 will have to be filed directly with USCIS is not known at this time. Most likely you will no longer be able to file at a USCIS field office if you are a visitor there, but will be required to file in the US

The local USCIS field office that services Brazil is in Lima, Peru. I suggest waiting a few weeks until the present situation shakes itself out...

Okay, so this is how I'm reading the information: The USC needs to petition and file the I-130 with the USCIS office that has jurisdiction over your U.S. place of residence (i.e. my U.S. domicile is in Texas, therefore, I'd file with the Texas Service Center), correct?

If the above is accurate, then where I get a bit confused is the following: Does the USC need to be physically present in the United States in order to petition and file the aforementioned paperwork? Can the USC be resident in their SO's home country while doing all of this?

If the USC CAN be resident in their SO's home country, then very little has really changed with DCF. The most basic part of DCF that has changed then is that the I-130 needs to be sent to the United States (it seems, in most -- if not all -- cases) instead of a U.S. embassy or consulate within the SO's home country.

If the USC CANNOT be resident in their SO's home country, then that dramatically changes the scope of DCF and practically, if not completely, eliminates it.

So if someone could answer my question ("Can the USC be resident in their SO's home country while petitioning and filing the forms"), I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.

Actually B-2 VISA's can be handled by the same Embassy that is no longer doing your petition, NOT USCIS. They have nothing to do with B-2. So since the work load have been lightened up for them awhile, and the B-2 process can take <1 week, but regardless, most likely will not get anyway because you have intentions of immigrating obviously. Also this comes from recommendation from USCIS.

I asked our Customs and Immigrations Liason about this change. She said it only changes the fact that the consulates and Embassies do not have the capability to do back ground checks on the USC. The UCIS does. This is a combination of the IMBRA and the new Child Protection law sponsored by Mr Walsh. If you have kids or know of a "mail order bride" that has been abused, you would understand the need for this. Like the IMBRA, it will take a few weeks/months for the USCIS to adjust and hire/train more people.
I feel for those at the end of their process having to wait. For those just starting, it will iron itself out before you get to the end. Good luck, Ken

DeadPoolX,

Not quite. I-130 is to be submitted to the USCIS office that has jurisdiction over the USC's place of residence. Period. That may well not be in the USA.

To some extent the answer will depend on how each particular international field office defines 'residence'. If an international field office decides that a particular petitioner is not resident in their jurisdiction they will decline the submission and instruct the person to submit to a USCIS service center.

Yodrak

John and Sonya,

I was referring to the consulates, not to the USCIS. And the consulates that were processing I-130 are now engaged in sorting out the I-130s they have figuring out what needs to be done with each of them, so their workload has changed a bit but has not yet necessarily decreased. Granted, it may not necessarily have increased, either.

Granted also, some of the new B2 applications that you suggest applying for may not go to the same consulate that was processing the immigrant visa.

Yodrak

Here's a little bit of an update: My husband was scheduled to have his interview on March 28. He got a call from the consulate today, saying the interview is postponed. The paperwork is either being sent to Rome or back to the States -- it's not clear which at the moment. (This might be a language issue between the officer and my husband...) When the sex offender check (and whatever else) is done, the paperwork will go back to Paris and he'll get a new interview date (and interview in Paris.) The officer told him this "could take months."

Basically, they have no idea how long it will take.

The officer told my husband that he's not "really" allowed to come visit me in the States while we're waiting on all of this. But, he can try to come visit as a tourist; there's just a risk they won't let him in when he gets to the passport control. My husband says there's a "50% chance" of getting turned back at the border.

Can anyone tell me: Is it legal or illegal for him to TRY to come see me (as a tourist)?

As for who's to blame: IMO, the politicians and the bureaucrats both screwed up, and it wouldn't have been that hard not to. I feel totally betrayed and think think that just about anybody involves deserves our anger!

As my husband says: The hangover really sucks when you didn't even drink....

It is not illegal to try

Tourist may visit for 90 days or less without needing to obtain a visitors visa from the following countries.: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.
So if you are willing to *risk* that 5O% chance of your husband being turned back... then... Really it is up to you. If you are not willing to risk it, could you come visit him? Or just wait...

Least your husband has that 5O% chance...many here donnot.


Disclaimer: The above stated is just my opinion based on the tourista visa rules I know of. It is not meant as any advice or legal help.

Immigration attorney "Folinskyinla" posted the following AILA memo with information from Condi Rice:

THANK YOU FOLINSKYINLA

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=421608

The text of Condi's cable as per AILA:

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CVIS, CMGT
SUBJECT: REFERRAL OF ALL I-130 PETITIONS TO USCIS SERVICE
OFFICES FOR ADJUDICATION

REF: 03 STATE 146632

1. Summary: CA and USCIS have completed a thorough analysis of the Adam Walsh Protection act and come to the conclusion that posts must cease accepting or adjudicating any I-130 petition for family-based immigrant status that was not adjudicated by USCIS, and inform any individual wishing to file such a petition that it is necessary to file it with the appropriate USCIS office and refrain from assisting further. This change is effective immediately. In any case in which a post has already accepted an I-130 from a petitioner but has not yet issued a visa, post must forward the petition to the appropriate USCIS overseas office as "not clearly approvable." We are working with USCIS and will provide subsequent guidance on processing I-600 petitions and previously approved I-130 petitions. CA recognizes that this change may cause difficulties and encourages posts to advise their resident American citizen communities that new procedures are in place so that they may plan ahead. End summary.

2. On July 27, 2006, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (Adam Walsh Act), Pub. L. No. 109-248, became law. Section 402 of that Act amends INA 204(a)(1) and 101(a)(15)(K), rendering ineligible to file a petition for immigrant status under INA 203(a) (I-130 or I-600), or for nonimmigrant K status (I-129F), any petitioner who has been convicted of a "specified offense against a minor," defined in section 111 of the Adam Walsh Act as an offense involving any of the following:

BEGIN QUOTE

A) An offense (unless committed by a parent or guardian) involving kidnapping.

An offense (unless committed by a parent or guardian) involving false imprisonment.

C) Solicitation to engage in sexual conduct.

D) Use in a sexual performance.

E) Solicitation to practice prostitution.

F) Video voyeurism as described in section 1801 of title 18, United States Code.

G) Possession, production, or distribution of child pornography.

H) Criminal sexual conduct involving a minor, or the use of the Internet to facilitate or attempt such conduct.

I) Any conduct that by its nature is a sex offense against a minor.

END QUOTE

Section 402 of the Adam Walsh Act provides that the bar against filing a petition because of such a conviction will not apply if the Secretary of Homeland Security, in his sole and unreviewable discretion, determines that the petitioner poses no risk to the beneficiary.

3. USCIS has provided interim guidance to its adjudicators to search its IBIS database for criminal history record information regarding USPER petitioners in family-based immigrant status cases and K nonimmigrant status cases. If there is an IBIS hit for one of the specified offenses against a minor, the USCIS field office must issue a Request for Evidence for all police arrest records and court disposition documents, and must schedule the petitioner for fingerprinting.

4. Consular officers do not have access to criminal history record information regarding USPER petitioners and therefore are unable to determine whether a petitioner has a conviction for a specified offense against a minor that renders the petitioner ineligible under INA 204(a)(1)(A)(viii) or 204(a)(1)((i)(II) to file a petition. The limited extract information in CLASS downloaded from the FBI's National Crime Information Center relates solely to aliens, and INA 105 provides for the use of such information "for the purpose of determining whether or not a visa applicant or applicant for admission has a criminal history record indexed in any such file."

5. In the absence of access to information that is essential to the determination of whether a petitioner is eligible to file a petition for immigrant status in a family-based classification, consular officers are unable to take any action on an unadjudicated I-130 petition. Rather, posts must advise individuals who seek to file such a petition that they should submit it directly to the appropriate USCIS office. USCIS maintains an office locator page, based on place of residence, on its website at https://egov.immigration.gov/crisgwi...n=offices.type
&OfficeLocator.office_type=OS. In cases in which a post has already accepted an I-130 for filing but has not yet issued an immigrant visa, the consular officer must consider the petition "not clearly approvable" because of the inability to fulfill INA 204(a)(1)'s requirement for a determination of the petitioner's eligibility to file. Pursuant to 9 FAM 42.41 N4.2-3(d) and 8 CFR 204.1(e)(3), posts must forward all such I-130 petitions that petioners filed at post, with all supporting documents, to the appropriate USCIS office. To reiterate, consular officers are no longer authorized to accept or adjudicate I-130 petitions at post under any circumstances. 9 FAM Appendix N 200 is being revised accordingly. We are preparing press guidance, which posts will be able to access at http://intranet.ca.state.gov/PPAffairs/ppaffairs.htm.

6. We are requesting clarification from USCIS regarding the validity, for Adam Walsh Act criminal record check purposes, of the fingerprint clearance procedures at the time of I-600 processing that are specified in Reftel (SOP-21) and 9 FAM 42.21 N13.3(d), as well as the applicability of section 402 of the Adam Walsh Act to petitions for family-based immigrant status or K nonimmigrant status that were approved prior to the act's effective date. Further guidance will follow our receipt of the USCIS clarification.
7. Minimize considered.
RICE
BT
#7956

Okay, so I am a US citizen. I filed the I130 DCF in my husband's country (Albania). So, will the I-130 (which WAS approved) now go to Vienna (the USCIS office with jurisdiction over Albania or will it come to the states because that's where I, the petitioner live????

)[/quote]

Okay, so I am a US citizen. I filed the I130 DCF in my husband's country (Albania). So, will the I-130 (which WAS approved) now go to Vienna (the USCIS office with jurisdiction over Albania or will it come to the states because that's where I, the petitioner live????
[/quote]

Avoci - The Paris consulate told my husband that since I reside in the US, our file will be sent to the US. (If I was residing in Paris, our file would go to Rome)

Okay, so I am a US citizen. I filed the I130 DCF in my husband's country (Albania). So, will the I-130 (which WAS approved) now go to Vienna (the USCIS office with jurisdiction over Albania or will it come to the states because that's where I, the petitioner live????