How many people get AoS interview waived?

[rebeccajo 14]

It doesn't matter what we THINK or what we FEEL about this question.

The question was asked and we have the memo from USCIS which explains transfers are based upon caseload. To conjecture does other readers a disservice.

Insofar as those adjusting from the within the country - the submitted file for that type of adjustment likely contains NO information regarding the bonafide intent of the marriage. An adjustment petition based upon a previously filed K visa does contain consular notes regarding bonafide intent. Thus the interview can be waived - the box on the adjudicator's checklist can be ticked off.

[Krikit 1,163]

It doesn't matter what we THINK or what we FEEL about this question.

The question was asked and we have the memo from USCIS which explains transfers are based upon caseload. To conjecture does other readers a disservice.

Insofar as those adjusting from the within the country - the submitted file for that type of adjustment likely contains NO information regarding the bonafide intent of the marriage. An adjustment petition based upon a previously filed K visa does contain consular notes regarding bonafide intent. Thus the interview can be waived - the box on the adjudicator's checklist can be ticked off.

You mean I'm NOT special?

[rebeccajo 14]

It doesn't matter what we THINK or what we FEEL about this question.

The question was asked and we have the memo from USCIS which explains transfers are based upon caseload. To conjecture does other readers a disservice.

Insofar as those adjusting from the within the country - the submitted file for that type of adjustment likely contains NO information regarding the bonafide intent of the marriage. An adjustment petition based upon a previously filed K visa does contain consular notes regarding bonafide intent. Thus the interview can be waived - the box on the adjudicator's checklist can be ticked off.

You mean I'm NOT special?

LOL!

Of course you are!

[athena_ny 1]

It doesn't matter what we THINK or what we FEEL about this question.

The question was asked and we have the memo from USCIS which explains transfers are based upon caseload. To conjecture does other readers a disservice.

Insofar as those adjusting from the within the country - the submitted file for that type of adjustment likely contains NO information regarding the bonafide intent of the marriage. An adjustment petition based upon a previously filed K visa does contain consular notes regarding bonafide intent. Thus the interview can be waived - the box on the adjudicator's checklist can be ticked off.

Since early last year, the I-130 has proof of bonafide marriage requirements. Still aren't seeing many transfers for this type of adjustment.

And while conjecturing may do others a disservice, I do not believe USCIS has ever been straightforward with anyone. Everyone would serve themselves well if they stop conjecturing if THEY will or will not have an interview...but that's just me.

[rebeccajo 14]

It doesn't matter what we THINK or what we FEEL about this question.

The question was asked and we have the memo from USCIS which explains transfers are based upon caseload. To conjecture does other readers a disservice.

Insofar as those adjusting from the within the country - the submitted file for that type of adjustment likely contains NO information regarding the bonafide intent of the marriage. An adjustment petition based upon a previously filed K visa does contain consular notes regarding bonafide intent. Thus the interview can be waived - the box on the adjudicator's checklist can be ticked off.

Since early last year, the I-130 has proof of bonafide marriage requirements. Still aren't seeing many transfers for this type of adjustment.

And while conjecturing may do others a disservice, I do not believe USCIS has ever been straightforward with anyone. Everyone would serve themselves well if they stop conjecturing if THEY will or will not have an interview...but that's just me.

Everyone would serve themselves well if they would stop trying to 'guess' what the criteria might be for being approved without interview. And that was the question - what is the criteria and what does it take.

There is CLEAR anecdotal evidence within this community that the immigrants country of origin is not a factor; that prior marriages is not a factor; that having income over the minimum acceptable levels is not a factor; that withholding paper proof of the relationship within the I485 packet is not a factor.

USCIS may not always tell be 'straightforward' with us. But the evidence clearly supports the statement within the memo.

And yes, I am being a bit 'dog with bone'-ish on this one. This discussion gets under my skin everytime I see it. It's right up there (personally for me) with other discussions on this board that try to 'pigeon hole' people. Like namecheck, who gets caught, and why.

Edited December 18, 2007 by rebeccajo

[athena_ny 1]

It doesn't matter what we THINK or what we FEEL about this question.

The question was asked and we have the memo from USCIS which explains transfers are based upon caseload. To conjecture does other readers a disservice.

Insofar as those adjusting from the within the country - the submitted file for that type of adjustment likely contains NO information regarding the bonafide intent of the marriage. An adjustment petition based upon a previously filed K visa does contain consular notes regarding bonafide intent. Thus the interview can be waived - the box on the adjudicator's checklist can be ticked off.

Since early last year, the I-130 has proof of bonafide marriage requirements. Still aren't seeing many transfers for this type of adjustment.

And while conjecturing may do others a disservice, I do not believe USCIS has ever been straightforward with anyone. Everyone would serve themselves well if they stop conjecturing if THEY will or will not have an interview...but that's just me.

Everyone would serve themselves well if they would stop trying to 'guess' what the criteria might be for being approved without interview. And that was the question - what is the criteria and what does it take.

There is CLEAR anecdotal evidence within this community that the immigrants country of origin is not a factor; that prior marriages is not a factor; that having income over the minimum acceptable levels is not a factor; that withholding paper proof of the relationship within the I485 packet is not a factor.

USCIS may not always tell be 'straightforward' with us. But the evidence clearly supports the statement within the memo.

And yes, I am being a bit 'dog with bone'-ish on this one. This discussion gets under my skin everytime I see it. It's right up there (personally for me) with other discussions on this board that try to 'pigeon hole' people. Like namecheck, who gets caught, and why.

No, on the things you list, I totally agree ... I'm just saying that I've yet to see a considerable amount of people filing with I-130 have their interviews waived, so it MAY have something to do with it. That other ####### is just #######.

But the 800 "WILL MY INTERVIEW BE WAIVED?!?!" posts do get tiresome. Truth is that with USCIS ... YOU NEVER KNOW. And to guess if you'll have an interview or not or if you'll get approved quickly or have a long wait is just time wasted.

So maybe we should just stop talking about it

[rebeccajo 14]

Hahahaha!

At the end of the day, what difference does it make if you DO get interviewed?

I mean, we were. On a 'discomfort' scale, I would compare it with a job interview. On the VERY plus side of it, at least we were told to our faces we were stuck in namecheck. Transferred adjustees whose cases take 'a long time' (whatever that means) are left to twist in the wind with no knowledge as to why they are delayed.

[athena_ny 1]

Hahahaha!

At the end of the day, what difference does it make if you DO get interviewed?

I mean, we were. On a 'discomfort' scale, I would compare it with a job interview. On the VERY plus side of it, at least we were told to our faces we were stuck in namecheck. Transferred adjustees whose cases take 'a long time' (whatever that means) are left to twist in the wind with no knowledge as to why they are delayed.

Psh, I don't think it makes a difference. I was fraught with worry before our interview, but I was worried about the overstay and his tourist visa situation and the fact we had so little evidence because we'd been married less than 5 months. What we had was good enough for them, and once we were in the room it wasn't that awful.

It's the waiting before/after interviews that is the worst part. I'd think the interview is pretty minor when looking at situation's like your's and LaL's.

[rebeccajo 14]

Hahahaha!

At the end of the day, what difference does it make if you DO get interviewed?

I mean, we were. On a 'discomfort' scale, I would compare it with a job interview. On the VERY plus side of it, at least we were told to our faces we were stuck in namecheck. Transferred adjustees whose cases take 'a long time' (whatever that means) are left to twist in the wind with no knowledge as to why they are delayed.

Psh, I don't think it makes a difference. I was fraught with worry before our interview, but I was worried about the overstay and his tourist visa situation and the fact we had so little evidence because we'd been married less than 5 months. What we had was good enough for them, and once we were in the room it wasn't that awful.

It's the waiting before/after interviews that is the worst part. I'd think the interview is pretty minor when looking at situation's like your's and LaL's.

You know I thought my situation was pretty awful too - when going through it. And I still think it's shameful that people are 'security checked' for the protection of our nation but these checks take - how long? Makes no sense to me. But....

Whenever I have spoken to politicos about namecheck, they ask for our story. I tell them we were stuck 17 months and their eyes start to glaze over. I am then usually told about how they have a case for so-and-so that's going on four years, or another that's been for five.

So yeah, there's always somebody worse off than yourself when it comes to this stuff. My Mama told me that when I was a kid - she meant it to apply to real life and being a petitioner in the service is no different from anything else we do.

Our situation was bad. Lal's is worse. There are others worse off than she and hubster.

It's always good to count your blessings. Especially this time of year.

[Jesse and Hema 2]

I guess in the end it doesn't make much difference, but thanks to everyone for their replies to this thread

[F2A 7]

Is there any recent case of Interview waved ?

[KayDeeCee 4,892]

Is there any recent case of Interview waved ?

There is a 50/50 random chance to have an interview or not. This only applies to those adjusting from a K-1. Everyone else will definitely have an interview.