"supervisory review:" what next?

[ninjarocket 1]

Each time I enquire with USCIS about my long delayed case I get a different answer and learn a new USCIS -related term.

Yesterday a lady at the immigration office at my work got an email response from her contact at the local USCIS office (though not at CSC where my case is pending). Does anyone out there know what supervisory review is??? The letter I received from my senator (included on another post http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...owtopic=132761) seemed more sinister.

It reads "Unfortunately, I can only get limited information for these petitions since they are processed by the California Service Center. I did notice that Dr Harrison has filed multiple inquiries on both applications and I do not know the final outcome of the inquiries. However, it appears that he is filing for a K3 process, which means that he will also need consular processing.

His spouse has been assigned a file A........, both of the Petitions listed below have been merged in this file, the file is currently with Supervisory review as of 6-16-2008. This may mean that they are in the review process. Unfortunately, some Posts take longer than others…

Hope this helps some…."

[ninjarocket 1]

I'm hoping that somebody out there has heard of this term and could help me to find out what it might imply.

Each time I enquire with USCIS about my long delayed case I get a different answer and learn a new USCIS -related term.

Yesterday a lady at the immigration office at my work got an email response from her contact at the local USCIS office (though not at CSC where my case is pending). Does anyone out there know what supervisory review is??? The letter I received from my senator (included on another post http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...owtopic=132761) seemed more sinister.

It reads "Unfortunately, I can only get limited information for these petitions since they are processed by the California Service Center. I did notice that Dr Harrison has filed multiple inquiries on both applications and I do not know the final outcome of the inquiries. However, it appears that he is filing for a K3 process, which means that he will also need consular processing.

His spouse has been assigned a file A........, both of the Petitions listed below have been merged in this file, the file is currently with Supervisory review as of 6-16-2008. This may mean that they are in the review process. Unfortunately, some Posts take longer than others…

Hope this helps some…."

[rebeccajo 14]

The term refers to a case wherein a decision has been rendered, but the adjudicator is looking for a supervisor to confirm the decision.

[Beth/ Paris Heart 2]

I'm hoping that somebody out there has heard of this term and could help me to find out what it might imply.

Each time I enquire with USCIS about my long delayed case I get a different answer and learn a new USCIS -related term.

Yesterday a lady at the immigration office at my work got an email response from her contact at the local USCIS office (though not at CSC where my case is pending). Does anyone out there know what supervisory review is??? The letter I received from my senator (included on another post http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...owtopic=132761) seemed more sinister.

It reads "Unfortunately, I can only get limited information for these petitions since they are processed by the California Service Center. I did notice that Dr Harrison has filed multiple inquiries on both applications and I do not know the final outcome of the inquiries. However, it appears that he is filing for a K3 process, which means that he will also need consular processing.

His spouse has been assigned a file A........, both of the Petitions listed below have been merged in this file, the file is currently with Supervisory review as of 6-16-2008. This may mean that they are in the review process. Unfortunately, some Posts take longer than others…

Hope this helps some…."

Ninjarocket,

I believe it means, USCIS dont know nothing, suppose to mean a supervisor is reviewing your case maybe do to a non- experience officer got your case and dont know what to do. Or its just another stall tatic. Im so sorry this is happening. Good luck, I hope this misery co es to a end to you and your loved one very soon.

Paris Heart

[ninjarocket 1]

hi rebeccajo

I hope you're right. At this point, any decision would be something. Even if it's an intent to deny, at least it would give me something to act on.

I'm guessing the A # is created relatively early in the review process and refers only to my spouse's biographical details being entered into a computer database somewhere.

It seems from the tone of the email that they're generally unhappy about multiple enquiries I made. Ironically, it seems that a letter to the ombudsman or a writ of mandamus is never be considered seriously unless one makes multiple attempts to enquire about ones case.

One other thing. The lady at my work forwarded my email to the person at USCIS in which I was ranting on about quitting my job and being suspected of visa fraud or terrorism etc.. Do you think it's possible that this email would end up being added to the file containing my petitions?

The term refers to a case wherein a decision has been rendered, but the adjudicator is looking for a supervisor to confirm the decision.

[NicoleX08 1]

I wish you luck ninjarocket. I hope that it will result in an approval soon!

[rebeccajo 14]

hi rebeccajo

I hope you're right. At this point, any decision would be something. Even if it's an intent to deny, at least it would give me something to act on.

I'm guessing the A # is created relatively early in the review process and refers only to my spouse's biographical details being entered into a computer database somewhere.

It seems from the tone of the email that they're generally unhappy about multiple enquiries I made. Ironically, it seems that a letter to the ombudsman or a writ of mandamus is never be considered seriously unless one makes multiple attempts to enquire about ones case.

One other thing. The lady at my work forwarded my email to the person at USCIS in which I was ranting on about quitting my job and being suspected of visa fraud or terrorism etc.. Do you think it's possible that this email would end up being added to the file containing my petitions?

The term refers to a case wherein a decision has been rendered, but the adjudicator is looking for a supervisor to confirm the decision.

I don't see any tone in the email which says they are unhappy with the number of inquiries. Your file apparently indicates inquiries; it's a fact in your case and they have so noted it.

A mandamus filing will be fruitless if you haven't been pro-active about your case. The purpose of a mandamus is to ask for a ruling in your favor because you've exhausted every other means available to you to. You have done the right thing in making your inquiries. I'd not idly note that all inquiries should be made in a professional manner.

You'd have to explain more to me about this apparently malicious forward of an email to USCIS. Whether or not such an occurence is impacting your case depends firstly on whether or not it has even been connected to the case. Appeals by citizens to USCIS and ICE are investigated but the government also realizes that many are either ravings or malicious. Your line of work and any government security clearances you possess can cause such a report to be taken more seriously; likewise if your beneficiary works in any sensitive areas of their country's infrastructure. Frequent travel to nations unfriendly to the US by either the petitioner or beneficiary may be investigated. So will involvement in political oranizations.

Edited June 21, 2008 by rebeccajo

[ninjarocket 1]

On searching the web, it seems that a Supervisory Review is the required whenever an adjudicator makes an adverse decision such as a Notice of Intended Denial, since a petition cannot be denied without such a review. So the news is bad, but at least they should soon let me know, right? I just hope that the adjudicator made a mistake that is caught during the review.

hi rebeccajo

I hope you're right. At this point, any decision would be something. Even if it's an intent to deny, at least it would give me something to act on.

I'm guessing the A # is created relatively early in the review process and refers only to my spouse's biographical details being entered into a computer database somewhere.

It seems from the tone of the email that they're generally unhappy about multiple enquiries I made. Ironically, it seems that a letter to the ombudsman or a writ of mandamus is never be considered seriously unless one makes multiple attempts to enquire about ones case.

One other thing. The lady at my work forwarded my email to the person at USCIS in which I was ranting on about quitting my job and being suspected of visa fraud or terrorism etc.. Do you think it's possible that this email would end up being added to the file containing my petitions?

The term refers to a case wherein a decision has been rendered, but the adjudicator is looking for a supervisor to confirm the decision.

I don't see any tone in the email which says they are unhappy with the number of inquiries. Your file apparently indicates inquiries; it's a fact in your case and they have so noted it.

A mandamus filing will be fruitless if you haven't been pro-active about your case. The purpose of a mandamus is to ask for a ruling in your favor because you've exhausted every other means available to you to. You have done the right thing in making your inquiries. I'd not idly note that all inquiries should be made in a professional manner.

You'd have to explain more to me about this apparently malicious forward of an email to USCIS. Whether or not such an occurence is impacting your case depends firstly on whether or not it has even been connected to the case. Appeals by citizens to USCIS and ICE are investigated but the government also realizes that many are either ravings or malicious. Your line of work and any government security clearances you possess can cause such a report to be taken more seriously; likewise if your beneficiary works in any sensitive areas of their country's infrastructure. Frequent travel to nations unfriendly to the US by either the petitioner or beneficiary may be investigated. So will involvement in political oranizations.

[rebeccajo 14]

ninjarocket -

I'd like for you to show us your links which indicate supervisory review is only for a NOID. I read links on USCIS that indicated it is used for many things.

[ninjarocket 1]

Here some examples of links I found. In the current context of a pending I-130, it seems to be the prelude to a NOID, otherwise the officer would adjudicate the case without supervisory review being necessary.

ninjarocket -

I'd like for you to show us your links which indicate supervisory review is only for a NOID. I read links on USCIS that indicated it is used for many things.

http://ashwinsharma.com/2006/03/30/gregory...plications.aspx

http://guiadoimigrante.com/services/AFMCha...10-Overview.pdf

http://www.shusterman.com/pdf/rfememo21605.pdf

[rebeccajo 14]

ninjarocket -

I've only had time to skim your resources, but please note Page 14 within the second link, wherein the procedure for a denial is explained, including the fact that the Service Center director must sign off on the denial (which would not at all fall under the category of 'supervisory review').

I realize you have cause for concern but the majority of cases are not denied at this level. Supervisory review is not the 'kiss of death' as I'm also certain your research has yielded many other situations wherein supervisory review is necessary, including an adjudicator who is simply unsure of a fact within the case.

Without knowing more about your case, I can't really see what makes you think there would be a denial. It is of course up to you what you disclose to us in a public forum.

[ninjarocket 1]

Well, I'm worried about silly mistakes I might have made which may cause my application to be suspected of visa fraud. I didn't know about visajourney.com when I filed my petitions. If I had known, I probably could have done a better job. I hope I get an intelligent officer who will see that we have a genuine relationship. Hence, the supervisory review is really worrying me.

If I have an opportunity to provide more evidence with a NOID, I could provide (1) millions of email printouts (only the mail boxes were included in my original petition which already amounted to many many pages), (2) 2007 joint tax return (although it still hasn't been processed, nor have I received the ITIN for my wife), (3) proof of 4 additional trips to be with my wife since filing (plus various excursions within her home country plus loads of new photos), (5) almost daily phone calls (even with Vonage I'm spending $100-$200 per month), (6) proof of continuing wire transfers in my bank statements (I'm paying for her to go through college)

Each time I enquire with USCIS about my long delayed case I get a different answer and learn a new USCIS -related term.

Yesterday a lady at the immigration office at my work got an email response from her contact at the local USCIS office (though not at CSC where my case is pending). Does anyone out there know what supervisory review is??? The letter I received from my senator (included on another post http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...owtopic=132761) seemed more sinister.

It reads "Unfortunately, I can only get limited information for these petitions since they are processed by the California Service Center. I did notice that Dr Harrison has filed multiple inquiries on both applications and I do not know the final outcome of the inquiries. However, it appears that he is filing for a K3 process, which means that he will also need consular processing.

His spouse has been assigned a file A........, both of the Petitions listed below have been merged in this file, the file is currently with Supervisory review as of 6-16-2008. This may mean that they are in the review process. Unfortunately, some Posts take longer than others…

Hope this helps some…."

[rebeccajo 14]

ninjarocket -

I'm worried about you. Do you just have a normal case of petitioner 'heebie-jeebies' or do you really think you haven't proven a legitimate relationship? Remember, your wife really has to prove the bonafides at interview. If you've got enough stuff in your file to show you are legally married, that will probably get you a NOA2.

Getting a NOA2 isn't hard. Most chimpanzees can do it. Really. This isn't the normal 'denial' stage of a case. Adjudicators in service centers are mostly looking to see if the forms are filled out properly, if the petitioner is a USC, if the couple is legally married (or in the case of K1's - free to marry) and for a CR1, they will be checking the financials.

Your case has taken a long time and I can understand you being concerned. I would be concerned also if I learned I was in supervisory review. Is there any legitimate reason you can think of which could have caused the case to go to review - or to cause you a denial?

[pushbrk 12,243]

ninjarocket -

Is there any legitimate reason you can think of which could have caused the case to go to review - or to cause you a denial?

Of course it's up to you what you share but just what "silly mistakes" are concerning you?

[ninjarocket 1]

rebeccajo, thanks for your concerns.

I'm sure I have plenty of evidence for a legitimate relationship, and could provide an abundance of such if asked. My worry is whether USCIS overrule such evidence with something else they consider to be suspect.

I guess the issue is question 21 on the I-130. I took it to be "requirement" that husband and wife have to have lived together in order to file a I-130 (although I since have understood that it is not for recently married couples). Of course, we are living together the whole time each time I visit, although my visits are typically only 10-12 days long, limited by the amount of vacation time I accrue. I'm worried that USCIS will consider this is inadequate or even as a lie given that the time that we actually spend together is limited.

The address I entered into question 21 is also her official residence, as of a few days after our marriage. We cosigned a tenancy agreement, etc. However, I since discovered that my wife's name is her married name (including my name) is used on the tenancy agreement, whereas she officially hasn't started using this yet. I entered only her maiden name on question 1 of part C and entered "none" for question 11!

We decided after marriage just to use her maiden name for the I-130 application to avoid her having to renew all of her documentation. I didn't notice that the married name had been used in the tenancy agreement. Maybe the lawyer that handled the tenancy agreement just assumed her name to be that, or perhaps my wife was so excited to be married that she immediately used that name.

I'm worried that USCIS will associate the above with visa fraud.

It would be a pity if I had to give up my career in order to be with my wife in her country. I'm not even sure I would have sufficient income if I were to do that, what with being too young to collect my pension (which won't have amounted to much anyway). I might think like a chimpanzee sometimes, but I'm also an educated person (i.e. Ph.D., lots of high impact scientific publications, prestigious awards for my work, etc..). I never thought it would come to this.

ninjarocket -

I'm worried about you. Do you just have a normal case of petitioner 'heebie-jeebies' or do you really think you haven't proven a legitimate relationship? Remember, your wife really has to prove the bonafides at interview. If you've got enough stuff in your file to show you are legally married, that will probably get you a NOA2.

Getting a NOA2 isn't hard. Most chimpanzees can do it. Really. This isn't the normal 'denial' stage of a case. Adjudicators in service centers are mostly looking to see if the forms are filled out properly, if the petitioner is a USC, if the couple is legally married (or in the case of K1's - free to marry) and for a CR1, they will be checking the financials.

Your case has taken a long time and I can understand you being concerned. I would be concerned also if I learned I was in supervisory review. Is there any legitimate reason you can think of which could have caused the case to go to review - or to cause you a denial?