Why K-3s take longer than K-1s?

[rin and john 71]

In the past two months, I-129F's are being processed faster for spouses versus fiance(e)'s (by an average of 30 days). I went to the "Immigration Timelines", "visa display options", "view all visas", then sorted by 129F - NOA2 date. Downloaded the last 300 I-129f approvals listed. Eliminated 36 records (31 of 300 had RFE's, 3 had no NOA1 date listed, 1 had an "expedite request" noted, and one was over 300 days - statistically an "outlier"). Of the remaining 264 records receiving 129F NOA2's since May 1, 2008, K-3's averaged 83 days and K-1's averaged 113 days.

I can only assume the three IR-1/CR-1 filed a 129f to keep their options open to go for either the IR-1/CR-1 or K3. In effect these should be combined with the K-3 statistics.

Also, three individuals listed Texas. I added them into the California data, but it did not significantly change the statistics.

A huge difference exists between California and Vermont in how they are currently processing K-1's versus K-3's (K-1's avg 73 days at Vermont; 133 days at California. K-3's avg 130 days at Vermont; 73 days in California). So the real question is "Why do K-3's take longer at Vermont than K-1's?"

129F_NOA1_to_NOA2_table.htm

I can empathize with those "caught up" in last year's K-3 delay. But current processing is only better for a K-1 if you are going through Vermont.

That analysis is flawed, because you are basing your data on I-129F NOA2. I think most people with I-129F NOA1 in the last 6 months don't even have an NOA2 at Vermont. A better analysis, is to sample the last 6 months, look at K-3 for Vermont and California. Analyze what percentage of K-3 filers have an I-129F NOA2 in each service center. There's where you will find the large discrepancy.

For example, if Vermont approves 5 out of 100 I-129F in the last 6 months, and they average approval time is 60 days, by your analysis, the average approval time would be 60 days. What about the other 95 that don't have an NOA2?

I tried looking at it that way. That data is also skewed because a significant number of VJers enter a I-129F NOA1 date, then never update their timeline. So I looked at the "last updated" column and discarded anyone who had not updated since April 30th. I also discarded anyone who had a number of days for "I-129F date to present" of less than the average for their visa type and service center (otherwise someone who filed yesterday would show up as "1 day"). In doing this, I capture those without NOA2's that have waited longer than the average for their service center and visa type. The averages are different, but they remain directionally the same.

2008_129f_data.htm

I agree with Thai Mom, the bigger injustice is the "I-130 sent to I-130 NOA1" timing for those that filed between August 2007 and January 2008. Since April 1, 2008 this is averaging just under 9 days. A significant number of the 2008 I-129F NOA1's that are K-3 related are from individuals with "I-130 sent to I-130 NOA1" days ranging from 70 to 180 days. It would appear that has improved.

I logon to this website multiple times daily. My last update on my timeline is May 18. Reason for that, is there is nothing to update, ie NOA, touches. So you will have alot of people that haven't updated their timeline, because there is nothing to update. They are in a blackhole waiting for I-129F NOA2 from VSC. Not trying to be a pain. Just want to get it right. I wish I was in BKK picking up my wife rather than having this conversation. No offense ;-)

I know the feeling. If I can help you pass the time until you are on your way to BKK, then you're welcome.

And with a May 18th update, yours would have been included in the data. I'll admit, choosing a cutoff date for theupdate is arbitrary, but if you don't alot of bad data gets in. There are a significant number of records in the data I downloaded that updated their NOA1 date in January and have not updated (or even visited VJ) since that time. My methodology might have excluded a few keepers, but it did so to weed out a much higher percentage of meaningless data.

I went through a similar exercise in late 2006 when I was awaiting Rin's NOA2's. I only looked at 129f's filed within a month of ours. After a few months, I deleted those records where people were inactive on VJ. I even updated my spreadsheet based on posts made by other members (frequently people get approved, announce it in a forum, but never update their timeline). Not too difficult as I only tracked about 40 to 50 cases that had been filed the month preceding ours (and I had alot of free time without her here!). Her petition was actually approved within a few days of what I had forecasted. It's just much more difficult right now because the approval times are changing (went up last year and are coming down this year). Large shifts (or variability) in data will make accurate forecasting much more difficult.

John

[daboyz 36]

In the past two months, I-129F's are being processed faster for spouses versus fiance(e)'s (by an average of 30 days). I went to the "Immigration Timelines", "visa display options", "view all visas", then sorted by 129F - NOA2 date. Downloaded the last 300 I-129f approvals listed. Eliminated 36 records (31 of 300 had RFE's, 3 had no NOA1 date listed, 1 had an "expedite request" noted, and one was over 300 days - statistically an "outlier"). Of the remaining 264 records receiving 129F NOA2's since May 1, 2008, K-3's averaged 83 days and K-1's averaged 113 days.

I can only assume the three IR-1/CR-1 filed a 129f to keep their options open to go for either the IR-1/CR-1 or K3. In effect these should be combined with the K-3 statistics.

Also, three individuals listed Texas. I added them into the California data, but it did not significantly change the statistics.

A huge difference exists between California and Vermont in how they are currently processing K-1's versus K-3's (K-1's avg 73 days at Vermont; 133 days at California. K-3's avg 130 days at Vermont; 73 days in California). So the real question is "Why do K-3's take longer at Vermont than K-1's?"

129F_NOA1_to_NOA2_table.htm

I can empathize with those "caught up" in last year's K-3 delay. But current processing is only better for a K-1 if you are going through Vermont.

That analysis is flawed, because you are basing your data on I-129F NOA2. I think most people with I-129F NOA1 in the last 6 months don't even have an NOA2 at Vermont. A better analysis, is to sample the last 6 months, look at K-3 for Vermont and California. Analyze what percentage of K-3 filers have an I-129F NOA2 in each service center. There's where you will find the large discrepancy.

For example, if Vermont approves 5 out of 100 I-129F in the last 6 months, and they average approval time is 60 days, by your analysis, the average approval time would be 60 days. What about the other 95 that don't have an NOA2?

I tried looking at it that way. That data is also skewed because a significant number of VJers enter a I-129F NOA1 date, then never update their timeline. So I looked at the "last updated" column and discarded anyone who had not updated since April 30th. I also discarded anyone who had a number of days for "I-129F date to present" of less than the average for their visa type and service center (otherwise someone who filed yesterday would show up as "1 day"). In doing this, I capture those without NOA2's that have waited longer than the average for their service center and visa type. The averages are different, but they remain directionally the same.

2008_129f_data.htm

I agree with Thai Mom, the bigger injustice is the "I-130 sent to I-130 NOA1" timing for those that filed between August 2007 and January 2008. Since April 1, 2008 this is averaging just under 9 days. A significant number of the 2008 I-129F NOA1's that are K-3 related are from individuals with "I-130 sent to I-130 NOA1" days ranging from 70 to 180 days. It would appear that has improved.

I logon to this website multiple times daily. My last update on my timeline is May 18. Reason for that, is there is nothing to update, ie NOA, touches. So you will have alot of people that haven't updated their timeline, because there is nothing to update. They are in a blackhole waiting for I-129F NOA2 from VSC. Not trying to be a pain. Just want to get it right. I wish I was in BKK picking up my wife rather than having this conversation. No offense ;-)

I know the feeling. If I can help you pass the time until you are on your way to BKK, then you're welcome.

And with a May 18th update, yours would have been included in the data. I'll admit, choosing a cutoff date for theupdate is arbitrary, but if you don't alot of bad data gets in. There are a significant number of records in the data I downloaded that updated their NOA1 date in January and have not updated (or even visited VJ) since that time. My methodology might have excluded a few keepers, but it did so to weed out a much higher percentage of meaningless data.

I went through a similar exercise in late 2006 when I was awaiting Rin's NOA2's. I only looked at 129f's filed within a month of ours. After a few months, I deleted those records where people were inactive on VJ. I even updated my spreadsheet based on posts made by other members (frequently people get approved, announce it in a forum, but never update their timeline). Not too difficult as I only tracked about 40 to 50 cases that had been filed the month preceding ours (and I had alot of free time without her here!). Her petition was actually approved within a few days of what I had forecasted. It's just much more difficult right now because the approval times are changing (went up last year and are coming down this year). Large shifts (or variability) in data will make accurate forecasting much more difficult.

John

I know you are probably busy, but i wonder if you chose lets say 11/01/07 as your cutoff date. I would be curious to see the results of that. My guess is you would see a pretty large gap in approval times between the service centers.

[rin and john 71]

In the past two months, I-129F's are being processed faster for spouses versus fiance(e)'s (by an average of 30 days). I went to the "Immigration Timelines", "visa display options", "view all visas", then sorted by 129F - NOA2 date. Downloaded the last 300 I-129f approvals listed. Eliminated 36 records (31 of 300 had RFE's, 3 had no NOA1 date listed, 1 had an "expedite request" noted, and one was over 300 days - statistically an "outlier"). Of the remaining 264 records receiving 129F NOA2's since May 1, 2008, K-3's averaged 83 days and K-1's averaged 113 days.

I can only assume the three IR-1/CR-1 filed a 129f to keep their options open to go for either the IR-1/CR-1 or K3. In effect these should be combined with the K-3 statistics.

Also, three individuals listed Texas. I added them into the California data, but it did not significantly change the statistics.

A huge difference exists between California and Vermont in how they are currently processing K-1's versus K-3's (K-1's avg 73 days at Vermont; 133 days at California. K-3's avg 130 days at Vermont; 73 days in California). So the real question is "Why do K-3's take longer at Vermont than K-1's?"

129F_NOA1_to_NOA2_table.htm

I can empathize with those "caught up" in last year's K-3 delay. But current processing is only better for a K-1 if you are going through Vermont.

That analysis is flawed, because you are basing your data on I-129F NOA2. I think most people with I-129F NOA1 in the last 6 months don't even have an NOA2 at Vermont. A better analysis, is to sample the last 6 months, look at K-3 for Vermont and California. Analyze what percentage of K-3 filers have an I-129F NOA2 in each service center. There's where you will find the large discrepancy.

For example, if Vermont approves 5 out of 100 I-129F in the last 6 months, and they average approval time is 60 days, by your analysis, the average approval time would be 60 days. What about the other 95 that don't have an NOA2?

I tried looking at it that way. That data is also skewed because a significant number of VJers enter a I-129F NOA1 date, then never update their timeline. So I looked at the "last updated" column and discarded anyone who had not updated since April 30th. I also discarded anyone who had a number of days for "I-129F date to present" of less than the average for their visa type and service center (otherwise someone who filed yesterday would show up as "1 day"). In doing this, I capture those without NOA2's that have waited longer than the average for their service center and visa type. The averages are different, but they remain directionally the same.

2008_129f_data.htm

I agree with Thai Mom, the bigger injustice is the "I-130 sent to I-130 NOA1" timing for those that filed between August 2007 and January 2008. Since April 1, 2008 this is averaging just under 9 days. A significant number of the 2008 I-129F NOA1's that are K-3 related are from individuals with "I-130 sent to I-130 NOA1" days ranging from 70 to 180 days. It would appear that has improved.

I logon to this website multiple times daily. My last update on my timeline is May 18. Reason for that, is there is nothing to update, ie NOA, touches. So you will have alot of people that haven't updated their timeline, because there is nothing to update. They are in a blackhole waiting for I-129F NOA2 from VSC. Not trying to be a pain. Just want to get it right. I wish I was in BKK picking up my wife rather than having this conversation. No offense ;-)

I know the feeling. If I can help you pass the time until you are on your way to BKK, then you're welcome.

And with a May 18th update, yours would have been included in the data. I'll admit, choosing a cutoff date for theupdate is arbitrary, but if you don't alot of bad data gets in. There are a significant number of records in the data I downloaded that updated their NOA1 date in January and have not updated (or even visited VJ) since that time. My methodology might have excluded a few keepers, but it did so to weed out a much higher percentage of meaningless data.

I went through a similar exercise in late 2006 when I was awaiting Rin's NOA2's. I only looked at 129f's filed within a month of ours. After a few months, I deleted those records where people were inactive on VJ. I even updated my spreadsheet based on posts made by other members (frequently people get approved, announce it in a forum, but never update their timeline). Not too difficult as I only tracked about 40 to 50 cases that had been filed the month preceding ours (and I had alot of free time without her here!). Her petition was actually approved within a few days of what I had forecasted. It's just much more difficult right now because the approval times are changing (went up last year and are coming down this year). Large shifts (or variability) in data will make accurate forecasting much more difficult.

John

I know you are probably busy, but i wonder if you chose lets say 11/01/07 as your cutoff date. I would be curious to see the results of that. My guess is you would see a pretty large gap in approval times between the service centers.

The data already shows a large gap between service centers and visa type. K3's are taking twice as long at Vermont than they are at California. K1's are taking twice as long at California than they are at Vermont. So looking at everyone's data K1, K3, Vermont, California; and trying to use an average doesn't work (the distribution for either K1 or K3 would be bimodal).

Going back to Nov. 2007 would add lots of line items w/o approvals (many because they have not been updated). So yeah, processing time would go up. Assuming a proportional number of VJer's are slackers (whether they filed K1, K3, Vermont, or California) when it comes to updating their timeline, the relative gaps would be similar to the data I already posted. Go look at the "advanced view" for any visa category for "immigration timelines". Set the number of rows to display to 50 or 100. Now scroll through pages until you get to 2005 or 2006. You'll notice that in some instances more than 50% of the pages line items have not received an NOA2 yet. Doubtful. While a few might still be in process due to AR, the vast majority of the timelines have been abandoned by the owner.

I'll try to take a look tomorrow at K-3's from Vermont, since that is probably the data you are most interested in. Just briefly purusing it; it looks like they virtually stopped approving I-129F's for K3's for a few months, but have started up again in June.

[Cassie 8]

I'll try to take a look tomorrow at K-3's from Vermont, since that is probably the data you are most interested in. Just briefly purusing it; it looks like they virtually stopped approving I-129F's for K3's for a few months, but have started up again in June.

this would fall in line with what I observed regarding VSC's overall performance. I think there was barely a trickle of K-1s approved April / May, and there were no Removal of Conditions approved during May as far as I remember. But VSC has perked up a bit in June, particularly in this last week.

[DanielParul 50]

I-129 processing may have speeded up for K-3s, but the official directions still say to wait until you have the receipt from the I-130 to file the I-129F for the K-3. We waited from November 20th to Feb 8th for that receipt. Just the I-129F processing times can mislead. They need to change the directions so that the I-130 and I-129F can be filed together in the same package, with one not having to worry about them rejecting it. Then the I-129F should not be delayed by the I-130 processing. That's what the intent of the law is. Sending out the receipt notices in a timely fashion helps, but what is going to prevent them from shifting resources and having another major receipting delay? I think processing should be at least as fast for K-3s as they are for K-1s. K-3 couples have made a commitment that is legally binding, so have more to deal with than love (which is a wonderful thing, and I'm not negating it in anyway)!

8+ months from filing to interview

Thai Mom

Our took 7.5 months from filing till interview for K1 visa with an approved military expedite and the case was not stuck in AP or name checks.... There are cases for K1s and K3s that get processed quicker or slower than the others

[DanielParul 50]

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

[Ilya R. 0]

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

I dont think its silly, if you have a family with kids, they cant afford to wait for a year, while lovers can.

[A_I_S 0]

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

Right, because the questions on I130 form differ so much from questions on I129F form.

K3 is the same as K1: no EAD, have to go through AOS at the end and the only difference is multiple entry and duration. So why exactly should K3 take longer to process than K1? A 2 year visa without EAD is only good for a spouse to sit at home watching TV.

[Urge To Race 2]

So there is no difference in commitment when your engaged versus married? But your statement "a fiancee(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant" seems to be a direct contradiction. If they are just as committed, they are just as likely to AOS as a married person, so there should be no difference. If finace(e)s are less likely to AOS, then surely married is a bigger commitment.

Besides, getting 2 years and multiple entries doesn't do much. You still have to AOS. A k1 can travel too once they get AP.

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

[HannahP 119]

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

I dont think its silly, if you have a family with kids, they cant afford to wait for a year, while lovers can.

What if you file a k3 but don't have kids? Or what if you file a k1 but have kids? How many k3s actually /have/ kids or have lived together for any period of time? (We lived together for two years before filing a k1; not exactly "lovers.")

[daboyz 36]

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

I dont think its silly, if you have a family with kids, they cant afford to wait for a year, while lovers can.

What if you file a k3 but don't have kids? Or what if you file a k1 but have kids? How many k3s actually /have/ kids or have lived together for any period of time? (We lived together for two years before filing a k1; not exactly "lovers.")

I wonder if the people that work at USCIS read all this and laugh their ####### off?

[rebeccajo 14]

What do you think?

I wonder if the people that work at USCIS read all this and laugh their ####### off?

[rebeccajo 14]

Both visas give options for deciding whether or not the alien wishes to live permanently in the US.

The K3 is actually a great visa for a truly committed married couple because it allows the couple real time to get a real life established in the US. The multiple entries allow the alien 2 years and more than one trip to get their belongings over here. It allows for time to transfer a career. I've read of K3 couples wherein the alien traveled back and forth for quite some time in order to finish up work projects in their home country before the permanent move. And then the ability to file for EAD prior to adjustment is marvelous for getting a job quickly once here - it's a godsend to those who are being transferred internationally.

K1's can enter one time so they try to drag all their possessions in one trip. They wait longer to be able to work because their EAD is tied to their AOS petition. And even though they can travel back and forth once AP is granted those entries are as a parolee, which under color of law is a less favorable entry than a visa entry.

So there is no difference in commitment when your engaged versus married? But your statement "a fiancee(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant" seems to be a direct contradiction. If they are just as committed, they are just as likely to AOS as a married person, so there should be no difference. If finace(e)s are less likely to AOS, then surely married is a bigger commitment.

Besides, getting 2 years and multiple entries doesn't do much. You still have to AOS. A k1 can travel too once they get AP.

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

Edited June 27, 2008 by rebeccajo

[HannahP 119]

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

I dont think its silly, if you have a family with kids, they cant afford to wait for a year, while lovers can.

What if you file a k3 but don't have kids? Or what if you file a k1 but have kids? How many k3s actually /have/ kids or have lived together for any period of time? (We lived together for two years before filing a k1; not exactly "lovers.")

I wonder if the people that work at USCIS read all this and laugh their ####### off?

I'm just trying to get certain people to think "outside the box" in regards to what a family/couple really is!

[Ilya R. 0]

Complaining about which visa should be processed quicker is plain silly... Marriage does not have anything more to do with commitment and love than being engaged does. K1 visa holders only get single entry and 90 days once they enter the US. K3 is a multiple entry visa and valid for 2 yrs. Also being already married to a USC, its almost a certainty that the Alien spouse is an immigrant whereas a fiance(e) still has time to consider and hence an intending immigrant.

Maybe a reason for USCIS to take more time processing K3s...

I dont think its silly, if you have a family with kids, they cant afford to wait for a year, while lovers can.

What if you file a k3 but don't have kids? Or what if you file a k1 but have kids? How many k3s actually /have/ kids or have lived together for any period of time? (We lived together for two years before filing a k1; not exactly "lovers.")

I wonder if the people that work at USCIS read all this and laugh their ####### off?

I'm just trying to get certain people to think "outside the box" in regards to what a family/couple really is!

I think most people who are married know what it is like to be engaged..... everyone who is married has been through it.