Please help: I-130 approved super-fast! But what about my I-129F?

[daboyz 36]

Ok, I'm through beating you over the head. Of course your I-130 went to NVC. For the past several months even those people with both petitions approved the same day have both petitions sent to NVC. With the exception of about 15 months from November, 2006 to February or March, 2008 that's the way it has always been.

Your assumption that they should have seen that you have and I-129F on file is a fantasy.

Your I-130 will not proceed any further without input from you. It will just sit at NVC unless you respond to their correspondence. You've already been given the link to how to push it through within a few weeks. Once the petition leaves NVC, the timelines are the same. There's absolutely no reason to be confident you can even get your I-129F approved that fast.

You have the information you need to make a decision. It's yours to make. If you insist on stubbornly holding onto your initial expectations, you are quite likely to be severely disappointed in the result.

You had a good plan. A really good thing happened to that plan. Your I-130 got approved in 30 days. Enjoy it. You may well have a CR1 visa faster than you ever dreamed of having a K3.

Or, you could shoot yourself in the foot and take a year to get the K3.

You've touched upon a couple excellent points here that I have not been clear on, and I appreciate that.

First of all, I was under the impression that if an I-130 and I-129F were concurrently approved by USCIS, only one resulting case would be forwarded on to NVC. But as you indicated, that is apparently not the case. (They would still apparently be considered as two entirely separate and independent cases.)

So far, I have not received any correspondence from NVS, but I am curious about the following: If I initiate the processing of my I-130 at NVC, will that preclude/prevent the possible subsequent processing of my I-129F at NVC?

In other words, is there a point at which I will specifically have to choose between the processing of the I-130 or I-129F at NVC? Or can I just let both processes unfold at NVC and accept whichever is ultimately approved first?

My understanding of this, is that you can follow both paths. They have been approving the I-129F and I-130 at the same time. That didn't seem to happen in your case. Usually the K-3 will make it to the embassy first, because NVC really just forwards it there. What I have heard of people doing, is following both, make an interview date for the K-3. Hope the CR-1 makes it there before the K-3 interview date. Then you can ask to have the interview changed from K-3 to CR-1. In your case, it sounds like the K-3 (I-129F) has not been approved yet. I'm not sure if it will be. Hard to say. Since you don't have a notice of approval for the K-3 (I-129F), I would move forward as if you never filed it.

[BenAndNida 0]

You may continue to allow them to run independently until the I-130 arrives at a Conslulate abroad. At that point, the K3 is dead. I already explained this.

OK, thanks for the clarification on that issue. That is great.

[~Jackie~ 30]

As much as I appreciate the benefits of coming on the I130..I want the choice of k3 also. We got a touch today, so the K3 could pass right on past the I130 that is not even AT nvc yet!

I have all the shortcuts ready and can't use them without a case number.

jackie

[BenAndNida 0]

a lot of us here wish they were in ur shoes...do urself a favor and forget about K3....u r lucky enough to get a much superior process waiting for u...good luck!

Thank you for your kind words, but everybody please stop saying the I-130(CR-1) track is superior to I-129F(K-3). For my situation, it is not. (There are several reasons for this.)

[Y's_habibitk 2]

If the I-130 is complete and is going to be faster, then why the continued desire for I-129F for K-3?

Based upon the timelines shown on this site, I disagree with what you've written. (So, why do you say that?)

For example: The processing time at the NVC is much longer for a CR-1 than for a K-3.

Follow these steps here:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...p;#entry1984191

You can finish with NVC in less than 6 weeks. It is a much better visa. She can work almost right away. You wont have to pay Adjustment of Status later on. So it's cheaper as well. I have decided to go this route, even though it maight take an additional 30-45 days. You are already way ahead by having your I-130 approved so quickly. I would take advantage of that.

I would say the same. It sounds like you were approved way ahead of time, but Im sure its hard to be patient now that you've been approved. Whatever your reasons are for wanting the K3, its not an option now, so try to make the best of what you have in front of you. USCIS is "administratively closing" some K3's, so I think you are powerless at this point.

Try to think of the wait time you were prepared for vs the wait of the Cr-1 at NVC.

Good Luck in whatever you do

Lisa

[daboyz 36]

a lot of us here wish they were in ur shoes...do urself a favor and forget about K3....u r lucky enough to get a much superior process waiting for u...good luck!

Thank you for your kind words, but everybody please stop saying the I-130(CR-1) track is superior to I-129F(K-3). For my situation, it is not. (There are several reasons for this.)

ok then ignore the NVC correspondence for the I-130, and wait for your I-129F approval. I'm sure it'll be soon.

[pushbrk 12,570]

a lot of us here wish they were in ur shoes...do urself a favor and forget about K3....u r lucky enough to get a much superior process waiting for u...good luck!

Thank you for your kind words, but everybody please stop saying the I-130(CR-1) track is superior to I-129F(K-3). For my situation, it is not. (There are several reasons for this.)

I haven't said that and there are potential reasons I can think of, why the K3 is a better path. I already mentioned one. What are your reasons? Knowing them might change my recommendation.

[Garu 0]

You may continue to allow them to run independently until the I-130 arrives at a Conslulate abroad. At that point, the K3 is dead. I already explained this.

This seems to have been a difficult topic to discuss but it has been extremely helpful wiht lots of good and new information provided (for me at least). I have been very interested since I have both petitions pending and will eventually have to make a decision based on what USCIS does; and I do favor the K3 based on timing issues and ease of getting through NVC (I'm always afraid of RFEs that could delay the process or mail lost in transit, etc).

Thank you BenAndNida and pushbrk for your discussion.

While I can not recommend anyone a specific path to follow because we all have different reasons, the post from pushbrk above sealed the deal for me.

If the 130 and 129F get approved simultaneously or 129F gets approved first; then I will take the K3 path.

If the 130 gets approved by itself, I will start the CR1 process and hope the 129F gets approved quickly. The worst that can happen is to lose a few hundred dollars getting the 130 immigrant visa that might or might not be used.

Thanks again.

[BenAndNida 0]

I haven't said that and there are potential reasons I can think of, why the K3 is a better path. I already mentioned one. What are your reasons? Knowing them might change my recommendation.

I agree that you haven't, but several others have.

Here is an example of how CR-1 is less optimal for me than K-3, aside from the processing time:

I work as a contract software engineer at a major U.S. company. Due to a contract stipulation that is unique to this company and state, I can only work for one year at a time, and then I must take a mandatory break (during which I cannot work for any competing companies). It just so happens that I am on my required break right now. That would be fine, and no problem, since I am quite used to this cycle for the past 8 years.

However, here is how it impacts my CR-1/K-3 situation:

As far as I can see, the CR-1 process appears to require all employment documents at the front end (i.e., now), which is very inconvenient, as I am not permitted to work now.

In contrast, the K-3 process appears to require all employment documents at the back end (i.e., several months from now), which would be optimal, as I will be back at work then.

So, if I want to follow the CR-1 track, it appears that I will have to immediately locate a new job that does not compete with my usual long-term employer.

So, that is just one example of why CR-1 is much less optimal for me than K-3, aside from any considerations of processing time.

[pushbrk 12,570]

I haven't said that and there are potential reasons I can think of, why the K3 is a better path. I already mentioned one. What are your reasons? Knowing them might change my recommendation.

I agree that you haven't, but several others have.

Here is an example of how CR-1 is less optimal for me than K-3, aside from the processing time:

I work as a contract software engineer at a major U.S. company. Due to a contract stipulation that is unique to this company and state, I can only work for one year at a time, and then I must take a mandatory break (during which I cannot work for any competing companies). It just so happens that I am on my required break right now. That would be fine, and no problem, since I am quite used to this cycle for the past 8 years.

However, here is how it impacts my CR-1/K-3 situation:

As far as I can see, the CR-1 process appears to require all employment documents at the front end (i.e., now), which is very inconvenient, as I am not permitted to work now.

In contrast, the K-3 process appears to require all employment documents at the back end (i.e., several months from now), which would be optimal, as I will be back at work then.

So, if I want to follow the CR-1 track, it appears that I will have to immediately locate a new job that does not compete with my usual long-term employer.

So, that is just one example of why CR-1 is much less optimal for me than K-3, aside from any considerations of processing time.

That's a unique situation alright. Let's look a little deeper. Do your last three tax returns look good or is it only 2007 and 2005 that look good? Are your YTD 2008 earnings over the 125%? Do you have more than three times the income requirement in assets? For the I-864, you are likely to get by with a single 2007 tax return. If it looks good, no problem.

[BenAndNida 0]

That's a unique situation alright. Let's look a little deeper. Do your last three tax returns look good or is it only 2007 and 2005 that look good? Are your YTD 2008 earnings over the 125%? Do you have more than three times the income requirement in assets? For the I-864, you are likely to get by with a single 2007 tax return. If it looks good, no problem.

Yeah, I agree my circumstances are quite unique.

My income and assets should not be a problem. This is just a unique and unexpected timing situation for me.

Oh well, I'll just find a new job at a new company...

Thanks for all of your helpful comments and suggestions (and those of everybody else as well).

It's very poignant to imagine what the visa application process would be like without all of the amazing help and resources found at this site.

[daboyz 36]

I haven't said that and there are potential reasons I can think of, why the K3 is a better path. I already mentioned one. What are your reasons? Knowing them might change my recommendation.

I agree that you haven't, but several others have.

Here is an example of how CR-1 is less optimal for me than K-3, aside from the processing time:

I work as a contract software engineer at a major U.S. company. Due to a contract stipulation that is unique to this company and state, I can only work for one year at a time, and then I must take a mandatory break (during which I cannot work for any competing companies). It just so happens that I am on my required break right now. That would be fine, and no problem, since I am quite used to this cycle for the past 8 years.

However, here is how it impacts my CR-1/K-3 situation:

As far as I can see, the CR-1 process appears to require all employment documents at the front end (i.e., now), which is very inconvenient, as I am not permitted to work now.

In contrast, the K-3 process appears to require all employment documents at the back end (i.e., several months from now), which would be optimal, as I will be back at work then.

So, if I want to follow the CR-1 track, it appears that I will have to immediately locate a new job that does not compete with my usual long-term employer.

So, that is just one example of why CR-1 is much less optimal for me than K-3, aside from any considerations of processing time.

That's a unique situation alright. Let's look a little deeper. Do your last three tax returns look good or is it only 2007 and 2005 that look good? Are your YTD 2008 earnings over the 125%? Do you have more than three times the income requirement in assets? For the I-864, you are likely to get by with a single 2007 tax return. If it looks good, no problem.

Since I-864 was brought up. My 2007 tax returns do not meet the 125%. My 2006 and 2005 do meet the requirements, and I m already over the 125% for 2008. Will I have a problem? Or do i need a co-sponsor?

[Thai family 0]

Here is an example of how CR-1 is less optimal for me than K-3, aside from the processing time:

However, here is how it impacts my CR-1/K-3 situation:

As far as I can see, the CR-1 process appears to require all employment documents at the front end (i.e., now), which is very inconvenient, as I am not permitted to work now.

In contrast, the K-3 process appears to require all employment documents at the back end (i.e., several months from now), which would be optimal, as I will be back at work then.

Keep both options open if the USCIS and Dept of State will let you, as you never know how circumstances may change. Fine tune your affidavit of support, unearthing everything you can to prove that your wife won't become a public charge.

My kids have a K-3 and are wishing for a CR-1 partially because we realize we would all prefer to deal with the USCIS as little as possible, so as not to grow old any faster than necessary. Besides, there are much better uses for money than the AOS fee. The USCIS comes from a law-enforcement national security angle. The Dept. of State comes from a diplomatic national security angle. From everything I see and my limited experience, the NVC seems easier to deal with than the USCIS. Our reasons were primarily the same as yours, wanting to get her here quickly and employment related. The petitioner had more than adequate income and employment for 2008 and none for 2007. It's a big deal to ask someone to sign on for ten years as a co-sponsor for an immigrant visa, as no one knows what might happen in the next ten years. However, not having an immigrant visa can even make it a painful process to get a driver's license. Adjustment of status applications seem to be taking longer now, which delays the time to citizenship. My DIL likes to keep busy, and she has an opportunity for a corporate transfer, so waiting for an EAD will complicate things.

The 129-F and I-130 were approved simultaneously at the CSC and the I-130 was never sent to the NVC. We are trying to get it sent there, since she needs to stay in Thailand at least until the end of January, unless circumstances change again. It says on the notice they sent it there, but it never arrived. I am trying to hold them to their word, as it is a semi-legal document. Perhaps we should be content with the hand has been dealt and not mess with it. We did a list of pros and cons, and the CR-1 came out way ahead of the K-3. Hindsight is always better that foresight. The K-3 was provided for in the LIFE act of congress, as immigrant visas for spouses were taking so long to obtain in comparison to finance visas. If the USCIS approved all I-130s as quickly as yours, there would have not been a need for K-3s.

If you are not permitted to work right now, why not just go to Thailand to be with her? My son just returned from spending six wonderful weeks with his wife and would highly recommend it.

Thai Mom

My advice for this process: Keep all of your doors open

My advice for happy and long marriage: Keep your doors open only to your spouse

[archie07 0]

My K3 petition was sent to the foriegn embassy by nvc and my wife already had her visa interview appointment when I received the I864 fee bill for the I 130. I ignored the I130. We adjusted status from the K3 petition and my wife received her green card. Almost two years later I receive a letter from the nvc asking what I want to do with the I130. I checked the box saying we adjusted status from another petition and sent a copy of the green card. NVC sent me a letter back saying thier records indicate my wife adjusted status or is a citizen and they are returning the I130 to the USCIS. Next the USCIS sends me a letter saying they received the petitiion back from nvc with a request they review it. I'm curious to know if this has happened to anyone that went the K3 route? I thought the I 130 is put into record storage.. ??? Perhaps Pushbrk you may know???

[pushbrk 12,570]

My K3 petition was sent to the foriegn embassy by nvc and my wife already had her visa interview appointment when I received the I864 fee bill for the I 130. I ignored the I130. We adjusted status from the K3 petition and my wife received her green card. Almost two years later I receive a letter from the nvc asking what I want to do with the I130. I checked the box saying we adjusted status from another petition and sent a copy of the green card. NVC sent me a letter back saying thier records indicate my wife adjusted status or is a citizen and they are returning the I130 to the USCIS. Next the USCIS sends me a letter saying they received the petitiion back from nvc with a request they review it. I'm curious to know if this has happened to anyone that went the K3 route? I thought the I 130 is put into record storage.. ??? Perhaps Pushbrk you may know???

Sounds like a simple error to me. Just remind USCIS the beneficiary already has LPR status.