Expedite request denied, background check under way

[Dan_&_Juls 0]

After inquiring with USCIS a few days ago about the possibility of having my I-129F case expedited based on financial emergency, I was rejected. The email sent by USCIS informing me of the rejection said the following about my case status:

"...Until the background investigation is completed, we cannot move forward on your case. These background checks are required to be completed on all applicants who apply for the immigration benefit you are seeking. We will make every effort to make a decision on this case as soon as the background checks are complete."

Now, my question is to the nature of this background check. I informed USCIS of my past run-ins with the law--i.e. that I have a couple of misdemeanor marijuana possession charges as well as a misdemeanor simple assault charge--each of which date back to 2005 and prior. I have long since served the required probationary sentences, and have been without even a traffic ticket in years. I sent the USCIS certified documents from all of my local authorities. I believe that I was very thorough in my presentation of the facts concerning my background.

So, does anyone know if this deal with my criminal background is the reason for the postponement? Or could the statement above from USCIS include more than just criminal background--i.e. maybe the background of my relationship with Julia, my work background?

Quite simply, I am confounded as to why this case is taking so long to be approved. I see others all over Visa Journey who've received their NOA2 within two or three months, and I am now 6 months removed from my NOA1, and not a peep. Well, that is until yesterday when I received word that an expedite is not possible. I suppose I can be grateful that I heard that much!

Trusting my God and Savior to move....

[Tim/Mav 305]

After inquiring with USCIS a few days ago about the possibility of having my I-129F case expedited based on financial emergency, I was rejected. The email sent by USCIS informing me of the rejection said the following about my case status:

"...Until the background investigation is completed, we cannot move forward on your case. These background checks are required to be completed on all applicants who apply for the immigration benefit you are seeking. We will make every effort to make a decision on this case as soon as the background checks are complete."

Now, my question is to the nature of this background check. I informed USCIS of my past run-ins with the law--i.e. that I have a couple of misdemeanor marijuana possession charges as well as a misdemeanor simple assault charge--each of which date back to 2005 and prior. I have long since served the required probationary sentences, and have been without even a traffic ticket in years. I sent the USCIS certified documents from all of my local authorities. I believe that I was very thorough in my presentation of the facts concerning my background.

So, does anyone know if this deal with my criminal background is the reason for the postponement? Or could the statement above from USCIS include more than just criminal background--i.e. maybe the background of my relationship with Julia, my work background?

Quite simply, I am confounded as to why this case is taking so long to be approved. I see others all over Visa Journey who've received their NOA2 within two or three months, and I am now 6 months removed from my NOA1, and not a peep. Well, that is until yesterday when I received word that an expedite is not possible. I suppose I can be grateful that I heard that much!

Trusting my God and Savior to move....

You opened a can of Worms requesting an expedite when you knew your Criminal Background. Alcohol is Legal, Mary-Jane is Not. The Assault Charge is NOT Considered "Simple". And it was less than 7 years ago. All you can do is wait.. It's good you sent Certified Reports to help speed up the process as best as posible. Good Luck.

[pushbrk 14,167]

You opened a can of Worms requesting an expedite when you knew your Criminal Background. Alcohol is Legal, Mary-Jane is Not. The Assault Charge is NOT Considered "Simple". And it was less than 7 years ago. All you can do is wait.. It's good you sent Certified Reports to help speed up the process as best as posible. Good Luck.

UM...."Simple Assault" is the formal name for a charge in the criminal code, not a comment about the crime.

[Operator 1,927]

My opinion is that it's possible that if an applicants background check shows some issue that a more extensive check is required. It doesn't necessarily mean that the petition would be rejected only that it requires additional processing thereby taking more time.

Our petition took six months to be adjudicated, some go fast and some go slow. I would wait a couple of weeks and start hounding them again. You could contact your local US congress person.

Good luck!

[Tim/Mav 305]

UM...."Simple Assault" is the formal name for a charge in the criminal code, not a comment about the crime.

I'm not sure what that meant. Assualt IV and a conviction. The OP does not state if the Victim was a FEMALE or Former Spouse. We know thats CRITICLE. Throw alittle Good Smoke in for another Illegal Activity. The OP stated: He was truthful about these past convictions and disclosed them. So he just must wait.

[NoneYa 73]

I seem to have read somewhere that only the Adam Walsh act would deny you the right to petittion. All other charges would be documented and presented to the recipient to make sure they were formally aware of any thing that was in your background. I am no lawyer but I am certainly smarter some of them. I do not deem any of this information to be accurate.

[Tim/Mav 305]

I seem to have read somewhere that only the Adam Walsh act would deny you the right to petittion. All other charges would be documented and presented to the recipient to make sure they were formally aware of any thing that was in your background. I am no lawyer but I am certainly smarter some of them. I do not deem any of this information to be accurate.

The OP does not indicate a Minor. I see no indication of the Adam Walsh Act but, however, the Assualt is not explained by the OP.

[Operator 1,927]

You opened a can of Worms requesting an expedite when you knew your Criminal Background. Alcohol is Legal, Mary-Jane is Not. The Assault Charge is NOT Considered "Simple". And it was less than 7 years ago. All you can do is wait.. It's good you sent Certified Reports to help speed up the process as best as posible. Good Luck.

I don't think that the OP is suggesting the the assault charge was "simple". The charge was Simple Assault...as opposed to say Aggravated Assault. In most states its the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor.

[NoneYa 73]

I didn't mean to indicate he was dealing the Adam Walsh act. I know that is not involved here. I was trying to state that I think he is clear. It will just take some time for them to pull the criminal. Sorry if I mislead anyone.

[pushbrk 14,167]

The OP does not indicate a Minor. I see no indication of the Adam Walsh Act but, however, the Assualt is not explained by the OP.

Sure it was. He wrote, "misdemeanor simple assault charge". You misinterpreted but that's all the explanation needed. The disclosures and court records are sent in compliance with IMBRA and would not result in a denied petition, only potential delay in adjudication.

[NoneYa 73]

You can be charged with a 15 year second degree felony if you fart on an officer. So just be careful out there and know that you can't even breath on someone without facing arrest.

http://boingboing.net/2008/09/24/man-farts-at-officer.html

[Tim/Mav 305]

I don't think that the OP is suggesting the the assault charge was "simple". The charge was Simple Assault...as opposed to say Aggravated Assault. In most states its the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor.

Good thought ! The is a difference between a misdemeanor assault and a aggravated . Felony VS Misdemeanor. The OP stated simple assault (Whatever) VS Felony in which a Waivor would be required. The OP indicates to me from a simple post a misdemeanor but I'm guessing.

The Arrest and Conviction stand in the eyes of the laws.

[TracyTN 237]

Don't think I've ever seen an expedite request granted based on financial reasons. Military deployments or terminal illness of one of the parties involved are about the only expedites that are regularly granted.

[Persepolis 5]

So what is the rule of thumb if you have a misdemeanor on your record that is not any of the ones mentioned in the I-129F question. Should you mention it or not?

The I-129F only asks for CERTAIN types of convictions many of which don't apply to the average person (besides domestic violence).

So if you have 1 conviction for something that is not listed on there should you even mention it? Because technically they only ask if you have been convicted of any of the following crimes.

[TracyTN 237]

They only ask about specific crimes but they're checking everything. So why would you purposefully omit something you know they'll find anyway?