CSPA and DS5535 (split)

[SPP1969 5]

Okay, so I married to an American citizen. 

We met in 2010, spent 7 years in a long distance relationship, got married in 2017, and shortly after she moved up to live with me in Edmonton.

She has 4 older children from her first marriage and I have 2 younger daughters from my first marriage.

We made a deal when she moved up that when my daughters were all done with school, we would move back to the USA.

My youngest daughter finished school in June of 2022.

Knowing that the whole process would take a while we started the immigration process in June of 2021.

In October of 2021, my oldest daughter (who was 20 at the time and her 21st birthday was in November of 2021) decided she wanted to move with us so we submitted the paperwork to add her petition.

We received our approvals in March of 2022.

Other than taking a long time, the process has been a fairly smooth one.

We did our medical exams in December of 2022 and had our interviews on January 4th of 2023 at the consulate in Montreal.

They asked me 3 questions and asked my daughter 2 questions.

They rejected my wife's divorce documents from her previous marriages saying they were not certified copies or originals and told me I got the wrong criminal background check.

They also told me I would receive an email with a bunch of supplemental questions.

They informed us that our cases were going into administrative processing.

They kept my daughter's passport, but sent me home with mine.

We sent the replacement documents and my passport to the consulate 3 weeks later.

The email with the supplemental questions arrived on January 30th and the answers were returned the same day.

My passport was sent back to me a few days later.

As of today it's been 109 days with 3 updates on the CEAC website.

I have prompted the consulate for an update on our cases twice with the standard 2 page email coming back from the email service that basically says you have to be patient and wait.

On Monday we had a zoom session with a lady on the Josh Goldstein legal team to discuss a WOM suit.

I have been going back and forth via email with her all week.

She told me that they can help me with a Mandamus suit, but they can't help my daughter.

She told me that because my daughter turned 21 during the process she is no longer being treated as a child, that her application is now in the F1 category, and will not be current for several years.

This didn't make sense to me.

If that is the case why does the approval notice still say she’s classified as an unmarried child under the age of 21?

Why did they have her do her medical now?

Why did they have her come for an interview if she’s still 5 or so years away from being eligible for approval?

Why didn’t they inform us of this?

Why did they keep her passport in Montreal? 

Did they think she wouldn’t need it for the next 5 or so years?

So I dug into it.

Her CEAC account still says her Visa is an F11 which comes up on Google as the unmarried son or daughter of a U.S. citizen.

I also dug into USCIS Child Status Protection Act which states:

 

 

C. Immediate Relatives

 

1. Applicability

In order to qualify for CSPA:

·         The adjustment applicant must have had one of the following approved or pending on or after the CSPA’s effective date: a qualifying Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130), Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (Form I-360), or Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485);

·         The applicant must have been under the age of 21 and unmarried at the time the qualifying Form I-130 or Form I-360 was filed; and

·         The applicant must remain unmarried.

If the petitioner of a pending or approved IR spousal petition dies, the spousal Form I-130 automatically converts to a widow(er)’s Form I-360.^[12] The widow(er)’s child(ren), if any, must be under the age of 21 and unmarried at the time of the petitioner’s death to be classified as derivatives on the automatically converted Form I-360, regardless of whether the child(ren) had a separate pending or approved Form I-130 at the time of the petitioner’s death.^[13]

Similarly, the beneficiary of a pending or approved spousal Form I-130 may subsequently file a VAWA-based Form I-360. In order to include his or her child(ren) on the self-petition as derivatives, the child(ren) must be under the age of 21 and unmarried when the Form I-360 is filed, regardless of whether the child(ren) had a separate or approved Form I-130 when the Form I-360 was filed.^[14]

2. Determining Child Status Protection Act Age

 

For IRs and IR self-petitioners or derivatives under VAWA, a child’s age is frozen on the date the Form I-130 or Form I-360 is filed, respectively. For derivatives of widow(er)s, a child’s age is frozen on the date the Form I-360 is filed or the spousal Form I-130 is automatically converted to a widow(er)’s Form I-360 (in other words, the date of the petitioner’s death). If the adjustment applicant was under the age of 21 at the time the petition was filed or automatically converted, the applicant is eligible for CSPA and will not age out.

 

My daughter was under 21 and unmarried at the time we filed the I-130 for her and remains unmarried today so should she not be protected by this law?

I put all these questions to the lady at Josh Goldstein's law firm and haven't heard back yet.

Something doesn't add up to me.

Am I missing something or is she mistaken?

I'm thinking of speaking to another law firm today about all of this.

I have seen the Hacking firm mentioned and PIC.

Hacking was easy to find.

Who or what is PIC?

 

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by SPP1969

[Chancy 6,233]

53 minutes ago, SPP1969 said:

My daughter was under 21 and unmarried at the time we filed the I-130 for her and remains unmarried today so should she not be protected by this law?

 

Just to be clear -- was your daughter under 21 yo on the receipt date listed on the I-130 receipt notice?  If so, your daughter's case should be IR2 visa category, regardless of how long the case is in AP.  Per CSPA, for IR2 cases, the beneficiary's CSPA age is frozen on the date of I-130 filing.  IR2 beneficiaries would never age out, as long as they remain unmarried.  If the law firm staff don't even know that, I suggest you drop them in favor of a more knowledgeable firm.

 

[SPP1969 5]

21 minutes ago, Chancy said:

 

Just to be clear -- was your daughter under 21 yo on the receipt date listed on the I-130 receipt notice?  If so, your daughter's case should be IR2 visa category, regardless of how long the case is in AP.  Per CSPA, for IR2 cases, the beneficiary's CSPA age is frozen on the date of I-130 filing.  IR2 beneficiaries would never age out, as long as they remain unmarried.  If the law firm staff don't even know that, I suggest you drop them in favor of a more knowledgeable firm.

 

Hey Chancy!

 

Yes the date on the receipt is 10/15/2021 and my daughters 21st birthday was 11/21/2021. 
 

The lady at Josh Goldstein‘a firm said they go by the date on the approval notice which was 3/3/2022. 

 

The visa type on CEAC still says F11 as I mentioned and the date shows as 10/15/2021. 

 

I think she’s just plain wrong. Don’t know how someone that does this for a living could get this so wrong.  I’m going to see if I can speak to someone at a different firm today. If they say she’s wrong I’ll lodge a complaint against her with her boss. You just can’t casually say “sorry but your daughter won’t be able to move down for like 7 years” without knowing for sure. 

[From_CAN_2_US 1,100]

1 hour ago, SPP1969 said:

Hey Chancy!

 

Yes the date on the receipt is 10/15/2021 and my daughters 21st birthday was 11/21/2021. 
 

The lady at Josh Goldstein‘a firm said they go by the date on the approval notice which was 3/3/2022. 

 

The visa type on CEAC still says F11 as I mentioned and the date shows as 10/15/2021. 

 

I think she’s just plain wrong. Don’t know how someone that does this for a living could get this so wrong.  I’m going to see if I can speak to someone at a different firm today. If they say she’s wrong I’ll lodge a complaint against her with her boss. You just can’t casually say “sorry but your daughter won’t be able to move down for like 7 years” without knowing for sure. 

My knowledge on IR5s is really limited. But  I got very interested when you posted the question and so I did some reading online, and everything I saw also said that your daughter was protected from Aging Out. The only thing I wasn’t sure about was this is a step daughter of a US citizen, but I doubt that makes a difference from a biological child. She is after all a derivative of an immediate relative.

 

I did read that the way this cut off is calculated changed very recently (Feb 14 2023) so perhaps this lawyer is not up to date with the latest regulations. 
 

I agree, if you are indeed right, highly inexcusable for a lawyer to be filing out wrong advice with so much confidence.

 

You were considering  consulting another lawyer. I suggest you give Jim Hacking a call on his daily show on YouTube. I think he will find your question interesting, and would love to correct a lawyer giving bad advice.

Edited May 19, 2023 by From_CAN_2_US

[SPP1969 5]

37 minutes ago, From_CAN_2_US said:

My knowledge on IR5s is really limited. But  I got very interested when you posted the question and so I did some reading online, and everything I saw also said that your daughter was protected from Aging Out. The only thing I wasn’t sure about was this is a step daughter of a US citizen, but I doubt that makes a difference from a biological child. She is after all a derivative of an immediate relative.

 

I did read that the way this cut off is calculated changed very recently (Feb 14 2023) so perhaps this lawyer is not up to date with the latest regulations. 
 

I agree, if you are indeed right, highly inexcusable for a lawyer to be filing out wrong advice with so much confidence.

 

You were considering  consulting another lawyer. I suggest you give Jim Hacking a call on his daily show on YouTube. I think he will find your question interesting, and would love to correct a lawyer giving bad advice.

Thanks CAN_2_US!

I just finished booking a call with Hacking Immigration Law, just waiting for a call back.

Yes step daughter is considered the same as daughter.

[PZibran325 112]

8 hours ago, SPP1969 said:

Okay, so I married to an American citizen. 

We met in 2010, spent 7 years in a long distance relationship, got married in 2017, and shortly after she moved up to live with me in Edmonton.

She has 4 older children from her first marriage and I have 2 younger daughters from my first marriage.

We made a deal when she moved up that when my daughters were all done with school, we would move back to the USA.

My youngest daughter finished school in June of 2022.

Knowing that the whole process would take a while we started the immigration process in June of 2021.

In October of 2021, my oldest daughter (who was 20 at the time and her 21st birthday was in November of 2021) decided she wanted to move with us so we submitted the paperwork to add her petition.

We received our approvals in March of 2022.

Other than taking a long time, the process has been a fairly smooth one.

We did our medical exams in December of 2022 and had our interviews on January 4th of 2023 at the consulate in Montreal.

They asked me 3 questions and asked my daughter 2 questions.

They rejected my wife's divorce documents from her previous marriages saying they were not certified copies or originals and told me I got the wrong criminal background check.

They also told me I would receive an email with a bunch of supplemental questions.

They informed us that our cases were going into administrative processing.

They kept my daughter's passport, but sent me home with mine.

We sent the replacement documents and my passport to the consulate 3 weeks later.

The email with the supplemental questions arrived on January 30th and the answers were returned the same day.

My passport was sent back to me a few days later.

As of today it's been 109 days with 3 updates on the CEAC website.

I have prompted the consulate for an update on our cases twice with the standard 2 page email coming back from the email service that basically says you have to be patient and wait.

On Monday we had a zoom session with a lady on the Josh Goldstein legal team to discuss a WOM suit.

I have been going back and forth via email with her all week.

She told me that they can help me with a Mandamus suit, but they can't help my daughter.

She told me that because my daughter turned 21 during the process she is no longer being treated as a child, that her application is now in the F1 category, and will not be current for several years.

This didn't make sense to me.

If that is the case why does the approval notice still say she’s classified as an unmarried child under the age of 21?

Why did they have her do her medical now?

Why did they have her come for an interview if she’s still 5 or so years away from being eligible for approval?

Why didn’t they inform us of this?

Why did they keep her passport in Montreal? 

Did they think she wouldn’t need it for the next 5 or so years?

So I dug into it.

Her CEAC account still says her Visa is an F11 which comes up on Google as the unmarried son or daughter of a U.S. citizen.

I also dug into USCIS Child Status Protection Act which states:

 

 

C. Immediate Relatives

 

1. Applicability

In order to qualify for CSPA:

·         The adjustment applicant must have had one of the following approved or pending on or after the CSPA’s effective date: a qualifying Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130), Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (Form I-360), or Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485);

·         The applicant must have been under the age of 21 and unmarried at the time the qualifying Form I-130 or Form I-360 was filed; and

·         The applicant must remain unmarried.

If the petitioner of a pending or approved IR spousal petition dies, the spousal Form I-130 automatically converts to a widow(er)’s Form I-360.^[12] The widow(er)’s child(ren), if any, must be under the age of 21 and unmarried at the time of the petitioner’s death to be classified as derivatives on the automatically converted Form I-360, regardless of whether the child(ren) had a separate pending or approved Form I-130 at the time of the petitioner’s death.^[13]

Similarly, the beneficiary of a pending or approved spousal Form I-130 may subsequently file a VAWA-based Form I-360. In order to include his or her child(ren) on the self-petition as derivatives, the child(ren) must be under the age of 21 and unmarried when the Form I-360 is filed, regardless of whether the child(ren) had a separate or approved Form I-130 when the Form I-360 was filed.^[14]

 

2. Determining Child Status Protection Act Age

 

For IRs and IR self-petitioners or derivatives under VAWA, a child’s age is frozen on the date the Form I-130 or Form I-360 is filed, respectively. For derivatives of widow(er)s, a child’s age is frozen on the date the Form I-360 is filed or the spousal Form I-130 is automatically converted to a widow(er)’s Form I-360 (in other words, the date of the petitioner’s death). If the adjustment applicant was under the age of 21 at the time the petition was filed or automatically converted, the applicant is eligible for CSPA and will not age out.

 

My daughter was under 21 and unmarried at the time we filed the I-130 for her and remains unmarried today so should she not be protected by this law?

I put all these questions to the lady at Josh Goldstein's law firm and haven't heard back yet.

Something doesn't add up to me.

Am I missing something or is she mistaken?

I'm thinking of speaking to another law firm today about all of this.

I have seen the Hacking firm mentioned and PIC.

Hacking was easy to find.

Who or what is PIC?

 

 

Hi There,

 

I don't have a whole lot to contribute to your post except that I wanted to provide you with an answer for your last question.

 

PIC is Palladino, Isbell & Casazza, LLC which is a law firm that a lot of us have had wonderful experiences with especially those of us that chose to retain Chris Casazza.

 

Good luck, and also I don't think what they're saying about your daughter is correct

[SPP1969 5]

4 hours ago, PZibran325 said:

Hi There,

 

I don't have a whole lot to contribute to your post except that I wanted to provide you with an answer for your last question.

 

PIC is Palladino, Isbell & Casazza, LLC which is a law firm that a lot of us have had wonderful experiences with especially those of us that chose to retain Chris Casazza.

 

Good luck, and also I don't think what they're saying about your daughter is correct

Awesome!

Thank you, I will look into them as well.

Thank you for the well wishes.

[igoyougoduke 1,623]

On 5/19/2023 at 8:14 AM, SPP1969 said:

Okay, so I married to an American citizen. 

We met in 2010, spent 7 years in a long distance relationship, got married in 2017, and shortly after she moved up to live with me in Edmonton.

She has 4 older children from her first marriage and I have 2 younger daughters from my first marriage.

We made a deal when she moved up that when my daughters were all done with school, we would move back to the USA.

My youngest daughter finished school in June of 2022.

Knowing that the whole process would take a while we started the immigration process in June of 2021.

In October of 2021, my oldest daughter (who was 20 at the time and her 21st birthday was in November of 2021) decided she wanted to move with us so we submitted the paperwork to add her petition.

We received our approvals in March of 2022.

Other than taking a long time, the process has been a fairly smooth one.

We did our medical exams in December of 2022 and had our interviews on January 4th of 2023 at the consulate in Montreal.

They asked me 3 questions and asked my daughter 2 questions.

They rejected my wife's divorce documents from her previous marriages saying they were not certified copies or originals and told me I got the wrong criminal background check.

They also told me I would receive an email with a bunch of supplemental questions.

They informed us that our cases were going into administrative processing.

They kept my daughter's passport, but sent me home with mine.

We sent the replacement documents and my passport to the consulate 3 weeks later.

The email with the supplemental questions arrived on January 30th and the answers were returned the same day.

My passport was sent back to me a few days later.

As of today it's been 109 days with 3 updates on the CEAC website.

I have prompted the consulate for an update on our cases twice with the standard 2 page email coming back from the email service that basically says you have to be patient and wait.

On Monday we had a zoom session with a lady on the Josh Goldstein legal team to discuss a WOM suit.

I have been going back and forth via email with her all week.

She told me that they can help me with a Mandamus suit, but they can't help my daughter.

She told me that because my daughter turned 21 during the process she is no longer being treated as a child, that her application is now in the F1 category, and will not be current for several years.

This didn't make sense to me.

If that is the case why does the approval notice still say she’s classified as an unmarried child under the age of 21?

Why did they have her do her medical now?

Why did they have her come for an interview if she’s still 5 or so years away from being eligible for approval?

Why didn’t they inform us of this?

Why did they keep her passport in Montreal? 

Did they think she wouldn’t need it for the next 5 or so years?

So I dug into it.

Her CEAC account still says her Visa is an F11 which comes up on Google as the unmarried son or daughter of a U.S. citizen.

I also dug into USCIS Child Status Protection Act which states:

 

 

C. Immediate Relatives

 

1. Applicability

In order to qualify for CSPA:

·         The adjustment applicant must have had one of the following approved or pending on or after the CSPA’s effective date: a qualifying Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130), Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (Form I-360), or Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485);

·         The applicant must have been under the age of 21 and unmarried at the time the qualifying Form I-130 or Form I-360 was filed; and

·         The applicant must remain unmarried.

If the petitioner of a pending or approved IR spousal petition dies, the spousal Form I-130 automatically converts to a widow(er)’s Form I-360.^[12] The widow(er)’s child(ren), if any, must be under the age of 21 and unmarried at the time of the petitioner’s death to be classified as derivatives on the automatically converted Form I-360, regardless of whether the child(ren) had a separate pending or approved Form I-130 at the time of the petitioner’s death.^[13]

Similarly, the beneficiary of a pending or approved spousal Form I-130 may subsequently file a VAWA-based Form I-360. In order to include his or her child(ren) on the self-petition as derivatives, the child(ren) must be under the age of 21 and unmarried when the Form I-360 is filed, regardless of whether the child(ren) had a separate or approved Form I-130 when the Form I-360 was filed.^[14]

 

2. Determining Child Status Protection Act Age

 

For IRs and IR self-petitioners or derivatives under VAWA, a child’s age is frozen on the date the Form I-130 or Form I-360 is filed, respectively. For derivatives of widow(er)s, a child’s age is frozen on the date the Form I-360 is filed or the spousal Form I-130 is automatically converted to a widow(er)’s Form I-360 (in other words, the date of the petitioner’s death). If the adjustment applicant was under the age of 21 at the time the petition was filed or automatically converted, the applicant is eligible for CSPA and will not age out.

 

My daughter was under 21 and unmarried at the time we filed the I-130 for her and remains unmarried today so should she not be protected by this law?

I put all these questions to the lady at Josh Goldstein's law firm and haven't heard back yet.

Something doesn't add up to me.

Am I missing something or is she mistaken?

I'm thinking of speaking to another law firm today about all of this.

I have seen the Hacking firm mentioned and PIC.

Hacking was easy to find.

Who or what is PIC?

 

 

Yes Department of States policy of CSPA age calculation and USCIS policy of CSPA( USCIS has updated as retroactively applied the changes) are different as of last year. Your daughter will probably not get the immigrant visa as DOS control immigrant visas abroad . You have to Sue DOS in a federal court if they choose to deny your daughters petition . you have to see how it plays out . DOS using older CSPA calculation means your daughter has aged out.

 

Quick read through FYI https://www.gtlaw.com/en/insights/2023/2/uscis-updates-child-status-protection-act-cspa-age-calculation-adjustment-status-applicants

 

 

 

Edited May 20, 2023 by igoyougoduke

[PZibran325 112]

1 hour ago, igoyougoduke said:

Yes Department of States policy of CSPA age calculation and USCIS policy of CSPA( USCIS has updated as retroactively applied the changes) are different as of last year. Your daughter will probably not get the immigrant visa as DOS control immigrant visas abroad . You have to Sue DOS in a federal court if they choose to deny your daughters petition . you have to see how it plays out . DOS using older CSPA calculation means your daughter has aged out.

 

Quick read through FYI https://www.gtlaw.com/en/insights/2023/2/uscis-updates-child-status-protection-act-cspa-age-calculation-adjustment-status-applicants

 

 

 

I guess I am confused because to me that quick read through you provided says as of February of this year USCIS will use  the “Dates for Filing” chart (Chart B) to calculate children’s ages so that makes it sound like she doesn’t age out as she was 20 when they filed ? Did I misunderstand ?

[igoyougoduke 1,623]

1 hour ago, PZibran325 said:

I guess I am confused because to me that quick read through you provided says as of February of this year USCIS will use  the “Dates for Filing” chart (Chart B) to calculate children’s ages so that makes it sound like she doesn’t age out as she was 20 when they filed ? Did I misunderstand ?

if you applying in Montreal, you case for immigrant visa  comes under DOS and not USCIS. Its only I-130 that is approved by USCIS.  AOS comes under USCIS while consular processing comes under Department of State (DOS)

[From_CAN_2_US 1,100]

44 minutes ago, igoyougoduke said:

if you applying in Montreal, you case for immigrant visa  comes under DOS and not USCIS. It’s only I-130 that is approved by USCIS.  AOS comes under USCIS while consular processing comes under Department of State (DOS)

My initial reaction when reading OPs post was the same - that the giideline

 

https://bizlegalservices.com/2023/02/17/recently-revised-cspa-policy-impact-on-consular-processing-cases/#:~:text=Applicability to Consular Processing&text=Generally speaking%2C CSPA provides a,eligible for derivative permanent residence.

 

 

“As confirmed in the USCIS Policy Manual, CSPA applies to “both noncitizens abroad who are applying for an immigrant visa through the Department of State (DOS) and noncitizens physically present in the United States who are applying for adjustment of status through USCIS.” While Chapter 7 of the Policy Manual primarily focuses on the impact of CSPA on adjustment applicants, USCIS emphasizes that the “same principles generally apply to noncitizens seeking an immigrant visa through DOS.””

The same rules of AOS applies to consular processing as well.

Would love to hear an update from @SPP1969 about what they learned from Hacking Immigration. I imagine it might take a few days for the lawyer to get back to them.

Edited May 20, 2023 by From_CAN_2_US

[igoyougoduke 1,623]

15 minutes ago, From_CAN_2_US said:

My initial reaction when reading OPs post was the same - that the giideline

 

https://bizlegalservices.com/2023/02/17/recently-revised-cspa-policy-impact-on-consular-processing-cases/#:~:text=Applicability to Consular Processing&text=Generally speaking%2C CSPA provides a,eligible for derivative permanent residence.

 

 

“As confirmed in the USCIS Policy Manual, CSPA applies to “both noncitizens abroad who are applying for an immigrant visa through the Department of State (DOS) and noncitizens physically present in the United States who are applying for adjustment of status through USCIS.” While Chapter 7 of the Policy Manual primarily focuses on the impact of CSPA on adjustment applicants, USCIS emphasizes that the “same principles generally apply to noncitizens seeking an immigrant visa through DOS.””

The same rules of AOS applies to consular processing as well.

Would love to hear an update from @SPP1969 about what they learned from Hacking Immigration. I imagine it might take a few days for the lawyer to get back to them.

the difference is USCIS has clarified using Date of Filing for CSPA calculation while DOS has not confirmed it and has continued to use Date of Final action. The two are different and can potentially lead to different cut off dates 

[SPP1969 5]

19 hours ago, From_CAN_2_US said:

My initial reaction when reading OPs post was the same - that the giideline

 

https://bizlegalservices.com/2023/02/17/recently-revised-cspa-policy-impact-on-consular-processing-cases/#:~:text=Applicability to Consular Processing&text=Generally speaking%2C CSPA provides a,eligible for derivative permanent residence.

 

 

“As confirmed in the USCIS Policy Manual, CSPA applies to “both noncitizens abroad who are applying for an immigrant visa through the Department of State (DOS) and noncitizens physically present in the United States who are applying for adjustment of status through USCIS.” While Chapter 7 of the Policy Manual primarily focuses on the impact of CSPA on adjustment applicants, USCIS emphasizes that the “same principles generally apply to noncitizens seeking an immigrant visa through DOS.””

The same rules of AOS applies to consular processing as well.

Would love to hear an update from @SPP1969 about what they learned from Hacking Immigration. I imagine it might take a few days for the lawyer to get back to them.

I will post an update when I hear back from the lady at Josh Goldstein's firm and from Jim Hacking's firm. 

The whole immigration process in the US is so overcomplicated and confusing it's ridiculous. 

When my wife moved from the USA to Edmonton the process was very easy and only took 10 months from start to finish.

[Chancy 6,233]

On 5/20/2023 at 3:31 PM, PZibran325 said:

I guess I am confused because to me that quick read through you provided says as of February of this year USCIS will use  the “Dates for Filing” chart (Chart B) to calculate children’s ages so that makes it sound like she doesn’t age out as she was 20 when they filed ? Did I misunderstand ?

 

Don't be confused by unofficial websites.  Refer to the official USCIS/DOS websites for their actual policy.  There's no change to CSPA.  USCIS has always had the option to decide whether to use Table A or Table B for Adjustment of Status eligibility (and therefore, CSPA lock-in date) for family-based visa categories.  Your daughter's case is "immediate relative" category, not family-based.  Visa number is always available for IR cases, such as IR2.  CSPA lock-in date for IR2 cases is I-130 filing date (ie. receipt date on I-797 notice for the I-130).

 

[Ontarkie 13,995]

~~Multiple posts split off to their own thread as this topic is more then just the normal DS-5535 mega thread.~~