Windza

For anyone following this thread I'm happy to report success... I received approval this morning on the single I-864 using only principal applicant income. I'm not sure I'd recommend this approach for anyone else but nonetheless, it can be done :-)

Yetsi... while I suggest you try and get a copy purely for peace of mind (they do ask you to bring it) I don't think it matters... I just had my interview today and no one asked to see anything I had with me (except the medical report). They knew I was coming and just ticked me off a list.

*coughcough* Troll.

Yes, but an undeniably funny one...

Well he said the interview was May 10, but hasn't logged on since April 17th. One could only guess how this drama ended!

In fits of laughter I would imagine

no she dont call me i chat with her online i send her money it the wait she push me get the visa about 4 months ago she told me she hope i die and call me a lot of name....

Wahaha... you had me up until this point mike1111. I'm sitting there one eyebrow raised, squinting disbelievingly as I read the first page... out of morbid curiosity I ventured to the second page thinking "this poor soul needs some serious guidance".

The whole "she tolde me she hope i die and call me lot of name" was just toooo much though...

Some might think this was a waste, but I award 10/10 for this jest!

Parents need not sign anything just for accomodation.

On the work thing, I have heard of such, but usually with large international companies (Google etc).

Thanks Penguin, my role with the company is systems and technology which fortunately enables me to perform the bulk of it from home (provided I have a decent broadband connection!).

So the tone of my original query has changed in recent days... having discussed my intentions with my employer there's every possibility now that I will remain employed beyond my leave provisions and to that end, they've signed off on a letter specifically for the NVC stating I will "remain an employee of the company and remuneration will continue even while residing in the United States and until notice is provided from either party". My thinking is that this shouldn't be treated differently to regular employment on the I-864 as it is now a question of job security and no longer a "known quantity" so to speak...

The only remaining questions I have now are:

1. Does anyone see issues using income only where the intending immigrant (spouse) is the sole income earner (i.e. 100% of total household income) and the petitioner makes $0.00?
   
2. It's likely we will need to reside with my in-laws temporarily when we first arrive (if we haven't purchased our own residence prior)... We've included a handwritten letter with signatures from them in the I-864 stating that we have unconditional accommodation with them whenever we require it BUT should this be backed up by an I-864A from them?
   Someone on another forum suggested this might be necessary but considering there's no financial element involved I feel the letter may be sufficient...
   

Yes, it looks like a standard message. The clause on the NVC checklist mentioning the petitioner not meeting the poverty like was marked with a 'X' and not as an RFE but as for your information only, so much that the case was closed and it was left to the CO to decide. Strange, but as the saying goes "every case is different....".

Well at least I know not to freak out now if I see something similar...

Moving forward with the thread; I guess I have two queries now:

1. As per my OP... can anyone see any issues arising here?
   
2. Can anyone here confirm success (or provide comment on) submitting an I-864 using only intending immigrant assets and/or income? Keeping in mind that using either would be comfortably above the 3x poverty guideline requirement.
   

that's why we don't believe its a gamble.

Re-reading your post I realise what you meant now... I thought you submitted $2000.00 short all told (including your own assets/savings) and that's why you had the "beneficiary doesn't meet the min income requirement" message from the NVC.

Is that a standard message when you use assets to supplement income?

Just seems odd and a little misleading to state something like that when in effect you actually have met the requirements as described by the I-864...

I suggest you supply additional information to explain the figures and the calculations when you submit your I-864.

The question with you appears to be that there is no US Citizen/LPR to sponsor or co-sponsor you. Whether the Embassy can accept an I-864 with a 100% self-supporting beneficiary - I just don't know, especially when neither of you will be employed when you relocate. You will effectively be living off your savings. Someone else will advise you on that one.

Thanks for the advice... you're not quite correct about my employment status when we relocate though. I will be still employed and earning income for another 15 weeks (albeit not in a traditional sense)

Seems like you were willing to take a gamble submitting an I-864 knowing you were just short of the income requirement... I definitely won't be taking that risk but would just prefer to list income rather than assets to substantiate support.

My US citizen wife is completing the I-864 on my behalf (I'm the principal applicant) and I wanted to clarify a few points about income continuing from the same source once I become a lawful permanent resident.

We both currently reside together in Australia and are planning a permanent return to the US in November.

My wife hasn't worked in quite a few years as I'm fortunate enough to support both of us (and our 15 month old son) on a single income.

This means we need to satisfy the I-864 requirements on either my assets and/or income (preferably income).

I understand the only way for me to legitimately list my income is under the condition it continues from the same source after I become a lawful permanent resident... all clear enough.

The murkiness comes in here;

Sometime in November I will be eligible for a "long service leave" (LSL) benefit somewhat unique to the industry I work in which entitles me to 3 months paid leave... I also accrue regular annual leave for this 3 month period such that I effectively end up with ~15 weeks of paid leave.

The intention is to take the entitlement and travel to the US in November and quit my employment at the end of the 15 weeks (i.e. while in the US as a lawful permanent resident).

With this in mind, is there any reason why my income shouldn't be listed on the I-864 (even though I know it's not a permanent arrangement)?

The answer might be as simple as; Yes, my income does continue from the same source after I become a lawful permanent resident therefore it's all good - but I'm worried there may be repercussions knowing it's not a traditional situation involving international employment.

As always, any constructive opinions/information will be appreciated.

Yes, that's why NVC closes the I-129F when the two petition arrive together. It's too late to file an I-129F now anyway. Your I-130 is already approved.

Please update your profile. It still says N/A for the visa a filing location. The N/A visa never existed.

LOL... you guys sure are keen for me to update my profile and timeline huh

Don't stress - I'll make sure I update it all... I'm a little preoccupied ATM and also ~9500mi from home. Let me get things a little more ordered and organised and I'll dazzle you with all the details

On a serious note, I do genuinely appreciate the contributions people make here, so thanks for your posts so far... it's awesome to know there's such a great resource at hand and other like-minded people out there prepared to help others.

Cheers!

On a separate note; Mods... please move this thread to the IR1 forum if necessary.

USCIS still propagates misinformation by ignoring the NVC policy. The thing to remember is that USCIS doesn't issue visas.

Regardless, I would post your remaining questions in the correct forum.

Well reading further into this, I'm a little confused - is the K3 path dead or not (at least for newer applicants) and wouldn't the NVC assume the IR1 path as default for IR's (at least based on the I-130 details)? The K3 just seems redundant in the face of the IR/CR path...

Alrighty Sparky - time to set yer visa type in yer profile and make a timeline in the timeline section.

Welcome to VJ, you I-130-approved-human, you.

LOL... thanks for the welcome - and all in due time... I won't leave VJ hanging (bit of a forum junky these days actually).

If the status message says they sent you an approval notice then you can believe it. If it just says post decision activity as a status without mentioning the last action was an approval notice, then something is hinky.

But, why are you posting this in the K3 forum??? You would be on the IR1 or CR1 path, not K3.

The "Post Decision Activity" was accompanied by a description stating the last action was the approval notice so it's good...

On the K3 vs. IR1 topic... there's still a troth of (mis?)information out there suggesting the K3/I-129F route is quicker... when I received the NOA2 so quickly it threw my intended approach out the window and clearly the IR1 is now the most obvious path to take.

In hindsight, the IR1 is what I should've been working toward all along but I'll blame bad advice and my own ignorance for not doing so.

OK... yeah wow! Based on your replies so far, it's safe to assume I'm not missing something - just very fortunate... it's one of those moments where I'm kind of reluctant to get too excited because I figure there's something I've misunderstood.

What's very strange is that it was processed through the Californian branch which had a 5.5 month PT at last check.

I guess I can really start to celebrate an exceptional ending to 2011 and a great start to 2012...

Uhhh... I've just been put in a tailspin... would anyone ever expect a 13 day processing time between NOA1 and NOA2?

We only just took receipt of the I-797C (NOA1) and logged onto the USCIS "My Case Status" page to see the petition is in an approved "Post Decision Activity" state and NOA2 was sent (13 days later).

I'm not complaining about this mind you, but was DEFINITELY not expecting such a quick turnaround - would anyone else ever expect this or am I missing something here (maybe I need pinching)?

It changes our whole intended approach to obtaining my visa (from my understanding, it'd be pointless now to file an I-129F right?).

Very interested to know peoples thoughts on this.

Cheers,

Windza