M J

DACA was a regulatory directive, not a group of people. And DACA was the reason a great many people experienced an extra two to three months of I-129F processing time at the CSC.

First Calm Down.... Vanessa&tony,
You dont know me i dont know you, we are just discussing a TOPIC and you' re just going at me. I DO have proof that I'm single...
In Spanish culture you dont call nobody "fiance" the said my husband or wife... Marry or Not. Thats culture.... you said that I'm "SILLY" like I said something about me calling my Fiance husband? , I said that was Stupid for the USCIS to go in base of that... so Calm Down.

Their 2 replies to me were pretty quick, so they should reply by Monday or Tuesday. There will be no new priority date, since nothing is done until the interview. This is why I was initially confused and asked them if there is anything I need to do before the interview.
This was their first reply to me when I asked about extending the petition:
I asked if there was anything I needed to do before the interview, or if it was past the 4 month period before we made an appointment, and they replied:

Pretty close! I was a more than adequate husband, and she was and still is a sociopathic liar. She is not pure evil just a liar and a cheat. She cooked really good, cleaned lousy, and was pretty lousy in bed (more than likely that was my fault LOL). Other then the fact that she contacted her lover every single day of our marriage; she was mildly tolerable when I could get her to stop watching youtube 10 hours a day or when she stopped complaining that she felt no emotion for me (maybe that's why she agreed to commit adultery with him on her planned return to her home country). How about them apples? Maybe I should cut her some slack?
I'm thinking she would still send her lover money as she had his bank account number, would more than likely get her green card then sponsor him to come to the US, for sure runaway with my child and sue for child support, and in the meantime is claiming emotional abuse even though I never called her names, never used curse words, never deprived her in any way, bought her a beautiful home, supported her in every way imaginable, and now I'm the bad guy. Bizarre.

I apologize in advance "ralphlaw" but are you for real? She lied everyday for 2 years. I didn't marry her so she could learn to love me. She was supposed to love me all along. Love relationships are forged on trust and communication and sincerity. She came here fraudulently. Obviously you don't understand con artists. They act so nice and sweet and wonderful, but they will cheat you blind. My ex-wife will continue to attempt to get a green card by lying, filing false affidavits, and rallying innocent people to her aid. If she succeeds you can believe she will come after our child and for money. You leave poverty by hard work and education and faith and following the rules, not by scamming.
Incidentally, one of our court dates was postponed. A court date for her to try to get some money from me. So, she didn't even bother to come see the baby. How messed up is that? That is a mother? So, Mr. Devil's Advocate should I just let her walk all over me. Should I just let her abuse the US Immigration and Legal system? What is the danger in giving her a green card? What is the danger in her coming from poverty and suing people? What is the danger in a sociopathic liar raising my child?
So, she has to be deported. She came to the USA with false premises. I applaud USCIS when it needs to get tough for those who take advantage of the system, but I grimace when I see abuse and ignorance.

Never! That will never happen in this country -- politics have placed women in the 'protected class.' That Act was a pay off to feminist and man-haters -- supported by legions of girly men politicians.
Even in the face of studies that show women are just as likely to be the aggressor in a domestic disturbance. Women

Sorry Celetes, I thought I asked the OP not you. I am sure he knows how to type.

I agree with duriantaste this is what I don't like about this forum some people are getting nasty even you’re not even talking to them. Is just showing how they are in person Very Unprofessional.

No that's not what the qn is about at all. it is ONLY about when you last met IN PERSON. Mine read "I met Vanessa in person when she came to stay with me in the US for X days on X date". that was it I sent ticket stubs, copies of passport stamps, itinerary and a couple of photos. Approved without issue.

Wow soon they will be processing May before May is even over and will have forgotten every other filer still waiting from last year.

There's likely to be a problem at the interview if the beneficiary doesn't submit the petitioner's current paycheck stubs. Current paycheck stubs demonstrate to the consular officer the petitioner's adequate current sustained income. Current sustained income is one the best ways to show the consular officer that the beneficiary won't become a public charge in the U.S. Also, submitting proof of liquid assets at a 3:1 ratio can offset the shortfall of income.



The U.S. Embassy Manila (USEM) accepts joint sponsors for K-1ers on a case-by-case basis. I would estimate that they accept joint sponsors, at best, 50% of the time. I've noticed that the USEM seems more likely to accept joint sponsors from young, educated Pinoys where the joint sponsor is a close family member.



If the USEM won't accept the joint sponsor and won't approve the visa without the petitioner meeting the income guidelines, they will issue the beneficiary a 221g which gives the petitioner one year to comply with the income requirements.



On the other hand, you could choose to delay the interview until the petitioner had a steady job and had current paycheck stubs which would show that the petitioner's income, when calculated on an annualized basis, would meet the income guidelines. Keep in mind that the USCIS-approved petition is valid for four months. The petition can be extended for another four months by requesting it from the USEM. I believe the USEM can extend the petition twice more. That would give the petitioner time to find a steady job and gather a few current paycheck stubs before the interview.



When joint sponsors and income are an issue, I recommend that the petitioner attend the interview.

Here's the pitch .. .
Send em back, file for divorce.
Send no monies to them.
When she starts contacting your family - have them tell her - 'You made the choice, you live with it'
and be done with it.

I'll suggest something else.
Get the woman a ticket, give the baby to the woman, along with the baby's passport
and two tickets back to home.
then wash your hands of it all.

Your real lucky you only got an RFE and nto a denial. Everything listed in clearly indicated in the instructions and if you Follow the Guides here.

Once your petition is approved by the USCIS, it's valid for four months. Before your petition expires, you can extend it's validity for another four months by emailing the U.S. Embassy Manila (USEM) and requesting it.
The Embassy will extend the validity of your petition once or twice more beyond the first extension if you request it. They Embassy is pretty good about extending petitions if you keep them informed.
Then, once you complete the medical and the interview, and the visa is issued, the visa will be valid for six months from the date of the medical. Generally, the medical is completed a week or two before the interview.
If there are problems with the medical, such as testing for TB, then it will extend the time before the interview another few months. In that case, you'll have three months less time to use the visa.
Here's the USEM email address: http://manila.usembassy.gov/mobile/wwwh3230.html

Hello fellow VJ'rs,
Subject: Changing Beneficiary Address for K visa (Foreign Fiancee address change)
I have found a few posts on here about this topic and wanted to post this experience for additional information of how it worked for me as most are worried about the mailed packages going to the wrong address of the beneficiary. (Typically can additionally download the packages from the corresponding consulate website) It is still something we want corrected for multiple reasons.
I can not speak for other ways to do this but this was EXTREMELY simple for me, and timing was the key. From research that others have tried, this was My steps.
step 1: On notification of NOA2, I called the NVC at 603-334-0700. This is usually a busy signal and once in phone system plan for a hold.
Step 2: Once on phone with someone, Provide your USCIS Receipt number (found on NOA1/NOA2), Beneficiary's Name and Birth Date, and Petitioners Name and Birth date.
Step 3: Explain what you want to do. (Change Beneficiary address.) and give them the new address.
Done…. and simple
Now some notes-
The first time I called it was too soon from approval of NOA2 and my documents were not in the NVC system, so I was told to call back in a few days. The friendly operator explained to me that this usually takes a week from NOA2 notification.
She also explained that since it was a K visa the processing of my petition does not stay at NVC long before being transferred onto the Beneficiary country. (as little as a week, but could be longer) SEE GUIDES for estimated durations. So timing is the key for this method.
Additionally, I also corrected my address at the same time, just giving it to her over the phone. so simple. (my local government changed my street address from "xxxx Street" to "xxxx Ave")
Hope this helps others!
~ Neal

So what you are saying is it is ok for these illegals to get preferred treatment over US citizens I beg to differ sir and I really don't care if they came here as children or not, they can follow the same procedures as all of us and also how do they pay taxes if they are illegal answer that one, and as for the so called moderator that transferred my topic to nothing to do with the k1 process I think this has alot to to with the process this is why the process takes so long oh and by the why after reading alittle further I found out they can applied to have their fees waived and not pay a dime for the processing.

You are providing assertions but no evidence and very superficial analysis. Yes, there are more DACA apps than I-129Fs. But that's pretty much where your analysis begins and ends.
First, DACA, by design, only affects a group of relatively young individuals. Many of them are students who will be working campus jobs and other low wages positions that are no better paying than illegal waitstaff jobs.
Second, DACA applicants are getting their approvals in under a month. In comparison, I-129F petitioners are waiting 6-7 months if they are lucky. A fast I-129F processing is 5 months; a fast DACA processing is a few weeks. Now think in terms of percentages what that means for relative fluctuations of completions per receipts. You want to talk about relative hardship? Well you should be talking about weeks versus months.
Third, as has been pointed out, the I-129F is just the beginning of a longer process for K-1 applicants. Moreover, what follows the I-129F involves a ton of logistics and thus requires a great deal of planning. Not having a set approval time frame (or even any transparency) for I-129Fs is a huge problem. Having a few days fluctuation for DACA approvals, on the other hand, poses no such problems on DACA applicants.
Fourth, as has been pointed out, the economic and emotional impact on I-129F petitioners is substantial. Supporting two separate households is no easy thing, not to mention how it negatively affects the job prospects for the beneficiary on both ends of the process.
The point is not that we should be choosing one or the other--I-129Fs or DACA. And it's not that the USCIS shouldn't process DACAs in a timely manner. I and most other posters here are totally fine with DACAs being completed more quickly than I-129Fs because DACA apps are simpler and should be easier to finish. But what is not ok is for DACA apps to be completed at a higher completions to receipts ratio than both I-129Fs and the two year average for all application types, all while I-129Fs get processed at their slowest rate in two years. As I have shown, I-129Fs are not just getting slowed down so that DACAs can get processed; they are being practically brought to a halt so that DACAs can get processed quickly. It's not defensible.

Agree and disagree ... yes they are not cutting in line, because there is no real line. There are sets of work to be done and the CSC is putting the illegals' work far ahead of ours.
Economic sense ... what does it matter? My fiancee will get a job soon after she is allowed to come here. Both her or an illegal can work and contribute to the US economy. And if you want to talk economic impact, consider that so many of us on VJ are sending money abroad via Western Union to help support our fiancees that doesn't see the light of day in the US. One of these days I would love to not be a hermit in my apartment and go out with my loved one and enjoy a nice dinner and a movie, go bowling, go shopping with her (did I really just say that?) ... things that can help our economy.

[Continued from the previous post due to limit on image embedding per post...]
4. Effects of Including the DACA Apps in the CSC Total Workload Stats

So let’s look more closely at what happens when we include the DACA application data to the other CSC data. The number of pending applications rises, the number of overall completions rises as the office starts turning out DACA approvals, the increase in the number of receipts is of course evident, the CPP decreases briefly before re-converging (note from the above graph how we know this decrease comes on the back of 129F and the subsequent convergence is improvements in DACA completions, not a fixing of the 129F completion figure), and the CPR does the same as the CPP (with the same underlying mechanism at work).

All Others Pending, Completions, and Receipts trends from above, but with percentage increase figures also included for perspective.

CPP and CPR from the first effects graph, but with percentage change figures added for perspective.
5. Comparisons of Pre-Aug., 2012 Stats with Post-Aug., 2012 Stats

We can see here that the slowdown in I-129F processing times isn’t being driven by an abnormal surge in the amount of I-129F petitions pending. In fact, there was, on average, fewer pending there than at times prior to the DACA applications. Moreover, all other apps at the CSC are similar down in terms of the number pending. But, when you add the DACA apps in, you can see how they are swamping the CSC, raising the total apps pending to 19% higher than its pre-DACA average.

Here we see the true weight of CSC processing choices on the I-129F completions. Compared to prior to the DACA apps, the average number of I-129F petitions completed at the CSC is down a staggering 33%, a change that stands-out from the other application types, and in stark contrast to how I-129Fs are being completed at the VSC.

This graph emphasizes that the slowdown in I-129F processing is not caused by some general surge in application receipts. To the contrary, even when you included the DACA applications, overall receipts are down across the board compared to the pre-DACA period. This is pretty damning for the USCIS’s handling of I-129Fs following the receipt of DACA applications. They have handled more filings in the past.

Again, we can see that the I-129F petitions are bearing a disproportionate reduction in completions per pending apps when compared to other application types, though all application types at the CSC have taken a bit of a hit. This is measuring how big the building backlog has gotten. No such slowdown at the VSC, however.

Again, we can see that the I-129F petitions s are bearing a disproportionate reduction in completions per pending apps when compared to other application types. This is how a backlog is born and perpetuated. No such slowdowns for other application types at the CSC, VSC, or even nationally. Do you need more evidence that I-129F petitions are being singled out for this current slowdown?
Linear Regression Analysis to Determine Statistical Significance of the Correlation
Going beyond what intuition and commonsense should tell us about the above data, we can find more evidence for the hypothesis that the DACA applications have causes a statistically significant slowdown in I-129F petition processing by breaking out the big econometric guns and turning to Gretl.
Given the time series nature of the data, I chose to model a linear AR1 regression to capture the interplay between the variables overtime. What this means in layman’s terms is that I measured the relationships between key variables, both within their current period and with a one month lag effect, to see which variables were correlating with which other variables. In particular, I wanted to ascertain the extent to which other variables were effecting the CSC’s I-129F completion numbers throughout the 24 month period. There are some limitations to making this type of equation with the data I have because related variables (such as receipts and all other pending) cause co-correlation problems; however, I do believe the results I was able to generate by carefully choosing key variables are pretty damn convincing.

What this basically says is that the numbers of DACA applications pending and completed have a statistically significant negative correlation with the completion of I-129F petitions at the CSC. Correlation is not causation, but, I think given the other analysis I provided above, we can pretty much call this one. Moreover, the model used ended up being surprisingly robust, explaining 88% of the variation in the dependent variable (completions of I-129F petitions at the CSC). For your reference, here is a mapping of the regression versus the actual trend line. The residual, a graph of which I cannot include due to the images per post requirements, decreases on average post-Aug., 2012, further giving validity to the notion that the regression is correctly capturing the influence of the DACA applications. I rest my case.

Conclusion
The DACA applications have caused a major slowdown in the processing of I-129F petitions at the CSC. The CSC has singled out I-129F petitioners to bear the brunt of these DACA filings. But it doesn't have to be that way. Let your representatives know that you do not deserve to be singled out for a delay in reunited with your loved one while DACA applicants jump the line to approval. Use this evidence in your complaints to them if you'd like. The USCIS is playing games with our petitions, but now we have the facts to call them out on it. So what are you waiting for?

The delay is obvious with the AOS transfers as well. This is getting beyond ridiculous. Illegals should have their own processing center, maintained by the fees they pay themselves.

I don't care, if they are illegal they have to be sent back asap, I really don't see what the big fuss is about. You are ILLEGAL, you have no rights. I am LEGAL, my affairs take priority over any illegals', brought here as a child or otherwise.

Are you serious??? I can give you sooo many examples of case numbers for DACA that have the same filling date as me and that have been approved in october, november, december. So don't say that DACA hasn't created any backlog at CSC, because they had!

This to start with if you're blind : http://www.cis.org/north/new-uscis-data-show-how-daca-delays-decisions-other-programs

As usual, illegals spitting in our face. Gotta love Obama.