Jump to content

xillini

Members
  • Content Count

    226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About xillini

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Member # 245401

Profile Information

  • City
    Chicago
  • State
    Illinois

Immigration Info

  • Immigration Status
    F-1 Visa
  • Place benefits filed at
    Nebraska Service Center

Immigration Timeline & Photos

Recent Profile Visitors

1,419 profile views
  1. Case approved as of today. Sent 28APR2019 Received 30APR2019 Biometric Mid October Case approved 31MAR2020 I know im technically april filer but i always thought May since i receive extension letter on May. LIN case, joint filer with a lawyer (just to make sure). Have a wonderful day and best luck for everyone!
  2. My lawyer back during AOS strongly suggests that during in-person interview "Do not show any tattoos" because USCIS officer might assume that tattoo is a sign for a gang member. Welcome to USA, Hope your result will turn out better so you don't have to deal with USCIS ever again once your N400 is approved.
  3. You are trying to hold them accountable, who are highly bureaucratic and does't care simply because they can do. I agree their lack of efficient processing, but you are not the 1st one trying to hold them accountable, and certainly not the last person, but it is almost assured that USCIS won't simply be changed. Again, they know how this waiting game works, so they simply don't care, unfortunately. This is like, Chinese changing definition of corona virus confirmation cases every week to manipulate the number and give twisted prospects, which every employer and agency does. Some are governed by legal basis (i.e: accounting for operation net profit), but this processing time is not governed by any part of INA, and therefore it is discretionary of USCIS's making its definition until Congress specifically defines the processing time. Well, Trump's first USCIS's director was almost sacked due to his professionalism, and second USCIS director is now promoted to acting to DHS. Currently director is a vacant position, but apparently, Ken Cuccinelli is de-facto director who is following and enforcing Trump's immigration policy and agenda is a de facto director. To be fair, USCIS is not the only agency that has this kind of attitude (we don't care simply because we can). if you deal with IRS, they have same mindset where you are required to provide detailed documentations if you are in their hook. The thing is in both IRS and USCIS, it is applicants' responsibility to demonstrate eligible benefits, and therefore, the burden of proof is more rigorous than other agency. Same thing goes for Veteran Affairs, HUD, and not to mention, DMV, just to name a few. We may hope someone else (such as Sen. Sanders) will become a president, who promised to abolish agency like ICE and reform USCIS, but that is different issue, political landscape is unpredictable, and most importantly, out of our hands. Since you would have your USC spouse, please tell them to vote! Again, USCIS does not have to agree with Congressional guidance simply because they can, for which they don't have to beg for budget since their finance is from application fees. As you know, USCIS director is not required to be appointed by Congress, but President can simply nominate anyone, and President Trump has been taking advantage of this system while effectively enforcing his political agenda on the table. The big picture here is democratic institution must be manged by "rule of laws", but many USA's agency is out of Congress's hands, and therefore there is big shadow that is not governed by Congress. To me, this practice is highly misleading and undemocratic, and potentially this will lead to impeach and prosecute elected officials involved in this, but for someone escaping from violence or low income countries, this is much better practice run in their country of home's government practice, and therefore, not that much gross practice, if not pleasant experience. USCIS deals with everyone from every part of the world, and will advise you that if you don't agree with our practice, you are more than welcome to go back to your home, or seek for another country's immigration benefits. Again, same thing, but they don't care daily human lives simply because they can, which is unfortunate. So this question must be individually answered for each individual who is seeking immigration benefits: "Is USA really a great country to live?"
  4. You can check with Glassdoor for juicy details of what is happening in USCIS working as ISO, but generally, all the comments commonly shares one point: ISO is expected to meet quota for processing cases and evaluated their job performances based on the processed cases, so if you think their life are easy, then clearly, you want to check the juicy details in Glassdoor. I agree that USCIS's convenient interpretation on timeline to justify their actions. Without knowing their tacit knowledge and practices, though, it is not easy to tell what is wrong with them. I do know, however, that in the past, USCIS outside of normal processing time is "After 50%", but when Trump assumed the office, they changed the definition of "outside of normal processing time" to 93% with a rationale that by changing definition of outside of normal processing time, it is expected that more ISOs are available for adjudicating actual cases sounds familiar when USCIS changes the infopass from making appointment to "call only" when they say more ISOs will be available for adjudicating cases. Now the problem continues because people can not even get I 551 stamps and they have to waste couple of hours to get connected and try for the best luck. Well, Welcome to USA!
  5. I don't know how specifics it is for you to be able to understand the true nature of your clients' relationship based on the conversation they spoke each other in their language, so it is up to you. Without committing anything illegal, you can submit the information to FDNS team in USCIS: https://www.uscis.gov/report-fraud/combating-marriage-fraud-and-abuse--immigration-benefit-programs (I won't say specifics, but if you work in financial institution, you know what it means when it comes to confidentiality on clients. While it is true that USCIS FDNS team won't reveal your name, and therefore, you will be safer than witness in front of judge, you know the rules). Also the long I 751 is not necessarily that due to the fraudulent cases, but rather US political leadership's failure (such as Congress) to provide clear guidance on immigration system (such as controversial DACA, TPS, and asylum), and USCIS's convenient interpretation on immigration laws (such as I 751 is supposed to process within 90 days of green card expiration). Personally, I would think it is selfish to blame on fraudulent cases because if there are laws and benefits, there are always those who want to take advantage of the system, and blaming these people is not a permanent solution, but rather, it is more permanent solution to fix the system. It is convenient to blame on fraudulent cases, but I can guarantee you that there will be always fraudulent cases in any systems, so the more robust solution would be to fix the system. Because even if there is 0 fraudulent cases, USCIS will come up with an idea to hurdle the process.
  6. Waiting time for ROC used to be between 4-8 months in prior to 2016 if it is straightforward case, and if it was a waiver case, then it was around 12-16 months if I remember correctly (Or you can look up other immigration websites that has historical waiting time and you can opt for I 751 specifically and see how many months for decisions). In 2016, a major change has been taking a place: Trump won election, which spurred all speculating cases rushing into any immigration benefits on top of surges of N400 in election years. In addition, due to increasing numbers of OPT I 765 EAD applications as well as DACA applications, USCIS had to selectively choose what to do, and they chose, unfortunately for I 751 applicants, those two applications over I 751 with a rationale that "I 751 applicants are still entitled as a green card holder, and therefore, if needed, I 751 applicants can get 551 Stamp", whereas I 765 or DACA applicants are not entitled and in need of more emergent cases. Well, I see several cases in some metro local offices that their I 130/485 were approved 20 months after filing dates, and that only means that they will have to go through I 751.
  7. Yes, indeed, USCIS announced that the applicants may be scheduled for in-person interview in different field office (i.e: living Seattle, but scheduled for interview at Yakima, WA) to increase efficiency. However, this has been severely criticized by some immigration advocate groups, accusing USCIS that it fails to serve immigrants. Some immigrants group have a vehicle to drive, and there is not easy public transportation between Seattle and Yakima, so they will either have to rely on their friends who have cars to drive, or use Uber, which will cost a lot of money, or they will miss the interview, which will lead to denial of the application, so these groups are suspecting that USCIS intentionally attempts to give tough time for immigrants while USCIS's intent was actually trying to accommodate this painful waiting time. While some of us, including myself, will be happy for this change (and to be honest, if they schedule me in-person interview on the other side of the country, I will travel for the interview, if I am given a choice, in lieu of blindly and wastefully waiting for another 4-5 months), other immigrants are not able to afford these distant interviews, for which they will be more likely risked to pass Not necessarily. I was in F1 OPT, where my OPT 1 year EAD is almost ending when my 485 was approved. I could have gone to STEM OPT to continue my employment, but definitely I 485 approval helped me a lot, and freed me to look for better opportunities when I could finally answer "No" to question asking me "Do you now or in the future require visa sponsorship?" during every job application. Your case H1B could be different, but after all, when you are approved for I 485, then you wouldn't have to deal with employer's immigration lawyers or had freedom to apply for jobs without any limitations. That is why USCIS calls "Every case is different". Yes, I agree. USCIS does not have consistency and lacks a vast of transparency, which is often justified in the name of "national security" (To m y background and eyes, USA is pretty much to police state, where men in uniforms are very respected). Well, that is just the way it is, and USCIS is not the only agency that lacks consistency and transparency, but many of US government institutions do lack these integrity. So my expectation is not high. For USCIS's side, to be fair, semantics of INA is written almost 60 years ago when same sex marriage was even unthinkable (or recognized as a major sin albeit there was no laws against it). While any immigration reforms in Congress is in limbo (whether it is good or bad for immigrants), administrative overrides were allowed (such as OPT and DACA), which complicates USCIS's function. In other words, there is no clear guideline from Congress, and political interests have been added to USCIS's job functions, and USCIS will have nothing but to follow its commander in chief. Similar to my earlier response, USCIS is dealing with immigration applications from "Asylum seekers" and "Green Card Lottery Winner" who are generally coming from "3rd world", where United States is the best country in the world to "EB-1 I 485", where United States is just one of the many developed countries in the world and obtaining a green card is nothing more than just making life easier for business purpose only because their professional careers and talents are wanted anywhere, if needed. This diverse interests group make it hard for USCIS to make any decisions. In other words, USCIS can't satisfy every stake holders, and as an agency representing United States in regards to immigration authorities, I believe it is fair to say USCIS reserves a right to prioritize and select the stake holders that fits the best national interests. Welcome to "Land of Freedom and Opportunity", if you think this is what is called "American Dream", that is no longer existing in the world, if anything.
  8. Which is why it is highly recommended that "just answer what you are being asked", not divulging more information than what is requested. This public charge is dated back to slavery era, where any slave who was able to get freedom "must demonstrate self-sufficiency" even if the owner wanted to release the slave to the freed, or "Manumission" [Search Public Charge in this link published by LSU law school scholar]. Not to mention, if slave is not able to demonstrate the self-sufficiency, then bond is required to be purchased to his/her merits by slave owner (and if you are a slave owner, then why would you pay for slave when you are already losing money since the slave at the time was part of financial asset, unless you, a slave owner, is very passionate to human right values and so on). So now, it is very clear that when someone supports "Make American Great Again" slogan, then we should know what that kind of America is meant by. Slavery in 1800 was a norm recognized by most countries and civlilizations, where slave owners proponents strongly supports. Now, it is even unthinkable to live under the world of slavery, so let's just assume that one day, there is no immigration office and laws, where moving to different country is not a privilege, but a mere right as free as we just travel to Las Vegas for vacation. Who knows, someday, history will record Trump and its MAGA supporters as a dark history of US as much as the history describes "the Southern Slavery Owners"
  9. I agree. I call it American puritanism, where everyone should be (or must be) innocent, which is why Congress made something called ROC. If there are 100K I 751 applications, there could be 1 fradualent case, but this just can not be tolerated. I mean, not every one is ethical as not everyone makes reasonable choices, and this is only matter of statistics, where there can be fradualent cases. Also, realistically, even when RoC is present, there can be fradualent cases as well. Overall, we live in a world where "It is better to be safe than sorry." (and how often do we hear or use this phrase?).
  10. I will start it is what it is, but back in 1986 when ROC was first introduced, there was no increased amounts of immigrants and ambiguous immigrants petitions (such as DACA and TPS). If taking a look at 80s, immigrants were 600,000 per each year as opposed to 1.1 million in 2010s, where USCIS is now outnumbered by each petitions. In addition, complicated cases such as DADA and TPS are added to put more stress on already shaky processing timeline. Not to mention, USCIS takes care of OPT EAD since its introduction in 2008. While it is true that # of USCIS employees also increased to do more works, life is not cut-and-dry, where the increased workload of USCIS is not the only thing to blame here, but more likely, in my opinion, US Congress's fault and ultimately its dividing opinion on immigration. Nothing really significant agenda has been accomplished in US Congress since 1986 when the world is using smartphone from 386 computers. What is interesting is many US lawmakers try to accomplish their political agenda, but none of them survived. I just wanted to point out just 5 years ago when Obama was in white house, DAPA (DACA's version for USC's parents who is undocumented) was pushed through (albeit it ultimately failed) and Green Card issuance for those students who completed their graduate study in US universities. Now here we are. So who knows in 5 years ? meaning that if Trump is not to be re-elected this year, all of his (or more like Steve Miller's) hard works will be gone to history and put to Supreme Court decisions (such as DACA). We shall see.
  11. Sometimes, they might still want to check if your membership is still on going because theoretically it is possible that you and your spouse applied to membership just for the sake of I 751 or N 400 process and cancelled the membership after the I 751 was filed, so I would still send everything since I 751 was filed to update the information, unless the RFE letter specifically includes that USCIS receives these items and "Do Not Send". Like I was mentioning, most of mortages paperwork includes your spouse as a successor for the title or deed to pay off the mortgage in case anything happens to you, so that can be also included in RFE (unless you specifically negotiate this terms with lenders and lenders agreed upon) and you can explain why title/deed is only on your name, but you and your spouse both share financial responsibility. If you just google online power of attorney or Will, there will be multiple websites you can find.
  12. This is generic response from USCIS to ask for more evidence, not specifically asking for deed/mortgage. So you can send more evidence for joint ownership (such as auto title/or joint lease if applicable). Generally, although it depends on your resident states, your mortgage may have your spouse included in case something happens to you (your death) because lenders absolutely hate and hate taking any chance, and anything can possibly happen to borrowers, in case the lenders would have losing their money if there had not been a clause to go after the borrower's spouse. (Generally, they can only go after spouse, but no further such as borrower's parents or children, meaning that if the borrower is single, lenders are taking greater risks, and therefore APR might reflect on this). So I am sure you can include that as part of your joint financial responsibility since it is legally binding contract. Not only this clause, but many other mortgage clauses often requires spouse's signature In addition, if you have Club membership (such as COSTCO or Sams' club), that will help. Also if you really want to make sure, you can just find affordable online legal contracts such as POA and Will, and reach agreeable term and condition with your spouse and have sign. While you can only submit what you only have, since you have still sometime left, you can still go after more. Hope this helps.
  13. Can I ask you how the RFE is worded out? That is very interesting response USCIS asks for. The bottom line is you can explain why in detailed and thorough letter describing the nature of your finance and so on.
  14. No offense to you, but I do think you would need to change your attorney, who didn't even check your signature on I 751 application.
  15. 1) Summary dissolution is a type of hassle free divorce for those who don't have grudge feelings to re-start a life, which has nothing to do with USCIS's I 751 process. Although this could mean that the I 751 applicant may or may not have sufficient evidence, just summary dissolution itself shouldn't impact I 751 process provided that you submit enough evidence to establish your immigration benefits. (but who knows what in new era in Trump administration? All he does is to create uncertainty in every aspect in the world, especially when it comes to immigration). You would need to consult with experienced immigration lawyers who is specialized in I 751 divorce waivers. I am not living in California, but it seems like this summary of dissolution is unique in CA state laws, and therefore, you are not the 1st person who is going to file I 751 with this summary dissolution, and certainly, you won't be the last person applying I 751 with this, should you be recommended to do so, meaning that there will be experienced immigration lawyers who have similar cases like yours. It is also good outreach from you to do your own homework before you talk with immigration lawyers so that you can weed out some immigration lawyers who advertise to specialize in family immigrations, but are not familiar or have zero experiences in I 751 divorce waivers, however. Please do your research so that not only you will avoid unreasonable charges, but also, most importantly, protect and seek your immigration benefits. 2) In your case, I would think it is best to submit upon your divorce finalization. You will have to use "good faith marriage" in divorce waiver for your I 751, where the chance is already high enough that you will receive RFE or in-person interview. It is playing the game in immigration system, but since it is already happening that you are filing for divorce, I would submit it ASAP when divorce is granted by a judge with expectation that you will have in person interview with significant delay for I 751, but this can be also dependent on how much evidences you can submit for bona fide marriage, and definitely, one can also be discussed with experienced immigration lawyers. Many divorce waivers are approved without any interviews, but generally, they have longer time to get approved if that is something that you are concerned about. The choice is up to you as this is also part of your life choice. Best luck!
×
×
  • Create New...