Jump to content

AndrewAlp

Members
  • Posts

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by AndrewAlp

  1. Wow! I had heard about all this kind of stuff, which is why I just went ahead and paid my lawyer who has a "contact" down at police headquarters in Bangkok 5000 baht.. no receipt mind you, had the police certificate in hand in 4 days. Pretty shady but good job on following your gut!

  2. 1 hour ago, AndrewAlp said:

    I thought I would smile so big when I saw this .. but instead it was a tear that rolled out of my eye.  I was very discouraged and then it happened .. I was going to check my app to see how many days it’s been and to my shock it says “Updated as of Sept 4 .. 4 alerts “ I clicked and it was an approval! I checked the old site to confirm .. then 3 minutes later the email came.  Wow praise God! Noa 1 Feb 14.

    CD7A5D2D-B26F-49A6-983A-45ABD2DFF5E6.jpeg

    I wanted to add that I was notified via text, email and OLD site was updated. The new site was not and still is not updated at all.

  3. 7 minutes ago, Toastbear said:

    No, he needs to send it via mail. They want a wet signature.

     

    I dont really know how much time you have to respond, but thats what the instructions say: wet signature.

     

    Also if you need it faster than you gotta pay extra for fast delivery

    It’s not required .. this is from a previous post where they talked at length.. the onlybwet signature you need is on the petition.

    A wet signature for the letter of intent to marry from the beneficiary hasn't been required for a couple years now. You cannot use a digital signature, but a scanned version should be fine.

    The letter of intent to marry is considered supporting evidence.

     

    In the past, it might result in an RFE, but they aren't doing this anymore. Even the I-130 no longer requires the beneficiary's signature anymore (if outside the US).

    Edited December 21, 2017 by geowrian “

  4. 1 minute ago, emekus94 said:

     

    This is not fully correct
    To the extent beneficiary has never been to the US/is well known/travels a lot, it's kind of impossible to do background check on them - hence the need for police reports from the beneficiary of everywhere they have lived since age 16.
    The police reports are equivalent to the petitioner background check in the US

    This makes more sense.  And the police report doesn't come into play until packet 3 correct?  So it would have nothing to do with NOA2.

×
×
  • Create New...