navd-0

DQ'd today on my 3rd RFE. Submission was on either 31/1 or on 1/2 I don't know what time it would have been in the US lol.

DQ'd today on my 3rd RFE. Submission was on either 31/1 or on 1/2 I don't know what time it would have been in the US lol.

1099 submitted. Basically just following our immigration lawyers advice.

All documents provided and forms filled out. I guess I just got a dud official, our lawyer suggested we just attach more paystubs as it's been a few months of delays since our original application.

Hey all, I've been RFE'd two times now, the first for not handwriting a date on the I-864 (yeah, I know) and the second RFE due to not meeting the minimum income threshold, despite providing evidence in the form of tax returns and W-2s showing income above the income threshold. For the first RFE, our lawyer suggested we just resubmitted a new document with a hand written date, just to appease the NVC. However for second RFE we don't know what else we can provide. I understand that the officials are just doing a checkbox exercise, but what are they looking for specifically if not Tax returns and W-2's. It should be noted that my partner and I have been living abroad for 4 years and she's only returned to American employment in the last few months. We sat on our DS-260 until she had surpassed the income threshold, then provided to the NVC 3 years of tax returns, 3 W-2 slips (showing income in excess of minimum requirements), we attached a contract of employment from a state employer and as double-insurance, we provided a print-out of publicly available State Employee incomes. It's obvious to us and our immigration lawyers that we exceed the income threshold, but what else can we provide to the NVC as this is the second needless delay in an already slow ordeal.

It is incredibly frustrating. This is our second RFE due to NVC making up their own rule interpretations.

I got a second RFE today. Submission was on the 6th Jan (10+ UMT). The first RFE was for 'please handwrite date on page 8' this RFE is 'you do not meet income requirements' despite obviously earning more than the income requirements with 3 months of W2 and 3 years of tax returns. Perhaps the NVC can read my forum posts where I admonish their incompetence and are now punishing me. I'll try and draft a letter to my senator and hope they will step in to advocate on our behalf.

Somebody posted on a Facebook group that they got DQ'd today after having submitted on 28/12/22.

It really just depends on who picks up your file! Like you said, nowhere does it say to hand write the date. In fact, it does explicitly say the form can be typed!

Hey there, Still dealing with the NVC drama. RFE'd on the 16th Dec and resubmitted docs on the 6th of January. We resubmitted the exact same documents as before (as advised by our lawyer), so fingers crossed we get a more competent official reviewing our case.

Hey everybody, How has everyone submitted documents, specifically the I-864? The NVC must have been upset with the clarity of our original documents because they RFE'd us to 'resubmit with handwritten date'; which is obvious bull. We have a lawyer who is suggesting we submit the same document again and that it should be fine this time; which I also don't understand! How did everyone else send the i-864? Fill entirely digitally and sign via touchscreen/touchpad Fill most digitally, print, sign and scan Print and handwrite entire document then scan Fill document digitally and upload scanned signed page into PDF document. Some other way, that I can't think of. Thanks for your help guys, it's frustrating dealing with this minor step in the process.

Deleted.

As Devsur pointed out above and on the I864 itself it absolutely does not have to be handwritten. Many others, I would imagine most people who know how to use a computer would have filled in the date on the PDF. This is just the NVC being officious. Unfortunately for me, we used a lawyer and that lawyer is on leave for another 2 weeks and we cannot resubmit the -864 without their signature!

Exact same message I got. The signature was entered by hand and the date was typed just like all other boxes. Nowhere does it say the date should be handwritten, on top of that why did they assume the signature wasn't handwritten. Absolute jokes. Submitted on 11 Nov and I bet these idiots will invent a new problem next time.

Absolutely. I filled the date using the calendar date selection option on the PDF. It's literally inbuilt into their PDF! Smells of BS. See below for example.

I finally got an update from NVC regarding my I-864. They have requested I resubmit the form and this time change Part 8, section 6.B (the date) to a handwritten date. Despite the i-864 PDF making you select the date from a dropdown menu. NVC good job. Very professional. Original submission was on 11 November.

Update on my dummy NVC email of the 16th. I sent an enquiry asking why there has been no update. I have received an email today on the 22nd from the NVC stating, that additional documents are required. I find this hard to believe because we have gone through all the requirements with our lawyer multiple times (and our case is rather simple) in addition there is still no update on the CEAC website about what is required. Seems like they are covering up for their delays with bogus emails, or at least making mistake after mistake. IR1. PD: May 2021 DS260 Submitted on 10 November 2022. As of today no update on CEAC website, but have received 2 nonsense emails.

Hey @Dil & Malar though I received an email from the NVC saying there was an update, it was inaccurate. I am still waiting for my DQ.

Thanks @Dil & Malar! We submitted on the 10th of November. Received a dummy email on the 17th saying there's an update to the website. However no actual update on the website, so we sent an enquiry today.

Also in the same situation. NVC sent an email on the 17th with no actual update on the CEAC website. Today I sent a enquiry to the NVC so let's see what their response is.

Excellent, Hopefully our lawyer may respond to our emails THIS WEEK.

I'm actually mad at myself for not realising that the Police and Courts are not their to help out the family, rather they're just their to do THEIR jobs. I remember vividly being asked 'Did you strike him' and I said no at first but then mentioned 'wait yes, I went to grab something and pushed past him to get it' and that became a whole thing for the police and courts, I didn't want to lie about anything, but they really latched on to some of the keywords I said.

One thing that would answer a lot of questions right off the bat is that if the CIMT exemption applies to me? In the US my conviction carries a MAX sentence of 6 months, however the same simple assault (which in the US is not CIMT) when carried out in Australia has a max sentence of 2 years. I had a look at the police stats and less than 5% of people are ever actually sentenced for the crime, most like me are just told to behave for 12 months. If the exemption applies to US Federal rates of sentencing instead of Australia we're back to this being a minor issue.

Thanks for your response ROK2USA, ESTA is managed by CBP which is a sister agency to USCIS, as such they interpret the same laws in a slightly different fashion. ESTA very clearly asks if I have been involved in a 'crime that has caused serious bodily harm' (which is close to the CIMT definition of assault). I obviously have not been involved in such a crime, therefore I tick 'no'. From my limited few hours of research into CIMT I can surmise that my conviction does not involve CIMT, however I am worried about chancing that to some random border official or immigration judge (the same people that sat by as children were separated from parents and put in cages!) I am completely unsure as to how to change interview location to Sydney, it's starting to seem that would be the best route. In addition will I have to hire another lawyer to deal with the criminal record, as our current lawyer is a bit more barebones about such things.

The crux of the issue as far as I can tell is what constitutes a CIMT 'Crime Involving Moral Turbidity' as that is the only test that matters. As CIMT is not clearly defined it leaves a lot open to chance, which is frightening. Legal scholarship has CIMT down to grievous harm or simple assault + deadly weapon. It looks as though I should be completely fine, but I just cannot find anything or anyone giving concrete information. The crux of the issue as far as I can tell is what constitutes a CIMT 'Crime Involving Moral Turbidity' as that is the only test that matters. As CIMT is not clearly defined it leaves a lot open to chance, which is frightening. Legal scholarship has CIMT down to grievous harm or simple assault + deadly weapon. It looks as though I should be completely fine, but I just cannot find anything or anyone giving concrete information.