allright,sorry for being silly

[B'sA 0]

- The OP filed on the last day of December at CSC. It is ***WAY*** to early for this poster to be calling the RFE line. Calling the RFE line now is a waste of everyone's time, and irresponsible.

The reason i 've put this question was that i wanted to know what's that all about.

Plus, my fiance would laugh if i told him to try to do this now.

No, i'm not getting despeeeerately crazy, i'm getting informed!

[rebeccajo 14]

Not to mention that we have two posters in the other thread who have used the trick and they now find themselves in Administrative Review.

An adjudicator can move a file to any desk, you know. And it doesn't have to be the one you are hoping for.

I don't know that we can necessarily correlate the one action (calling the RFE line) to a result (administrative review). That would be a severe abuse of power, and probably a firing offense. I'm sure it occasionally happens, but I have to believe, on the whole, the adjudicators are more professional than that.

The anecdotal evidence is right there in plain sight and could have nothing at all to do with 'professionalism'.

Whinging phone calls from petitioners, especially when they blather on and on about their relationship (as was reported in one of the accounts of one of the individuals who now finds themselves waiting longer) could raise the suspicions of the AO enough to send the file off for evaluation.

You can't disregard the evidence just because it's not to your liking.

[DA BOMB 1]

rebeccajo - you as a long time member and organizer of this forum, I find it immature and completely uncalled for the message you left in my inbox:

Are we going to have a discussion in public about the answers to the question on the I94W regarding convictions for the use of controlled substances?

You send this to me as if it's some secret and you threaten to expose me - trust me if I had any I wouldnt post them in public so yes, if you would like to discuss this then lets. All the prior conviction history for my husband past to present has been laid before the immigration officials - and he's sitting here with a greencard....oh.. and without an I-601. Is there anything else you would like to discuss in public?

[rebeccajo 14]

Mox, Administrative Reviews at this stage of the process are not all that common.

Thus, IMO, a sample size of 2 (out of the number of people who report using the 'trick') gives me pause.

[rebeccajo 14]

stuff completely off-topic and TOS-violating

I would like to know why

a) You are posting this in this thread, which has nothing to do with your case or your issue with rj, and

B) why you are posting the contents of a pm, which is against the TOS.

Whatever your beef with rj, take it somewhere else please.

Mox, let it stand. We'll take the post back to the thread it comes out of, which is here:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...=115911&hl=

[rebeccajo 14]

Mox, let it stand. We'll take the post back to the thread it comes out of, which is here:

*pit bull trots back to his dog house with a sideways glance behind him*

(whistle if you need me. )

LOL. Sorry.

Just wanted you to know it doesn't personally bother me that she posted my PM. Even if it is a TOS violation.

[panamania79 2]

My question is: could anybody explain what's the RFE trick?

Thank you,guys!

You are not being silly at all.I've always wanted to know about the RFE trick also.

[B'sA 0]

My question is: could anybody explain what's the RFE trick?

Thank you,guys!

You are not being silly at all.I've always wanted to know about the RFE trick also.