Lets collect some information about IMBRA effects

[aussiewench 9]

The only petitions that would be being held without any further process will be the ones that were recalled. There is other processes besides the IMBRA requirements so therefore they would be correct in saying that processing hasnt stopped on all other petitions dated 6 March and later. They just wont be approving any of those petitions until they meet the requirements of the IMBRA. Petitions filed prior are also being processed and approved.

[ajames79 0]

Whether or not this is factual, I dont know, but Gary Bala is an AILA lawyer

taken from http://fianceevisalawyer.com/

May 30, 2006

Parts of the IMBRA law, which are not currently being challenged in court such as Section 832, require USCIS and DHS to gather from U.S. petitioners their criminal background information, including information on convictions. The USCIS approved petitions as of March 06, 2006 and later were not complicant with this requirement. Thus, State Department is unable to continue to process. New I-129F Petition forms asking petitioners for this information was obviously called for under IMBRA, but USCIS has thus far not been able to comply. Though technically IMBRA applies to all K-Visas (K-1 & K-3), State Department is currently implementing the recall only on the I-129F Petition for K-1 Visas, for reasons which are not clear.

Meanwhile, USCIS is apparantly taking the position that standard administrative protocol allows a six (6) month grace period after passage of a new law such as IMBRA to issue the implementing regulations and release any new required immigration forms. The six (6) month grace period would expire appoximately June 06, 2006.

It would appear that in these cases USCIS will: either send a Request for Additional Evidence (RFE) to the affected petitioners requesting the newly-required information and documents to bring the petition approvals into IMBRA-compliance, after which they will continue to process the case and forward to State Department; or perhaps in some cases request that State Department and the post ask for the information and documents of petitioner through a letter to the visa beneficiary.

Our office contacted the USCIS, Regulatory Management Division, which advised us that they expect to issue implementing regulations and new form requirements by the six (6) month time frame after the new law's passage, which would be by approximately June 06, 2006. With the guidance to officers and others needed from the implementing regulations, it would thus be reasonable to expect that USCIS processing of the "recalled" I-129F Petitions will continue after that time. Petitioners and beneficiaries would be well advised to continue their efforts to remain patient.

So in your own *smile* non lawyer opinion do you think it is a good idea for those of us who were sending our k-1 paperwork out next week to wait another week or two??

This is so confusing. I truly appreciate all you searchers out there!

Edited June 1, 2006 by ajames79

[Ladylethal 12]

She's just saying what the laywer said about IMBRA.

If you want to go ahead and send your petition to get it "in line" it's fine, if you don't want to get RFEd or whatever is it that they're gonna do to us then you wait, but there will be tons of petitions ahead of you once you do send yours.

EDIT: My status changed as well, they're no longer giving an estimate, before it was 30-45 days.

Edited June 1, 2006 by Luis&Laura

[ajames79 0]

She's just saying what the laywer said about IMBRA.

If you want to go ahead and send your petition to get it "in line" it's fine, if you don't want to get RFEd or whatever is it that they're gonna do to us then you wait, but there will be tons of petitions ahead of you once you do send yours.

EDIT: My status changed as well, they're no longer giving an estimate, before it was 30-45 days.

Thank you.

Just gathering opinions. Weighing out the options and seeing what other people would do.

I know we are all just reaching for information. Good luck with your k-1.

[Yodrak 7]

rachelw,

I sure do hope that USCIS has finally done away with the useless time estimates. The advice to use the processing dates to estimate case completion is a step in the right direction, unfortunately it omits the crirical element of how to use the processing dates. Too many people read the words 'we have begun processing' and their mind jumps ahead to 'we have completed processing'.

Yodrak

Here's something only mildly interesting.

I checked my status online on the USCIS website. It is now saying

Your I129F PETITION FOR FIANCE(E) was received on March 13, 2006. We will mail you a decision as soon as processing is complete. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. Follow the the link below for current processing dates.

Before it said between 80 and 110 days to process (this is NVC).

When I first got the NOA1, it said between 60 and 90 days to process. When they changed it to 80-110 days, it gave my case a "last updated" date of 3/24/06. Now that they have changed it to "use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done", my last updated didn't change.

This really isn't a big deal at all... funny though, when you watch all of this like a hawk, waiting for new information, the smallest change gets you all worked up!!

I wonder if they have changed this so people can't complain when the 110 days are up... hmm...

Anyone else seeing this change too?

Edited June 1, 2006 by Yodrak

[wodengdaini 0]

Here's something only mildly interesting.

I checked my status online on the USCIS website. It is now saying

Your I129F PETITION FOR FIANCE(E) was received on March 13, 2006. We will mail you a decision as soon as processing is complete. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. Follow the the link below for current processing dates.

Before it said between 80 and 110 days to process (this is NVC).

When I first got the NOA1, it said between 60 and 90 days to process. When they changed it to 80-110 days, it gave my case a "last updated" date of 3/24/06. Now that they have changed it to "use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done", my last updated didn't change.

This really isn't a big deal at all... funny though, when you watch all of this like a hawk, waiting for new information, the smallest change gets you all worked up!!

I wonder if they have changed this so people can't complain when the 110 days are up... hmm...

Anyone else seeing this change too?

I have the same on mine as yours.

[Ladylethal 12]

I think that if everyone checks they will have the same.

Yodrak, indeed, people do think that only their cases have that date so their petition should be the exact one they're claiming to be working on.

If I understand processing dates correctly it means that the oldest date they're processing is the one they put down, which could mean some faster official could be working on a different pile and have already reached further dates.

[GaryC 7]

Something interesting just happened. I was listening to Rush Limbaugh (PLEASE NO ENDLESS DISCUSSION OF THE VIRTUES OF RUSH HERE! save that for the off topic forum) There was someone that got on and talked about the delays caused by IMBRA. He ( the caller) sounded very angry about the whole thing because our government is bending over backwards to allow the illegals to stay only to hold up the ones that are doing it legaly. Rush said he should fly her to Mexico and walk her across. He also said that this illustrates how the government could deal with the illegal issue if it wanted to. Just thought it was interesting that we just got national coverage for our problem.

[Yodrak 7]

The recall involves petitions that were approved post 5 March and sent onward to the DoS. So, has the NBC approved and forwarded any I-129f petitions with Receipt Date after 5 March? Perhaps there are not any K3 petitions for the USCIS to recall from DoS?

Yodrak

Whether or not this is factual, I dont know, but Gary Bala is an AILA lawyer

taken from http://fianceevisalawyer.com/

May 30, 2006

Parts of the IMBRA law, which are not currently being challenged in court such as Section 832, require USCIS and DHS to gather from U.S. petitioners their criminal background information, including information on convictions. The USCIS approved petitions as of March 06, 2006 and later were not complicant with this requirement. Thus, State Department is unable to continue to process. New I-129F Petition forms asking petitioners for this information was obviously called for under IMBRA, but USCIS has thus far not been able to comply. Though technically IMBRA applies to all K-Visas (K-1 & K-3), State Department is currently implementing the recall only on the I-129F Petition for K-1 Visas, for reasons which are not clear.

....

[Ladylethal 12]

Gary, that shows how much it's costing petitioners this IMBRA delay.

[rachelw610 0]

Oh yeah, I definatly agree. Their dates really don't seem to mean much. It seems that it's all about accountability, not wanting to give an estimate that something will be done by a certain time, then when it isn't, having to deal with a boatload of complains from people wondering why their petitions haven't been approved. I just interpreted that the change in how they advise people to estimate the wait for an approval was done for that reason. Maybe the 110 day figure is not so accurate anymore. I'll believe their estimates, and online status ####### when I have the NOA2 in my hand!!

rachelw,

I sure do hope that USCIS has finally done away with the useless time estimates. The advice to use the processing dates to estimate case completion is a step in the right direction, unfortunately it omits the crirical element of how to use the processing dates. Too many people read the words 'we have begun processing' and their mind jumps ahead to 'we have completed processing'.

Yodrak

Here's something only mildly interesting.

I checked my status online on the USCIS website. It is now saying

Your I129F PETITION FOR FIANCE(E) was received on March 13, 2006. We will mail you a decision as soon as processing is complete. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. Follow the the link below for current processing dates.

Before it said between 80 and 110 days to process (this is NVC).

When I first got the NOA1, it said between 60 and 90 days to process. When they changed it to 80-110 days, it gave my case a "last updated" date of 3/24/06. Now that they have changed it to "use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done", my last updated didn't change.

This really isn't a big deal at all... funny though, when you watch all of this like a hawk, waiting for new information, the smallest change gets you all worked up!!

I wonder if they have changed this so people can't complain when the 110 days are up... hmm...

Anyone else seeing this change too?

[GaryC 7]

I am a member of Rush 24/7 and have the "special" email address that gets to him. I think I may send him a detailed email and see if he can give us some more discussion time. He does have an audience of 20 million people. He sounded sympathetic.

[Ladylethal 12]

That seems cool.

[Yodrak 7]

Laura,

The processing date is the Receipt Date of the most recent case being processed, not the oldest. In the event of discrepancies there are a number of possible explanations:

- since the processing dates are updated only periodically, it is possible that more recent cases have entered processing since the last update

- it's also possible for some cases to be taken off the shelf early for use in training

- it's possible that an incorrect processing date is published

Yodrak

...

If I understand processing dates correctly it means that the oldest date they're processing is the one they put down, which could mean some faster official could be working on a different pile and have already reached further dates.

[Ladylethal 12]

The newest? Hmmmmm, well, then it goes to show how randomly that date is put, maybe they actually do an average.

We see cases way ahead of processing date being adjucating and stuff that should have been adjucated yeons ago still in processing. Go figure.