IMBRA / Background Check

[jamesfreddyc 0]

If the main purpose of the new IMBRA law is to try to identify us horrible monsters (American men seeking mail order brides)...

(BTW, meeting someone online, conversing and building a relationship over months/years does NOT correctly describe "seeking a mail-order-bride". If it were NOT for letter-writing and long-distance relationship building, then I probably would not be here ---- my grandfather fought in WWII and built a loving relationship with my grandmother while fighting in that war).

Sorry -- a bit off-track... Anyway ---

Should we go ahead and get the background check run (with the FBI?) right now and send it in to the USCIS to add to our portfolios?

I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with running a background check if that means my wife and I can proceed with our existing application for a K3/Non-Immigrant visa. Do you think it will only add confusion to our case or perhaps show that we have nothing to hide?

[simple_male 1]

If the main purpose of the new IMBRA law is to try to identify us horrible monsters (American men seeking mail order brides)...

(BTW, meeting someone online, conversing and building a relationship over months/years does NOT correctly describe "seeking a mail-order-bride". If it were NOT for letter-writing and long-distance relationship building, then I probably would not be here ---- my grandfather fought in WWII and built a loving relationship with my grandmother while fighting in that war).

Sorry -- a bit off-track... Anyway ---

Should we go ahead and get the background check run (with the FBI?) right now and send it in to the USCIS to add to our portfolios?

I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with running a background check if that means my wife and I can proceed with our existing application for a K3/Non-Immigrant visa. Do you think it will only add confusion to our case or perhaps show that we have nothing to hide?

I see that your I-130 is approved already which is a good news. I am concentrating on my I-130 since it is approved and slowly giving up on I-129F. I would not run any background check and send it to NBC, unless I am asked to do. Most likely, USCIS/NBC would send RFE (to provide information about any conviction, if any) to all with NOA-1 from March 6. We have to wait until we hear from USCIS/NBC and in the meantime, we should concentrate on approved I-130.

[kitkat1 5]

I see that your I-130 is approved already which is a good news. I am concentrating on my I-130 since it is approved and slowly giving up on I-129F. I would not run any background check and send it to NBC, unless I am asked to do. Most likely, USCIS/NBC would send RFE (to provide information about any conviction, if any) to all with NOA-1 from March 6. We have to wait until we hear from USCIS/NBC and in the meantime, we should concentrate on approved I-130.

I agree - don't waste your time or effort. They are either going to send a new form to fill out and sign or send a RFE. Look at it this way, at least you have the option to go the I-130 route!

[Tim and Bethanie 1]

I don't think it is to identify "horrible men", as much as it is to protect innocent women, who are entering a foreign country in which they are usually unfamiliar with and give them some options and understanding up front! This is just a bump in the road that will sort out sooner than later, unfortunatly it causes those already in the process delay. The positive side for those men or women that are "horrible", maybe it will act as a deterrent even if for a short time.

I met my husband online, doesn't put us in the marriage broker business either. I never had a problem with him knowing my background. Don't think I like it pointing directly toward marriage brokers, feel it should have been natural to have had these checks done on every petitioner in the first place. Sadly we all lose for others lack of intelligence that have travelled this road before us, sorry you fell into this at the time you did. Know I went a bit off with this, but like everyone else you are probably angered, hurt and frustrated at the whole process, just try to remember what each of us goes through makes it easier for the next guy as others have done for us.

Likely best you wait it out, as others stated if they want something believe you me they will ask for it.

B

[mendeleev 68]

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

It'll be our second K1 -- she went home in January without marrying me. We'll start the second (and final) K1 soon and hope to be married in about a year. (So, we'll have to try to time our submission so the visa is issued between February and April.)

Last time, she had to get a police report. She'll have to do it again. It was a hassle -- police didn't know quite how to do it, gave her a runaround. This time, I may have some reporting to do. Or will they (USCIS) check on me directly, like my employer could if he felt like it?

So, I got to see a police letter saying that she had no criminal record. In a way, it seems fair that I should get some scrutiny too, even if it adds to the hassle.

Edited June 13, 2006 by novotul

[jamesfreddyc 0]

I don't think it is to identify "horrible men", as much as it is to protect innocent women, who are entering a foreign country in which they are usually unfamiliar with and give them some options and understanding up front! This is just a bump in the road that will sort out sooner than later, unfortunatly it causes those already in the process delay. The positive side for those men or women that are "horrible", maybe it will act as a deterrent even if for a short time.

I met my husband online, doesn't put us in the marriage broker business either. I never had a problem with him knowing my background. Don't think I like it pointing directly toward marriage brokers, feel it should have been natural to have had these checks done on every petitioner in the first place. Sadly we all lose for others lack of intelligence that have travelled this road before us, sorry you fell into this at the time you did. Know I went a bit off with this, but like everyone else you are probably angered, hurt and frustrated at the whole process, just try to remember what each of us goes through makes it easier for the next guy as others have done for us.

Likely best you wait it out, as others stated if they want something believe you me they will ask for it.

B

While I agree with your premise, it's STILL a bit disheartening to be labeled someone who acquired a "mail order bride" (which is the actual language in the IMBRA). I simply do NOT consider 3 years of long distance relationship building as "mail order bride hunting"....

Including learning spanish (self taught) in order to communicate with her, countless hours on the phone, thousands of words written in letters/emails, and about 25 trips to visiting my wife (including my own family making the trip to visit her and her family). Needless to say, she has a very good understanding of life in the United States, including our laws and culture --- heck, she has several family memnbers and freinds already living here. The bottom line is, she has nothing to be "protected" from ----

So, yes I agree that the segment of the USCIS petitioners who puruse the websites for some mail order bride SHOULD be questioned. There is no way of knowing if that particular woman understands the full ramifications of hitching up with a potential predator (ie monster) without the IMBRA in place.

.... But it should be much more specific as to whom it applies to.

I am NOT a mail order bride hunter. I am, and have been in a lasting, loving, long-distance relationship for over 3 years prior to our union.

j