K-3 ? (Sorry if answered)

[ivy88 0]

I agree with you and thats why I considering going the k3 route

K3 was originally intended to reunite husbands and wives faster, much faster. Under current procedures (with rare exceptions) there is no timeline advantage to speak of and the costs have become significantly higher to take the K3 route instead of the CR1 or IR1, with little if any time savings. It's the most frequently discussed subject in the K3 forum. Check it out.

Respectfully disagree on the bold statements above.

Looking at the data here on VJ, it still appears that a K-3 is 2 to 4 months 'faster' than a CR-1/IR-1 ("NOA2 to interview" for the past three months is 86 days for K-3s and 209 days for CR-1s in the "immigration timelines" stats). For some, those 2 to 4 months would be deemed a timeline advantage. The additional cost of going the K-3 route vs. CR-1 route is between $126 to $671 depending on when EAD and AOS are filed.

Factors to consider before making the decision:

1) How long have you been married? If you go for the immigrant visa and it is less than two years, your spouse will get a conditional GC. More than two years and your spouse will get a 10 year GC.

2) Will your spouse want to work in the USA (within the first two years of arrival)? With the CR-1/IR-1 they can work right away. With the K-3, they will have to file for an EAD. This can be done either before adjusting status (for a price), or along with adjusting status (EAD fee waived).

With regards to cost, it depends on your answers to 1) and 2) above):

A K3 costs $355 for the I-130, $0 for the I-129F, and $131 for the visa (at the embassy); $486 total. The IR-1/CR-1 costs $355 for I-130 plus $70 for AOS bill plus $400 for IV bill ; $825 total.

With the CR-1 your spouse can get a SSN and work upon arrival in the USA. With a K3, no SSN or EAD. To get them for the K-3, you would have to file either the EAD ($340) or AOS, $1,010 cost (EAD $0 when filed concurrently or subsequent to AOS). However, if your spouse will not work, then the costs between the two are not substantially different.

If you file for IR-1/CR-1, then two years after your spouses arrival you would have to file I-751 to lift conditions at a cost of $545 (assumes the original GC was a 2-yr conditional card). Total cost from start to 10 yr GC would be $1,370.

If you can get the K-3 and wait until your second wedding anniversary, you avoid receiving a conditional green card and lifting conditions. That means only $1,010 for AOS resulting in a ten year GC. The total for I-130 filing to 10 yr GC would be $1,496. ($126 - well worth it to most people for the potential to be reunited 2 to 4 months sooner).

If the K3 route is chosen plus AOS upon arrival (to get SSN and EAD) then the total would be $486 plus $1,010 plus $545 (for lifting conditions); a total of $2,041. An alternative would be to file K-3 ($486), then EAD ($340), then AOS ($1,010) around second wedding anniversary - total of $1,836. These options are $671 and $466 more, respectively, than the CR-1. Again, potentially worth it for the 2 to 4 month time savings to some applicants.

[Dakine 26]

K3 was originally intended to reunite husbands and wives faster, much faster. Under current procedures (with rare exceptions) there is no timeline advantage to speak of and the costs have become significantly higher to take the K3 route instead of the CR1 or IR1, with little if any time savings. It's the most frequently discussed subject in the K3 forum. Check it out.

Respectfully disagree on the bold statements above.

Looking at the data here on VJ, it still appears that a K-3 is 2 to 4 months 'faster' than a CR-1/IR-1 ("NOA2 to interview" for the past three months is 86 days for K-3s and 209 days for CR-1s in the "immigration timelines" stats). For some, those 2 to 4 months would be deemed a timeline advantage. The additional cost of going the K-3 route vs. CR-1 route is between $126 to $671 depending on when EAD and AOS are filed.

Factors to consider before making the decision:

1) How long have you been married? If you go for the immigrant visa and it is less than two years, your spouse will get a conditional GC. More than two years and your spouse will get a 10 year GC.

2) Will your spouse want to work in the USA (within the first two years of arrival)? With the CR-1/IR-1 they can work right away. With the K-3, they will have to file for an EAD. This can be done either before adjusting status (for a price), or along with adjusting status (EAD fee waived).

With regards to cost, it depends on your answers to 1) and 2) above):

A K3 costs $355 for the I-130, $0 for the I-129F, and $131 for the visa (at the embassy); $486 total. The IR-1/CR-1 costs $355 for I-130 plus $70 for AOS bill plus $400 for IV bill ; $825 total.

With the CR-1 your spouse can get a SSN and work upon arrival in the USA. With a K3, no SSN or EAD. To get them for the K-3, you would have to file either the EAD ($340) or AOS, $1,010 cost (EAD $0 when filed concurrently or subsequent to AOS). However, if your spouse will not work, then the costs between the two are not substantially different.

If you file for IR-1/CR-1, then two years after your spouses arrival you would have to file I-751 to lift conditions at a cost of $545 (assumes the original GC was a 2-yr conditional card). Total cost from start to 10 yr GC would be $1,370.

If you can get the K-3 and wait until your second wedding anniversary, you avoid receiving a conditional green card and lifting conditions. That means only $1,010 for AOS resulting in a ten year GC. The total for I-130 filing to 10 yr GC would be $1,496. ($126 - well worth it to most people for the potential to be reunited 2 to 4 months sooner).

If the K3 route is chosen plus AOS upon arrival (to get SSN and EAD) then the total would be $486 plus $1,010 plus $545 (for lifting conditions); a total of $2,041. An alternative would be to file K-3 ($486), then EAD ($340), then AOS ($1,010) around second wedding anniversary - total of $1,836. These options are $671 and $466 more, respectively, than the CR-1. Again, potentially worth it for the 2 to 4 month time savings to some applicants.

Cost me OVER 2K more to go thru adjusting status K3/K4 as USCIS screwed up and my wife and child had do do biometrics 3 times. We have to fly to do biometrics. Also cost about 4K+more as my wife wasn't able to work because of delayed getting SSN.

Big mistake on my part going with the K3/K4

Ive also seen peeps on K3s still waiting for their GC after aone year+!

Edited January 29, 2009 by Haole

[pushbrk 12,569]

K3 was originally intended to reunite husbands and wives faster, much faster. Under current procedures (with rare exceptions) there is no timeline advantage to speak of and the costs have become significantly higher to take the K3 route instead of the CR1 or IR1, with little if any time savings. It's the most frequently discussed subject in the K3 forum. Check it out.

Respectfully disagree on the bold statements above.

Looking at the data here on VJ, it still appears that a K-3 is 2 to 4 months 'faster' than a CR-1/IR-1 ("NOA2 to interview" for the past three months is 86 days for K-3s and 209 days for CR-1s in the "immigration timelines" stats). For some, those 2 to 4 months would be deemed a timeline advantage. The additional cost of going the K-3 route vs. CR-1 route is between $126 to $671 depending on when EAD and AOS are filed.

Factors to consider before making the decision:

1) How long have you been married? If you go for the immigrant visa and it is less than two years, your spouse will get a conditional GC. More than two years and your spouse will get a 10 year GC.

2) Will your spouse want to work in the USA (within the first two years of arrival)? With the CR-1/IR-1 they can work right away. With the K-3, they will have to file for an EAD. This can be done either before adjusting status (for a price), or along with adjusting status (EAD fee waived).

With regards to cost, it depends on your answers to 1) and 2) above):

A K3 costs $355 for the I-130, $0 for the I-129F, and $131 for the visa (at the embassy); $486 total. The IR-1/CR-1 costs $355 for I-130 plus $70 for AOS bill plus $400 for IV bill ; $825 total.

With the CR-1 your spouse can get a SSN and work upon arrival in the USA. With a K3, no SSN or EAD. To get them for the K-3, you would have to file either the EAD ($340) or AOS, $1,010 cost (EAD $0 when filed concurrently or subsequent to AOS). However, if your spouse will not work, then the costs between the two are not substantially different.

If you file for IR-1/CR-1, then two years after your spouses arrival you would have to file I-751 to lift conditions at a cost of $545 (assumes the original GC was a 2-yr conditional card). Total cost from start to 10 yr GC would be $1,370.

If you can get the K-3 and wait until your second wedding anniversary, you avoid receiving a conditional green card and lifting conditions. That means only $1,010 for AOS resulting in a ten year GC. The total for I-130 filing to 10 yr GC would be $1,496. ($126 - well worth it to most people for the potential to be reunited 2 to 4 months sooner).

If the K3 route is chosen plus AOS upon arrival (to get SSN and EAD) then the total would be $486 plus $1,010 plus $545 (for lifting conditions); a total of $2,041. An alternative would be to file K-3 ($486), then EAD ($340), then AOS ($1,010) around second wedding anniversary - total of $1,836. These options are $671 and $466 more, respectively, than the CR-1. Again, potentially worth it for the 2 to 4 month time savings to some applicants.

This is a pretty good anaylysis but they assume a 2 to 4 month time savings based on a small data sample that is incomplete. Many of the recent VJ CR1 visas are issued to beneficiaries who had both petitions filed. The second petition slowed the first through the system and the couple subsequently chose the CR1 route. Some of them didn't use the appropriate shortcuts through NVC. My analysis takes a different route which can certainly be argued against. I see the I-130 being approved about a month sooner than the two petitions together would be approved, followed by pushing the case through NVC. NVC eats up the month or so advantage and two to 6 more weeks are potentially added because of immigrant visa interview scheduling delays at some Consulates vs non-immigrant interview scheduling. The net change is a matter of 4 to 6 weeks and it can go either way.

Another cost factor beyond "fees" is the delay in work authorization. This is far more significant for those who would wish to and could find become employed shortly after arrival. I see the minimum cost differencial as $671 for anybody who would receive a conditional green card.

K3 is still right for some people. It just doesn't carry anything like the advantages it did a couple years ago or earlier. We have far more people reporting they wish they had never filed the I-129F than those who report they are happy they did. I disagree with the blanket recommendation for the immigrant visa path, however because there are very definite exceptions in individual case.

[4Lifer 0]

K3 was originally intended to reunite husbands and wives faster, much faster. Under current procedures (with rare exceptions) there is no timeline advantage to speak of and the costs have become significantly higher to take the K3 route instead of the CR1 or IR1, with little if any time savings. It's the most frequently discussed subject in the K3 forum. Check it out.

Respectfully disagree on the bold statements above.

Looking at the data here on VJ, it still appears that a K-3 is 2 to 4 months 'faster' than a CR-1/IR-1 ("NOA2 to interview" for the past three months is 86 days for K-3s and 209 days for CR-1s in the "immigration timelines" stats). For some, those 2 to 4 months would be deemed a timeline advantage. The additional cost of going the K-3 route vs. CR-1 route is between $126 to $671 depending on when EAD and AOS are filed.

Factors to consider before making the decision:

1) How long have you been married? If you go for the immigrant visa and it is less than two years, your spouse will get a conditional GC. More than two years and your spouse will get a 10 year GC.

2) Will your spouse want to work in the USA (within the first two years of arrival)? With the CR-1/IR-1 they can work right away. With the K-3, they will have to file for an EAD. This can be done either before adjusting status (for a price), or along with adjusting status (EAD fee waived).

With regards to cost, it depends on your answers to 1) and 2) above):

A K3 costs $355 for the I-130, $0 for the I-129F, and $131 for the visa (at the embassy); $486 total. The IR-1/CR-1 costs $355 for I-130 plus $70 for AOS bill plus $400 for IV bill ; $825 total.

With the CR-1 your spouse can get a SSN and work upon arrival in the USA. With a K3, no SSN or EAD. To get them for the K-3, you would have to file either the EAD ($340) or AOS, $1,010 cost (EAD $0 when filed concurrently or subsequent to AOS). However, if your spouse will not work, then the costs between the two are not substantially different.

If you file for IR-1/CR-1, then two years after your spouses arrival you would have to file I-751 to lift conditions at a cost of $545 (assumes the original GC was a 2-yr conditional card). Total cost from start to 10 yr GC would be $1,370.

If you can get the K-3 and wait until your second wedding anniversary, you avoid receiving a conditional green card and lifting conditions. That means only $1,010 for AOS resulting in a ten year GC. The total for I-130 filing to 10 yr GC would be $1,496. ($126 - well worth it to most people for the potential to be reunited 2 to 4 months sooner).

If the K3 route is chosen plus AOS upon arrival (to get SSN and EAD) then the total would be $486 plus $1,010 plus $545 (for lifting conditions); a total of $2,041. An alternative would be to file K-3 ($486), then EAD ($340), then AOS ($1,010) around second wedding anniversary - total of $1,836. These options are $671 and $466 more, respectively, than the CR-1. Again, potentially worth it for the 2 to 4 month time savings to some applicants.

This is a pretty good anaylysis but they assume a 2 to 4 month time savings based on a small data sample that is incomplete. Many of the recent VJ CR1 visas are issued to beneficiaries who had both petitions filed. The second petition slowed the first through the system and the couple subsequently chose the CR1 route. Some of them didn't use the appropriate shortcuts through NVC. My analysis takes a different route which can certainly be argued against. I see the I-130 being approved about a month sooner than the two petitions together would be approved, followed by pushing the case through NVC. NVC eats up the month or so advantage and two to 6 more weeks are potentially added because of immigrant visa interview scheduling delays at some Consulates vs non-immigrant interview scheduling. The net change is a matter of 4 to 6 weeks and it can go either way.

Another cost factor beyond "fees" is the delay in work authorization. This is far more significant for those who would wish to and could find become employed shortly after arrival. I see the minimum cost differencial as $671 for anybody who would receive a conditional green card.

K3 is still right for some people. It just doesn't carry anything like the advantages it did a couple years ago or earlier. We have far more people reporting they wish they had never filed the I-129F than those who report they are happy they did. I disagree with the blanket recommendation for the immigrant visa path, however because there are very definite exceptions in individual case.

In our particular situation, it seemed a good idea to file for the K-3 because the initial cost of bringing my wife and daughter was only $355 + $131, my wife does not need to become employed, and we can wait for EAD, AOS, etc. Of course we INITIALLY thought K-3 would be much faster. Are we still choosing the right path considering our circumstances? Thanks!