Why are people advising others that the K3 is obsolete?

[trailmix 77]

It appears your reality is different from others. We will have to agree to disagree. If I had listened to your advice about anything related to speeding up a K3, albeit sending both petitions together or not, I'd be disappointed just as many others that have chosen to be frieghtened by your advice.

Interesting discussion. I don't know why people would be frightened by pushbrk's advice - it's advice, it's not advice with a gun pointing at them.

I've been in a few threads where push has given this advice. When people are hell bent on filing for a K3 I will, sometimes, explain the whole thing to them - in short - you can, but it's unlikely to be approved.

In those somewhat rare cases where a K3 would be beneficial to an applicant, they can certainly give it a try, nothing ventured nothing gained, but I also think it is important for them to know that they just might be wasting their time.

I suppose they (USCIS/NVC) made this decision to stop the doubling up of paperwork - one reason may be for people that persue the K3, get it then pursue the CR1/IR1. Basically you have now been the receipient of the processing of your case twice. If everyone played the visa game the way you do I assure you the wait would be much longer.

Edited May 1, 2010 by trailmix

[john & jean 37]

you can lead a mule to water, can not make him drink!!!

[SPSguy 18]

What they have to lose is the filing fee and all their months of hoping ending in a hug disappointment

I don't know which added filng fees you are referring to, for me I actually saved money not having to adjust status, lift conditions, seek employment authorization.

But again, as you stated yourself, this strategy works for people that do not have immediate intent to immigrate.

Yet not having immediate intent and K3 being obsolete are two different beasts.

I can't predict the future but I don't think there's enough evidence out there to suggest that you are right either. We don't know the circumstances surrounding the case that Sachinky posted.

Let's give it a few months and the truth shall set everyone free. I'll let you have the final word.

[pushbrk 12,893]

I don't know which added filng fees you are referring to, for me I actually saved money not having to adjust status, lift conditions, seek employment authorization.

But again, as you stated yourself, this strategy works for people that do not have immediate intent to immigrate.

Yet not having immediate intent and K3 being obsolete are two different beasts.

I can't predict the future but I don't think there's enough evidence out there to suggest that you are right either. We don't know the circumstances surrounding the case that Sachinky posted.

Let's give it a few months and the truth shall set everyone free. I'll let you have the final word.

People with no immediate immigrant intent have no use for an immigrant visa, so the I-130 filing fee is wasted. I did not say "this strategy or any strategy workd for people who do not have immediate intent to immigrate. I said K3 WAS, with emphasis on WAS a good option for those people. In the present tense, I have no confidence it is an available option or that any strategy will cause it to be available.

There's plenty of evidence USCIS and NVC do it their way according to procedure and are seldom open to special requests except when there are grounds to expedite the process.

Yes, we know all we have to know about the case Sachinky posted. Their petitions arrived at the same time and they requested the I-129F proceed because they hadn't filed I-130 petition(s) for the child or children. NVC said no and told them to file the petitions for the children. It's perfectly clear.

This statement makes no sense to me.

Yet not having immediate intent and K3 being obsolete are two different beasts.

The two aren't different beasts. One is a flower and the other a fish. This thread has gone on for 5 pages, yet in post 5, I wrote.

The new NVC procedure is as of February 1. For all practical purposes, at this point in time, the K3 visa is no longer a viable option. Therefore it is currently obsolete. If all you're arguing is the use of the term "obsolete" then you are technically correct. From a practical standpoint though, K3 is obsolete, dead, unavailable, no longer a viable option, not going to happen. Take your pick.

The title of this thread includes the word "why". The answer to "Why some people...." has been made clear days ago. That opinions vary is a given.

Cases where the foreign spouse has no immediate immigrant intent are, IMO, an important rare subset where the K3 visa WAS, again emphasis on WAS the only real solution. At this time, I have no reason to believe that avenue is still open. I think it should be and hope it becomes open again. Maybe some will risk the fee and months of waiting for potential disappointment and we'll see. But again, those cases are an extremely small percentage of the spouse visa cases and NOT what the K3 was actually intended for. Being outside the actual intention for which the K3 was created is one more reason I strongly doubt either USCIS or NVC will give such requests much consideration. That's an opinion though. I don't know of anybody who has tried since February.

Edited May 2, 2010 by pushbrk

[aishahossam 1]

[ het pushbrk, i want to add you give excellent advice and long ago you advised me on doing cr1 instead of k3 but i was so gun hoe about k3 heheh .. now nvc got both my petitions and it went cr1, at first i was like oh no be here forever ,, but my case is almost complete, been here less than 2 months, would have been much soonner out of nvc but i got rfes anyways me and my husband are now thanking god it went cr1 cause when he gets home, we dont have to do all thiis paperwork, he will enter as a resident, we can get social security number and he can work,and no big 1050 fee for ajusting status heheh//// doing k3 now doesnt get u ahead quicker ,and even when u get in the states what are you gonna do with a k3? justsit? thats about it, so pushbrk keep giving the great advice!!!!!!!!!!!! peace quote name='pushbrk' date='30 April 2010 - 12:09 PM' timestamp='1272643798' post='3908048]

Now those are some concrete reasons. I'll even add one more, in that you would interview months sooner in Vancouver than Montreal. Yours is one of the exceptions that make the K3 an attractive choice. Another exception I've mentioned several times is when the foreign spouse has no other way to legally enter the USA even to meet family but is not yet ready to immigrate and/or be subject to maintaining permanent resident status.

For the average couple wanting to be reunited with in the USA permanently, there is potentially a few weeks advantage, none or a delay in timeline to be weighed against the cost and hassle associated with adjusting status and waiting for work authorization. It's hardly a justification to start hanging your hat on USCIS honoring a procedural request or risking your whole process by intentionally creating the need for an RFE.

The subject line of this thread is telling. The question is "Why....?" The answer has been clearly given. For those to whom the answer doesn't apply or who wish attempt to find a way around the new NVC procedure, let them do so well informed as to the possibilities and realities of the situation.

I'll say again that my wife and daughter came to the USA on K3/4 visas and that I strongly disagree with NVC's decision to change their procedures. At the same time, I have a comprehensive and holistic understanding of both the K3 and IR1/CR1 processes and have given my assessment with that in mind.

[sachinky 465]

Another case involving the K-3 and K-4.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/255138-k3-k4-visa-converted-to-cr-1-by-national-visa-center/

[himher 634]

I rarely post on here anymore. I will break silence for a couple of comments:

USCIS cannot close out the K3 option. Because the LIFE act specified that this category be created for this specific purpose and last time I checked Congress still makes the laws even if the various agencies make the rules.

Those of you who note that I130 petitions are sailing through at the same speed as K3 petitions never acknowledge that your spouses sailed in on the backs of K3 visa filers and had there been no LIFE act and no K3 path the petitions that you insist people should file and the path that you insist people should take would not exist. I remember the days of the 1-year and longer CR1 backlogs even if your memories have failed you. We on the other hand filed in June of one year and she arrived in Jan of the following year. EAD by April. Rights to travel in and out of the country from day of arrival.

NONE of you crowing CR1 holders beat that timeline then and none of you beat it now. We took the K3 path in spite of Dan and Pushbrk and others screaming the exact same thing over and over when the thing that they SHOULD of been screaming is a big thank you that the K3 path designated by the LIFE act ALSO shortened the CR1 path and that reduction in CR1 processing time is because the K3/CR1 paths were finally consolidated.

Instead of screaming and crowing about the end results it would be more appropriate to write a long, touching thank you to the K3 couples who made your screaming and crowing possible. As to those who consider the K3 path - getting your family intact IS quicker while getting all of the work authorizations, etc takes exactly the same amount of time. Spending the extra (2) months apart is also cheaper which is Yu and Dan's favorite "benefit". So: If you want cheaper with more time apart and less paperwork - choose CR1. If you want your family intact more quickly and are willing to pay for the AOS/etc and your husband/wife can stand a breather for a couple of months while the EAD is processed - choose K3. Those are the pros and cons and those have always been the pros and cons.

David and Nita

ROC pending

[pushbrk 12,893]

I rarely post on here anymore. I will break silence for a couple of comments:

USCIS cannot close out the K3 option. Because the LIFE act specified that this category be created for this specific purpose and last time I checked Congress still makes the laws even if the various agencies make the rules.

Those of you who note that I130 petitions are sailing through at the same speed as K3 petitions never acknowledge that your spouses sailed in on the backs of K3 visa filers and had there been no LIFE act and no K3 path the petitions that you insist people should file and the path that you insist people should take would not exist. I remember the days of the 1-year and longer CR1 backlogs even if your memories have failed you. We on the other hand filed in June of one year and she arrived in Jan of the following year. EAD by April. Rights to travel in and out of the country from day of arrival.

NONE of you crowing CR1 holders beat that timeline then and none of you beat it now. We took the K3 path in spite of Dan and Pushbrk and others screaming the exact same thing over and over when the thing that they SHOULD of been screaming is a big thank you that the K3 path designated by the LIFE act ALSO shortened the CR1 path and that reduction in CR1 processing time is because the K3/CR1 paths were finally consolidated.

Instead of screaming and crowing about the end results it would be more appropriate to write a long, touching thank you to the K3 couples who made your screaming and crowing possible. As to those who consider the K3 path - getting your family intact IS quicker while getting all of the work authorizations, etc takes exactly the same amount of time. Spending the extra (2) months apart is also cheaper which is Yu and Dan's favorite "benefit". So: If you want cheaper with more time apart and less paperwork - choose CR1. If you want your family intact more quickly and are willing to pay for the AOS/etc and your husband/wife can stand a breather for a couple of months while the EAD is processed - choose K3. Those are the pros and cons and those have always been the pros and cons.

David and Nita

ROC pending

Apparently you failed to read the early posts in the thread and are unaware that it is NVC, not USCIS that effectively killed the K3. In a present day discussion, K3 is simply no longer available, making any argument FOR it, irrelevant TODAY.

This is also moot of course but obtaining work authorization for a K3 visa holder takes an AOS filing and three months or more of waiting. CR1 visa holders enter the US fully work authorized, with SS and Green cards arriving within two or three weeks in most cases. Not comparable at all.

Edited May 7, 2010 by pushbrk

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Apparently you failed to read the early posts in the thread and are unaware that it is NVC, not USCIS that effectively killed the K3. In a present day discussion, K3 is simply no longer available, making any argument FOR it, irrelevant TODAY.

This is also moot of course but obtaining work authorization for a K3 visa holder takes an AOS filing and three months or more of waiting. CR1 visa holders enter the US fully work authorized, with SS and Green cards arriving within two or three weeks in most cases. Not comparable at all.

A K3 visa holder does not have to file for adjustment of status to obtain an EAD.

[daboyz 36]

A K3 visa holder does not have to file for adjustment of status to obtain an EAD.

True, but it is like throwing $340 away. If you file for EAD and AOS at the same time, there is no fee for the EAD.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

True, but it is like throwing $340 away. If you file for EAD and AOS at the same time, there is no fee for the EAD.

A K3 is in legal status for two years after entry and really doesn't need to worry about adjusting to maintain status. Many persons through the years have chosen to spend the money on the EAD and wait until the 2-year anniversary of the wedding to file for adjustment, thus avoiding the extra step and expense of removing conditions.

[daboyz 36]

A K3 is in legal status for two years after entry and really doesn't need to worry about adjusting to maintain status. Many persons through the years have chosen to spend the money on the EAD and wait until the 2-year anniversary of the wedding to file for adjustment, thus avoiding the extra step and expense of removing conditions.

Good point.

[pushbrk 12,893]

A K3 is in legal status for two years after entry and really doesn't need to worry about adjusting to maintain status. Many persons through the years have chosen to spend the money on the EAD and wait until the 2-year anniversary of the wedding to file for adjustment, thus avoiding the extra step and expense of removing conditions.

Yes, my wife and I did exactly that under the old fee structure. It's still a viable option but less attractive under the new fee structure. Moot anyway today as one would actually have to obtain a K3 visa, which is extremely unlikely to happen.

[sachinky 465]

Why are people insisting on things that happened 2-3 years ago with what is happening now? The new rule has only gone into effect as of Feb 1, 2010.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Yes, my wife and I did exactly that under the old fee structure. It's still a viable option but less attractive under the new fee structure. Moot anyway today as one would actually have to obtain a K3 visa, which is extremely unlikely to happen.

I am of the opinion that it is better to let the actions of NVC bear out this prediction than it is to bang a gong constantly about the K3 being dead. The information is out there for readers and they can make their plans accordingly. The appropriate I-130's can always be filed if NVC closes the I-129. In the meanwhile it's best to give an accurate representation of the merits of the two visas rather than get carried away with one perspective.