AOS - K1 VISA HOLDER -- NEED HELP

[Nich-Nick 3,354]

Any idiot can read the forms and the requirements and determine (with reasonable accuracy) whether the required vaccinations have been administered. My point was that the law requires the determination to be made by a panel physician or civil surgeon - not an immigration officer.

It says in their handbook to verify that those shots were given even if the civil surgeon says complete and to reject it if the shots aren't there. That's why it seems to me that the USCIS determines eligibility. The civil surgeon is charged with choosing the right vaccine, keeping it at a proper storage temperature and shelf life, determining if it is medically safe to give based on patient medical history, and recording it properly on the form.

And concerning results checkboxes. The instuctions to panel physicians say

If

any of the boxes under the "Not Medically Appropriate" heading was checked, the

"Applicant may be eligible for blanket waiver(s) because vaccination(s) not medically

appropriate (as indicated above)" box must also be checked. This box will probably

always be checked because some vaccines may not be age appropriate for the

applicant.

The part that says this box will probably always be checked indicates to me that most DS-3025s would probably be marked "Incomplete...blanket waiver" just because adults don't get the baby shots. They could have MMR, Tdap, and a history of chickenpox (everything needed for adult AOS) and still have their results marked "Incomplete...blanket waiver". Which brings me back to the USCIS adjudicators are instructed to look at the shots and grant a blanket waiver if appropriate.

I know Jim and Vanessa preach a different story, but I wanted to explain why I believe my husband and many others were granted a green card without RFE, or I-693, or "complete" marked on the DS-3025.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

And concerning results checkboxes. The instuctions to panel physicians say

If

any of the boxes under the "Not Medically Appropriate" heading was checked, the

"Applicant may be eligible for blanket waiver(s) because vaccination(s) not medically

appropriate (as indicated above)" box must also be checked. This box will probably

always be checked because some vaccines may not be age appropriate for the

applicant.

The part that says this box will probably always be checked indicates to me that most DS-3025s would probably be marked "Incomplete...blanket waiver" just because adults don't get the baby shots. They could have MMR, Tdap, and a history of chickenpox (everything needed for adult AOS) and still have their results marked "Incomplete...blanket waiver". Which brings me back to the USCIS adjudicators are instructed to look at the shots and grant a blanket waiver if appropriate.

I know Jim and Vanessa preach a different story, but I wanted to explain why I believe my husband and many others were granted a green card without RFE, or I-693, or "complete" marked on the DS-3025.

We "preach a different story" because of what the instructions say. I know someone who had shots marked "not age appropriate" but otherwise she was up to date. Her form was marked complete. An error sure but still, there you go.

My shots also had "not age appropriate" but my form marked "incomplete". The required shots were complete, and I knew it, I still paid $50 for a vaccination transcription because I wanted to be sure I didn't get an RFE... something i just couldn't afford at that moment in time.

I personally "preach" that if you don't mind an RFE go ahead and send it. But if you do, it certainly doesn't hurt. That and at the time of the majority of my "preaching" almost everyone was getting an RFE for an I-693. Better to err on the side of caution.

Edited November 11, 2010 by Vanessa&Tony

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

It says in their handbook to verify that those shots were given even if the civil surgeon says complete and to reject it if the shots aren't there. That's why it seems to me that the USCIS determines eligibility. The civil surgeon is charged with choosing the right vaccine, keeping it at a proper storage temperature and shelf life, determining if it is medically safe to give based on patient medical history, and recording it properly on the form.

And concerning results checkboxes. The instuctions to panel physicians say

If

any of the boxes under the "Not Medically Appropriate" heading was checked, the

"Applicant may be eligible for blanket waiver(s) because vaccination(s) not medically

appropriate (as indicated above)" box must also be checked. This box will probably

always be checked because some vaccines may not be age appropriate for the

applicant.

The part that says this box will probably always be checked indicates to me that most DS-3025s would probably be marked "Incomplete...blanket waiver" just because adults don't get the baby shots. They could have MMR, Tdap, and a history of chickenpox (everything needed for adult AOS) and still have their results marked "Incomplete...blanket waiver". Which brings me back to the USCIS adjudicators are instructed to look at the shots and grant a blanket waiver if appropriate.

I know Jim and Vanessa preach a different story, but I wanted to explain why I believe my husband and many others were granted a green card without RFE, or I-693, or "complete" marked on the DS-3025.

I have been lectured about taking a similar position on another point, by Vanessa no less.

I also did something which I sincerely believed was following the rules. I didn't get any RFE's, and my wife and step-kids now have their green cards. I presumed what I did was the right thing to do - until I discovered that other people had done it differently, and thought I had been lucky. I didn't agree until I was shown other people who had gotten RFE's for doing essentially what I had done. At that point, I backed away and conceded that I really might have been an exception.

The DS-3025 and I-693 are one of the biggest "who the hell knows" aspects of the AOS document package. People have submitted only a DS-3025 marked "incomplete" and "blanket waiver" and been approved. Many others have gotten RFE's for an I-693. Many have even submitted a DS-3025 marked "complete", and still gotten an RFE for a COMPLETE I-693 because USCIS inexplicably lost the medical results, though some have been successful in provoking USCIS to somehow locate the lost medical file.

The point is that the law requires a civil surgeon to clear the immigrant for medical inadmissibilities, but will allow a panel physician in a foreign country to clear them if they arrived as the spouse, fiancee, or derivative child of a US citizen. The latter case seems to be where the "who the hell knows" aspect comes into play. The IO has the authority to go over the results they received from the panel physician and determine whether the vaccinations are complete. Some IO's are unwilling to do this, and want a civil surgeon to rubber stamp the results on an I-693. Given the number of RFE's people have gotten for submitting a DS-3025 marked "incomplete", I'm guessing the IO's who are willing to certify the vaccinations themselves are probably not the majority.

[Nich-Nick 3,354]

We "preach a different story" because of what the instructions say.

I guess I've just never seen specific instructions that say "if your record is not marked 'complete' you need a civil surgeon which is what a lot of people post. Nor have I seen on the USCIS website "the USCIS will not accept a DS-3025 under any circumstances." I'm not saying you say these things but just giving example of how they could be more explicit on the matter to erase all confusion. I have been studying the medical information for two and a half years, more so than any other topic I research. So I'm not here to argue. I only wanted to point out that adjudicators are instructed in writing, to look for shots and not the word complete. It is my interpretation that if they find everything they're looking for on the DS-3025, then they can approve the application. No complaints about you were intended and preach was not meant in a bad way so don't take offense. You're doing a great job. I think I said preach because you patiently repeat over and over the same information to all who ask.

My shots also had "not age appropriate" but my form marked "incomplete". The required shots were complete, and I knew it, I still paid $50 for a vaccination transcription because I wanted to be sure I didn't get an RFE... something i just couldn't afford at that moment in time.

I personally "preach" that if you don't mind an RFE go ahead and send it. But if you do, it certainly doesn't hurt. That and at the time of the majority of my "preaching" almost everyone was getting an RFE for an I-693. Better to err on the side of caution.

Risk an RFE ...a difference all people have to work out for themselves. I didn't care about an RFE once we were together. An RFE wasn't going to snatch him away. But mostly I was being stubborn that it was stupid to pay somebody to copy shots from one form to another when there were no additional shots to be given. Stubborn isn't a good reason, but I was tired of spending money and filling out yet another form. I was more interested in getting the darn thing sent off within 2 weeks of POE and forgetting about immigration until they forced us to do something else.

If you're talking about last fall and all the RFEs, yeah I dug into that one too because people were speculating all kinds of things. I even asked Ron Paul, a congressman and my former OB/GYN doctor, to look into the matter. I thought since he was a medical doctor and a congressman, he might be a good person to ask them if the new contractors and their new software were rejecting K1s for not sending a full medical exam in the application and if they were trained to order the A-files of K1s. That was my speculation after learning that the personnel that open the mail had changed around the time the RFEs started. I don't know if that helped, but the rush of RFEs for no logical reason did subside which is good. It was crazy there for a few months.

[Nik+Heather 121]

Our IO checked the dates on the vaccines he needed to have as were age appropriate. I saw her review the sheet! So our experience supports the way that Nich sees things.

[pinkhonu 5]

Biometrics are done at Application Support Centers (ASC) which can be different than an interview location. Here's the page to find your office

https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=ASC

I think the Louisiana thing was a mistake, You should try a walk-in appointment at your closest office, showing the appointment notice. Lot's of people go for biometrics early once they get the notice and are not turned away.

Hi Nich-Nick! I tried checking it on google maps... driving to the ASC in Louisiana would actually just be 3 hours and 57 minutes from where we are at the moment.. rather than going to Jacksonville, FL... that will take us 5 hours. so as you can see, the one in Louisiana is the closest one in distance.

[pinkhonu 5]

I guess I've just never seen specific instructions that say "if your record is not marked 'complete' you need a civil surgeon which is what a lot of people post. Nor have I seen on the USCIS website "the USCIS will not accept a DS-3025 under any circumstances." I'm not saying you say these things but just giving example of how they could be more explicit on the matter to erase all confusion. I have been studying the medical information for two and a half years, more so than any other topic I research. So I'm not here to argue. I only wanted to point out that adjudicators are instructed in writing, to look for shots and not the word complete. It is my interpretation that if they find everything they're looking for on the DS-3025, then they can approve the application. No complaints about you were intended and preach was not meant in a bad way so don't take offense. You're doing a great job. I think I said preach because you patiently repeat over and over the same information to all who ask.

Risk an RFE ...a difference all people have to work out for themselves. I didn't care about an RFE once we were together. An RFE wasn't going to snatch him away. But mostly I was being stubborn that it was stupid to pay somebody to copy shots from one form to another when there were no additional shots to be given. Stubborn isn't a good reason, but I was tired of spending money and filling out yet another form. I was more interested in getting the darn thing sent off within 2 weeks of POE and forgetting about immigration until they forced us to do something else.

If you're talking about last fall and all the RFEs, yeah I dug into that one too because people were speculating all kinds of things. I even asked Ron Paul, a congressman and my former OB/GYN doctor, to look into the matter. I thought since he was a medical doctor and a congressman, he might be a good person to ask them if the new contractors and their new software were rejecting K1s for not sending a full medical exam in the application and if they were trained to order the A-files of K1s. That was my speculation after learning that the personnel that open the mail had changed around the time the RFEs started. I don't know if that helped, but the rush of RFEs for no logical reason did subside which is good. It was crazy there for a few months.

I'm taking the risk for now. You are right. That's what I said or posted... not sure if in this topic... I don't care getting an RFE. My purpose is to be with my husband. If I get one, I'll deal with it. Until then, I just have to wait.

And yes I totally agree... it's not being stubborn. In addition to this, I just wanted to know if they really needed it. If they really need it, they'll give me an RFE. hehe