Reopened petition?

[transer 0]

I got the email on 2/7 that my K1 petition had been approved. I thought "Finally, we're moving along!"

Today, I get this:

"We reopened this I129F PETITION FOR FIANCE(E) on February 9, 2011, and are now reviewing our earlier decision. We also mailed you a notice describing the next steps in the process. Please follow any instructions on this notice. Our review should be completed within 30 days. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283."

Any idea what might be happening?

[YuAndDan 153]

Thats a good sign.

Moving to Review and admin processing forum...

[Adilet&Venera 2]

Hmm... what could that mean? never heard of such a thing.

That is just a bit frustrating... after being joyous and excited for getting approved, there is a BOOM! "Sorry, we have to further review.." I am really sorry this is happeneing to you. I hope it's just a glitch in their system. You might want to call them (make sure you talk to the 2nd tier person) and attempt to find out what is going on there.

[transer 0]

Any chance a senatorial inquiry could have caused the reopening? I got a letter today dated 2/8 saying one of my senators was asking for a review, as I'd requested before I heard anything. Somehow I doubt it's that simple, but it'd be nice if that's all it was...

[Sergi9 110]

Any chance a senatorial inquiry could have caused the reopening? I got a letter today dated 2/8 saying one of my senators was asking for a review, as I'd requested before I heard anything. Somehow I doubt it's that simple, but it'd be nice if that's all it was...

Here is an example of something that really confuses me. Why if you submitted in July 2010 and got the NOA1 at the end of July and are just slightly outside the "goal processing time" would you get a Senators office involved in the case?

Now you get what you asked for " a review" .. and you are shocked. Hmm... maybe the additional scrutiny in the case was not a good thing?

The problem seems to be there is a BIG difference from a senators check on status and where you file is in the system and "re-opening" a case to review it.

TOTALLY UNSOLICITED ADVICE to those who are just at the beginning of the process and have no reason to believe there is a problem with the case other than the insane "goal processing time" posted on the USCIS website which applies only to a perfectly pristine packet with no RFE and for a country where the beneficiary has no added security checks. .. ....

IF ITS NOT BROKEN DON'T TRY TO FIX IT.

[Karu4Link 7]

Here is an example of something that really confuses me. Why if you submitted in July 2010 and got the NOA1 at the end of July and are just slightly outside the "goal processing time" would you get a Senators office involved in the case?

Now you get what you asked for " a review" .. and you are shocked. Hmm... maybe the additional scrutiny in the case was not a good thing?

The problem seems to be there is a BIG difference from a senators check on status and where you file is in the system and "re-opening" a case to review it.

TOTALLY UNSOLICITED ADVICE to those who are just at the beginning of the process and have no reason to believe there is a problem with the case other than the insane "goal processing time" posted on the USCIS website which applies only to a perfectly pristine packet with no RFE and for a country where the beneficiary has no added security checks. .. ....

IF ITS NOT BROKEN DON'T TRY TO FIX IT.

First, this person filed before me. July 28th was the NOA1 for him/her if I remember correctly. Almost 6 and a half months is not "just slightly outside the processing time". The USCIS website does NOT say that the 5 month processing goal is "an estimate" as stated by most of the many customer service reps that I talked to. In fact it clearly says on the timelines page: "If the office is processing a particular type of application in less time than our processing goal, you will see the processing times expressed in months (for example, if the office is processing naturalization applications in less than our 5 month goal, the processing time will state “Five Months”). However, if that office is taking longer than our processing goal to handle the form type in question, you will see the filing date (e.g., “April 10, 2003”) of the last case we processed on the date the website chart was last updated." So if our case has gone beyond the stated processing time (in our case it still says 5 months for K-1) we have every right to contact our congresspeople for information.

Second, my packet (which was looked over by a friend of mine who is an immigration attorney and who told me that my packet was put together better than the ones he did for people; he even told me that he now follows the way I put together my packet because he was so impressed with it) was what you would call "perfectly pristine". Everything was tabbed, divided, labeled, and organized properly with a cover letter, and table of contents for the evidence, and for the entire package. Everything was checked, double checked and triple checked by both me and my immigration attorney friend. I had no RFE and my fiance is from England for God's sake. Both of us have pristine criminal records (or lack thereof) without even a speeding ticket or a parking ticket. Our case was as simple as it could be, and it still took them almost 6 and a half months. What did you file and how long have you been waiting? If you filed a K-1, and haven't been waiting long, I GUARANTEE YOU, you will change your tune when you pass the "processing goal", and you will want to expedite your case in any way possible. Don't get on this guy's case for doing the smart thing in a ridiculously stupid and complicated process. (Which does in fact seem to be broken, so I know I want to do everything I can to fix it.) Kthxbai!

[transer 0]

Here is an example of something that really confuses me. Why if you submitted in July 2010 and got the NOA1 at the end of July and are just slightly outside the "goal processing time" would you get a Senators office involved in the case?

Now you get what you asked for " a review" .. and you are shocked. Hmm... maybe the additional scrutiny in the case was not a good thing?

The problem seems to be there is a BIG difference from a senators check on status and where you file is in the system and "re-opening" a case to review it.

TOTALLY UNSOLICITED ADVICE to those who are just at the beginning of the process and have no reason to believe there is a problem with the case other than the insane "goal processing time" posted on the USCIS website which applies only to a perfectly pristine packet with no RFE and for a country where the beneficiary has no added security checks. .. ....

IF ITS NOT BROKEN DON'T TRY TO FIX IT.

While I appreciate you taking the time to reply, you don't seemed to be well versed in the current status of K1 petitions.

Having recently witnessed about half of the August petitions being processed at the same facility without mine having been "touched", I followed the common advice given to those in the same situation-file a service request with USCIS, and request that your senators and congressperson check into the matter on your behalf. I'm far from the only person to have done this lately, so the request to my representatives in and of itself is not suspect in why the petition was reopened-if that were the case, I would not be the only person I've found on these forums who has encountered this situation.

My concern, which may not have been stated clearly, is the possibility that the timing of my Senator's request could have caused crossed wires, and caused the reopening. I figure it's unlikely, but given the nature of bureaucracies, it's not outside the realm of possibilities.

At the moment, I'd just like to get a real answer from anyone with solid information as to why we had an approval, and two days later had it yanked away. USCIS phone support has no information, even at tier 2, and I've not found anyone at all on VJ who's been in a similar situation. Very, very frustrating. My hope is that I'll get the physical letter they supposedly sent in the next day or two, so I can take care of whatever they want me to take care of.

[Used to be broken 147]

What did you file and how long have you been waiting? If you filed a K-1, and haven't been waiting long, I GUARANTEE YOU, you will change your tune when you pass the "processing goal", and you will want to expedite your case in any way possible. Don't get on this guy's case for doing the smart thing in a ridiculously stupid and complicated process. (Which does in fact seem to be broken, so I know I want to do everything I can to fix it.) Kthxbai!

Not sure if you noticed or not but this post was moved to the I601/I212 221(g) Waivers Forum Thread, otherwise known as Immigration H3LL. Often the folks here have been married longer than you K1 folks have even known each other. They also often wait longer than your application process just for a security check. Some have been waiting years, they have no "online status tool" to check on things and no "goal processing times" to even hang a hat on. Waiver applications have over a year long backlog in some jurisdictions,and 221(g) denials come out of nowhere. Hopefully this did not happen to the original poster and this is just a random glitch.

I am sure you mean well, but you have no IDEA what a ridiculously stupid and complicated process this is until you have walked in some of these folks shoes. I am also not speaking for them , but my guess is they like I think the Congressional Phone lines could be put to better use when there is in fact a real problem, instead of "just checking status".

[Karu4Link 7]

I meant no offense to anyone, I am very much aware that there are others who have waited far far longer than I have and I have a great deal of respect and admiration for their tenacity. Regardless of how long someone has been waiting or what they filed though, if the USCIS tells us one thing, they should stick to it instead of giving us BS answers and lying to us. And as for the "ridiculously stupid and complicated process" I meant that to cover immigration in general, not just K-1. When I mailed the privacy release form and explanation letter to my congresswoman, I didn't do it to check status, I did it because every time I "checked status" with USCIS customer service, they lied to me. For example, telling me that they had no record of August petitions being approved before the July ones, when I have a friend who applied a couple weeks after me who was approved before I was. Also telling me that 6 and a half months was not outside of the posted 5 month processing goal. Also telling me that they were currently processing July 24 petitions (which they told me for over 2 weeks through about 4 different calls). That is a serious issue for me when I cannot get a straight answer from someone who is supposed to be helping me. That is why I mailed my congresswoman, (not called, I only called once to follow up, and the call lasted maybe 5 minutes total) so I could alert her to the fact that the USCIS was lying to people. I honestly think that if it was brought to more important people's attention that maybe all people undergoing the immigration process (not just K-1, everyone) would be more likely to get fair and equal treatment. I don't know, I didn't mean to mock anyone or make light of their situations, I guess I'm just expressing my frustration at the complexity and unfairness of the entire immigration process, whichever road you happened to take.

[transer 0]

Got the promised I-797 which was supposed to tell me why the reopened the petition.

All it says:

"After review, we have reopened the above application or petition, or reconsidered teh decision previously issued. You will receive a notice under separate cover once all action has been completed"

Great. A non-answer.

[Used to be broken 147]

Got the promised I-797 which was supposed to tell me why the reopened the petition.

All it says:

"After review, we have reopened the above application or petition, or reconsidered the decision previously issued. You will receive a notice under separate cover once all action has been completed"

Great. A non-answer.

Well this is not sounding good. Can you think of anything that might have been a "red flag" in the file, or an inadmissability? This is a K1 petition right?