What does this mean? Boehner Says He’d Allow Homeland Security Shutdown

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Get your hubby to the Mexico or Canada quickly...

Canada won't let him in. We have to go Mexico.

[JohnR! 5,495]

:-(

Mean Canadians!!!

Canada won't let him in. We have to go Mexico.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

:-(

Mean Canadians!!!

Yeah he has a CIMT. I don't think they will let him in. sniff sniff

[JohnR! 5,495]

I recall we had this conversation before. It sucks and I wish there was something that could be done...

Yeah he has a CIMT. I don't think they will let him in. sniff sniff

[Janelle2002 3,865]

I recall we had this conversation before. It sucks and I wish there was something that could be done...

Yes. I'm getting some help from my congressman's office. Trying to figure why USCIS requested my original petition. This is a circus. A complete joke.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

Yes. I'm getting some help from my congressman's office. Trying to figure why USCIS requested my original petition. This is a circus. A complete joke.

It means activity that could possibly generate a NOIR or NOID. The USCIS approves petitions and consulates are forbidden from re-adjudicating it unless they have new and compelling evidence that was not available when the USCIS first approved it, before sending to the NVC. With that said, the consulates reject approved petitions every day and are shielded by the doctrine of consular non-reviewability.

So, either the USCIS is going to reapprove, or send a NOIR or NOID.

Edited February 16, 2015 by ExExpat

[Janelle2002 3,865]

It means activity that could possibly generate a NOIR or NOID. The USCIS approves petitions and consulates are forbidden from re-adjudicating it unless they have new and compelling evidence that was not available when the USCIS first approved it, before sending to the NVC. With that said, the consulates reject approved petitions every day and are shielded by the doctrine of consular non-reviewability.

So, either the USCIS is going to reapprove, or send a NOIR or NOID.

However, the embassy did not return, did not deny any form of our petition at all. The Congressman's office has it in writing. They said under no circumstances did they ask for it to be revoke, returned or anything of that nature. They said USCIS asked for it on their own.

USCIS approved the I-601, why would they NOIR the I-130. Makes no sense.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Janelle2002

[LibCampFireClub 635]

However, the embassy did not return, did not deny any form of our petition at all. The Congressman's office has it in writing. They said under no circumstances did they ask for it to be revoke, returned or anything of that nature. They said USCIS asked for it on their own.

USCIS approved the I-601, why would they NOIR the I-130. Makes no sense.

Consulates routinely hold on to paperwork they don't want to approve. It's only when the USCIS demands to get it back from the consulate that things get moving.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Consulates routinely hold on to paperwork they don't want to approve. It's only when the USCIS demands to get it back from the consulate that things get moving.

Well, the consulate made him inadmissible 08/2014. 09/2014 USCIS contacted the consulate wanting our I-130 back. Approved I-601 waiver 01/2015. However, USCIS still has the original I-130 petition. Embassy can't do anything without. So far, no one at USCIS can tell me why the original I-130 was requested by USCIS and when it will be sent back to the consulate.

I have submitted a service request and have the Congressman's office involved. Hopefully I will have an answer soon.

Very odd situation. One attorney told me he hasn't the slightest idea what is happening.