Adam Walsh Waiver KOA2 time line

[spartanfans13 1]

I filed a K-1 I-129F in august 2015. Received my KOA1 a week later. Still waiting for any response for the KOA2. It will be 5 months in Jan 2016. Does anyone have any information on how long the visa waiver for AWA takes??

[Villanelle 4,122]

Please type Adam Walsh into the search bar on VJ and read about other users experiences. The casual way you are asking about it implies that you have no idea what is involved and the probably negative outcome.

5 months for AWA is not even a drop in the bucket/ These cases take years and an attny is likely needed.

[spartanfans13 1]

Thank you for the response. Sorry if I did not fill in all the details. We filed almost 5 months ago. Prior to filing I have hired Alan Lolly from San Diego CA who is an expert on these AWA waiver. I have done countless research and have scanned VJ for the most recent experience's. My conviction is 20 years old and I have done my due diligence getting a therapy evaluation, etc. I do anticipate being denied but I plan to take my case to the highest court possible. I will not stop no matter what the cost. I was looking for specific situations, but it seems like the complete story is unavailable here.

[AussieNemesis 16]

It varies widely, think years not months.

[Mike-eeh and Odie 193]

Thank you for the response. Sorry if I did not fill in all the details. We filed almost 5 months ago. Prior to filing I have hired Alan Lolly from San Diego CA who is an expert on these AWA waiver. I have done countless research and have scanned VJ for the most recent experience's. My conviction is 20 years old and I have done my due diligence getting a therapy evaluation, etc. I do anticipate being denied but I plan to take my case to the highest court possible. I will not stop no matter what the cost. I was looking for specific situations, but it seems like the complete story is unavailable here.

Even with your 20 years due diligence, you still have to prove beyond any questionable doubt that you are 100% rehabilitated and that there is zero chance for you to harm anyone. If there is even a 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance they believe you will harm someone again, you will be denied. Hence why these cases take years to overcome, if they even overcome at all. Not to sound grim, but based on what I read here and other sites, your chances of being approved are like less than 5%, and that's with a good lawyer!

[aaron2020 11,651]

Good luck with taking it to the highest court.

The US Supreme Court has already ruled that a US citizen does not have a right to appeal when the US government denies a visa to a foreign spouse. http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/06/supreme-court-rules-against-spouses-visa-denial-challenge/

You are asking to bring a fiancée, an unrelated person. Not even a spouse.

Immigration is a privilege extended to the foreigner, not a right of the USC.

Edited December 29, 2015 by aaron2020

[spartanfans13 1]

Even with your 20 years due diligence, you still have to prove beyond any questionable doubt that you are 100% rehabilitated and that there is zero chance for you to harm anyone. If there is even a 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance they believe you will harm someone again, you will be denied. Hence why these cases take years to overcome, if they even overcome at all. Not to sound grim, but based on what I read here and other sites, your chances of being approved are like less than 5%, and that's with a good lawyer!

Thanks for the response. Well, that is the major question here for sure. The attorney general is the one asking immigration to follow the AWA language which states "zero risk", however, this language is flawed. At issue is that no one is a zero risk and therefore the language in the AWA is unconstitutional. I will be addressing this language issue with my therapy evaluation. My therapist will establish that no on is zero risk, which will set me up for a reasonable appeal when my waiver is denied. The second problem is challenging this in court, another long battle. I have spent much time with my attorney on this subject as he is one of the most accomplished attorneys in the AWA waiver. Most attorneys are ill equipped to tackle this type of waiver, so many failures due to this. I refuse to give up or be negative because my circumstance is quite different, however, i do expect to receive a denial. I am planning on taking the final decision from the immigration to federal court where there are success stories. Bottom line, the law is wrong, we all know it, but to overcome it takes money, time, persistence, and faith. I am only inquiring on the timelines for these type of K-1 visas, thus my post on here.

[spartanfans13 1]

Good luck with taking it to the highest court.

The US Supreme Court has already ruled that a US citizen does not have a right to appeal when the US government denies a visa to a foreign spouse. http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/06/supreme-court-rules-against-spouses-visa-denial-challenge/

You are asking to bring a fiancée, an unrelated person. Not even a spouse.

Immigration is a privilege extended to the foreigner, not a right of the USC.

Thank you for the response. If you read the decision by the supreme court, the issue at hand was "does a USC have a due process right to challenge the decision for denial: which was based on the Immigration law that found him involved as a know terrorist. I appreciate your comments but your a bit off base here. The issue does not revolve around a spouce or a fiance. Its about what is applicable in the law. The challenge should have been the reason for denial, not whether she had the right to. In my case, I will not be denied based on my foreign finance, there will be no issues with that. I will be denied based on the AWA which casts light upon myself as being the reason for denial. In fact, the AWA actually denies my ability to petition for foreign fiance, so I am required to request a waiver in order for me to do so. Sometimes when these decisions are released by the court, it can be easy to lump a whole lot of things into them. Due diligence is needed when reviewing any case decision and usually they are very specific, sometimes only allowing a successful challenge only to the individuals who appealed without changing the law entirely.

[AussieNemesis 16]

I wish you all the success in the world, and please keep us posted on your progress.

[TBoneTX 45,293]

Some posts that threatened to derail the thread have been removed. Thanks to all for remaining on the track.

VJ Moderation

[TBoneTX 45,293]

A post about a separate case has been split from this thread, left here in the IMBRA forum, and given the topic title "Belated AWA Problems; Will This Plan Work? [split topic]."

VJ Moderation