Requesting expedited K-1

[MarkPerry 488]

8 hours ago, Roel said:

Actually when it comes to the immigration you are entitled to nothing. Immigration to USA is a privilege, not your right.

 

IMO claiming an expedite based on the "financial loss" of $900 is laughable. Its that much is a loss for you, how do you plan on affording AoS, medical, bio-metric fees?

 

The financial loss for the expedite has to be SEVERE. Quoting:

"USCIS may expedite a petition or application if it meets one or more of the following criteria:

• Severe financial loss to company or person;"

 

Im sorry, but this is a ridiculous request and as was stated before - it will just made others have to wait longer for their actually reasonable expedite.

Excellent Post

[geowrian 22,337]

4 minutes ago, Cruise77 said:

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.  In all fairness the OP by posting on a public forum asking for feedback, got just what she asked for.  Perhaps it wasn't what she wanted to hear, but it has been civil honest feedback.

Agreed. But nobody should be chastised for sharing their experience here either. My concern is that the feedback has gone beyond "I don't think it will qualify because x, y, and z" to complaining that it slows down the progress for others. The OP is permitted to make the request just as others are permitted to make low-success requests. Personally, I would have recommended against it due to that low likelihood of success, but I wish her the best and I understand that each person has to act as their own attorney and on their own behalf. I don't want the OP's case to be processed before mine since I filed sooner, but that's a concern between USCIS and me, not the OP and me.

[MarkPerry 488]

5 hours ago, Boiler said:

I have seen some farcical expedite requests, and has been said no harm probably in trying, but this one may have taken the cake.

 

Do let us know how you get on.

When I first read it, I thought it was a joke or a person trying to be funny.  Then they went on with back up posts.

 

I bet you the person getting the request has a good laugh.  I would be worried I would get extra attention or they would flag my file or case.

[enw10 17]

I know this has nothing to do with the expedite, but why can't you take back some of his stuff anyway?  I know you said it's in case something goes wrong, but I doubt you're going to give up the process if something goes wrong.  At some point you'll live together, right?  Or at the very least, at some point you'll visit each other again.  I don't know... we've been slowly trickling stuff to the US in people's luggage since we decided to move.  If something goes wrong, I guess we'll just trickle it back.  

[Transborderwife 4,666]

most airlines even when non refundable will allow you to changethe date for $100.  people in war torn countries don't get expedited.  seems very frivolous

[Unidentified 2,930]

You completely wasted the time of USCIS that they could have spent looking at an actual hardship expedite request. You're not in any hardship, why would you even think you're eligible? If $900 is a hardship for you then you're not ready for this process. You're not ready for all the fees concerning immigration, wedding, housing/rent etc. 

 

Sorry to be harsh. Yes, you have every right to apply I'm not saying you're not. But yeah, you wasted your time and others. 

[ali1632 10]

3 hours ago, Cruise77 said:

 

Right there you just logically lost your argument.  There is no severe financial loss whatsoever in your case.  Loss of intended benefit from money spent on a plane ticket is not a severe loss.

We have already established that the threshold for what is considered "severe" is totally unknown. 

 

Quote

 This was simply very poor judgement on your part planning a move without even having your visa approved.

 

It was not poor judgment, it was a decision made based on pros and cons. I was aware of the risk, and I will be fine if the expedite request is denied. That is not the question at hand as this once again is not about hardship. It is about whether or not I can establish proof for a financial loss.  

 

Quote

 

My cynical voice would tell me it seems like you simply don't want to wait it out like the rest of us, so you are trying to play the system in your favor.  

 

 

Why on earth should I wait if I have a qualifying contingency?? And if asking is the only way to find out if my contingency qualifies, then why shouldn't I ask?

 

Quote

Having said that it's not the dollar amount that matters here.  It's the effect of said "severe" loss to your current situation. Let's be honest if a $980, or even a $458 loss is really that damaging (severe) to you at this point, there is no way you are financially stable enough to qualify for a K-1.  In other words you aren't going to be out on the street next week because you bought a plane ticket and had to incur shipping costs.  This request simply lacks any substance to it.

I don't understand why people want to associate "severe loss" and "damage" to my financial stability. Seriously. If you have any peripheral experience with small claims court, tax law, or arbitration in the business world, you would know that losses and damages to not have to incapacitate in order to be considered losses and damages. Whether this fits their definition of severe is as unknown as ever, and still worth a shot. 

 

Quote

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.  In all fairness the OP by posting on a public forum asking for feedback, got just what she asked for.  Perhaps it wasn't what she wanted to hear, but it has been civil honest feedback.   

I still don't see why I shouldn't be testing the threshold, especially given that I've read about successes for documentable losses less than $1500. But yes, I'm getting what I asked for, an analysis of the logical merits, PLUS a whole lot of personal judgment and assumptions about my solvency. And with one 2nd-hand exception, none of this has seemed to be based on actual experience with the process. Where are the people who applied for expediency (declined or approved) with valid examples of what documentation does or doesn't qualify?

[Unidentified 2,930]

7 minutes ago, ali1632 said:

We have already established that the threshold for what is considered "severe" is totally unknown. 

 

It was not poor judgment, it was a decision made based on pros and cons. I was aware of the risk, and I will be fine if the expedite request is denied. That is not the question at hand as this once again is not about hardship. It is about whether or not I can establish proof for a financial loss.  

 

Why on earth should I wait if I have a qualifying contingency?? And if asking is the only way to find out if my contingency qualifies, then why shouldn't I ask?

 

I don't understand why people want to associate "severe loss" and "damage" to my financial stability. Seriously. If you have any peripheral experience with small claims court, tax law, or arbitration in the business world, you would know that losses and damages to not have to incapacitate in order to be considered losses and damages. Whether this fits their definition of severe is as unknown as ever, and still worth a shot. 

 

I still don't see why I shouldn't be testing the threshold, especially given that I've read about successes for documentable losses less than $1500. But yes, I'm getting what I asked for, an analysis of the logical merits, PLUS a whole lot of personal judgment and assumptions about my solvency. And with one 2nd-hand exception, none of this has seemed to be based on actual experience with the process. Where are the people who applied for expediency (declined or approved) with valid examples of what documentation does or doesn't qualify?

 

When you hear the word "severe" you should have known it would be way more than $900 and they are definitely not interested in expediting because of a plane ticket. The system doesn't need to be tested for fun, it's a waste of time. Accept that you will be waiting a while. This process is neither short nor cheap nor fun. 

 

If you have read about "documentable loses less than $1500" feel free to post links and explain what they were. I bet you it was more sensible than a plane ticket. 

[Boiler 45,535]

Let us accept the OP's argument for a minute.

 

Has there ever been a case on VJ that would not qualify for an expedite?

[Unidentified 2,930]

5 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Let us accept the OP's argument for a minute.

 

Has there ever been a case on VJ that would not qualify for an expedite?

 

Not as ridiculous as this one. They're generally about pregnancies or someone is dying. 

[Transborderwife 4,666]

2 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

 

Not as ridiculous as this one. They're generally about pregnancies or someone is dying. 

 

 

heres one who only lost a week's pay 

[Boiler 45,535]

I was thinking of everybody on VJ, not just the small few who filed an expedite.

[Unidentified 2,930]

4 minutes ago, Transborderwife said:

 

 

heres one who only lost a week's pay 

Wonder how much he makes in a week. 

[javadown2 308]

I'm a little confused, so you say you can just bring his stuff back with you (and would have to ship if you didn't?), so why is it that he can't bring it with him when the visa is approved? and why do you even need to go with him? And yes expenses can add up but really it is to be expected with the whole immigration process, but hey it doesn't hurt to ask. I would imagine they want to know what percentage your "lose" is compared to your income and do you meet the poverty levels required for 1-134? Our Visa was approved and she had her visa in hand a little over 2 months after we initially applied, but you never know what can happen or the timeline. Good luck in your process!

[ali1632 10]

10 minutes ago, javadown2 said:

I'm a little confused, so you say you can just bring his stuff back with you (and would have to ship if you didn't?), so why is it that he can't bring it with him when the visa is approved? 

Traveling together, we have twice the free baggage allowance. He will be maxing his allowance already. 

 

Re: your speculation about needing to show a percentage of income or something, I doubt that and have not heard an example. The criteria do not specify any kind of hardship needs to be caused in order to qualify a loss, but I guess it's possible.