I129f September 2017 filers

[Mrsjackson 300]

7 hours ago, AntoinetteB said:

Question do you have to have the title to a vehicle to use it as income? 

Does the petitioner not just meet the income requirements? You can use assets but typically the petitioner’s income shown on their tax form is what is used so I’m confused why you’re asking?

Edited February 24, 2018 by Mrsjackson

[AntoinetteB 165]

9 minutes ago, Mrsjackson said:

Does the petitioner not just meet the income requirements? You can use assets but typically the petitioner’s income shown on their tax form is what is used so I’m confused why you’re asking?

Im asking because this is a helpful group that everyone is suppose to be able to come together and help and answer questions that others do not know. Text messages can come accross as rude and there are ways to speak in a manner that doesnt seem like your attacking someone anywho im the beneficiary and I make just enough but i wanted to know because I simply wanted to know 

[ana e jordan 140]

7 hours ago, AntoinetteB said:

Question do you have to have the title to a vehicle to use it as income? 

I would say no, because then how would you prove to own the car? But just my thoughts 😉

[J&B 52]

17 minutes ago, AntoinetteB said:

Im asking because this is a helpful group that everyone is suppose to be able to come together and help and answer questions that others do not know. Text messages can come accross as rude and there are ways to speak in a manner that doesnt seem like your attacking someone anywho im the beneficiary and I make just enough but i wanted to know because I simply wanted to know 

@AntoinetteB, are you the petitioner or the beneficiary? 

[AntoinetteB 165]

Im the petitioner i thought i edited it 

[Mrsjackson 300]

30 minutes ago, AntoinetteB said:

Im asking because this is a helpful group that everyone is suppose to be able to come together and help and answer questions that others do not know. Text messages can come accross as rude and there are ways to speak in a manner that doesnt seem like your attacking someone anywho im the beneficiary and I make just enough but i wanted to know because I simply wanted to know 

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said “text messages can come off as rude” because I wasn’t trying to be rude or attack you. It can be hard to tell over the internet I know, but I was asking in order to get a better understanding of your situation so that I could try and help you. I’m really not sure what part came off as rude to you? But I can understand being a little defensive and on edge when coming on this site, as I have noticed that some people are a little brisk. 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Mrsjackson

[Kush_Omaded 29]

Hey @HarmonyAndYoussef, 

I was reading through your situation on the forum earlier, and I did just want to put in my two-cents, although I'm by no means an expert. While of course I can't speak for anybody else, I don't think anyone here was meaning that they would try to dictate to you how many pictures you should include. 50, 200, 1000--nobody here can stop you from including as many pictures as you'd like, as that's certainly your prerogative for your own case. But the consular officer examining your case is only human too, and while I'm sure 200 pictures may not be the most they've seen, it may be slightly overwhelming, and they may not have time to examine all the evidence. But I'm sure including some photos from a variety of dates and locations is definitely appreciated. Morocco is, of course, a tough embassy; most in the Middle East are, so front-loading your packet (which I'm sure you did) is a plus, and additional evidence is always necessary. But just remember that with more evidence comes the necessity for more discretion, particularly if you have a tough consulate. From what I've read of other filers from the Middle East, too, henna in particular is a huge red flag for the consular officer. Even if you say it was just for your engagement party, I've read of another recent filer (from North Africa too, I believe, but somebody correct me if I'm misremembering?) whose pictures included content from a friends' engagement party or wedding. She had henna visible on her hands in the picture, and was naturally dressed nice, so the CO questioned her about it, thinking it was her wedding. Ultimately she had to provide proof from her friend certifying that the henna was from the friend's wedding and not the beneficiary/petitioner's wedding, and she was told she was lucky not to have been denied for it. Maybe her consular officer was just having a bad day, but still not an ideal situation. Sometimes what you think is extra evidence in your favor is misinterpreted by the CO and it plays against you. While that may absolutely not be the case for you, I would still advise caution. Include any of the pictures you feel are helpful, but do be careful with some of the engagement ones. Even if you never signed any papers, sometimes your CO's understanding (or even misunderstanding) of the situation at hand might cause mishaps. The henna, the beautiful dress (Your dress was absolutely gorgeous, by the way, it looks almost identical to the type worn in Afghanistan for engagements/weddings. I was a lot jealous, I'll admit. Haha! I told my fiancé he's lucky; I'm not gonna bankrupt his family for my million dollar bride-price, my bride-price (welwar for any fellow Pashtuns somewhere out there) is just an Afghan wedding dress )-- sadly, lovely engagement stuff like that might get the CO wondering if you're culturally married, even if not legally. And, while it's unfair, a CO's interpretation that you're married "in the culture" even if not "in the eyes of the law" is still grounds for denial. So ultimately, make your case how you want to, include what you want to, but do be cautious. I think we'd all hate for anyone to have issues with their case, just because a CO misinterpreted something. But the good thing is too, if you have so many pictures, then you have plenty of evidence, so if you decide to exclude the engagement party pictures, you'll still have ample proof.  
Good luck! 

[Naes 12,205]

This week in numbers;

 

This week August came as far as Received date 29th of August.

However, 2 days of this week was RFE only dates, so there were no Approval updates.

As we confirmed before too, these dates (and even dates where we saw updates online) usually means most approvals were/going to be mail only.

 

August is going stronger than any other month so far, giving me some hope that things will only get better (even if it is not by too much or too fast) from here on.

However always keep in mind, things can change so fast, and anything can happen during this process.

NVC backlog was a mystery for us and it happened suddenly, yet ended up eating 2 months of those approvals.

And things such as AP or anything on the way can also cause a backlog.

 

My advice is not make firm/unchangeable wedding plans.

 

On another note,  I saw about 10 withdrawals in the month of September during the past week.

The same movement happened one week before August started.

My guess is they are first updating those that will not get adjudication due to being withdrawn...

So September next week??

I personally can't wait!

 

Overall Movement:

 

	June	July	Aug.	Total
02/20/18	17	39	31	87
02/21/18	72	85	186	343
02/22/18	37	66	135	238
02/23/18	21	56	54	131
Total	147	246	406	799

 

Approvals only

- dates don't appear here means possible mail only approvals. Please check your informed delivery and mailboxes timely-

 

 

	June	July	Aug.	Total
02/21/18	25	62	86	173
02/22/18	8	29	101	138
Total	33	91	187	311

 

 

----------------Monthly Updates

 

Overall Numbers:

(December has validation errors so the given numbers are less than actual petitions)

 

	Virgins	Touched	Approved	Total
June	983	999	1665	3647
July	1423	848	1126	3397
Aug	2529	504	618	3651
Sept	3155	130	8	3293
Oct	3770	128		3898
Nov	3304	67	1	3372
Dec	3297	28		3325
Total	18461	2704	3418	24583

 

 

Overall look into months:

 

 

[shawarma_frites 21]

14 hours ago, Kush_Omaded said:

From what I've read of other filers from the Middle East, too, henna in particular is a huge red flag for the consular officer. Even if you say it was just for your engagement party, I've read of another recent filer (from North Africa too, I believe, but somebody correct me if I'm misremembering?) whose pictures included content from a friends' engagement party or wedding. She had henna visible on her hands in the picture, and was naturally dressed nice, so the CO questioned her about it, thinking it was her wedding. Ultimately she had to provide proof from her friend certifying that the henna was from the friend's wedding and not the beneficiary/petitioner's wedding, and she was told she was lucky not to have been denied for it.

HOLY SH**!

 

We did henna and I included a photo of it because who in their right mind would consider a henna ceremony as proof of a legally-binding wedding?? It was included as sign of our commitment to each other and respect for his culture/traditions...which is important to show in the application. Besides, it was his mother and aunties who were just dying to do henna. His family was happy, respectful, and supportive of our union, enough to want to give us a henna ceremony. I think that's great.

 

We only ever called it an engagement party/ceremony in the application, and it was super intimate.

 

Can everyone just acknowledge WHY the MENA couples have engagement parties that are also secretive non-legal religious "weddings"? It's so we can finally consummate our relationship.  

 

Now, shouldn't it be a red flag that if we weren't following some traditions in order to sleep together? And wether or not it's technically legal to have pre-marital sex in that country, the U.S. shouldn't care. 

 

If the COs hold that against us, that's just proof that some COs would find any reason to deny a legitimately engaged couple the K-1. 

 

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/22/17041862/uscis-removes-nation-of-immigrants-from-mission-statement

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/agency-leader-insists-mission-statement-anti-immigrant-53316136

 

Quote

 

The director also told employees to stop calling applicants "customers."

In his message to them on Thursday, he wrote, "Use of the term leads to the erroneous belief that applicants and petitioners, rather than the American people, are whom we ultimately serve. All applicants and petitioners should, of course, always be treated with the greatest respect and courtesy, but we can't forget that we serve the American people."

 

Cissna told the AP on Friday that the word "customers" is business-speak and disrespectful to visa applicants.

 

"It's demeaning to them because a lot of times the sorts of things they're applying for relates to intimate family matters or refugees," he said. "We're not selling anything. We're not working in a bakery."

Cissna said feedback has been positive from employees, but others had strong reactions.

 

We're "customers." This is the mindset that many COs have, if not worse.

 

I repeat:

"Use of the term leads to the erroneous belief that applicants and petitioners, rather than the American people, are whom we ultimately serve [...] but we can't forget that we serve the American people."

 

What a backwards thing to say. The director is ultimately not disagreeing with the notion that immigrants are customers. Rather, he is implying that calling immigrants customers leads Americans to believe that USCIS puts immigrants' best interests above the interests of American citizens.

 

 I bet most petitioners ARE American people. They forget that there are Americans' lives being determined by USCIS. Here we have COs callously calling our loved ones customers. 

 

And using henna to deny a K-1 (even when a legal certificate of non-marriage is provided)? That's callous. 

Edited February 25, 2018 by shawarma_frites
edit for clarification

[sumbunny 566]

23 minutes ago, shawarma_frites said:

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/22/17041862/uscis-removes-nation-of-immigrants-from-mission-statement

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/agency-leader-insists-mission-statement-anti-immigrant-53316136

 

We're "customers." This is the mindset that many COs have, if not worse.

 

I repeat:

"Use of the term leads to the erroneous belief that applicants and petitioners, rather than the American people, are whom we ultimately serve [...] but we can't forget that we serve the American people."

 

What a backwards thing to say. The director is ultimately not disagreeing with the notion that immigrants are customers. Rather, he is implying that calling immigrants customers leads Americans to believe that USCIS puts immigrants' best interests above the interests of American citizens.

 

 I bet most petitioners ARE American people. They forget that there are Americans' lives being determined by USCIS. Here we have COs callously calling our loved ones customers. 

 

I read that article too and it made me so mad. *I* am an American citizen, and *I* want the love of my life to be here as soon as possible. If USCIS could start serving me, as an American citizen, in a more expeditious fashion, I would greatly appreciate it.

[Mrsjackson 300]

46 minutes ago, shawarma_frites said:

HOLY SH**!

 

We did henna and I included a photo of it because who in their right mind would consider a henna ceremony as proof of a legally-binding wedding?? It was included as sign of our commitment to each other and respect for his culture/traditions...which is important to show in the application. Besides, it was his mother and aunties who were just dying to do henna. His family was happy, respectful, and supportive of our union, enough to want to give us a henna ceremony. I think that's great.

 

We only ever called it an engagement party/ceremony in the application, and it was super intimate.

 

Can everyone just acknowledge WHY the MENA couples have engagement parties that are also secretive non-legal religious "weddings"? It's so we can finally consummate our relationship.  

 

Now, shouldn't it be a red flag that if we weren't following some traditions in order to sleep together? And wether or not it's technically legal to have pre-marital sex in that country, the U.S. shouldn't care. 

 

If the COs hold that against us, that's just proof that some COs would find any reason to deny a legitimately engaged couple the K-1. 

 

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/22/17041862/uscis-removes-nation-of-immigrants-from-mission-statement

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/agency-leader-insists-mission-statement-anti-immigrant-53316136

 

We're "customers." This is the mindset that many COs have, if not worse.

 

I repeat:

"Use of the term leads to the erroneous belief that applicants and petitioners, rather than the American people, are whom we ultimately serve [...] but we can't forget that we serve the American people."

 

What a backwards thing to say. The director is ultimately not disagreeing with the notion that immigrants are customers. Rather, he is implying that calling immigrants customers leads Americans to believe that USCIS puts immigrants' best interests above the interests of American citizens.

 

 I bet most petitioners ARE American people. They forget that there are Americans' lives being determined by USCIS. Here we have COs callously calling our loved ones customers. 

 

And using henna to deny a K-1 (even when a legal certificate of non-marriage is provided)? That's callous. 

You raise a really good point by asking wouldn’t it also be a red flag to not follow customary engagement traditions. It’s kind of like you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t and that doesn’t seem fair. I’m from Canada where culture is near identical to that of the states so I can’t relate but I sympathize with that. Perhaps if this causes an issue for you you could explain that it’s a traditional ceremony for ENGAGED couples and not a ceremony for actual matrimony. Then perhaps include some information on the ceremony itself, how long it’s been around in your culture, what exactly it means, etc. I often wonder how familiar USCIS agents are with other cultures and their traditions I think there are times when things probably need to be explained in depth. Best of luck to you!

[LoveTakesOver 100]

36 minutes ago, shawarma_frites said:

HOLY SH**!

 

We did henna and I included a photo of it because who in their right mind would consider a henna ceremony as proof of a legally-binding wedding?? It was included as sign of our commitment to each other and respect for his culture/traditions...which is important to show in the application. Besides, it was his mother and aunties who were just dying to do henna. His family was happy, respectful, and supportive of our union, enough to want to give us a henna ceremony. I think that's great.

 

We only ever called it an engagement party/ceremony in the application, and it was super intimate.

 

Can everyone just acknowledge WHY the MENA couples have engagement parties that are also secretive non-legal religious "weddings"? It's so we can finally consummate our relationship.  

 

Now, shouldn't it be a red flag that if we weren't following some traditions in order to sleep together? And wether or not it's technically legal to have pre-marital sex in that country, the U.S. shouldn't care. 

 

If the COs hold that against us, that's just proof that some COs would find any reason to deny a legitimately engaged couple the K-1. 

 

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/22/17041862/uscis-removes-nation-of-immigrants-from-mission-statement

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/agency-leader-insists-mission-statement-anti-immigrant-53316136

 

We're "customers." This is the mindset that many COs have, if not worse.

 

I repeat:

"Use of the term leads to the erroneous belief that applicants and petitioners, rather than the American people, are whom we ultimately serve [...] but we can't forget that we serve the American people."

 

What a backwards thing to say. The director is ultimately not disagreeing with the notion that immigrants are customers. Rather, he is implying that calling immigrants customers leads Americans to believe that USCIS puts immigrants' best interests above the interests of American citizens.

 

 I bet most petitioners ARE American people. They forget that there are Americans' lives being determined by USCIS. Here we have COs callously calling our loved ones customers. 

 

And using henna to deny a K-1 (even when a legal certificate of non-marriage is provided)? That's callous. 

I don't disagree with the article and the mission being stated. I think that interpretation is that Americans, the petitioner being served and not the beneficiary as the applicant.  If a beneficiary is being referred as "customer" sometimes it might put biased against them because the mindset is more focused on the beneficiary rather than the American who is trying to petition. I am an American Citizen born in the United States just trying to petition my love one under K1 process.  The K1 immigrant has nothing to do with what they are referring as immigrant applicant.  The real applicant here is me .... not the beneficiary. 

 

Sometimes, there should be order of priority what is really serving the American citizens. For example, K1/K3 and dependents should be more priority that is because we consider this an immediate family of an American citizen or soon to be. LOL For example, military members trying to marry foreign nationals... hey they sacrifice to fight for our country. Immediate relative is a different story. Working visas, pertains to business as an American employers who pay their taxes and wants to recruit from the outside. If you are to weigh in the basis of priority, which type of visa should be served first. Because for some reason, I see all this H1B visas getting approved in short period of a time. 

[Kush_Omaded 29]

4 hours ago, shawarma_frites said:

HOLY SH**!

 

We did henna and I included a photo of it because who in their right mind would consider a henna ceremony as proof of a legally-binding wedding?? It was included as sign of our commitment to each other and respect for his culture/traditions...which is important to show in the application. Besides, it was his mother and aunties who were just dying to do henna. His family was happy, respectful, and supportive of our union, enough to want to give us a henna ceremony. I think that's great.

 

We only ever called it an engagement party/ceremony in the application, and it was super intimate.

 

Can everyone just acknowledge WHY the MENA couples have engagement parties that are also secretive non-legal religious "weddings"? It's so we can finally consummate our relationship.  

 

Now, shouldn't it be a red flag that if we weren't following some traditions in order to sleep together? And wether or not it's technically legal to have pre-marital sex in that country, the U.S. shouldn't care. 

 

If the COs hold that against us, that's just proof that some COs would find any reason to deny a legitimately engaged couple the K-1. 

 

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/22/17041862/uscis-removes-nation-of-immigrants-from-mission-statement

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/agency-leader-insists-mission-statement-anti-immigrant-53316136

 

We're "customers." This is the mindset that many COs have, if not worse.

 

I repeat:

"Use of the term leads to the erroneous belief that applicants and petitioners, rather than the American people, are whom we ultimately serve [...] but we can't forget that we serve the American people."

 

What a backwards thing to say. The director is ultimately not disagreeing with the notion that immigrants are customers. Rather, he is implying that calling immigrants customers leads Americans to believe that USCIS puts immigrants' best interests above the interests of American citizens.

 

 I bet most petitioners ARE American people. They forget that there are Americans' lives being determined by USCIS. Here we have COs callously calling our loved ones customers. 

 

And using henna to deny a K-1 (even when a legal certificate of non-marriage is provided)? That's callous. 

It may not be an issue for every CO, of course. And, I'm speculating of course, but I think it's not strictly the henna that's the problem, it's the cultural significance typically attached to it. As you said, henna is a celebratory thing, and weddings are one of the most major times when it's used. Emphasizing that you received henna from your fiancé's female relatives strictly for an engagement and not a wedding might keep you in the clear. It's frustrating, though, wondering how close to the line you can tiptoe without crossing it and receiving a denial. For the sake of the K-1 process and AOS, we have to put our stock by paperwork, you have to have that marriage license before you're legally married. Period. But I guess the CO's see cases where in other countries legal marriage and cultural marriage (as you said, being able to legally consummate your relationship) might be confused under a country's laws. I mean, even in the U.S., some states do even recognize common law marriages, where if you live together long enough eventually you're considered married in the eyes of the law. So I guess marriage is a fuzzy thing sometimes, and for our process it's a bit nerve-wracking trying to find out what's "too engaged." Best of luck to all my MENA and Southeast Asia lovelies, though. We can do it! Just hang in there

[Fippsie 164]

Jumped another day to april 13th <3

[peterad 28]

My fiance can't visit me (beneficiary) in Kenya as she can;t get time off, and this process is killing us, so I decided to risk a B2 visa interview, and had it today.... I GOT IT.

 

Got lots of negative advice saying it was a big risk but I am glad I went ahead. WIll be able to visit my fiance (if POE allows!) for a motnh and hopefully get NOA2 whilst in the states with her.

 

If anyone has considered it, its definitely possible