March 2018 I-129f Filers

[The_Empyrean 733]

15 minutes ago, Greenbaum said:

Highly doubt that's true but that's your opinion not mine. Each case stands on its own and each background is based on the individual and their country. Some will be shorter others will take longer. JMO

How different countries impact the approval time? So me being recently Naturalized will take longer/shorter as opposed to someone who was born USC?

[Greenbaum 12,259]

3 minutes ago, PaulMac said:

How different countries impact the approval time? So me being recently Naturalized will take longer/shorter as opposed to someone who was born USC?

1

Nope. It has to do with where the beneficiary is coming from, their country.

 

It's a different world we live in. It's near impossible to tell who is a friend and who is a foe. So background checks are different. Some countries will cooperate and others will not. Those that don't more scrutiny is given to the application. 

Edited October 2, 2018 by Greenbaum

[The_Empyrean 733]

7 minutes ago, Greenbaum said:

Nope. It has to do with where the beneficiary is coming from, their country.

 

It's a different world we live in. It's near impossible to tell who is a friend and who is a foe. So background checks are different. Some countries will cooperate and others will not. Those that don't more scrutiny is given to the application. 

Weird. Two of my relatives work in the govt, back in Lithuania. One internal affairs, other international, neither of them even heard of any background checks requested by USCIS... 
They get embassy requests on particular people from time to time, who were convicted/ spent time in jail.. Will have to dig deeper, now it's just interesting how it works.

 

[SalishSea 17,836]

1 minute ago, PaulMac said:

Weird. Two of my relatives work in the govt, back in Lithuania. One internal affairs, other international, neither of them even heard of any background checks requested by USCIS... 
They get embassy requests on particular people from time to time, who were convicted/ spent time in jail.. Will have to dig deeper, now it's just interesting how it works.

 

Do you really think the United States admits immigrants without performing background checks and other vetting?  Don't you remember San Bernardino?

[The_Empyrean 733]

1 minute ago, Jorgedig said:

Do you really think the United States admits immigrants without performing background checks and other vetting?  Don't you remember San Bernardino?

I'm not arguing or claiming that they don't. They might be. But would make more sense for NVC, or Embassy to do so. I don't work for any of these institutions, so i'm just speculating.

[Greenbaum 12,259]

1 minute ago, Jorgedig said:

Do you really think the United States admits immigrants without performing background checks and other vetting?  Don't you remember San Bernardino?

You eloquently made my point. Thank you. I don't understand why so many ppl here can't grasp the background check piece of the process.

[BananaButton5 175]

1 minute ago, Jorgedig said:

Do you really think the United States admits immigrants without performing background checks and other vetting?  Don't you remember San Bernardino?

I think he was more under the impression that the beneficiary background part takes place at the consulate stage, not that it doesn't happen at all. I know for Canada my beneficiary has to get his own background check done and bring to interview, so I think it's reasonable to think some people could assume that. 

[SalishSea 17,836]

1 minute ago, BananaButton5 said:

I think he was more under the impression that the beneficiary background part takes place at the consulate stage, not that it doesn't happen at all. I know for Canada my beneficiary has to get his own background check done and bring to interview, so I think it's reasonable to think some people could assume that. 

That is not correct.  All beneficiaries must obtain police certificates from countries where they have resided.  That is not the same thing as background checks.  Even for Canada.

[The_Empyrean 733]

5 minutes ago, Jorgedig said:

That is not correct.  All beneficiaries must obtain police certificates from countries where they have resided.  That is not the same thing as background checks.  Even for Canada.

What we're saying is... Embassy should do background check (if USCIS doesn't), Police Certificate it's just a paper that says you weren't convicted. They should do general check on USCIS, but leave the thorough one for embassy/consulate, as they have more and easier access to that info being in the country in question, they have the person in front of them. Of course they should check in USCIS if he/she is not wanted etc.
Saying that the cases depend on individual isn't wrong, but isn't correct either (unless they have overhauled the system completely).
Being rude doesn't make your statement stronger by the way.

Cheers!

[SalishSea 17,836]

1 minute ago, PaulMac said:

What we're saying is... Embassy should do background check (if USCIS doesn't), Police Certificate it's just a paper that says you weren't convicted. They should do general check on USCIS, but leave the thorough one for embassy/consulate, as they have more and easier access to that info being in the country in question, they have the person in front of them. Of course they should check in USCIS if he/she is not wanted etc.
Saying that the cases depend on individual isn't wrong, but isn't correct either (unless they have overhauled the system completely).
Being rude doesn't make your statement stronger by the way.

Cheers!

How was I being rude? I was simply stating that the police report acquired by the beneficiary in his/her home country is not the same as a background check.  I also did not say there are not background checks at the NVC/embassy levels.  There are background checks all along the process of immigration.  For obvious reasons, the details of resources used to perform those checks are not disclosed to the general public.  

 

And because the US receives differing levels of cooperation from other countries, the background check process is not the same everywhere.  

[Greenbaum 12,259]

Background checks.

 

As part of its benefits adjudication process and as required by law, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) conducts background checks on petitioners and applicants who seek certain immigration benefits. These background checks consist of four separate checks against systems within Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In order to facilitate the collection and transmission of information necessary to complete background check processes, USCIS maintains five information technology electronic systems: the Fingerprint Masthead Notification System (FMNS), the Customer Identity Capture System (CICS), the FD-258 Tracking System - Mainframe (FD-258 MF), the Benefits Biometrics Support System (BBSS), and the Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS) Manifest. USCIS is conducting this privacy impact assessment (PIA) because FMNS, CICS, FD-258 MF, BBSS, and IBIS Manifest collect, use, and share personally identifiable information (PII). This PIA replaces the previously published USCIS PIA for the "Background Check Service (BCS)" which describes planned background check-related systems that were never implemented. Upon publication of this PIA, the BCS PIA will be retired.

 

Additional screening and background checks based on country of birth, citizenship, or residency in the “State Sponsors of Terrorism” (T-7) list: Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, Syria; or from the “List of 26”: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, UAE, Yemen. This is a mandatory stop list and allegedly takes 2 to 4 days, thanks in part to the partially rolled out PATRIOT (Pre-Adjudicated Threat Recognition and Intelligence Operations Team) system managed by ICE, but often take 3 to 6 weeks and if there is a hit who knows how long.

 

Security Advisory Opinion (SAO) or Washington Special Clearance,[1] commonly called security clearance, administrative clearance, or administrative processing,[2] is a process the United States Department of State and the diplomatic missions of the United States use in deciding to grant or deny a United States visa to certain visa applicants. The process involves sending a request from the visa issuing post to the Department of State's headquarters in Washington, D.C., to investigate an individual's case for possible espionage, terrorism, and illegal export of technology out of the United States

[Greenbaum 12,259]

 The background check crowd sure got quite.

[Greenbaum 12,259]

1 hour ago, PaulMac said:

I'm not arguing or claiming that they don't. They might be. But would make more sense for NVC, or Embassy to do so. I don't work for any of these institutions, so i'm just speculating.

USCIS is "homeland security". NVC is part of the "State Department". So background checks are USCIS responsibility and NVC allocates visa's based on country visa allotments. Each country has an allotment (Yes, some country's have more while others have less) of "slots" for a visa from that country. IF NVC has too many applying from one country then it can slow down the process for that country till such time as it can open up new case numbers for those applicants when things smooth out. That's why some ppl are put off for a month or so till such time as their is a visa slot available.

[BJ & Christine 1,392]

5 minutes ago, Greenbaum said:

USCIS is "homeland security". NVC is part of the "State Department". So background checks are USCIS responsibility and NVC allocates visa's based on country visa allotments. Each country has an allotment (Yes, some country's have more while others have less) of "slots" for a visa from that country. IF NVC has too many applying from one country then it can slow down the process for that country till such time as it can open up new case numbers for those applicants when things smooth out. That's why some ppl are put off for a month or so till such time as their is a visa slot available.

The maximum number of family-sponsored and employment-based preference visas that can be issued to citizens of any country in a fiscal year. The limits are calculated each fiscal year depending on the total number of family-sponsored and employment-based visas available. No more than 7 percent of the visas may be issued to natives of any one independent country in a fiscal year; no more than 2 percent may issued to any one dependency of any independent country. The per-country limit does not indicate, however, that a country is entitled to the maximum number of visas each year, just that it cannot receive more than that number. Because of the combined workings of the preference system and per-country limits, most countries do not reach this level of visa issuance.

 

 

The annual limit for total number of legal immigrants is 675,000. This is the maximum allotment of visa numbers per year, covering both foreign nationals who receive immigrant visas at consular offices abroad, and those who adjust status within the United States.

• 675,000 is a "flexible" cap, with certain categories of immigrants exempted from the limit (for example, immediate relatives of U.S. Citizens and certain special immigrants)
• The annual limit is divided into three main categories: family sponsored, employment-based, and diversity visa

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-country-sent-the-most-foreign-fiancees-to-the-us-in-2016-2017-04-05

[The_Empyrean 733]

58 minutes ago, Greenbaum said:

Background checks.

 

As part of its benefits adjudication process and as required by law, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) conducts background checks on petitioners and applicants who seek certain immigration benefits. These background checks consist of four separate checks against systems within Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In order to facilitate the collection and transmission of information necessary to complete background check processes, USCIS maintains five information technology electronic systems: the Fingerprint Masthead Notification System (FMNS), the Customer Identity Capture System (CICS), the FD-258 Tracking System - Mainframe (FD-258 MF), the Benefits Biometrics Support System (BBSS), and the Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS) Manifest. USCIS is conducting this privacy impact assessment (PIA) because FMNS, CICS, FD-258 MF, BBSS, and IBIS Manifest collect, use, and share personally identifiable information (PII). This PIA replaces the previously published USCIS PIA for the "Background Check Service (BCS)" which describes planned background check-related systems that were never implemented. Upon publication of this PIA, the BCS PIA will be retired.

 

Additional screening and background checks based on country of birth, citizenship, or residency in the “State Sponsors of Terrorism” (T-7) list: Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, Syria; or from the “List of 26”: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, UAE, Yemen. This is a mandatory stop list and allegedly takes 2 to 4 days, thanks in part to the partially rolled out PATRIOT (Pre-Adjudicated Threat Recognition and Intelligence Operations Team) system managed by ICE, but often take 3 to 6 weeks and if there is a hit who knows how long.

 

Security Advisory Opinion (SAO) or Washington Special Clearance,[1] commonly called security clearance, administrative clearance, or administrative processing,[2] is a process the United States Department of State and the diplomatic missions of the United States use in deciding to grant or deny a United States visa to certain visa applicants. The process involves sending a request from the visa issuing post to the Department of State's headquarters in Washington, D.C., to investigate an individual's case for possible espionage, terrorism, and illegal export of technology out of the United States

Thank You. Thats what i wanted to know!