I-751 April 2018 Filers

[Rochbaby 7]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/visa-policy-changes/index.html

Have you guys read this?

[ParabolaEulogy 21]

1 hour ago, Sydney T. said:

We aren't allowed to utilize the google doc as per VisaJourney rules. Been posted about many times in here.  From everything I've gathered, no CSC filers after April 6th have received biometrics.   I've called and was told somethingwould be done and sent to "action"...2 weeks and one day later...still nothing. 

Same problem here: no news about biometrics and got NOA before yours. Called USCIS and they don't provide any clear reply ...anyone else can clue us in?

[Ash.1101 1,756]

3 hours ago, Rochbaby said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/visa-policy-changes/index.html

Have you guys read this?

Most of us have.

This isn't a bad thing though. This weeds out the people who send in applications to hold a spot in line or those who figure they will just wait to get everything when it's needed. I wouldn't say it affects most of us here at VJ.

The only downside is that they can now deny it without telling us what we may have been missing. So those that only did half of their research may be surprised when things get kicked back.


This won't affect the people who meet all the requirements but may have sent a lesser quantity of proof.

This will affect the people who forgot to send a signed I-864 or tax return or any of the required things for an application to be adjudicated.


So one thing we'll have to do on VJ is stop saying "Oh don't worry about it, just wait until you get the RFE".

Edited July 17, 2018 by Ash.1101

[jackiewackie 23]

39 minutes ago, Ash.1101 said:

The only downside is that they can now deny it without telling us what we may have been missing. So those that only did half of their research may be surprised when things get kicked back.


This won't affect the people who meet all the requirements but may have sent a lesser quantity of proof.

 

Yeah, I don't have that kind of blind trust/faith in the Government or the administration. The whole purpose of it is to curb immigration (both illegal, AND legal). What makes you think they will be fair or just? It just gives them more leeway and unchecked allowances to reject visas as and when they feel like. Also, surely the result of a small mistake shouldn't be deportation?  Last I checked, I was applying for residency in the States (you know, like a first world country), not North Korea. The application process is already complicated to begin with. Considering that the USCIS has NEVER been organized, what if THEY overlooked some papers/applications on their end? They'd be NO way for recourse on our end. This is in no way good news, nor will it make things more efficient. This just gets rid of checks and balances, which is not a good thing. 

Edited July 17, 2018 by jackiewackie

[jackiewackie 23]

3 hours ago, ParabolaEulogy said:

Same problem here: no news about biometrics and got NOA before yours. Called USCIS and they don't provide any clear reply ...anyone else can clue us in?

No news about biometrics and I received my NOA on 05/25. I have an infopass appointment tomorrow and will ask about the biometrics. 

[Ash.1101 1,756]

16 minutes ago, jackiewackie said:

 

Yeah, I don't have that kind of blind trust/faith in the Government or the administration. The whole purpose of it is to curb immigration (both illegal, AND legal). What makes you think they will be fair or just? It just gives them more leeway and unchecked allowances to reject visas as and when they feel like. Also, surely the result of a small mistake shouldn't be deportation?  Last I checked, I was applying for residency in the States (you know, like a first world country), not North Korea. The application process is already complicated to begin with. Considering that the USCIS has NEVER been organized, what if THEY overlooked some papers/applications on their end? They'd be NO way for recourse on our end. This is in no way good news, nor will it make things more efficient. This just gets rid of checks and balances, which is not a good thing. 

Personally, we (my husband and I) haven't ran into an issue of fairness or justness in the system, and I've only read a case from one person here where USCIS royally screwed them over. (They had the case, then lost their case, admitted they lost their case, and told the person to reapply because it was no longer in the system). Everyone else it wasn't a case of not meeting the requirements, but them wanting more proof because the proof was lacking on a subjective level.

It should become fairly obvious very quickly if the system is taken advantage of, and it may mean less DIY cases and more lawyer cases.

And just from the amount of people here on VJ that know you could placeholder an application, I do truly believe it was probably something that was taken advantage of. 


It's a bad apples spoil the bunch case, but we'll see what the response truly is once more applications get put through/denied.


The big question will be, can they deny applications because they don't believe there is ENOUGH proof? So say you send in 5 documents supporting a bona fide marriage, one of the requirements. Will they just deny if they don't like the proof sent? From what it looks like, it's simply if you don't have a complete packet from the initial take in like when they cash the check. Again though. I do believe that they should at least say what is missing, but yes that would hold them accountable. 


And as a side note, I don't trust or have faith in the government. I expect the worst when it comes to immigration and that our lives have no matter to them and we are just numbers on a paper. We are actually an inconvenience at the end of the day. I believe they give a right of immigration solely because it can look good, I don't believe they want anyone to actually immigrate here unless they can benefit the country in some way. We're in their claws and they can crush us any time unless people with more power decide to care a little bit more.

Edited July 17, 2018 by Ash.1101

[jackiewackie 23]

5 minutes ago, Ash.1101 said:

And just from the amount of people here on VJ that know you could placeholder an application, I do truly believe it was probably something that was taken advantage of

I'm not sure what you mean by placeholder an application.

 

We will see I suppose. If people are making use of the system, I don't think it's bad to have more stringent rules in place. However, leaving it to "their discretion" just leaves much to be abused. 

[Ash.1101 1,756]

1 minute ago, jackiewackie said:

I'm not sure what you mean by placeholder an application.

 

We will see I suppose. If people are making use of the system, I don't think it's bad to have more stringent rules in place. However, leaving it to "their discretion" just leaves much to be abused. 

It's when you send in an application with little to none of the requirements. So say you may send in the Green Card application I-551 all filled out and nice with the I-864, but then don't send the tax information or bona fide marriage information because you want to wait to get all of that stuff. Or because, a common reason, you haven't filed taxes yet but will by the time they send out an RFE.

They would normally process the I-551, send out the NOA (which gives you legal status to be in the US while it processes) then send out an RFE for anything else needed when they go to adjudicate it.

This is becoming SUPER common with the wait times because people are assuming they have a year to collect evidence, or that the initial evidence they send doesn't matter anyways if their case isn't taken care of for another year.


So the idea is that say you send a complete packet with an abundance of proof, and Joe B sends a packet with just the application and what used to be enough to get by. Now instead of doing a full input and putting Joe B's paperwork infront of yours to be adjudicated and hit with an RFE. They will now just deny him on the spot and grab your paperwork and send it on.

This could cause a longer wait for NOA's initially, but should lower wait times for adjucation if done correctly.

[jackiewackie 23]

19 minutes ago, Ash.1101 said:

The big question will be, can they deny applications because they don't believe there is ENOUGH proof? So say you send in 5 documents supporting a bona fide marriage, one of the requirements. Will they just deny if they don't like the proof sent? From what it looks like, it's simply if you don't have a complete packet from the initial take in like when they cash the check. Again though. I do believe that they should at least say what is missing, but yes that would hold them accountable.

This is my biggest worry. I feel like certain things can be pretty subjective as to what qualifies as proof. 

 

21 minutes ago, Ash.1101 said:

And as a side note, I don't trust or have faith in the government. I expect the worst when it comes to immigration and that our lives have no matter to them and we are just numbers on a paper. We are actually an inconvenience at the end of the day. I believe they give a right of immigration solely because it can look good, I don't believe they want anyone to actually immigrate here unless they can benefit the country in some way. We're in their claws and they can crush us any time unless people with more power decide to care a little bit more.

I agree with this entirely. The current administration is particularly anti-immigration. I never believed their whole spiel about just curbing 'illegal immigration'. I'm not even against stringent immigration laws, I just think that there should be little left to discretion, and that there should be transparency. 

 

5 minutes ago, Ash.1101 said:

It's when you send in an application with little to none of the requirements. So say you may send in the Green Card application I-551 all filled out and nice with the I-864, but then don't send the tax information or bona fide marriage information because you want to wait to get all of that stuff. Or because, a common reason, you haven't filed taxes yet but will by the time they send out an RFE.

They would normally process the I-551, send out the NOA (which gives you legal status to be in the US while it processes) then send out an RFE for anything else needed when they go to adjudicate it.

Wow. I did NOT know this. That's pretty risky, even before the policy change. I panicked for a month and a half awaiting the NOA because I had used paper clips, which I found out after sending, that they didn't like that. 

[Pkr 21]

39 minutes ago, jackiewackie said:

This is my biggest worry. I feel like certain things can be pretty subjective as to what qualifies as proof. 

 

I agree with this entirely. The current administration is particularly anti-immigration. I never believed their whole spiel about just curbing 'illegal immigration'. I'm not even against stringent immigration laws, I just think that there should be little left to discretion, and that there should be transparency. 

 

Wow. I did NOT know this. That's pretty risky, even before the policy change. I panicked for a month and a half awaiting the NOA because I had used paper clips, which I found out after sending, that they didn't like that. 

Oh really I did not know that and I do not recall reading anywhere that it would be an issue using paper clips . Where did you find this information ?

[ParabolaEulogy 21]

58 minutes ago, jackiewackie said:

I'm not sure what you mean by placeholder an application.

 

We will see I suppose. If people are making use of the system, I don't think it's bad to have more stringent rules in place. However, leaving it to "their discretion" just leaves much to be abused. 

Honestly CNN is most probably the most unreliable news outlet out there. I would be interested in seeing an official announcement from the government, if any.

[ParabolaEulogy 21]

1 minute ago, Pkr said:

Oh really I did not know that and I do not recall reading anywhere that it would be an issue using paper clips . Where did you find this information ?

Staples is what they dont like. Paper clips are easily taken out so paper clips are perfectly fine.

[jackiewackie 23]

2 minutes ago, Pkr said:

Oh really I did not know that and I do not recall reading anywhere that it would be an issue using paper clips . Where did you find this information ?

I just saw it on forums (probably Visajourney) .

 

1 minute ago, ParabolaEulogy said:

Staples is what they dont like. Paper clips are easily taken out so paper clips are perfectly fine.

Ah, ok. I may have gotten it wrong.

[jackiewackie 23]

3 minutes ago, ParabolaEulogy said:

Honestly CNN is most probably the most unreliable news outlet out there. I would be interested in seeing an official announcement from the government, if any.

https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-updates-policy-guidance-certain-requests-evidence-and-notices-intent-deny

 

I'm now a little worried about what they mean by little supporting evidence. Our lives barely changed after getting married (We were already living together for 2 years before getting married, had joint accounts but lazily used) and so sent in a lot of repeated information. The only thing that changed was that we got a car & car loan together, another cat, and a bunch of travel tickets and pictures and weddings that we had attended. Obviously all sent in, but it can certainly look minimal under someone's who's looking for mortgage, children, insurance change..etc..

[ParabolaEulogy 21]

5 minutes ago, jackiewackie said:

https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-updates-policy-guidance-certain-requests-evidence-and-notices-intent-deny

 

I'm now a little worried about what they mean by little supporting evidence. Our lives barely changed after getting married (We were already living together for 2 years before getting married, had joint accounts but lazily used) and so sent in a lot of repeated information. The only thing that changed was that we got a car & car loan together, another cat, and a bunch of travel tickets and pictures and weddings that we had attended. Obviously all sent in, but it can certainly look minimal under someone's who's looking for mortgage, children, insurance change..etc..

Don't worry.  I am certain they are trying to weed out those who are not serious.