AOS interview successful, but waiting for FBI name check

[doodles75 0]

Where did you interview and have you made any inquiries into your case? That's a damn long time....

I interviewed in Albany New York and on a follow up they said that i was waiting on the FBI name check, that there is nothing i can do. Basically 'sit down and shut up young lady'

I keep thinking it can't possibly take much longer, but still i wait and still nothing, diddly squat, not a sausage not even a little dicky bird of hope for signs of GC.

[rebeccajo 14]

Yeah it pretty much is a 'sit down and shut up' proposition. But the school of thinking in this thread is we should all still be proactive about our petitions in case we need to 'prove' later on that USCIS failed us somehow.

Depending on when you last inquired, I don't think it would be at all out of order for you to Infopass. From what I hear that office is horribly busy. The namecheck could be done but your file could be lying on someones desk buried.

[LaL 418]

i dont know how much longer we will last on this list. Hubby is fed up and talking about moving back to Canada. We spent way too much time dealing with this on the K1 stage, now AOS, who's to say we won't get stuck at citizenship (if he chooses to do this at all).

we have been dealing with immigration for 917 days from K1 NOA. I just saw another CSC transfer that took 7 days. i am going to say outright i AM pissed at this whole process, and have been feeling much like my husband.

i keep asking myself, is it really worth the wait? im not too sure right now.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

WE keep talking about the same thing, and we haven't been waiting nearly as long as other people -- in fact, I have actively been seeking work back in London. At the end of the day, I moved back to the US because I had a really great job offer and for no other reason -- he reluctantly agreed to all of this, and it is turning out to be much more difficult than anticipated in terms of his immigration status and his ability to get a good job with same pay and benefits he had back there.

When I told this to my current employer, they assigned a lawyer to work on our case. Just yesterday they went through all our AOS paperwork and pointed out several things that may have been red flags, which makes me wonder how wise it was to go this without a lawyer in the first place. Of course, they could be wrong, but I will be interested to see what transpires over the next few months.

[LaL 418]

WE keep talking about the same thing, and we haven't been waiting nearly as long as other people -- in fact, I have actively been seeking work back in London. At the end of the day, I moved back to the US because I had a really great job offer and for no other reason -- he reluctantly agreed to all of this, and it is turning out to be much more difficult than anticipated in terms of his immigration status and his ability to get a good job with same pay and benefits he had back there.

When I told this to my current employer, they assigned a lawyer to work on our case. Just yesterday they went through all our AOS paperwork and pointed out several things that may have been red flags, which makes me wonder how wise it was to go this without a lawyer in the first place. Of course, they could be wrong, but I will be interested to see what transpires over the next few months.

red flags? is your petition atypical if you don't mind me asking?

[rebeccajo 14]

WE keep talking about the same thing, and we haven't been waiting nearly as long as other people -- in fact, I have actively been seeking work back in London. At the end of the day, I moved back to the US because I had a really great job offer and for no other reason -- he reluctantly agreed to all of this, and it is turning out to be much more difficult than anticipated in terms of his immigration status and his ability to get a good job with same pay and benefits he had back there.

When I told this to my current employer, they assigned a lawyer to work on our case. Just yesterday they went through all our AOS paperwork and pointed out several things that may have been red flags, which makes me wonder how wise it was to go this without a lawyer in the first place. Of course, they could be wrong, but I will be interested to see what transpires over the next few months.

red flags? is your petition atypical if you don't mind me asking?

Well I'm wondering what the lawyers consider to be atypical.......

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

The big thing they told us we shouldn't have done was listed a profession under "current occupation" on the I-485 as since he was applying as K-1 he should not currently be working. Our reply was that we understood that to be "what is your normal profession" (i.e. what he did before coming here) -- they said, "well you would think so but they don't always see it that way." They seemed to think that in some cases it might imply working illegally. They also pointed out that on the G325 we had listed "sole trader listed with the Inland Revenue" as his employment (self employed) was not language they would have used, and that we should not have listed that employment as being from "2004 until present" Basically, they thought this language might suggest working here illegally and raised a red flag (he has not done any work here prior to EAD).

They also wondered if the fact my husband had received a police caution for a very minor offense when he was 18 (that did not appear on his police report that was submitted during the K-1, as it was a caution and not a conviction) should not have been mentioned in part 3 of the I-485.

Bear in mind we are not currently certain that the FBI clearance is the only thing holding us back as the letter we recieved after our interview was very ambigious.

[belladona_ph 0]

That is my case status now for AOS..national security check, and like everyone else, got that same notice from Homeland Security. Reading the experiences here in VJ, at least gives us an idea on how others are doing in their AOS. Some AOS quick, some taking years ... Different experiences, different time of waiting..and this made us more patient... come winter, spring, summer, autumn . . .

Good luck to all of us in waiting....

Jan

[rebeccajo 14]

The big thing they told us we shouldn't have done was listed a profession under "current occupation" on the I-485 as since he was applying as K-1 he should not currently be working. Our reply was that we understood that to be "what is your normal profession" (i.e. what he did before coming here) -- they said, "well you would think so but they don't always see it that way." They seemed to think that in some cases it might imply working illegally. They also pointed out that on the G325 we had listed "sole trader listed with the Inland Revenue" as his employment (self employed) was not language they would have used, and that we should not have listed that employment as being from "2004 until present" Basically, they thought this language might suggest working here illegally and raised a red flag (he has not done any work here prior to EAD).

They also wondered if the fact my husband had received a police caution for a very minor offense when he was 18 (that did not appear on his police report that was submitted during the K-1, as it was a caution and not a conviction) should not have been mentioned in part 3 of the I-485.

Bear in mind we are not currently certain that the FBI clearance is the only thing holding us back as the letter we recieved after our interview was very ambigious.

robinlake, why do they think that stuff about his employment makes any difference? I mean, do they have some experience with that being an issue?

And how else are you supposed to answer the questions on the I-485 but truthfully?

If your lawyers are 'guessing' at these flags then I tend to think they are incorrect. However, if they've got some previous examples of this being a problem then did they tell you what those were?

I really don't think this stuff is anything more than the FBI spinning the names around and getting a file hit. Which they then have to manually extract from their massively disorganized record keeping system before giving the file (or files) to some poor soul to trudge through.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

They said only "it could have caused a problem" -- I guess in how the Officer interprets the information? They did not mention a specific example. This lawyers explanation for why certain things cause problems are "they are the department of homeland security they can do what they want"

We answered the questions on the I-485 truthfully -- the police "caution" did not include an arrest so I believe we did everything correctly. It did not appear on the police report, but perhaps it was recorded somewhere not available to the public? That would be my guess.

My mind, it boggles.

[mamamija 0]

I also came with K3 visa, we had an interview in May 2005, taken biometrics in April 2006....silence now....

In October we received a letter that FBI name check is pending. Lawyer says that it can be that they checking the marriage if it was in good faith or FBI name check....But i am wondering if it would be checking for true intentions- they would ask us for second interview- they never did.....I do not know what to do....Please help

[rebeccajo 14]

I also came with K3 visa, we had an interview in May 2005, taken biometrics in April 2006....silence now....

In October we received a letter that FBI name check is pending. Lawyer says that it can be that they checking the marriage if it was in good faith or FBI name check....But i am wondering if it would be checking for true intentions- they would ask us for second interview- they never did.....I do not know what to do....Please help

We'd love to if we could. Unfortunately, if you have someone advocating for you (your lawyer), if you are checking with USCIS periodically by Infopass or whatever other method you choose, then there isn't much else we can suggest you do.

You can involve an elected representative if you like by having them make an inquiry on your behalf. Don't expect results from this though. Expect only that it will add to your arsenal of 'evidence' should you ever need to prove that USCIS has failed in keeping their end of the bargain with you.

[scotty 0]

I just find this whole check thing so hard to comprehend, I know the jist of it but it still does not excuse the

sheer incompetance of those at the top of the relevant departments.I mean in this day and age of the computer how long should it take to get in touch with the opposite goverments and for them to get back to them

i.e FBI-- please search your database for any bad deads done by xyz

Scotland yard--nothing here mate

FBI---ok thank you

FBI---nothing on this person go ahead and give them their green card

LOCAL OFFICE--- right will do

ok at the top a month not 2 fckin years

I mean come on short staffed,overloaded,missing files, it so infuriates me that noone can touch them

thank you for the time to allow me to vent my feelings

Ps It will be just my good fortune to get approved and the green card in the post after all the hassles we

have had since our journey started

Regards Scotty

[dani_christine 0]

well, kids...there's a new wrinkle in the mix. some of you may remember that last year, we were able to fight for Anthony's right to receive a Pell grant to go to school. (due to my dad's terminal illness, and lots of trans-atlantic travel, i only made about $8,000 in 2004). anyway...

then came the fall 2006 semester. Anthony was accepted into a very selective nursing program, and had to let that slot go to someone else, as we couldn't qualify for any financial aid somehow, due to his immigration status. so he has missed out on being able to attend for an entire semester already, due to this delay.

well, it's that time again. Anthony's been accepted into another nursing program and is set to begin the first week of January. so we've been applying for student loans. get this:

basically, we were told that while there is a provision that allows those granted temporary parole to qualify for federal financial aid, it only applies in the first year. for subsequent years, they do not qualify because their green card should have been approved during that time. She actually showed us this is the regulations book! so we got a copy, for what it's worth, which we're taking to our next infopass appointment on wednesday morning.

i'm with ya, lal_brandow. i'm sick to death of being screwed around by USCIS. on wednesday, we've decided, we are going to demand to speak to a supervisor about our case. supposedly, our file has been sitting on their desk for an entire month now. i don't care if we have to wait hours to speak to her...i am not leaving that building until we have some sort of answer.

for what it's worth, the regs said that if a person has an I-551 stamp in their passport, they are qualified for federal financial aid.

the kicker here is that if we'd been smart enough to apply for EAD, at least he could be working now to help pay for his tuition. but of course, we believed them when we read the processing times.

had we moved to the UK, i could have been granted indefinite leave to remain, been authorized to work, and eligible for NHS health benefits within the span of about a week.

[rebeccajo 14]

.......basically, we were told that while there is a provision that allows those granted temporary parole to qualify for federal financial aid, it only applies in the first year......

i'm with ya, lal_brandow. i'm sick to death of being screwed around by USCIS. on wednesday, we've decided, we are going to demand to speak to a supervisor about our case. supposedly, our file has been sitting on their desk for an entire month now. i don't care if we have to wait hours to speak to her...i am not leaving that building until we have some sort of answer.

for what it's worth, the regs said that if a person has an I-551 stamp in their passport, they are qualified for federal financial aid.

the kicker here is that if we'd been smart enough to apply for EAD, at least he could be working now to help pay for his tuition. but of course, we believed them when we read the processing times.

Dani and Laura.....make that three of us who are sick of this. And I'm finding it very difficult to daily read the ever-growing amount of threads on VJ of transferred cases approved without interview, some now at lightning fast speeds of less than 90 days. In my two years on VJ, I have NEVER been one to begrudge those who got through processes faster than us. But my bubbling anger is not borne of jealousy - instead I smell something afoot.

Something is not right here and I'm beginning to wonder just exactly what it is. I DO believe that USCIS is consciously trying to improve systems, not only to better service customers but also for the benefit of national security. However, it is also under the gun and will soon have to answer to Congress for the huge appropriation it was granted and has spent.

This sudden rash of lickety-split CSC transferred approvals coupled with the dumping of namecheck-stuck cases from their statistical data is making me hopping mad. I feel like not only are we stuck in a blackhole but that we are the victim of a political machine trying desperately to save itself before it has to answer to its master. Personally, I'm of the opinion that USCIS is more interested in generating approvals right now. Our namecheck cases are 'collateral damage' to them and their efforts are being focused elsewhere in order to produce short-term, glowing data.

Dani, I bolded your paragraph about EAD for a reason. Are the rest of you reading the posts from VJ members who are electing not to file for EAD and AP because of the number of cases they are recently seeing approved in these new record times? I cannot believe these people would roll that kind of dice with their lives. Especially when it is my opinion that the trend they are betting the ranch on is VERY short term.

Edited November 11, 2006 by rebeccajo