When do I need an NBI clearance?

[angeljolie 188]

3 minutes ago, payxibka said:

What unwritten rule?  My wife's NBI was 11 months old at time of interview 

I guess it's a rumor then. Glad to know! 

[seekingthetruth 1,238]

Sorry, off topic, but I think this topic is done.

 

@angeljolie I just saw your timeline and that is very fast for your i-130 approval, 59 days!  Is your daughter getting the same timeline?  I hope that my wife and step-daughter will be on the same approval timeline.

[angeljolie 188]

3 minutes ago, seekingthetruth said:

Sorry, off topic, but I think this topic is done.

 

@angeljolie I just saw your timeline and that is very fast for your i-130 approval, 59 days!  Is your daughter getting the same timeline?  I hope that my wife and step-daughter will be on the same approval timeline.

Yes we were pleasantly surprised at how fast it was. Our kids' (daughter and son) cases got approved on 19 Nov (88 days if my math is correct lol). Hoping for a swift approval for your wife and daughter too! Looks like things are picking up now.

[PWB 213]

3 hours ago, VicDEH said:

This kind of scares me now. My wife also just finished getting her NBI and they refused to do an AKA.  Although she insisted they told her the multipurpose NBI would be all that they would do for her.  We accepted that and hoped that the embassy would accept it.  However, after reading here it seems that this is not the case.  I guess we need to prepare for a 221-g on this one.

Don't mean to scare you, but this NBI procedure causes a lot of problems.  It seems to me when the USEM wants to control the number of visa's issued they use either the NBI or Sputum Testing to slow down the visa.  Why else would it have taken 11 months of administrative processing to issue our visa.  We submitted the same NBI three times and completed three negative sputum test.  We hope the best for you.

[user555 196]

2 hours ago, payxibka said:

What unwritten rule?  My wife's NBI was 11 months old at time of interview 

Hank said, "Correct .. they don't.     There have been numerous reports from people being asked to get a new NBI because the on they presented as over 6 months old."

 

I read a case on this site about a guy who had a fiancee in the Philippines get at 221g because his fiancee's NBI was just over 6 months old. This happened this year. 

 

The point is, USEM is not consistent with their rules. 

[user555 196]

2 hours ago, payxibka said:

What unwritten rule?  My wife's NBI was 11 months old at time of interview 

JonSeattle said: My fiance's interview was in March, and she got 221(g). Her NBI clearance was just over 6 months old. Finally, 5 months later, her CEAC went from Refused to AP. Fortunately it looks like the 1 month extension on the medical with cover this. Hopefully yours will go much faster.

 Payx, you act like you've never seen these types of threads before. 

[user555 196]

4 hours ago, angeljolie said:

The documents do have the term "AKA" explicitly written on them.

Interesting. The one we got didn't have AKA printed on it, but there was a checkbox on the online form to add an AKA name, which my wife did. We'll see how it goes at our interview in 2 weeks! She was never married before, so maybe that's the reason? 

[angeljolie 188]

4 minutes ago, user555 said:

Interesting. The one we got didn't have AKA printed on it, but there was a checkbox on the online form to add an AKA name, which my wife did. We'll see how it goes at our interview in 2 weeks! She was never married before, so maybe that's the reason? 

I was never married before too. If your wife can get a new clearance, it might save you from the headache. Please see my post earlier about how to ensure the AKA will be printed on the document. Good luck on the interview! You’re getting close! 

[payxibka 10,045]

14 minutes ago, user555 said:

JonSeattle said: My fiance's interview was in March, and she got 221(g). Her NBI clearance was just over 6 months old. Finally, 5 months later, her CEAC went from Refused to AP. Fortunately it looks like the 1 month extension on the medical with cover this. Hopefully yours will go much faster.

 Payx, you act like you've never seen these types of threads before. 

One or two occurrences a year does not a trend make.  Why are you showing a thread about CEMAR, that is not the subject

[user555 196]

3 minutes ago, payxibka said:

One or two occurrences a year does not a trend make.  Why are you showing a thread about CEMAR, that is not the subject

The thread was about a CEMAR, but that specific user said NBI. The NBI was over six months old. I bolded his comment. I can find a dozen postings about this. USEM does not follow their own rules as evidenced by the reports in this forum (more than 1 or 2 a year). 

Edited December 9, 2020 by user555

[payxibka 10,045]

4 minutes ago, user555 said:

The thread was about a CEMAR, but that specific user said NBI. The NBI was over six months old. I bolded his comment. I can find a dozen postings about this. USEM does not follow their own rules as evidenced by the reports in this forum (more than 1 or 2 a year). 

I have been a part of this regional forum for more than 2 years and only recall a couple of reports over that time frame.   I guess that's enough to make a blanket statement that the consulate gets "grumpy" if it is more than 6 months. 

[angeljolie 188]

28 minutes ago, payxibka said:

I have been a part of this regional forum for more than 2 years and only recall a couple of reports over that time frame.   I guess that's enough to make a blanket statement that the consulate gets "grumpy" if it is more than 6 months. 

Would you recommend that applicants go to their interview with a clearance that’s more than 6 months?

[Talako 771]

The AKA can trip you in a couple of ways.  My wife's BC was corrected a couple of months after her birth for spelling.  She got a 221(g) because she needed to add the original spelling as an AKA. 

 

When you step back and look at it, it makes you wonder what kind of police record can a person get into in their first couple of months in life.  

[flicks1998 1,044]

5 hours ago, Talako said:

 

 

When you step back and look at it, it makes you wonder what kind of police record can a person get into in their first couple of months in life.  

Thats what I was thinking as well.  My fiance was born illegitimate but her parents married when she was 4 which then they legitimized the birth.  I thought, she would be the first 4 and under who had a criminal record that i know of.  However, I think what they are looking for is later in life, if someone decided to commit some crime, maybe they could resort back to their original name to do this keeping their true, current name clean.  I dont know if that is correct, but how I tried to rationalize it.  

[angeljolie 188]

6 hours ago, Talako said:

The AKA can trip you in a couple of ways.  My wife's BC was corrected a couple of months after her birth for spelling.  She got a 221(g) because she needed to add the original spelling as an AKA. 

 

When you step back and look at it, it makes you wonder what kind of police record can a person get into in their first couple of months in life.  

I have a similar case. On my birth certificate, my surname was spelled “NATION” but my real surname is “NACION” (these are made up names but you know what I mean). I didn’t have NATION on the AKA of the clearance I submitted because I never used it ever. Plus I thought “it’s just one letter” and it wasn’t a completely different name. But when I read your post, it made sense that I have to have it written down as an AKA too, based on USEM’s standards. Will definitely get a new one for the interview with it listed too.  Thanks for sharing!