A short rant

[Rocio0010 5,579]

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

They don’t need to change INA to make  this better:

 

Idea 1: They can certainly produce an I-751EZ for couples who since the date  I-485  was approved or POE have

-  never been in a state of legal separation 

- cohabitated 

- have not filed for divorce 

- listed both members of the couple as parents on each child born

 

and the conditional LPR (CLPR) has remained admissible (example no  crimes).  
 

If so, approval would be automatic.

 

Idea 2: the CLPR should be able to declare an intent to naturalize before the green card expires by paying the N-400 fee in advance. The CLPR would then get a 4 year extension letter, and would file a new form (paying the I-751 fee) that combines I-751 / N-400 when the N-400 window opens, but no later than 3 years after the resident since date.  There would then be a single adjudication.  

 

Both ideas are consistent with INA.  USCIS could then focus resources on couples with a higher probability of fraud.  

Where do I vote you for Senator?

[STO Overland 137]

46 minutes ago, Rocio0010 said:

Where do I vote you for Senator?

 According to the N400 civics test

 

Question 24, that would be California. 
Question 49: only citizens are allowed to vote in a federal election

Edited June 16, 2022 by DeezNuts

[martinzl 91]

1.  It's a moneymaker

2.  Not a priority since USCIS can simply issue updated extension letters as they've already done.

When I informed my wife's employer that her green card was going to expire but that she had received an extension letter they told me that once a person was hired they never really checked to see if that person remained in employment status. What I don't understand is since most of the ROCs are granted, with such a backlog, USCIS should be able to develop a plan to screen and fast track many of the applications and simply issue 10-year green cards without any interview.

[Dashinka 24,487]

14 hours ago, SS_SS said:

I don't think they can get rid of it, unless they change INA, which is unlikely to happen in this political environment. 

They could rubber stamp approve the I751s where the couple are still married and provide adequate evidence, and focus on the I751s with divorce waivers, and the ones with very little evidence.  I realize that this would also piss some people off, but it would be sort of the same thing we see with consulate processing of spousal visas where times vary just because of which country they are dealing with.

 

I tend to agree, the I751 is a waste of time, but I don't see changes coming to the INA or USCIS, it brings in money.  When we filed at the end of 2016, it was right when the I751 processing started to slow down to a crawl (they were only issuing 12 month extension letters back then).  We filed of course as it was required, but pretty much forgot it and my wife filed for naturalization a year later and was finished with USCIS 5+ months later.  I know, not everyone wants to naturalize, but for those that do and are also in the I751 quagmire, I suggest forgetting about the I751 and get the N400 clock running.

[Dashinka 24,487]

4 hours ago, Mike E said:

Focusing on I-485 processing will just increase the number of I-751s they have to process later. 
 

By focusing on I-485s there will be fewer 10 year green cards issued. 
 

There will be fewer 10 year green cards issued because USCIS will schedule more interviews (or issue positive decisions with interviews waived) before the couple has been married 2 years.
 

Historically  some couples file I-485 with fewer than 2 years of marriage but due to USCIS inefficiency, they get 10 year green cards because USCIS approved the case 2 or more years after the marriage anniversary.  
 

USCIS should use machine learning to automatically approve I-751 cases.  It isn’t hard to feed a software program hundreds of thousands of cases and from that the program learns which ones were approved and which were denied. Using this, most pending cases can be simply approved.  

Probably the reason USCIS is focusing on the I485, they do not want to lose out on the I751 fees.

[Dashinka 24,487]

3 hours ago, Mike E said:

They don’t need to change INA to make  this better:

 

Idea 1: They can certainly produce an I-751EZ for couples who since the date  I-485  was approved or POE have

-  never been in a state of legal separation 

- cohabitated 

- have not filed for divorce 

- listed both members of the couple as parents on each child born

 

and the conditional LPR (CLPR) has remained admissible (example no  crimes).  
 

If so, approval would be automatic.

 

Idea 2: the CLPR should be able to declare an intent to naturalize before the green card expires by paying the N-400 fee in advance. The CLPR would then get a 4 year extension letter, and would file a new form (paying the I-751 fee) that combines I-751 / N-400 when the N-400 window opens, but no later than 3 years after the resident since date.  There would then be a single adjudication.  

 

Both ideas are consistent with INA.  USCIS could then focus resources on couples with a higher probability of fraud.  

Great ideas.  Unfortunately USCIS is a government bureaucracy, so most likely will not happen at least for a long time. 

[Rocio0010 5,579]

1 hour ago, DeezNuts said:

 According to the N400 civics test

 

Question 24, that would be California. 
Question 49: only citizens are allowed to vote in a federal election

I was just being sarcastic…

[PWB 213]

Follow the money.

[STO Overland 137]

3 hours ago, Rocio0010 said:

I was just being sarcastic…

I had guessed that. Different humor for different folks 

Edited June 16, 2022 by DeezNuts

[Mobius1 175]

Its not so much about the money than it is about their unwillingness to issue immigration benefits to people.

 

While they say its to weed out fake marriages, which is a noble and right thing to do, but 97% of completely legit people also suffer due to it.

 

The idea behind it the wait and watch. The insane divorce rates and the modern day extremely low tolerance of spouses in marriages that fall apart on the most tiny of disagreements.

This goes in their favor of not having to issue 10 year GCs but rake in the cash at the same time.

 

Also, in such a short duration of 2 years, one cant gather enough evidence unless they try very hard, have irrefutable evidence such as a child etc.

Sometimes they approve cases with in 5 months of filing, which will literally produce little to no evidence. Again a slam dunk for them.

 

If one is able to cross the biggest of barriers, the design is again to screw people up in grey areas of the law.

 

What's amazing is that us, the immigrants are held to such a high standard that an average citizen cannot even fathom.

 

Administer the good moral character, citizenship test to the by birth citizens, and more than 70% will fail it.

[Rafagus 64]

Another unfair issue is that depending on the service center that will review the form, the waiting can be as low as 6 months or as high as 2 years, so, even some petitioners of the same form are treated differently.....

 

 

[Rocio0010 5,579]

16 hours ago, Mobius1 said:

Also, in such a short duration of 2 years, one cant gather enough evidence unless they try very hard, have irrefutable evidence such as a child etc.

Well, on that one I disagree… it’s not hard to get joint bank accounts or joint utilities. Having a child is just one evidence. 
We don’t have kids and I’m very confident of the package we put together. Bank statements, utilities, health/ vehicle insurance, title to our home, etc etc. 

13 hours ago, Rafagus said:

Another unfair issue is that depending on the service center that will review the form, the waiting can be as low as 6 months or as high as 2 years, so, even some petitioners of the same form are treated differently.....

 

 

Agree. Mine is at LIN. Just got myself a comfy chair to sit and wait

[yoda one for me 322]

5 hours ago, Rocio0010 said:

22 hours ago, Mobius1 said:

Also, in such a short duration of 2 years, one cant gather enough evidence unless they try very hard, have irrefutable evidence such as a child etc.

Well, on that one I disagree… it’s not hard to get joint bank accounts or joint utilities. Having a child is just one evidence. 
We don’t have kids and I’m very confident of the package we put together. Bank statements, utilities, health/ vehicle insurance, title to our home, etc etc. 

Agree. Mine is at LIN. Just got myself a comfy chair to sit and wait

I'm with Rocio on this. The thing is, they only want two years worth of evidence anyway. I grant that it's easier for folks who are in a good financial position to be able to include things like vehicles and property ownership, but even folks who are living rent-free with family can still comingle their finances through bank accounts and shared credit cards (or authorized users on one), can get individual wills written up, and can try to make sure both names (and the shared address) are on as many other incidental bills throughout the period as they can. Me and my spouse are childfree, we sent a pretty chunky packet and have no concerns because we knew we needed to collect this kind of thing even before we got married.

 

I realize it may not have been the intent by Morbius1 here, but I think it's dangerous to suggest that having a child is a kind of gold standard of irrefutable evidence. I worry it could give people the wrong impression and lead to some folks taking on even greater hardship by having a child before they feel ready to, all under some belief it will make any immigration problems go away. 

[Rocio0010 5,579]

4 minutes ago, yoda one for me said:

I'm with Rocio on this. The thing is, they only want two years worth of evidence anyway. I grant that it's easier for folks who are in a good financial position to be able to include things like vehicles and property ownership, but even folks who are living rent-free with family can still comingle their finances through bank accounts and shared credit cards (or authorized users on one), can get individual wills written up, and can try to make sure both names (and the shared address) are on as many other incidental bills throughout the period as they can. Me and my spouse are childfree, we sent a pretty chunky packet and have no concerns because we knew we needed to collect this kind of thing even before we got married.

 

I realize it may not have been the intent by Morbius1 here, but I think it's dangerous to suggest that having a child is a kind of gold standard of irrefutable evidence. I worry it could give people the wrong impression and lead to some folks taking on even greater hardship by having a child before they feel ready to, all under some belief it will make any immigration problems go away. 

Exactly. We had to get more “creative” in terms of evidence, but it’s doable as long as you think proactively and start collecting evidence right after your conditional gc is approved. I bought a legal size envelope, labeled it “ROC evidence” and started collecting evidence as we went. I can’t emphasize how this made it so simple to put the package together. And when I say “creative”, I mean think of things that you already have. For example, we go to the vet for our three pets. So we asked our vet to put both our names on the bills. State taxes filed jointly. Emergency contact info in your workplace, etc.

I might get downvoted for saying this, but although a child is a piece of evidence, for immigration it only means that you procreated.

[Mobius1 175]

1 hour ago, yoda one for me said:

I realize it may not have been the intent by Morbius1 here, but I think it's dangerous to suggest that having a child is a kind of gold standard of irrefutable evidence. I worry it could give people the wrong impression and lead to some folks taking on even greater hardship by having a child before they feel ready to, all under some belief it will make any immigration problems go away. 

That's definitely not the intent. No one should have a child just to prove something.  But a child is among the heaviest of evidences uscis considers. I am saying this based on the first hand experience in the interview.

 

A pretty senior and not to happy/ friendly looking IO took our interview. As soon as we presented the birth cert as first evidence, it was like he stepped into happy land. Said that's all he needs as well as "(lets assume) Even if the marriage was fake at some point, the fact that there is a child made it real"