The dreaded DS-5535 thread for Montreal. Post here and support each other (PART 2)

[herecomestherain 77]

On 10/6/2022 at 12:20 AM, ice-qube said:

Why? Yes I have my reasons: annoyance just on the principle of the thing, and the extreme amount of money involved. That's it.

One person on this thread wrote a letter directly to the main players at the consulate and DOS and they got approved. Maybe you could try that first.

[ohmygod 60]

On 10/6/2022 at 1:16 PM, jujubemom said:

So it took about a week from getting issued to get the passport?

Did you move? Or you went for a visit and come back to do the full move?

 

[ConsistentCut 17]

After a couple days to cool down and read through all 230 pages of this thread I've accepted the situation. Seems like people either get approved in the first 4 months or are waiting for a year or more.

 

My case has been updated both days since the interview, but I dunno how much that really means. As far as the "previous passports" thing all my research has confirmed my opinion that this question is referring to passports with other countries you may hold that have been used to travel. Your Canadian passport has machine readable lettering on the bottom of your bio page that directly refers to any previously expired canadian passport you've ever held, so the US government already has access to your expired passports. It also makes no sense to tell someone to submit a questionnaire that "takes 60 minutes" the same day if they require you to dig up 40+ years of expired passport history. If I'm wrong, I guess I'll find out eventually.

 

The fact they are giving the DS5535 in concert with missing document requests as well as giving it to kids and babies virtually guarantees it is a (badly) automated procedure outside of the consulates control. I really feel like I was dinged before I even handed my documents over. Just a general intuition I guess. There is absolutely no legitimate reason at all why this was required of me. I am squeaky clean legally, have no suspect history of any kind, have a very uncommon english name that until a few years ago wasn't even Google-able, have only travelled outside north america once, and that was to western europe where I met my wife in 2015. Prior to that my last international travel was a trip to seattle in 2004.

 

I pray for everyone in this thread on AP due to the DS that their cases will clear asap and without having to sue. After this long a road and so many hiccups in the way, we don't, unfortunately, expect anything but the worst case scenario regarding this and will not be waiting much longer than 90 days before taking legal action. Hopefully it gets approved naturally before then.

 

I chalk it up to Covid. With all the supply chain issues our societies are experiencing it only makes sense there are major issues with the immigration chain too. It's appalling and frustrating, but "it is what it is." All the best.

Edited October 7, 2022 by ConsistentCut

[EB2-NIW 1]

Hi, I have a question for those who applied for write of Mandamus and already cleared and got their visa. What was your visa expiry date? was it valid till the end of your medical (6 month after the medical exam) or the the clearance does have an expiry date and visa is valid till clearance expiry. If the latter, how long is the clearance typically valid for? thanks

[Siarg 72]

2 hours ago, ohmygod said:

Did you move? Or you went for a visit and come back to do the full move?

 

I’m not sure if this question was for me, but I just crossed to activate, moving next year. Still have to wrap things up in Canada (couldn’t prepare to close down business and leave the apartment while we were waiting and now it’s winter and I have a warm seasonal business). 
 

If it was resolved when we interviewed we probably would be there!

[throwitaway 190]

Just now, EB2-NIW said:

Hi, I have a question for those who applied for write of Mandamus and already cleared and got their visa. What was your visa expiry date? was it valid till the end of your medical (6 month after the medical exam) or the the clearance does have an expiry date and visa is valid till clearance expiry. If the latter, how long is the clearance typically valid for? thanks

The visa expires 6 months post medical. As far as their internal clearance for AP goes, the validity of the clearance is based on its type, and ranges between three and 48 months. Given that they don’t reveal what type of clearance they’ve requested for you, it’s difficult to determine where you fall on that time range. The only way you know it’s expired is the next time you apply for a visa you’re put into AP again.

[ohmygod 60]

4 minutes ago, Siarg said:

I’m not sure if this question was for me, but I just crossed to activate, moving next year. Still have to wrap things up in Canada (couldn’t prepare to close down business and leave the apartment while we were waiting and now it’s winter and I have a warm seasonal business). 
 

If it was resolved when we interviewed we probably would be there!

Yes, the question is for you. Thanks for clarifying 

[ice-qube 648]

2 hours ago, ConsistentCut said:

My case has been updated both days since the interview, but I dunno how much that really means.

Not much, amigo, if the rest of our experiences have any predictive value.

Quote

 I really feel like I was dinged before I even handed my documents over.

Yes i believe that you are likely right. If this was the case, they made us go to the consulate on false pretences, essentially. 

 

2 hours ago, ConsistentCut said:

After this long a road and so many hiccups in the way, we don't, unfortunately, expect anything but the worst case scenario regarding this and will not be waiting much longer than 90 days before taking legal action.

This is debatable. If the case actually got to court, it might lose on the prospect of it only having been 90 days (according to all I have read, the rule of thumb--there is no statutory definition--is that any time within six months for a decision is "reasonable"). However, it seems to me these cases are never even getting to litigation now. The US attorneys obviously know these are not legit national security holds, which is exactly why, shortly after receiving the summons for the WOM suit, they seem to just tell the consulate go ahead and get processing again. In that light, perhaps if you find a lawyer willing to take it on earlier, it might be fine, because it will never likely see a court. 

 

I am still dithering on WOM, just because it sticks in my craw so much, but it sure seems like there is no other way now. And that really just makes me even more disenchanted with this.

 

 

[ice-qube 648]

5 hours ago, herecomestherain said:

One person on this thread wrote a letter directly to the main players at the consulate and DOS and they got approved. Maybe you could try that first.

Which person was that? I don't recall reading it. 

[herecomestherain 77]

17 minutes ago, ice-qube said:

Which person was that? I don't recall reading it. 

I don’t remember it was a couple pages back. They wrote letters to the most common defendants of WOM cases.

[ClemsonC 62]

22 minutes ago, ice-qube said:

Which person was that? I don't recall reading it. 

It was a VJ Member who had a previous expedite in her case. I believe this was in August, for her father. 

[ConsistentCut 17]

30 minutes ago, ice-qube said:

Which person was that? I don't recall reading it. 

@ThisIsHell and it was for his wife I believe

[ConsistentCut 17]

36 minutes ago, ice-qube said:

Not much, amigo, if the rest of our experiences have any predictive value.

Yes i believe that you are likely right. If this was the case, they made us go to the consulate on false pretences, essentially. 

 

This is debatable. If the case actually got to court, it might lose on the prospect of it only having been 90 days (according to all I have read, the rule of thumb--there is no statutory definition--is that any time within six months for a decision is "reasonable"). However, it seems to me these cases are never even getting to litigation now. The US attorneys obviously know these are not legit national security holds, which is exactly why, shortly after receiving the summons for the WOM suit, they seem to just tell the consulate go ahead and get processing again. In that light, perhaps if you find a lawyer willing to take it on earlier, it might be fine, because it will never likely see a court. 

 

I am still dithering on WOM, just because it sticks in my craw so much, but it sure seems like there is no other way now. And that really just makes me even more disenchanted with this.

 

 

They still have to have a legitimate reason to deny you. I'm pretty sure "we extreme vetted him for 12 months after his interview and found nothing" won't hold up in court.

[throwitaway 190]

2 hours ago, ice-qube said:

This is debatable. If the case actually got to court, it might lose on the prospect of it only having been 90 days (according to all I have read, the rule of thumb--there is no statutory definition--is that any time within six months for a decision is "reasonable"). 

Not really, I’ve seen WoM fail for applications that have been in AP for 3-5 years. 

[throwitaway 190]

2 hours ago, ConsistentCut said:

They still have to have a legitimate reason to deny you. I'm pretty sure "we extreme vetted him for 12 months after his interview and found nothing" won't hold up in court.

I mean, it can and does hold up in court. Thousands of DV applicants languished in post-interview AP this year and lost their chance, not because they were denied based on the INA, but because the government failed to adjudicate by the fiscal year deadline. Similarly, other visa types are not protected by law with regards to the timeline of adjudication - if the cost of their inaction meant the total loss of a visa to thousands, you think “I waited for a year” is going to mean anything to them? The DC court denied over 50+ WoM and TRO in September alone. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by throwitaway
clarity