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

[Irish89 44]

On 11/14/2023 at 9:17 PM, throwitaway said:

Sadly, DS5535 delays in Montreal are not new, this has been ongoing since 2018.

100% agree and understand that. What we’d all like to try and find out is the particular reason behind the higher rate of Motions to dismiss for WOM’s. Which seems to be a more recent trend. 

[Inveigh 69]

On 11/14/2023 at 11:16 PM, Ahmad0606 said:

The stats from 2021 to 2022 were much better than this year. A lot of people were cleared in 90 days span.

Do we have a comparative sheet for 221(G) / 5535 comparing 2021, 2022, / 2023 approvals?

[SEP-27-DS_5535 29]

1 hour ago, Inveigh said:

Do we have a comparative sheet for 221(G) / 5535 comparing 2021, 2022, / 2023 approvals?

Here’s the link for the 2021/2022 sheet.
 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1L8T4Yp7oWm0imRrEOEES_28QicBY1DsKKvMmEGMVPd4/htmlview?pli=1#gid=0

[northface 30]

11 hours ago, Irish89 said:

100% agree and understand that. What we’d all like to try and find out is the particular reason behind the higher rate of Motions to dismiss for WOM’s. Which seems to be a more recent trend. 

   

  I guess the office or DC process unit has no enough staff to clear tons of DS5535 form requests.   Observed the Embassy webpage for recruiting staff in October?. Also the DC head office posted a public comment request for Extension of DS5535 use , evaluate it necessary or not,, etc. The comment close date expiring soon. Interesting to take a look

 

www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0028-0001

 

 

 

[Superluminal 142]

1 hour ago, northface said:

   

  I guess the office or DC process unit has no enough staff to clear tons of DS5535 form requests.   Observed the Embassy webpage for recruiting staff in October?. Also the DC head office posted a public comment request for Extension of DS5535 use , evaluate it necessary or not,, etc. The comment close date expiring soon. Interesting to take a look

 

www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0028-0001

 

 

 

What kind of and quantity of positions were they filling? If they are resource constrained maybe they put AP clearances on hold since they aren't held to a particular timeline. This is especially true now with being able to shutdown all the WoM cases.

[Dana.L 12]

Hello everyone,

 

I know a few people on this thread were given a 221g and are waiting to hear back, but is there anyone here who has recently been issued their visa after 221g? 

 

If yes, what was your timeline from interview to admin processing to issued?  Also if you emailed the consulate during your waiting period, how often did you reach out to them and what did you say? 

 

Thanks ❤️

[SEP-27-DS_5535 29]

2 hours ago, Dana.L said:

Hello everyone,

 

I know a few people on this thread were given a 221g and are waiting to hear back, but is there anyone here who has recently been issued their visa after 221g? 

 

If yes, what was your timeline from interview to admin processing to issued?  Also if you emailed the consulate during your waiting period, how often did you reach out to them and what did you say? 

 

Thanks ❤️

Seems like someone has deleted the CR1/IR1 data from the Montreal Spreadsheet. The spreadsheet is only displaying data for K1 visa’s.🤔

[Leo The Great 133]

17 minutes ago, Ahmad0606 said:

Seems like someone has deleted the CR1/IR1 data from the Montreal Spreadsheet. The spreadsheet is only displaying data for K1 visa’s.🤔

CR1/IR1 and other visa type data is still there. Looks like members are filtering the spreadsheet on Visa Type (K1) and not reverting back to "select all" once done.  

Edited November 16, 2023 by Leo The Great

[Irish89 44]

9 hours ago, northface said:

   

  I guess the office or DC process unit has no enough staff to clear tons of DS5535 form requests.   Observed the Embassy webpage for recruiting staff in October?. Also the DC head office posted a public comment request for Extension of DS5535 use , evaluate it necessary or not,, etc. The comment close date expiring soon. Interesting to take a look

 

www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0028-0001

 

 

 

Interesting. Not really sure what this is about. They want the public to send in their own comments on the DS-5535 form, like leaving a review almost? 

[LYV 63]

3 hours ago, Irish89 said:

Interesting. Not really sure what this is about. They want the public to send in their own comments on the DS-5535 form, like leaving a review almost? 

Hmm..Yes, wonder if this means anything at all for us. 

[throwitaway 190]

On 11/15/2023 at 10:04 PM, Irish89 said:

100% agree and understand that. What we’d all like to try and find out is the particular reason behind the higher rate of Motions to dismiss for WOM’s. Which seems to be a more recent trend. 

Politics

[throwitaway 190]

21 hours ago, northface said:

   

  I guess the office or DC process unit has no enough staff to clear tons of DS5535 form requests.   Observed the Embassy webpage for recruiting staff in October?. Also the DC head office posted a public comment request for Extension of DS5535 use , evaluate it necessary or not,, etc. The comment close date expiring soon. Interesting to take a look

 

www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0028-0001

 

 

 

They do this all the time, when DS-5535 was introduced they did it as well, it’s a part of how they make changes in the budget.

[ak47 31]

Has anybody who has interviewed in March or April filed a WOM ?

 

Technically folks from March or April have crossed the 6 month wait time and the WOM's should not be dismissed then. 

[Superluminal 142]

1 minute ago, ak47 said:

Has anybody who has interviewed in March or April filed a WOM ?

 

Technically folks from March or April have crossed the 6 month wait time and the WOM's should not be dismissed then. 

This is sadly not true. I filed a WoM at 3 months like many others in the past, and it got a motion to dismiss. In the dismissal motion, it said that waiting up to 3 years would not be considered an unreasonable time to wait. There have been cases this summer where a judge threw out a WoM case since the plaintiff had ONLY waited 16 or 17 months.

 

We have to take into consideration that the WoM cases have been growing at a rapid rate in the last couple of years. Several months back I had looked on PACER and found that WoM cases for AP were being filed at a rate of 2 - 4 per month in 2020 and 2021 and in early 2023 they were being filed at a rate of 30 - 50 per month. I imagine the State department is sick of these and will fight tooth and nail to stop the WoM lawsuits from being the cultural norm. The traditional wisdom for the WoM being effective was that a filing a WoM would give the state department the option to either (i) fight your WoM, or (ii) just process your case. Since fighting the WoM would be harder, they would just accelerate your case and be done with you. However now, likely because to the large number of filings happening, they are actually investing the effort in fighting the WoMs.

 

One final note on the WoM, is that none of us actually expected it to get to the point where a judge will issue a WoM. The costs for preparing the lawsuit only covers the filing, not actually fighting the case and hoping a judge will rule in our favour. This is why the motions to dismiss sting. You then have to pay your lawyer to respond, and each time there is a roadblock, it costs $$$$$.

 

All that being said, filing a WoM is totally up to you and you may have different luck given you waited a bit longer to file.

[ak47 31]

11 minutes ago, Superluminal said:

This is sadly not true. I filed a WoM at 3 months like many others in the past, and it got a motion to dismiss. In the dismissal motion, it said that waiting up to 3 years would not be considered an unreasonable time to wait. There have been cases this summer where a judge threw out a WoM case since the plaintiff had ONLY waited 16 or 17 months.

 

We have to take into consideration that the WoM cases have been growing at a rapid rate in the last couple of years. Several months back I had looked on PACER and found that WoM cases for AP were being filed at a rate of 2 - 4 per month in 2020 and 2021 and in early 2023 they were being filed at a rate of 30 - 50 per month. I imagine the State department is sick of these and will fight tooth and nail to stop the WoM lawsuits from being the cultural norm. The traditional wisdom for the WoM being effective was that a filing a WoM would give the state department the option to either (i) fight your WoM, or (ii) just process your case. Since fighting the WoM would be harder, they would just accelerate your case and be done with you. However now, likely because to the large number of filings happening, they are actually investing the effort in fighting the WoMs.

 

One final note on the WoM, is that none of us actually expected it to get to the point where a judge will issue a WoM. The costs for preparing the lawsuit only covers the filing, not actually fighting the case and hoping a judge will rule in our favour. This is why the motions to dismiss sting. You then have to pay your lawyer to respond, and each time there is a roadblock, it costs $$$$$.

 

All that being said, filing a WoM is totally up to you and you may have different luck given you waited a bit longer to file.

Which month was your interview ?