Congressional inquiry on I-824 for I-130, template response?

[Dataunavailable 82]

17 minutes ago, Mike E said:

Nah. They only have to hit the go for new cases. They did the same thing for I-130, N-400, etc. Last in, first out

Which is then where a WoM should get something moving after a 3 month period of waiting. If their end of fiscal year 2023 is a 3 month 824 from time of receipt to adjudication, than I will def submit a WoM if I don't hear anything in the next few weeks. 

[Troy B 223]

Honestly, if you have to file an i-824 doesn't that mean you messed up the i-130 submission?  Remember WoM aren't always successful.  And an unsuccessful WoM would result in a denial.  Requiring to re-submit an i-130 and waiting on that.   As noted i-824's seem to take about a year.

[Dataunavailable 82]

49 minutes ago, Troy B said:

Honestly, if you have to file an i-824 doesn't that mean you messed up the i-130 submission?  Remember WoM aren't always successful.  And an unsuccessful WoM would result in a denial.  Requiring to re-submit an i-130 and waiting on that.   As noted i-824's seem to take about a year.

Irregardless of a mistake, there are some things that just shouldn't be the way they are. It's poor practices on USCIS side of things. Humans are not robots, I get I need to wait now, that's besides the point. 

 

Common sense should come to play, I filled out both spots, a person should know looking at an I-130 that states the beneficiary current address is not in the U.S with me, so obviously they would not be doing AoS at a FO. That should not require a $465 fee to submit a form to move a form. An RFE or email would solve the issue and reduce the backlog for cases that actually require the 824. 

 

This is not a case of someone lied to a consular deal with the consequences, this is bad practice on a form that shouldn't be required in specific situations. 

 

@Mike E This is true? An unsuccessful WoM denies whatever form it was sent in for? 

[appleblossom 2,478]

32 minutes ago, Dataunavailable said:

Common sense should come to play, I filled out both spots, a person should know looking at an I-130 that states the beneficiary current address is not in the U.S with me, so obviously they would not be doing AoS at a FO.

 

I know it might seem like common sense to you, but plenty of people who live outside the US decide to stay and apply via AOS whilst on a visit. They can't just assume that you weren't trying to do the same..

Edited September 16, 2023 by appleblossom

[Dataunavailable 82]

40 minutes ago, appleblossom said:

 

I know it might seem like common sense to you, but plenty of people who live outside the US decide to stay and apply via AOS whilst on a visit. They can't just assume that you weren't trying to do the same..

There is no denying that happens of course. But that also should be why they would send either an RFE and not approve the petition or send an email/MyUSCIS notification that they need to clarification on what the petitioner wants to do with the I-130, is the beneficiary here or abroad. Heck, even them approving it, and just needing a call to USCIS to say, send it to NVC please.

It would make more sense if the I-824 in these specific situations, would require proof sent with it that the beneficiary is either in the U.S or in their home country, not just $465 to check a box that requests a petition moved to the NVC. 

 

That would make sense that they do not understand what to do and require proof, what does not make sense is when someone has to submit a form that has the exact same information on it, that is on the I-130. 

 

I'm not here to argue the point of this form, all I really wanted was clarification if anyone knew what my congressional inquiry meant, it just kind of snowballed in to this mess of me going in circles. 🤷‍♂️

[Mike E 11,739]

5 hours ago, Dataunavailable said:

This is true? An unsuccessful WoM denies whatever form it was sent in for? 

That used to be the prevailing view on

VJ. Then people started to test that, and found that the government rarely challenges a WoM.

 

The WoM here is for I-824, not I-130. Presumably I-130 is already approved. So on what legal basis would an approved I-130 be denied? 
 

“You hurt out feelings, so we are canceling I-130”

 

?

 

[Boiler 45,466]

I have always supported WoM. There are some situations I may be hesitant, it is not a go for it no matter what.

 

I 824 I simply do not know, I do not recollect seeing anybody file. Not sure I have come across many DIY's so $5k for most people is not insignificant.

 

Hacking has done 1600 WoMs, might ask them if they have done any I 824s and what they think the time cut off is.

[Dataunavailable 82]

20 minutes ago, Mike E said:

That used to be the prevailing view on

VJ. Then people started to test that, and found that the government rarely challenges a WoM.

 

The WoM here is for I-824, not I-130. Presumably I-130 is already approved. So on what legal basis would an approved I-130 be denied? 
 

“You hurt out feelings, so we are canceling I-130”

 

?

 

That was my thoughts, but I don't know enough about it to say anything. Our I-130 has been approved since May of this year. They could deny an 824, but on what grounds, all they use the form for in my situation is, does the I-130 stay or go? Deny the action to adjudicate the form and have to re file it? 

[Dataunavailable 82]

10 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I have always supported WoM. There are some situations I may be hesitant, it is not a go for it no matter what.

 

I 824 I simply do not know, I do not recollect seeing anybody file. Not sure I have come across many DIY's so $5k for most people is not insignificant.

 

Hacking has done 1600 WoMs, might ask them if they have done any I 824s and what they think the time cut off is.

I had a consultation with them prior to sending in my 824, the lawyer actually advised to not send in the I-824 even when sent an email of the 797 from the I-130 stating the petitioner must file an I-824 if they do not wish to do an AoS and do consular abroad.

 

I always heard great things, so that's why I did a consultation. Hell, even a Tier 2 at USCIS and 3 regular agents told me the I-130 was sent to NVC and on what date, NVC said they have no records of receiving it. It wasn't until I finally spoke with another T2 that he told me the I-824 is required if I want to get it sent to NVC. 

 

Still nothing bad to say about Hacking, just odd they would advise against filing the 824 in my position. 

[Boiler 45,466]

What did the Lawyer say you should do?

[Dataunavailable 82]

15 minutes ago, Boiler said:

What did the Lawyer say you should do?

He offered they can help for $4200, they would take care of it all and get the I-130 sent to NVC without needing the I-824. Did also offer other things for that charge, like the NVC process as well, asked a few times and told, the I-824 is unnecessary. 

I don't have $4200 lying around just on chance and could still need the I-824 plus a year of waiting.  

 

Hell, for all I know, they don't need to use the 824 and can get stuff done.

 

Did also say, if I choose to not use their services, the I-824 should be around a six month wait. This was before I sent anything and knew what SC the form was at.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Dataunavailable

[Boiler 45,466]

Hmm wonder what their plan was.