Open letter to Homeland Security

[Chris Parker 11]

Chris, what security advantage do they gain by delaying the adjustment of status of someone who is already in the United States?

The security advantage is simple: If we process it now, we are going to have to approve it because we have no evidence of fraud and we can't expect them to have much to show for themselves because they haven't been living together for very long.

But if we make them wait a year or two, then we suddenly send them a notice requiring them to come to an interview and bring convincing evidence of the relationship that we didn't ask for on the original application, people suddenly are scrambling to find what they really have to show for themselves for all the time they've been together. And the Service's expectation of what evidence should be available from a couple that's been living together married for several years is rightfully much higher than what it could expect if they are just newly married. Think about it!

PS: Even our church's office still considered us newly married even after we'd been married for 18 months, because it's still nothing next to 5-10-25 years like most people.

Edited September 15, 2007 by Chris Parker

[Chris Parker 11]

We laughed after our interview because the Officer stated that once we got through name check and everything was fine they would mail the green card out. Well, what are they going to do if it doesn't (not that we are worried) send armed cards to our front door? They had my husband in "custody" if you will, at the interview. That was the time to detain him if they felt that was in the best interest of national security. Instead they send him on his way - with an approved I-130.

I used to wonder that too! What would they do? Arrive at the door with the cuffs?

Actually, I think that's probably what they would do. Now, in my opinion, THAT is the scary stuff.

If they intend to deny, what they will do is they won't give you the I-551 stamp at the interview. Go home and we'll send you a notice with our decision. The reason could be that the case had to be reviewed with a supervisor, or more frequently today, a name-check is still pending.

The notice never comes unless you make noise. Depending on the circumstances, when you do finally get the notice, it will either be for another interview (a second chance you could call it), or an outright denial notice.

Whether they will subsequently choose to initiate removal/deportation proceedings depends on the strength of their evidence of fraud in the case. Often it is still rather gray, they don't have enough evidence to convince an immigration judge or they have higher profile cases to work on instead, so you're just here out of status but at least not a permanent resident. Even if an immigration judge orders you deported (or the Service orders such through expedited removal), I think you just get the deportation decision in the mail and a notice about when & where to appear to surrender for removal processing, if you haven't already left the country on your own. That's how our immigration system works!

Edited September 15, 2007 by Chris Parker

[Chris Parker 11]

WELL THEN I GUESS I BROKE THE LAW AT 14 BC I NEVER REPORTED IT TO THE GOVERMENT HAHA .. AND ITS FUNNY BC ISNT THAT BEING A LITTLE PETTY TO GO AS TO FAR AS TO SAY SOMETHING LIKE THAT ??

You weren't authorized to work at age 14? Or you should have paid taxes on this income but you and your parents never reported it? The I-9 is the employer's responsibility to obtain, not the employee's.

[rebeccajo 14]

We laughed after our interview because the Officer stated that once we got through name check and everything was fine they would mail the green card out. Well, what are they going to do if it doesn't (not that we are worried) send armed cards to our front door? They had my husband in "custody" if you will, at the interview. That was the time to detain him if they felt that was in the best interest of national security. Instead they send him on his way - with an approved I-130.

I used to wonder that too! What would they do? Arrive at the door with the cuffs?

Actually, I think that's probably what they would do. Now, in my opinion, THAT is the scary stuff.

If they intend to deny, what they will do is they won't give you the I-551 stamp at the interview. Go home and we'll send you a notice with our decision. The reason could be that the case had to be reviewed with a supervisor, or more frequently today, a name-check is still pending.

The notice never comes unless you make noise. Depending on the circumstances, when you do finally get the notice, it will either be for another interview (a second chance you could call it), or an outright denial notice.

Whether they will subsequently choose to initiate removal/deportation proceedings depends on the strength of their evidence of fraud in the case. Often it is still rather gray, they don't have enough evidence to convince an immigration judge or they have higher profile cases to work on instead, so you're just here out of status but at least not a permanent resident. Even if an immigration judge orders you deported (or the Service orders such through expedited removal), I think you just get the deportation decision in the mail and a notice about when & where to appear to surrender for removal processing, if you haven't already left the country on your own. That's how our immigration system works!

Hmmm.

They never gave my husband an I551 stamp at his interview.

We made a lot of noise over the next 14 months.

We did get a notice in the mail eventually. It was a notice for collection of a second set of fingerprints. There was no interview.

And there was no outright denial.

There was a greencard.

And that's how immigration worked for us.

[athena_ny 1]

People, get you act together....

This is beyond ridiculous. I have been waiting, and waiting and waiting. My wife and I have been married for going on 4 years now, and it has been almost one year since we began the process of allowing her to come the USA and work to support our family. Your terrible inefficiency has put uncessary stress on our lives. Your lack of clarity has caused unecessary delays. Your lack of hard work has wasted thousands of dollars in revenue for YOU - taxes my wife could have been paying into the US treasury if you could be bothered to fix your system and get her a work permit.

We are not terrorists. We are not illegal aliens. We are the people who follow the rules and suffer for it. We are the people who praise our country to our spouses, so that they will consider living here, and then have to explain why Homeland Security with its unbelievable budget can't be clear and efficient.

You force us to harrass our congressmen and women. You force us to fill out the same forms mutliple times. You force us to prove that we don't need money before you allow our spouses to make any.

You are an embarassment to a merit-based capitalistic system of government.

I will never forgive you.

-B

As tempting as these thoughts may be, the facts of the matter are:

(1) You and your wife are living together in the U.S.A.

(2) Although your interim benefits are temporary and subject to renewals, they provide you with most of the same rights as lawful admission for permanent residence would give you.

(3) The government is just taking a cautious approach to approving a very powerful application; the longer full status is withheld, the more likely any marriage fraud or misrepresentation is likely to be uncovered.

(4) The broken immigration system is partially due to Congress's irresponsibility to fix it or to fund it. So, your Congressmen need to be continually reminded of the problems people are encountering dealing with their law.

1) True. And she is going crazy sitting at home all day on limited income, not being able to work. She has two masters degrees, speaks 3 languages, and gave up a lot to come here.

2) Benefits? What benefits? They won't issue her a social security number, so we can't get her a drivers license. She can't work. She's not elegible for any benefits or assistance should I lose my job. She's in limbo. The only thing she has is free movement (a multiple entry visa).

3) We've been married for close to four years. I could understand if the was a IMBRA marriage, or even a young marriage from a high-risk country. I'm afraid that doesn't sit with me.

4) Agreed. Good point.

I just wanted to offer a suggestion can she not get a job doing something that doesnt require a ss number like babysetting or something on that lines it would give her something to do.. i feel bad for her bc i am scared of the same situation when my fiance gets here and we have been trying to come up with things for him to do until we are sure he can work i am somewhat new to this .... i know also how hard it is to do other work when you are we qualified to do something else so maybe just to make her feel better until the redtape ####### is over i do however agree with both of you though it is ####### but maybe nessary ####### ..lol well that is my suggestion ...

Babysitting or something that doesn't require an SSN is just under the table, and is still considered employment and if there is no EAD, it's still breaking the law.

WELL THEN I GUESS I BROKE THE LAW AT 14 BC I NEVER REPORTED IT TO THE GOVERMENT HAHA .. AND ITS FUNNY BC ISNT THAT BEING A LITTLE PETTY TO GO AS TO FAR AS TO SAY SOMETHING LIKE THAT ??

If you made under a certain amount, as a USC, you didn't have to report it to the government.

We're talking about working without auth, not taxes. Not petty, because while working without auth is forgiven today for adjusting status, who knows if it will be when our spouses go to apply for citizenship? They could easily change that loophole. (Because even while it's the employer's responsibility, working without auth can result in deportation if you aren't adjusting through a spouse.)

So, if you can't discriminate between "paying taxes" and "working without auth" you should step out of the discussion.

Edited September 15, 2007 by meow mix

[Krikit 1,164]

Krikit, while I agree you can use random security checks to improve security on something like, say an airline, or as a check of procedure, I cannot think it's a good use of resources here. Honestly, if you were trying to ferret out fraud by making people wait, wouldn't you start by having an I-485 that required evidence of relationship? Or maybe not concentrate on the first-world relationships? Or do something to ensure that the person waiting for the green card can't work or otherwise get around in the U.S.? Wouldn't you narrow it down at all?

USCIS elsewhere seems to operate on the assumption that once you're here, you're hard to get rid of.

Not agreeing or disagreeing on the reasons why it's a poor use of resources, Caladan. Just saying that I know for a fact that DHS does random checks in various areas of their organization.

Personally, I cannot for the life of me understand why these checks aren't completed prior to issuing the visa. If national security is the utmost priority for the DHS, why in the world would they let "potential threats" into the country and allow them to remain knowing it could take them years to investigate permutations and pull files. Makes no sense.

[Krikit 1,164]

Chris, I think you've been watching too many spy movies.

[LaL 418]

Chris - I think it might be helpful for you to know that I have tracked our FBI namechecker's since mid 2006. Yes, you are right - no one got the I-551 stamp. The reason was because the file is not complete without this one item. Interview for marriage legitmacy is often concluded with the words "you are aproved, but pending FBI namecheck".

Conversely - you can look at threads of interviewees that are *not* stuck in namechecks with regard to the I-551 stamp. If they even bothered to ask for it (since this request is usually met with resistance) they had to beg, plead, and nag for this stamp. It is often stated they are refused as "the greencard is mailed so quickly now".

Oh, and CSC transferees have little hope of getting the stamp at all unless they make an infopass appointment and try to explain the the officer that hundreds of applications are sent to CSC, approved without interview, here is the email approval, please give me the stamp. I can tell you there have been many accounts of local offices completely unaware of the CSC process at all. Now if they can get the local offices to understand this procedure, refer back to the previous paragraph.

Krikit - to answer your question why aren't these checks done prior to visa issuance? In most cases police reports and a rudimentary biometrics/name run through is sufficent. They save the really indepth security clearances for visa issuance for countries on the "list of 26" and the "terrible 7". I have seen a few peppered here & there who have a name hit from "friendly" countries, but is usually cleared in a mater of weeks. Otherwise generally, police reports satisfy the requirement.

[Chris Parker 11]

We're talking about working without auth, not taxes. Not petty, because while working without auth is forgiven today for adjusting status, who knows if it will be when our spouses go to apply for citizenship? They could easily change that loophole. (Because even while it's the employer's responsibility, working without auth can result in deportation if you aren't adjusting through a spouse.)

Working without employment authorization is not an inadmissibility.

By itself, it won't affect naturalization, as the same rules of admissibility are applied to you again, this time for "admission to citizenship."

[igomo 0]

Chris did provide us with proof that USCIS can delay our cases at their will (I'm pasting the text he posted below).

Has anyone been told that you're approved pending further review or your case is pending further review? If not, it's clear that they use the name check as a way to not let you know what's going on... After all, can a name check really take 2 years?

I believe the answer to whether USCIS uses delaying tactics is somewhere in the middle between what Chris believes and those who believe USCIS doesn't deliberately delay any case.

"8 CFR 103.2(B)(18) Withholding adjudication. A district director may authorize withholding adjudication of a visa petition or other application if the district director determines that an investigation has been undertaken involving a matter relating to eligibility or the exercise of discretion, where applicable, in connection with the application or petition, and that the disclosure of information to the applicant or petitioner in connection with the adjudication of the application or petition would prejudice the ongoing investigation. If an investigation has been undertaken and has not been completed within one year of its inception, the district director shall review the matter and determine whether adjudication of the petition or application should be held in abeyance for six months or until the investigation is completed, whichever comes sooner. If, after six months of the district director's determination, the investigation has not been completed, the matter shall be reviewed again by the district director and, if he/she concludes that more time is needed to complete the investigation, adjudication may be held in abeyance for up to another six months. If the investigation is not completed at the end of that time, the matter shall be referred to the regional commissioner, who may authorize that adjudication be held in abeyance for another six months. Thereafter, if the Associate Commissioner, Examinations, with the concurrence of the Associate Commissioner, Enforcement, determines it is necessary to continue to withhold adjudication pending completi on of the investigation, he/she shall review that determination every six months."

[WifeOHunkyJohn 2]

Chris - show us links to other people who believe the FBI name check is fake. I have googled it and I have been stuck in it, and every website I have found about it includes many other poeple who have been stuck in it. I have found ZERO websites about people who believe it is a huge conspiracy that USCIS use to uncover fraud/ expose the applicant as fake/ force the applicant to split up out of frustration thus removing USCIS responsibility to issue a green card.

It's interesting theory. Actually it's hysterically funny since there are no links, no tangible evidence presented, and you claim that USCIS, The Ombudsman, Congress, Senate, the FBI and every news agency who has looked into it on behalf of applicants waiting for green cards or citizenship ... out of ALL THESE PEOPLE, not ONE SINGLE, SOLITARY PERSON has turned round and said, "ooh, actually this is all a lie. FBI name check doesn't exist". Hm... I wonder why that is?

You seem to be the only person to believe this, at least from everything I have found (and I have had 13 months of looking through the internet, letters to political representatives, talking to CSC people and generally bugging the s**t out of any media person who would listen...) and I would just love for you to show me where I missed it.

I'm curious. I'm amused. And I'm also pissed as hell that you are trying to tell me USCIS want me to break up with my hubby and they are sitting on their hands when it comes to my application, just because they can't be ar**d processing the application and giving me my green card, lest I jump up and down and have a temper tantrum about it until they relent.

Show me where I am wrong. Not an opinion. Not a theory. A provable, researchable FACT I can see, research and follow-up on.

Because until you do, I will continue to believe that everything you spout about this issue is complete and utter Horse Sh*t.

Just my humble opinion of course.

[igomo 0]

I'm not here to defend Chris but I don't think he said that the FBI name check is fake. I think that he is saying that the USCIS will sometimes use "name check" when it's actually just sitting on your case hoping that the couple breaks up or are investigating. According to my lawyer, if they really want they can question your neighbors, etc...

Chris - show us links to other people who believe the FBI name check is fake. I have googled it and I have been stuck in it, and every website I have found about it includes many other poeple who have been stuck in it. I have found ZERO websites about people who believe it is a huge conspiracy that USCIS use to uncover fraud/ expose the applicant as fake/ force the applicant to split up out of frustration thus removing USCIS responsibility to issue a green card.

It's interesting theory. Actually it's hysterically funny since there are no links, no tangible evidence presented, and you claim that USCIS, The Ombudsman, Congress, Senate, the FBI and every news agency who has looked into it on behalf of applicants waiting for green cards or citizenship ... out of ALL THESE PEOPLE, not ONE SINGLE, SOLITARY PERSON has turned round and said, "ooh, actually this is all a lie. FBI name check doesn't exist". Hm... I wonder why that is?

You seem to be the only person to believe this, at least from everything I have found (and I have had 13 months of looking through the internet, letters to political representatives, talking to CSC people and generally bugging the s**t out of any media person who would listen...) and I would just love for you to show me where I missed it.

I'm curious. I'm amused. And I'm also pissed as hell that you are trying to tell me USCIS want me to break up with my hubby and they are sitting on their hands when it comes to my application, just because they can't be ar**d processing the application and giving me my green card, lest I jump up and down and have a temper tantrum about it until they relent.

Show me where I am wrong. Not an opinion. Not a theory. A provable, researchable FACT I can see, research and follow-up on.

Because until you do, I will continue to believe that everything you spout about this issue is complete and utter Horse Sh*t.

Just my humble opinion of course.

[LaL 418]

Has anyone been told that you're approved pending further review or your case is pending further review? If not, it's clear that they use the name check as a way to not let you know what's going on... After all, can a name check really take 2 years?

Yes - of course there have been. From what I have read - the couple is told "I have to review a few things. You will hear by mail our decision". Of course this makes the few this happens to uneasy. As far as I have seen the members has come back to report they got their greencard in a few weeks. The only flat out denials at AOS I have seen were due to a misstep. Be it a mail SNAFU and not receiving the interview letter, or misunderstanding the request by RFE and returning something "other than" requested. Even stokes interviews (the few) that have been reported have been sucessful.

Yes, namechecks can take years. I belong to 3 groups that have been developed for namecheck discussion. There are also several groups lobbying for checks & balances to be installed in this process. This has much exposure and is not some miniscule circumstance. The sheer numbers of people "stuck" as previously posted should depict that properly.

It is known that everyone goes through this process and is started soon after your NOA1 for AOS. I really don't understand why this is being depicted as some covert-weed-out-fraud-just-by-delaying-adjudication-operation. It sounds more like hysteria-inspiring science fiction based loosley on some CFR that is broad enough to include such. Can they delay your application due to suspicion? Absolutely. Are they using the FBI namecheck as a cover to do such? No, I don't buy that for a second. If they were - we would see a hell of alot of us (CSC'ers included) having to submit further current proof of marriage legitimacy when they get around to finally adjudicating our cases. Do we requests for updated evidence at times? Sure - many things especially I-864 can become outdated. Even then, this "right" of the USCIS based on the CFR posted is not utilized in this way. Greencards are handed out at the end of our namecheck wait, with 2 or 3 people only to my knowledge needing to submit additional updated documents. Could even chalk that up to local office nuances.

If you want to see fraud prevention - you should look further into visa petitions returned to USCIS vs. concocting a theory based on a broad CFR and stating FBI namechecks are a delay tactic to catch fraudsters.

I have to ask, what is the motivation here?

Edited September 15, 2007 by LaL

[athena_ny 1]

Chris - show us links to other people who believe the FBI name check is fake. I have googled it and I have been stuck in it, and every website I have found about it includes many other poeple who have been stuck in it. I have found ZERO websites about people who believe it is a huge conspiracy that USCIS use to uncover fraud/ expose the applicant as fake/ force the applicant to split up out of frustration thus removing USCIS responsibility to issue a green card.

It's interesting theory. Actually it's hysterically funny since there are no links, no tangible evidence presented, and you claim that USCIS, The Ombudsman, Congress, Senate, the FBI and every news agency who has looked into it on behalf of applicants waiting for green cards or citizenship ... out of ALL THESE PEOPLE, not ONE SINGLE, SOLITARY PERSON has turned round and said, "ooh, actually this is all a lie. FBI name check doesn't exist". Hm... I wonder why that is?

You seem to be the only person to believe this, at least from everything I have found (and I have had 13 months of looking through the internet, letters to political representatives, talking to CSC people and generally bugging the s**t out of any media person who would listen...) and I would just love for you to show me where I missed it.

I'm curious. I'm amused. And I'm also pissed as hell that you are trying to tell me USCIS want me to break up with my hubby and they are sitting on their hands when it comes to my application, just because they can't be ar**d processing the application and giving me my green card, lest I jump up and down and have a temper tantrum about it until they relent.

Show me where I am wrong. Not an opinion. Not a theory. A provable, researchable FACT I can see, research and follow-up on.

Because until you do, I will continue to believe that everything you spout about this issue is complete and utter Horse Sh*t.

Just my humble opinion of course.

I'm not here to defend Chris but I don't think he said that the FBI name check is fake. I think that he is saying that the USCIS will sometimes use "name check" when it's actually just sitting on your case hoping that the couple breaks up or are investigating. According to my lawyer, if they really want they can question your neighbors, etc...

Chris - show us links to other people who believe the FBI name check is fake. I have googled it and I have been stuck in it, and every website I have found about it includes many other poeple who have been stuck in it. I have found ZERO websites about people who believe it is a huge conspiracy that USCIS use to uncover fraud/ expose the applicant as fake/ force the applicant to split up out of frustration thus removing USCIS responsibility to issue a green card.

It's interesting theory. Actually it's hysterically funny since there are no links, no tangible evidence presented, and you claim that USCIS, The Ombudsman, Congress, Senate, the FBI and every news agency who has looked into it on behalf of applicants waiting for green cards or citizenship ... out of ALL THESE PEOPLE, not ONE SINGLE, SOLITARY PERSON has turned round and said, "ooh, actually this is all a lie. FBI name check doesn't exist". Hm... I wonder why that is?

You seem to be the only person to believe this, at least from everything I have found (and I have had 13 months of looking through the internet, letters to political representatives, talking to CSC people and generally bugging the s**t out of any media person who would listen...) and I would just love for you to show me where I missed it.

I'm curious. I'm amused. And I'm also pissed as hell that you are trying to tell me USCIS want me to break up with my hubby and they are sitting on their hands when it comes to my application, just because they can't be ar**d processing the application and giving me my green card, lest I jump up and down and have a temper tantrum about it until they relent.

Show me where I am wrong. Not an opinion. Not a theory. A provable, researchable FACT I can see, research and follow-up on.

Because until you do, I will continue to believe that everything you spout about this issue is complete and utter Horse Sh*t.

Just my humble opinion of course.

Yes, that is what he said - which is the same thing as saying that the name check is fake and a cover up.

[WifeOHunkyJohn 2]

ok, first off. The FBI Name check is a real thing.

Second, due to accountability and statistical reports that are made to Congress, the thought that applications are being delayed as "most effective method to expose suspected marriage fraud" is unfounded.

Third, While USCIS performs a function under Homeland Security, they are not a National Security agency and have no law enforcement capabilities, you may be confused with Customs and Border Enforcement.

Fourth, only one percent of the people submitted for Name check have substantial delays in this process.

No one here is arguing with the fact that the system needs to changed, but paranoia does not help.

I wish that were true. The thing about USCIS isn't a law enforcement agency is true, however USCIS is also charged with the investigation of applications for immigration benefits to prevent fraud which would threaten America's national security (DHS mandate). It's sort of like the detective vs. the police officer. USCIS is the detective when they process an application. See the links below to see some material about how this process really works...

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/men...0004718190aRCRD

http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/Na...ity091206FS.pdf

With regards to classified information, all information considered or obtained in the processing of an immigration application and everything kept in the A-file has been designated by DHS as classified information in the interests of national security. You can't even make a Privacy Act request to see it, ever!

Really? In your very same article, just above what you pasted, it states the following:

(16) Inspection of evidence. An applicant or petitioner shall be permitted to inspect the record of proceeding which constitutes the basis for the decision, except as provided in the following paragraphs.]

(i) Derogatory information unknown to petitioner or applicant. If the decision will be adverse to the applicant or petitioner and is based on derogatory information considered by the Service and of which the applicant or petitioner is unaware, he/she shall be advised of this fact and offered an opportunity to rebut the information and present information in his/her own behalf before the decision is rendered, except as provided in paragraphs (B)(16)(ii), (iii), and (iv) of this section. Any explanation, rebuttal, or information presented by or in behalf of the applicant or petitioner shall be included in the record of proceeding.

(ii) Determination of statutory eligibility. A determination of statutory eligibility shall be based only on information contained in the record of proceeding which is disclosed to the applicant or petitioner, except as provided in paragraph (B)(16)(iv) of this section.

(iii) Discretionary determination. Where an application may be granted or denied in the exercise of discretion, the decision to exercise discretion favorably or unfavorably may be based in whole or in part on classified information not contained in the record and not made available to the applicant, provided the regional commissioner has determined that such information is relevant and is classified under Executive Order No. 12356 (47 FR 14874; April 6, 1982) as requiring protection from unauthorized disclosure in the interest of national security.

(iv) Classified information. An applicant or petitioner shall not be provided any information contained in the record or outside the record which is classified under Executive Order No. 12356 (47 FR 14874; April 6, 1982) as requiring protection from unauthorized disclosure in the interest of national security, unless the classifying authority has agreed in writing to such disclosure. Whenever he/she believes he/she can do so consistently with safeguarding both the information and its source, the regional commissioner should direct that the applicant or petitioner be given notice of the general nature of the information and an opportunity to offer opposing evidence. The regional commissioner's authorization to use such classified information shall be made a part of the record. A decision based in whole or in part on such classified information shall state that the information is material to the decision.[source

When you read the whole document of "§ 103.2 Applications, petitions, and other documents." the information that you quoted doesn't make sense when you read it in context. For example, it starts talking about the application procedures, then goes on to talk about requests for evidence, and then starts discussing what to do if the requests for evidence are unfulfilled, ignored or unsatisfactory. No problems so far...

Then it goes on to talk about national security and how some information (some of it noted above) may not be able to be disclosed to the applicant, HOWEVER, "the regional commissioner should direct that the applicant or petitioner be given notice of the general nature of the information and an opportunity to offer opposing evidence". Therefore your claim of the following "So, it turns out, here is where the real explanation is of what is going on behind the FBI name checks delay excuse is actually very simple" doesn't make sense. Once you get past point 16, point 17 goes on to discuss " (17) Verifying claimed citizenship or permanent resident status." Then we get to your point 18 about withholding adjudication. Only when you read it in context, and look at the information in sequence - as opposed to taking out any line or paragraph that suits - you read the chain of events that have to happen in order to get us to 18. And nowhere in all of this is their any indication that the USCIS are just playing around with the application because they can, and are offering the excuse that the FBI name check is holding things up. There is a chain of command, a hierarchy of people within USCIS that have to approve the hold on the application before such a hold can be authorized. It talks about regional commissioner, the district director who has to determine that there is an investigation still underway, and when the investigation is still pending after a set time as mandated in this document (six month where it is re-reviewed before being allowed to continue but only for another 6 months)... And then it escalates from the regional commissioner, to the associate commissioner...

With all that accountability, and the chain of information within this document that outlines the entire process, it sure doesn't sound to me like it's all a huge conspiracy where they are faking an FBI Name Check just so that they don't have to process a green card application.

Of course, i may be wrong and look forward to you offering your take on things...