This was something that seems to have happened in November or December of 2022:

https://www.uscis.gov/i-131a

Quote

ALERT: We have published an updated Form I-131A, edition date 11/02/22.

We have published an updated Form I-131A, edition date 11/02/22. This updated form allows you to apply for a travel document (carrier documentation) to board an airline or other transportation carrier without the carrier being penalized, if you are a foreign national:

• Who is not a lawful permanent resident or conditional lawful permanent resident; and
• Who received a Form I-512/Form I-512L, Advance Parole Document, or an Employment Authorization Document, with travel endorsement; and
• Whose document was lost, stolen, destroyed, or damaged while you were temporarily traveling outside the United States.

Quote

Use this form if you are:

[...]

• Not an LPR or a conditional LPR, but you received a Form I-512/Form I-512L, Advance Parole Document, or Form I-765, Employment Authorization Document (EAD), with travel endorsement that was lost, stolen, damaged or destroyed while you are overseas and wish to apply for a travel document (carrier documentation) that allows you to board an airline or other transportation carrier without the airline or transportation carrier being penalized.

In the past, VisaJourney contributors who has lost their AP have reported difficulties getting back to the U.S., with successful efforts requiring a Humanitarian Parole document from a U.S. consulate (some have reported the consulate refuses, and instead says USCIS should issue an emergency AP document), convincing the airline at a CBP pre-clearance airport to let the AP holder talk to CBP, or convincing the airlines to let the AP holder board:

• https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/674633-loststolen-advance-parole-while-abroad-stranded/#comments
• https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/663647-lost-eadap-combo-card-while-out-of-us-on-vacation/
• https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/659836-lost-ead-card-while-traveling-abroad-how-do-i-return-to-the-us/?do=findComment&comment=8988399
• https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/699157-how-to-get-back-into-the-us-after-losing-i-765-eadadvance-parole-combo-card-while-traveling-in-europe/
• https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/689445-do-not-lose-your-eadap-card-while-abroad-i-did-and-heres-my-story/

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/28/politics/us-covid-measures-travelers-china/index.html

https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-updates-policy-to-automatically-extend-green-cards-for-naturalization-applicants

I became a U.S. citizen in 1/2018 2018, and filed I-129F in 2/2018

Long story short my now wife received her 10 year green card 10/2022 close to 5 years after I-129F was filed.

We didn t go the CR-1 route because of the legal difficulty of my wife, a citizen and resident of Burma, getting married to a foreigner of a different race and religion. Among the few countries she could travel to without a visa, marriage between two foreigners was a cumbersome process. Something like the Utah zoom marriage service did not exist.

Let s imagine remote marriage service did exist and we went the CR-1 route. How might our timeline have changed:

March 2017 - during one of our actual in person meetings , we get married via Utah Zoom and file I-130. While we had decided to get married earlier, our previous two meetings were in Burma and in 2016, Internet speeds their didn t support video conferencing.

January 2018 - I take oath of citizenship and inform USCIS or NVC to upgrade petitioner status.

March 2019 - on our two year wedding anniversary my wife enters the USA on her CR-1 visa. In the real timeline she entered January 2019 on a K-1.

April 2019 - my wife receives a 10 year green card. In the real time line she filed I-485 April 2019, and received a 2 year gc in January 2020, forcing us to file I-751 in 10/2021.

In the real timeline, a year later in 10/2022 she received her 10 year gc. This btw is abnormally fast. We have a high profile member on visajourney who has been waiting 3 years with a joint filing and if anything, has a more solid case than ours.

Back to the alternate timeline. March 2022 - my wife files for U.S. citizenship. In the real time she hasn t filed yet and won t be eligible until later this month in October 2022.

K-1 was not faster for us. It was more expensive in USCIS fees.

Imagine a petitioner who is already a U.S. citizen, visiting a fianc (e) in a country with decent Internet. I think end to end the process would be faster by a year or 2. Probably more because I-751 cases are a death march now and not a day goes by without discussion on visajourney about what to do when a 24 month extension letter expires. 36 month extension letters are coming is my prediction.

Conditional LPRs increasingly can t travel, can t work, can t drive. This didn t matter much to us because of the pandemic and my fortunate financial situation. But most couples aren t as old as my wife and I are.

Do not do K-1 unless your alien fianc (e) has children aged 18, 19, or 20 and you both want them to immigrate at the same time.

As https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/10/05/21-55365.pdf recounts Sandra Munoz is a U.S. Citizen who sued in court to overturn a denial of an immigration visa to her spouse. District Court ruled for the U.S. government under the doctrine of consular non reviewability. The decision was appealed and the appellate court overruled the district court.

Vacating the district court s grant of summary judgment in favor of the government, and remanding, the panel held that (1) where the adjudication of a non-citizen s visa application implicates the constitutional rights of a citizen, due process requires that the government provide the citizen with timely and adequate notice of a decision that will deprive the citizen of that interest; and (2) because the government failed to provide timely notice in this case, the government was not entitled to summary judgment based on the doctrine of consular nonreviewability

The panel explained that, as set forth in Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753 (1972), and Kerry v. Din, 576 U.S. 86 (2015), the doctrine of consular nonreviewability admits an exception in certain circumstances where the denial of a visa affects the fundamental rights of a U.S. citizen.

The panel concluded that, under the precedent of this circuit, Mu oz possessed a liberty interest in her husband s visa application. The panel explained that this court recognized the existence of this interest in Bustamante v. Mukasey, 531 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2008), and Justice Kennedy s controlling concurrence Din declined to reach this issue. Because Mu oz asserted this protected liberty interest, the panel proceeded to evaluate whether the government provided a facially legitimate and bona fide reason for denying the visa

The opinion goes on to mentioned that the petitioner s spouse was denied the visa because of suspected affiliation with a criminal gang but took 3 years to issue the denial.

The panel also observed that the administrative provisions for review of visa applications a 30-day period in which visa denials must be submitted for internal review and a 1-year period in which reconsideration is available upon the submission of additional evidence and approvals provided contextual support for the proposition that receiving timely notice of the reason for a denial is essential for effectively challenging that denial.
By this standard, the panel concluded that the government s nearly three-year delay in providing appellants with the reason for the denial of Asencio- Cordero s visa did not meet the requirements of due process. Therefore, the panel concluded that the government was not entitled to invoke consular nonreviewability to shield its visa decision from judicial review and, as a result, the district court could look behind the government s decision on remand