jan22

Montreal’s visa operation is focused on immigrant visas.

NVC reviews to ensure that you have submitted some documentation for all the requirements. They do not evaluate the quality of those documents, as they are not authorized/trained to adjudicate visas. They cannot review documents and determine, for example, that they are fraudulent. The final evaluation and acceptance of documentation is done by the officials at the interview.

Similar efforts have occurred over the years in other aspects of consular processing — for example, applications for Consular Report of Birth Abroad applications — and have been extremely helpful in having an applicant ready with all required information at the interview and, therefore, being approved the first time an officer reviews the case at interview. The ultimate goal is for an officer to have to review a case only once, thus freeing them for more cases, or reviews of cases that were previously 221(g)ed, or those that have finally cleared administrative processing and are ready for approval processing. Ultimately, it should help reduce backlogs at posts — but that remains to be seen, depending on any new processing requirements that might be announced in the future.

I am not familiar with Cairo’s current procedures, but I would not leap to the assumption that this is something to be concerned or panicked about right now. When there is an officer review of the details/documentation of a non-immigrant visa case (which a K-1 technically is) prior to the interview, the officer usually either issues the visa or sends an interim refusal until the interview. The interim refusal may suggest additional information to bring to the interview. For example, if someone has applied for a visa under the Interview Waiver program and the officer decides that the person really needs to be interviewed, they will issue a 221(g) refusal and require the person to come in for an interview. They will tell the applicant if there’s a specific piece of information to bring with them. It appears to me that what Cairo is doing is reviewing the case for completion prior to the interview, to help applicants come fully prepared with everything they need to bring. To document the review and what was requested, they issue the 221(g) sheet. Since none of the main areas were checked on the OP’s sheet as far as I could see, it seems to me that they were likely satisfied with the basic documents, but wanted to indicate that documentation of a solid, bonafide relationship is very important — probably THE most important part of the application.. NOTE: If someone has gone through Cairo for a K-1 visa recently and my basic assumption about their process is wrong, please let me know and I’ll reassess this response! About asking for an earlier interview — the date you received is likely the earliest open date. Unless you have a valid reason (other than, of course, wanting to be together as soon as possible), it is unlikely that you will get an earlier date.

No problem — happy to help!

Just to check —- you naturalized before your son immigrated, right? Did he immigrate on an IR-2 or some other immigrant visa? Is he in your physical custody (i.e., is he living with you)? If all of the answers to these are “Yes”, your son became a US citizen immediately after entering as a permanent resident to live with you (Child Citizenship Act of 2000). I would recommend that you immediately take the evidence of a) your naturalization; b) his proof of entering as a legal permanent resident; c) documentation that he is living with you at the same address, and and immediately apply for a US passport for him. It should be the fastest way to document his acquisition of US citizenship. After he has the passport, you can then always apply for a Certificate of Citizenship as a further proof in case the passport is lost, etc. Goid luck!

You need to work with NVC and convince them of your argument so they move the case forward to the Embassy — may or may not work out, but you need to try. This might be a case for lawyer involvement, as it’s a rather unusual situation for NVC (and the consular officer).

Just a note — NVC does not have the authority to definitively decide on CSPA issues. They may make an initial determination to allow a case to move forward to interview, but the actual, legal determination as to the application of CSPA issues resides with the consular officer at the time of interview. The officer will decide the “seek to acquire issue”, which seems the biggest issue, IMO.

You indicate that you have no plans to apply to immigrate your husband’s step-father, but I wanted to share information that might be useful if the situation changes or for someone else who might be in a similar situation. Sounds like it would be unlikely that your husband would be able to petition him — the marriage to his mother would have had to occur prior to your husband’s 18th birthday. If not, her husband does not qualify for immigration as the step-parent of your husband.

You need both. For more information on how/where to get what you need, check out the “Police, Court, Prison Records” information at https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/Visa-Reciprocity-and-Civil-Documents-by-Country/Georgia.html.

The requirement was dropped for immigrant visa applicants as of March 11, 2025. See https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/visas-news/cdc-removes-covid-19-vaccination-requirement-for-immigrant-visa-applicants.html .

I’m sure you know this, but just in case… You have no standing to apply for an immigrant visa for your MIL. Has your spouse completed the naturalization application and taken the oath of citizenship? If so, she needs to file the I-130. If not, she needs to wait until she’s a US citizen and then file.

The announcement of the USCIS change you are referring to was in regard to adjustment of status cases. It said nothing about a change to the immigrant visa vaccination requirements, which are set by the CDC.

Have you read all the information available on the State Department’s website: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/Morocco.html ?

Your stepson would not have become a US citizen after entering the US on his IR-2 visa. Per your timeline, his mother (your wife) entered the US on her IR-1 visa in December 2021. There is no way she could have become a US citizen prior to your stepson’s IR-2 entry in November 2024. He, therefore, became a legal permanent resident (green card holder) like his mother. The next step has been explained here. If you haven’t already paid the green card processing fee, do so immediately. If you have paid it, the green card should arrive relatively soon. The IR-2 visa was valid for only one entry into the US. At that time, a stamp (I-551) was placed on or near the US visa in your stepson’s Vietnamese passport. That stamp is proof of his immigration status for one year. It can be used for travel in and out of the US or for any time proof of legal status is needed. You should receive the green card long before that one year mark.

Per the OP, this is his stepson, not his biological son. Unless the boy’s mother had become a US citizen prior to her son’s entry to the US, he does not derive US citizenship after his IR-2 entry. OP: As others have advised, if you haven’t paid the green card processing fee, do so immediately. Once that’s paid, the green card will be processed and sent to you.

How are they planning on hiring you in October 2025? If it is on OPT, accepting the stipend payments may be viewed as on-going, continued payment under your CPT, which could essentially extend the amount of time spent on CPT to a full year. If that happens (a year of CPT), you are not eligible for OPT if in the same degree program. You need to review this carefully.

At the consular interview. You can slow down the case at NVC if it appears it will be ready to send to interview before you meet the 212e requirement.

The benefit to being from a visa waiver program country is being able to travel to the US for up yo 90 days without a visa, once ESTA is approved. It actually can be more difficult for a citizen of a VWP country to get a visa approved because of this. Applying for a tourist visa instead of using ESTA usually indicates to a consular officer that the applicant intends to spend more than 90 days in the US — which leads them to question how strong the ties to the home country can be if the applicant can be gone that long on a visit. The multiple visa applications almost assuredly led to the ESTA denial — they make her appear to be desperate to get to the US, which leads to a question as to why and what her plans are. She would be best served to wait a year or two and the apply again for ESTA. Another visa application now — which is likely to get denied once the consulate officer knows that ESTA was denied, creating a vicious circle — will only lengthen the time she should wait to apply again for ESTA, IMO.

In the past, a student visa could not be issued until 120 days before the program start date listed on your I-20. That has been changed, and you can now be issued a student visa up to 365 dats before the start date. So, I would apply as early as possible, just in case you end up with a lengthly administrative processing time.

Vietnam is, in fact, a signatory to The Hague Adoption Convention; the Convention went into force there in 2012. OP — you should read the State Department information carefully: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/VietNam.html Being able to adopt a child in Vietnam and adopting a child in Vietnam and qualifying to immigrate that child to the US are two different things. I don’t say this to be rude or unsympathetic, but to be realistic about the situation. I believe it is highly unlikely — essentially impossible — that the Vietnamese Hague Central Authority, USCIS, and the US Department of State will approve an adoption for immigration of a newborn to a (by then) 70-year-old father.

Just to be sure I understand your plans — You are go8ng to file the I-130 while in the US on the NATO visa, but indicate you will be applying for an immigrant visa in Canada, i.e., you are NOT going to file to adjust your status in the US; While the I-130 is in process, you will continue to live in the US and do your NATO job; When the I-130 is approved, and you have been documentarily qualified at NVC, you will return to Canada to attend your visa interview and remain there until the visa is issued; After the visa is issued, you will enter the US using the immigrant visa and become a legal permanent resident; You will continue with your NATO job until the end of the contact/assignment. if the above is accurate, I don’t see any problem from an immigration standpoint. There might, however, be an issue from an employment standpoint. If you get placed into AP, you will likely not be able to use your NATO visa to re-enter the US to go to work even if it is not cancelled…the reason for the AP and the immigrant intent will be visible to an immigration officer at the POE, so even if the visa appears valid on its face, there is the possibility of being turned away at the POE. It will be a decision of the sponsoring country (I’m assuming Canada) as to whether they want to continue to be represented by someone who is a US LPR, as they might see a possibility that you can no longer fully reflect their interests versus that of your new country. If you haven’t already discussed your plans with them, I urge you to do so. You don’t mention whether you wife is employed and able to meet the requirements of the Affidavit of Support on her own, or if you are planning on using your continued salary to meet the requirements. If the latter, it is critical to be able to prove your position and salary will continue. You also will, BTW, lose any privileges connected with the NATO visa. An easier path, IMO, would be to file the I-130 and, once it’s approved, delay the process at NVC until close to the time your NATO position is going to end and return to Canada after the position has ended. Your wife will still remain in the US — likely for the about same amount of time as in your scenario. You then enter as an LPR with none of the possible NATO complications. If your wife cannot meet the AOS requirements, you can hopefully have a credible job offer ready or you can have a joint sponsor.

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied. During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes. With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason. People can be far different in person than they appear online. Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver. Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent. There is no provision for this meeting to be waived. Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued. You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa. Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household

Depends on the size of the business — you would need to invest enough to own at least 50% of an operating business. If you purchased only 50% of a business, it would need to include a stipulation that you would be the controlling partner because an E Treaty Investor visa is specifically to allow a business investor to develop and direct the business in which he/she invested. The investment also must be sufficient to ensure the investor’s commitment to making the business successful. I would recommend a lot more research on not only the requirements for an E2 visa but also on the proposed type of businesses you are planning to invest in. I doubt that a $100,000 investment in either of the types of businesses you stated would meet the requirements. You would most likely not be able to purchase a controlling interest in an active, profitable off-license business or grocery store for that amount. It probably wouldn’t cover the cost of purchasing the stock to sell or the equipment needed to operate. The profit margins for small grocery stores in the US run, on average, between 1 to 3% — not sufficient to establish and support your family in the US for a $100,000 investment. (Major supermarkets operate with a larger margin, but your proposed investment would be insufficient for investing in one if the major chains). As to an off-license business — you would need to also check the requirements, cost, and length of time to get (or retain, if you buy an existing business) a liquor license. The requirements vary from state to state. Some, for example require the licensee to be a US citizen or LPR, which you will not be. Good luck in your research!

I agree, it is likely because of aging out. The CSPA age protection cannot be calculated exactly, since the Priority Date is not yet current, assuming you are from the Philippines. The current PD is 02/01/2004 — 10 months before your PD. it is clear, however, that the older “child” has aged out from CSPA protection even if the PD was current as of this month. The petition was pending approval for 4 years, 5 months, and 29 days. So, as long as a visa number is available (I.e., the PD is current) before they turn 25 years, 5 months, and 29 days old, they would qualify for the visa. As of October 1, 2024 (this month), the older child was 25 years, 7 months, 10 days old and has aged out. There is still a possibility that the younger one will qualify, although it will likely be close. He/she is currently (as of Oct 1), 21 years, 9 months, and 20 days old (although you said 22 years old). If a visa number is available in the next +/-3 years 8 months or so, the younger will not age out. The PD has to advance more than 10 months before their PD will be current. Historically, the F-4 PD moves very slowly, if at all, during a Fiscal Year. For example, looking at the F-4 PD for Phillipines on October 1 of the last five years, it was: Oct 2024 2/1/2004 Oct 2023 8/22/2002 Oct 2022 8/22/2002 Oct 2021 8/22/2002 Oct 2020 1/1 2002 So, for 3 years prior to this year, the PD did not move at all. It made a large jump this year, but it is unlikely to do so again. I would likely send an e-mail to NVC, asking about this, especially highlighting that the younger “child” has not yet definitely aged out of CSPA protection.