jan22

No tourist visa is needed. The D visa allows you to seek entry to the US while your cruise ship is in a US port.

Yes, with the understanding that entry into the US depends on approval of the US immigration officer, as always.

The C1 (transit) part of the visa gets you into the US to join the cruise ship. You are admitted into the US at a Port of Entry for the sole purpose of onward travel to the ship within 29 days (or the departure date of the ship if it's less than 29 days from date of your entry). Once you've joined the ship, the C1 serves no purpose until you are no longer working on that ship -- then you can use the C1 to transit the US to go home or to travel to join a different ship. The D (crewnember) part of the visa is used once you are working on the ship. It will allow you (with immigration officer approval, of course) to enter the US when your ship is in a US port, with the requirement that you will depart with the ship or on any other vessel within no more than 29 days.

Important correction -- the I-751 needs to be file inTWO years, not three.

The MRV fee for a non-petition visa is $160 (or inr equivalent at Embassy exchange rate). The MRV fee for a petition-based visa is $190 (or inr equivalent). See https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-information-resources/fees/fees-visa-services.html You don't state how much you paid -- and I did not look up the official Embassy exchange rate -- but the amount owed indicates it would be close to the $30 difference per person between these two rates. You will not be able to schedule an appointment for H visas until the proper amount is paid. BTW, there will be a fee increase to $185 and $205, respectively, that is scheduled to take effect on May 30, 2023.

Sorry about the shoulder -- I know they can be painful. Just wanted to be sure people would be going to the correct agency site for information. Your quoted section is true of any visa any time!

I don't understand why you think an expedite is needed or might be approved, if I understood one of your posts. If the court order says that your daughter can leave with you anytime after a certain date -- and doesn't have a date after which she can no longer move -- the only problem from a US immigration standpoint would be if the process was completed too soon. Did I misunderstand? And, it certainly wouldn't be a reason to expedite the whole family. You, the US citizen parent, could travel with her to the US before the rest of the family if hers was exedited, while the rest of the family waited for theirs. Asking for an expedite of the entire family would look like an excuse for jumping the queue, IMO.

First of all, USCIS has nothing to do with the DVD program. It's a State Department operation. Second, I find it always better to go to an official information source versus other sites. The cited information (copIed from the link?) is an okay summary of the process, but doesn't give official, complete information. In the FAQ section of the DV Instructions, Question 22, (there's a link to the FAQs on page 3 of the instructions at this site: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Diversity-Visa/DV-Instructions-Translations/DV-2024-Instructions-Translations/DV-2024-Instructions.pdf) it says to keep your confirmation number until September 30, 2024, in case of any updates.

His his mother-in-law does not qualify for TPS under the Sudan designation per the information in the site quoted in the post (https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/temporary-protected-status/temporary-protected-status-designated-country-sudan). One of the requirements is continuous presence in the US since April 19, 2022. The OP stated that his MIL arrived on December 25, 2022, clearly after that April date. Applying for TPS under this designation would merely result in a denial and make her an overstay, subject to all the repercussions of that.

"Family friends" are frequently not deemed to be credible sponors. What reason would they have to spend thousands of dollars each year for your studies when you aren't even a family member?

Thanks for the follow-up info -- this is a change I obviously missed out on. Most important thing for the OP is what we said at the beginning --- he/she needs to contact KCC if the case number is still not available since that's the only way to find out what's going on.

There is no interaction between KCC and any Embassy on a case until the DS-260 is filed. The Embassies do not have access to any of the information held at KCC until then, so they have nothing on which to base a verification of an individual's identity.

The answer to the question for almost all applicants will be "Yes". It is not asking if you actually are inadmissible under a public charge finding. Rather, it is asking whether you have to meet the requirement for not becoming a public charge. If you read the "Alert" on the DHS home page for the I-485, it makes it somewhat cIear that this question was added to the newest form to collect the data to show the applicant overcomes the public charge requirement. On page 8 of the instructions for the I-485 (https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-485instr.pdf ), there is a link to a list of those who can answer "No" to the question (i.e., those who are exempt from this inadmissibility): https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-g . Even with the link, it is not easy to find the list, though! The link only takes you to the Volume 8 (Admissibility) Part G (Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility) -- a whole chapter on public charge. The link doesn't take you specifically to Chapter 3, where you need to start looking. This link (https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-g-chapter-3) takes you to Chapter 3 (ApplIcability). In this chapter, you need to scroll down to Part C ( Exemptions) to see the list of categories of those to whom the public charge does not apply (i.e., those who are exempt from it). Unless your parents fall under one of those categories, you have to say "Yes" to question 61 and answer the required questions that follow it.

Not sure who "they" are, but siblings are not "Immediate Relatives" under immigration law. The visa categories for immediate relatives start with "IR" and there are no annual numeric limits. Siblings are "Family Preference" by immigration law. The visa categories for family preferences start with "F" and, per immigration law passed by Congress, there is a limit to how many in each "F" sub-category can be issued each year, with a further limitation that no country can account for more than 7% of that annual limit in any given year.

??? The Embassy does not have the ability to do anything on this case right now and no way they can verify identity or anything else on a case for which they have no information. Plus, it is not a given that the issue the OP is having is because the CN is locked. It might be, but it might be something else. The best thing the OP can do is contact KCC, as advised in the notice, to find out exactly what the issue is and get it addressed appropriately.

If they haven't completed the DS-260, there is no way the case is at the Embassy. It is still at KCC. Did you contact KCC via e-mail or phone call, as advised in the notice you received?

It is different only for India, Mexico, or the Phillipines. No matter what country, the wait for an IR-4 (sibling visa) is a very long time -- approaching 18-20 years for all other countries -- and even longer for those three. The timeline, of course, starts from when your aunt filed the petition. You didn't say when that was. Unless she filed it a long time ago, your parents would be in the US a lot faster if you petition for them. One question -- do you have younger siblings who are still dependent on your parents? They would not be able to come with your parents if they come on IR-5 visas.

If you are already 18, it is too late to submit a CRBA application. The application must be filed prior to the child (you) turning 18. If you can gather the required documentation, you can use it to directly apply for a US passport instead.

I wasn't going to repond to this, since its written in an older post, but there is too much misinformation not to correct it for possible future readers. The VJ 2013 post is grossly out of date -- and was superceded when all the USCIS posts closed in 2019-2020. It should be ignored, as it has no relevance to anything now. Not sure where you got the idea that you could not file for an immigrant visa in Nigeria (i.e., "but not for spouse or fiancee")! Of course, as it states in the paragraph you then quoted, there has to be a petition filed and approved before the visa application is filed -- but that's true for anywhere in the world. That paragraph makes no mention of the possibility of filing the petition in Nigeria for certain types of IVs, but it doesn't give any details on filing in the US either. It, appropriately, refers the reader to DHS for information on filing the petitions (which will include the concept of exceptional circumstances allowing overseas filing as an option). I do not know if Lagos is currently accepting I-130s with exceptional circumstances (there was a recent time period in which they were not, which may or may not have been a workload issue), but they have the same legal authority to do so as any other US Consulate/Embassy does.

I think we understood what you were asking the fIrst time. However, there is no way anyone on the forum can guess what might have caused the concerns with the limited information you provided here. A couple of things for your consideration: Every application goes through a stage of final administrative processing after the interviewing officer says it's approved. Part of that is a review by a senior officer. This can result in a request for additional information or take some time for final security checks. It is normal and not personal to your case --although I know it seems very personal right now. You haven't supplied information here that would help pinpoint any additional concerns in your case. You said this was your "2nd attempt", which implies something went wrong on the first attempt -- did this attempt "cure" (i.e., correct or resolve) whatever that was? You describe the letter as a "generic" one that they give to anyone not approved. But, it specifically states that the officer did not believe you had a bona fide relationship and that you needed to provide information showing the relationship was for more than an immigration benefit. The rest of the letter is generic -- and likely has to be since they do not know what types of information you might have concerning your relationshIp, so they cannot be more specific. Again, you have more than a clue on what is concerning them about your case. The Ietter starts with a statement on what is of particular concern --- they don't believe your relationship is real; rather, they believe it is for immigration purposes only. We don't know why that is, but if you think about everything you submitted and what was asked and answered, maybe you or your fiancee do (or can figure it out). Maybe something from the 1st attempt? Maybe something confusing in your fiancee's family paperwork? Maybe some thing in the timeline of your relationship? The root of the problem has been identified -- whether you agree that is a valid concern or not -- so you do not have to "blindly" send documents. You can make sure what you send adds to the picture of your plan for a loving, committed, lifelong relationship. Until you submit something to address what has been requested, your case will not move forward.

The way to get to an officer to resolve things is to submit what has been requested. If you had all of it at the interview, it should fairly quick to organize and get the appointment to submit it. One question -- what do you mean by "this is our 2nd attempt"? Second petition and visa interview?

How long will you have been outside the US when you try to re-enter?

This is not what was suggested. There is no way he will qualify for a student visa -- that requires proving to the consular officer that you have no immigrant intent and plan to return to your home country after your studies. He cIearly does have immigrant intent and no intention or returning. In addition, you need to be aware that student visas can only be used for no more than one year in a public high school with full payment of unsubsidized tuition costs (usually $10,000-15,000). The rest of high school would have to be at private schools.

There is never a guarantee that you will be approved for filing the I-130 petition with a Consulate, even with a new job offer. It is at the discretion of the Consulate as to whether your case a) meets the criteria of an "exceptional circumstance", and b) work load levels and staffing allow the Consulate to accept the case without a serious impact on their workflow. A decision on whether a case will be accepted cannot be made until all the information is available, i.e., the job offer has been received and accepted with a specific starting date. So, if you follow this path, you won't know if your case will be accepted for sure consular filing for a while. Amsterdam has the same authority to accept I-130s as Frankfurt. They might not have the staff or time to do so right now, but who knows what might happen in the upcoming months? They will not, however, respond and tell you they will accept your case for I-130 filing until you actually have a case (a job offer in your case) and can give them all the details. IMO -- and, it is only my opinion -- with their own cases plus all the other special cases and nationalities being routed through Frankfurt now, it is unlikey they would accept an I-130 from the Netherlands that has no connection to Germany. But, I've been wrong before!

It makes it makes me wonder what, if anything, happened in 2005. OP: Any response you get right now would be nothing but pure speculation. The key to perhaps understanding what's going on is, first and foremost, to find out why the ESTA was denied. A denied ESTA implies there's something in the DHS system that means she may be ineligible to enter the United States without a visa and they want a visa officer to take a look at it. It may be something as simple as travel to one of the countries on the list of state sponsors of terrorism which would mean that a visa is now required for that person instead of ESTA. It may be something else that DHS wants a visa officer to take a look at, such as a name similar to someone who has an ineligibility to enter the US. DHS wants it ruled out that she is this person.