Hey guys, this is something that Nsoto posted om Immigrate2Us. I thought those of you who are waiting for a 1st interview in CDJ might find some usefull information in it. This was before the Pilot Program!This was an update released in November 2006...I have highlighted the part regarding NVC..
I called NVC just a minute ago, The representative confirmed that they started scheduling appointments for CDJ 2 months ago...
I hope this clears up any confusion...thanks!!!
Santiago Burciaga, Chief of the Immigrant Visa Section at the U.S.
Consulate
in Cd. Juarez, and Warren Janssen, Officer in Charge of the USCIS office
located near the consulate, each spoke at CLINIC''s annual family law
training in
El Paso on November 16, 2006. The following is a summary of the
information
they provided:
Caseload. The consulate has experienced a large increase in workload
during
the last two years as a result of the USCIS service centers' prioritizing
the
adjudication of I-130 petitions and their sending far more approved
petitions
to the National Visa Center (NVC). For example, in fiscal year 2005, which
ended October 31, 2005, the consulate adjudicated 60,327 immigrant visa
(IV)
applications. In fiscal year 2006 it adjudicated 88,202, which represented
a 32
percent increase. In fiscal year 2007, the consulate anticipates
adjudicating
104,000 applications, which represents an additional 15 percent increase
over
2006 and a 42 percent increase over 2005. October 2006 was the busiest
month
in the consulate's history given that it adjudicated 8,706 applications.
The consulate is still working its way through a long backlog of pending
cases. This backlog translates to a 10- to 12-month delay in the
consulate's
scheduling the IV interview from the date it receives the file from the
NVC. One
year ago the consulate had a backlog of 48,000 immigrant visas. Today the
backlog is down to 35,000 cases, which represents a 27 percent reduction.
Staffing. For most of fiscal year 2005 the consulate was operating with
only
10 full-time foreign service officers. The consulate has filled most of
those vacancies and now is operating with a staff of 18. Next year, if
fully
staffed, the consulate will be operating with 23 officers.
Sensitivity Training. Any applicants who have an objection to the manner
in
which their interview was handled may ask to speak to a supervisor. That
supervisor will come out and speak to them about their concerns.
Scheduling. Currently the NVC forwards approved IV applications to the
consulate, which assumes responsibility for scheduling the interview.
Beginning in
spring 2007 the NVC will schedule the initial interviews for Cd. Juarez.
If
the applicant wants to reschedule the interview, he or she will deal
directly
with the consulate. The consulate plans to keep chipping away at the
35,000
case backlog before that transfer occurs. After the backlog is eliminated
at
the consulate, the NVC would start scheduling IV interviews for Cd. Juarez,
though by then a new backlog would have been created at the NVC.
The consulate will expedite the scheduling of the IV interview in
compelling
cases. But the reasons must be extreme, almost life-threatening. The
consulate wants to see medical reports and a physician's statement
explaining the
current medical problem, treatment, and what might happen if the IV
interview is
further delayed. Security Checks. The consulate aims for same-day service for IV applicants
(issuance of the visa on the day of the interview for approveable cases),
but
is forced to delay the issuance an extra day or two in many cases due to
fingerprint (IDENT) checks. The process may be slowed even more next year
when the
consulate moves from a two-digit print to all ten digits.
K-1 and K-3 Applications. The consulate aims to schedule the interview for
the fiance) visa applicant within 30 days of receiving the approved
I-129F.
Applicants are sent a letter advising them to appear for an open
appointment
anytime between 8 to 10 a.m., Monday through Friday. Spouses of U.S.
citizens
who are applying for K-3 visas will be offered the option of proceeding
with
either the K-3 or the immigrant visa application if the consulate has
received
the IV file at the time it schedules the interview. Once they make that
election, they can't change their mind. In other words, if they elect to
proceed
with the IV application and run into difficulty satisfying the affidavit of
support requirements, they can't elect to proceed with the K-3 application.
Affidavits of Support. The consulate is following an October 2006
Department
of State cable, which in turn incorporates the final regulation issued by
the
USCIS on June 21, 2006. The USCIS introduced a new Form I-864W in
situations
where the IV applicant has earned or will be credited with 40 qualifying
quarters. If the applicant submits the necessary social security earnings
record,
the applicant will be relieved of all affidavit of support requirements.
As
a result of the USCIS final rule and DOS cable the consulate stopped
requiring
the I-130 petitioner in those situations to submit last year's tax return
and
evidence of income at or above 125 percent of the poverty guidelines. If
the
sponsor is relying on assets in lieu of income, the sponsor may count his
or
her principal residence, provided the real estate is located in the United
States. The consulate is continuing to disregard real estate located in
Mexico.
The NVC used to forward all I-864s directly to the consulate without
pre-screening them, but beginning in May 2006, the NVC started analyzing
them for
financial sufficiency.
Processing Derivatives. In cases where the principal beneficiary has
adjusted status in the United States and there are derivative family
members residing
in Mexico, the principal may file a Form I-824 with the USCIS. Once
approved, it is forwarded to the designated U.S. consulate, which will open
a file and
start IV processing of the derivatives. Alternatively, the principal may
send notification directly to the consulate indicating that he or she has
acquired lawful permanent resident (LPR) status and requesting IV
processing for the
derivatives. The LPR should make the request in writing and include a copy
of
the green card (I-551) and/or I-797 approval notice. The consulate will
cable the USCIS to obtain confirmation of the adjustment approval and, if
confirmed, will initiate IV processing of the derivatives. The principal
beneficiary
should be present at the IV interview for the derivatives and bring the
green
card for verification purposes.
Refusals. Immediate relative applicants who are refused an immigrant visa
based on the need to submit additional proof or documentation may return
for a
re-interview at any time during the month they are denied. They are
instructed either to go to the Information window at the consulate or
contact the Call
Center. A maximum of 45 cases are accepted in this manner every day.
Preference category applicants who are refused may also return at any time
during the
month they are refused, but they are required to contact the Call Center
first.
Inadmissibility for Prior DUI. If the applicant has been convicted of even
one driving while intoxicated (DUI) during the last two years, he or she
will
be denied an immigrant visa based on the health-related ground of
inadmissibility for having a physical or mental disorder. The applicant
will be issued a
Class A certification. If the DUI occurred between two and three years
ago,
it still might be considered, but there will not be an automatic denial. Inadmissibility for False Claim of Citizenship. Applicants who have made a
false claim of citizenship will be found permanently inadmissible pursuant
to
INA ァ 212(a)(6)(C)(ii). However, the consulate is making some exceptions
for
children. If the child is age 15 or younger, the child will not be
considered
to have the mental capacity to make the false claim, and thus will not be
found inadmissible. If the child is aged 16 or 17, the consulate will
examine the
circumstances and the child's mental capacity to decide if the child should
be found inadmissible. Any child aged 18 or older will be treated as if he
or
she had the mental capacity to make the false claim. Waivers. Approximately 11 percent of the IV applicants are denied for
being
inadmissible, but many are eligible to submit a waiver. The number of
waiver
applications submitted in fiscal year 2006 was more than twice the number
submitted during the prior fiscal year (9,148 vs. 3,948). In October 2006
the
consulate received 1,016 waivers, putting it on target to receive
approximately
12,000 waivers this fiscal year, which represents a 24% increase from the
prior
year. The most common reason for denying an applicant is for unlawful
presence (INA ァ 212(a)(9)(B)), followed by fraud/misrepresentation (INA ァ
212(a)(6)(C)(i)), health-related grounds (INA ァ 212(a)(1)), and
criminal-related grounds
(INA ァ 212(a)(2)).
When the IV applicant is formally denied for being inadmissible, the
applicant is instructed to appear before the consulate's separate waiver
unit. The
applicant is not allowed to submit the waiver packet on the same day of the
denial. Given the current backlog in applicants needing to submit a
waiver, they
are currently being told to return between one to two weeks later. After
the
waiver packet is submitted, it takes the consulate between two weeks and
one
month to forward it to the USCIS-CDJ office that adjudicates them.
If the waiver applicant is ultimately approved by USCIS, it takes
approximately 30 to 60 days for the consulate to reschedule him or her for
a second
interview on the IV application. The consulate does not reevaluate such
issues as
public charge or other grounds of inadmissibility at that second interview,
but it will have to update the security checks. It asks applicants if they
have
remained outside the United States during the pendency of the waiver
application, but it does not require submission of any proof of that
foreign residence.
Contacting the Consulate. To call the consulate from within the United
states, call (900) 479-1212. From within Mexico, call 01-900-849-4949, or
if using
a credit card, call 01-477-788-7070. To contact the consulate by e-mail,
use
this address: cdjimmigrantvisas@state.gov. The congressional liaison
person
is Mike de la Hoya. He can be reached directly at (915) 534-6060, ext.
2302,
or at 011-52-656-611-3000, ext. 2302. To reach him or any of the staff at
the
consulate by fax, use these numbers: 011-52-656-616-9388 or 9027. Update from Warren Janssen. Mr. Janssen's office is located near the
consulate, but is under the jurisdiction of the DHS/USCIS. He is mainly
responsible
for adjudicating waiver applications, though he also adjudicates
locally-filed
I-130 petitions and investigates adoptions and other cases of suspected
fraud. When he started in this position in July 2005 he faced a backlog of
waiver
applications and a steady monthly stream of approximately 300-400
applications. He now receives about three times that number.
He reported that there is currently between a 7- to 10-month wait from the
time of submission of the Form I-601 waiver application and supporting
documents
to the time his office issues a decision. He hopes to reduce that time to
3
months. His biggest challenge is a lack of support staff who can take the
waiver files from the box, shelve them, and prepare them for review. The
anticipated additional support staff will help speed up the adjudication
time.
Applicants may ask to expedite the adjudication if they submit evidence of
serious
health factors or military deployment. Attorneys or representatives who
submit a G-28 with the waiver packet should expect to receive a copy of the
USCIS
decision on the waiver.
He does an initial review of all waiver applications and recommends either
approval or denial. He has one assistant who works with him in the USCIS
office
in Cd. Juarez, and he currently outsources the adjudication of some of the
waiver cases to USCIS officers located in Tijuana and Mexico City. This
will
help reduce the backlog over the next six months. He also anticipates soon
hiring at least one additional adjudicator.
The current approval rate for waivers filed with his office is 75 percent.
He aims for a consistent approach by doing the initial review and
recommendation. Adjudicators are free, for example, to approve a case he
has recommended
for denial after doing a more thorough examination of the file. The number
one
reason for waiver denial is that it was poorly prepared and not adequately
supported with documentation.
All claims of hardship to the qualifying relative must be supported by
documentary evidence or an explanation specifying the hardship. Family
separation
and financial inconvenience, in and of themselves, do not necessarily
constitute extreme hardship. Extreme hardship may be demonstrated in many
different
ways, including health factors (e.g., ongoing or specialized treatment for
a
physical or mental condition), financial considerations, lower quality
education
or loss of opportunity for higher education, personal considerations (e.g.,
close relatives living in the United States and/or in the foreign country),
and
other special factors (e.g., cultural, language, religious, and ethnic
obstacles, fears of persecution). Applicants may submit additional documents and supporting evidence at any
time prior to the adjudication of the waiver. Applicants who are denied
may file
an appeal with the Administrative Appeals Office. Those appeals are filed
with his office. If the applicant wants his office to consider the appeal
as a
motion to reopen or reconsider (MTR) the denial, he or she should
specifically
indicate on the appeal. If the applicant is submitting new evidence with
the
MTR, it must have been unavailable at the time of the waiver application
was
submitted. For example, the MTR may not be based on inadequate
representation.
But if the new evidence was unavailable at the time of the submission
(e.g.,
effects of Hurricane Katrina that occurred subsequently) his office will
consider it. Persons who are denied may not re-file a new waiver
application
unless they re-apply for an immigrant visa with the consulate, are denied,
and
then submit a new waiver through the consulate.
This article first appeared in Catholic Legal Immigration News, Vol X, No.
12
(December 2006) and was reprinted in 12 Bender's Immigr. Bull. 6 (Jan. 1,
2007).
