Based in whr I live I would rather go to the senator than the house rep based on his political views. I am not saying they would not find the status or jeopardize. Just the comfort feeling.
Printable View
It can be, but need not be.
For USCIS purposes, in an otherwise healthy person, it is latent TB (Class B) only if TST is >10mm (positive is defined >5mm) AND the person is recent arrival (<5 years) from high TB incidence country (India qualifies).
So, although I have >10mm skin test (and XRay negative), since I am in the US >5 years, my CS did NOT check 'Class B' for me.
Details here (esp. p19):
http://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeeh...b-ti-civil.pdf
Thats where the blood test comes into picture . I really dont understand why skin test is still used.
Blood test is simple , objective and gives a yes / no answer - negative clears you of any TB - active or latent, positive indicates atleast latent Tb ( could be active based on other conditions / x ray ). No more measuring redness , softness and worrying about if you took BCG and what not
While I am all for getting greened without an RFE, how equitable would it be if USCIS chooses to randomly apply an old protocol to a select few. Would they now open themselves for a litigation? Is that even possible? I definitely do not want to water down your hopes here but at the same time there is not much data to support the theory that some are being greened without an RFE.
The whole RFE episode seems to be an arbitrary execution of the protocol. With an established backlog like EB2I, it could have been better (wishful thinking, I guess).
vyruss,
It's not going to happen.
The one year validity for I-693 after May 31, 2014 is a matter of USCIS policy and is binding on all adjudicators until different guidance is issued.
The new policy was developed in conjunction with CDC and I don't believe USCIS has the authority to modify the policy without consulting with the CDC first.
That is not going to happen within FY2014 IMO. I do hope that, at some point, the validity can be extended to at least 2 years. That would remove all the present problems in future years.
Currently there is zero evidence in Trackitt, for cases that have been updated, of any case being approved with an expired I-693.
Medical RFE
Pre Change -- 645
<1 Year ------ 78
Yes ---------- 86
No ------------ 0
Unknown ------- 9
Total ------- 818
I hope sportsfan receives the RFE as soon as possible.
That is what I thought. On the policy issue, is this not an old policy that is just being enforced now. It was probably glossed over in the past and now merely being enforced. It would just be prudent to suck it up, spend the money on the medicals now and wait for the "inevitable" RFE. But I would be really mad if I fall into PWMB category just because USCIS muddled the RFE issuing process.
How long USCIS takes to update the status to "Request for Evidence Response Review" once we send the RFE response? Will there be some delay?
^Mine got updated the day after TSC received the docs.
I have an elementary Q, reg. answer on my senator inquiry / privacy form (for EB2-I):
1/ Under "Information about you", it asks "Are you the petitioner?"
2/ In a separate section, it asks "Info about beneficiary or foreign visitor".
I am a little confused. Am I the I-485 petitioner or beneficiary, or both?
Thanks
Sports fan, Just for my future reference. Did you talk to the congress man, write, or fax or email or face to face?
Did you represent yourself or both you and your wife? My spouse will not indulge in these conversations. So, I will have to fight this battle. Will they need primary or can the derivative appeal their case?,
Early responders to RFE should have completed 60 days wait already (based on response receipt date), any of them created case/enquiry with TSC?
NSC has started approving people who got current in Aug.
Things are getting little better at TSC. 14 approvals in 4 days at TSC vs 11 at NSC. Let's hope it keeps accelerating.