• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

DV 2020 All Selectees

Walt91 said:
It’s familybased as well, which is a big amount of people too. I’m sure this will be challenged in court. The only reason AILA failed is due to the fact that they put it on top of the healthcare requirement case. The content itself was fine except that they need to run a complete separate case for the immigration ban and leave the healthcare stuff alone. AILA was the first case and it’s not going to be the only one. The only thing we can do is wait.
Click to expand...
This is only partially correct. The official reason for denying the restraining order was indeed that they tried to piggyback the previous EO, but the judge also said that because those family based applicants just switch category from F1A to F2A after they turn 21, then there is no real "loss" of their chance, they would just have to wait a ridicolous amount of time (which he also claimed is the congress' problem, not his). Furthermore, if you read their case carefully, you would see that what they ask is for those people to be able to request an emergency appointment at the embassy, and not banning the EO altogether. Anyhow, none of this is even remotely related to DV so I wouldn't count on AILA etc. to solve the problem (they're also showing no sign of filing another lawsuit anytime soon, much less for DV)
 
Last edited:
Let's be realistic, remaining dv2020 winners at this point, have around 10% chance of getting their green card by end of Sept (I'm one of them, but thank God based in Europe - feeling sorry for winners of poor countries as they have a chance to dramatically improve their life). 21m unemployed Americans at this point and virus ain't going anywhere anytime soon. It is more than certain that Trump will extend EO by further number of months, very likely until elections, it is his selling point for being reelected and it is backed up public (65% of the public support these meassures). I would also say that the only chance for DV2020 winners is to go thru court. EO was meant to temporary suspend GC issuing which is the case for employment based etc visas. For DV winners, it is quite different as EO means in fact GC gone for good before legal processing end of 30th of Sept
 
pablo992 said:
Can someone check the new post on twitter(USA GREEN CARD). Is this for real? I can't post it here it doesn't allow me?
Click to expand...
It’s only a page created by someone like us.
However it’s nothing new. They want only to add news categories to this ban, for us nothing change. And for now nothing is official, they are only speculations
 
EO just ban issuing visa not interview. The problem for DV winner is the closure of embassy. As long as being interviewed before 10/1, DV winner still can have visa after 9/30. This is my understanding, please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WBA
seektruelyme said:
EO just ban issuing visa not interview. The problem for DV winner is the closure of embassy. As long as being interviewed before 10/1, DV winner still can have visa after 9/30. This is my understanding, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Interviews could happen if the 2NL will be send out, then the embassy has to be open. If this is the case you do the interview but your case will be put on AP since they can’t approve your visa until the ban is lifted. So in the best scenario the ban will be lifted prior to September 30. if this is not the case we simply would not be able to get the visa and then it’s end of story.
 
seektruelyme said:
EO just ban issuing visa not interview. The problem for DV winner is the closure of embassy. As long as being interviewed before 10/1, DV winner still can have visa after 9/30. This is my understanding, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
I like this idea. The problem is not the ban at this stage but the closure of the embassies due to the coronavirus. I called KCC last week, they said my CN is ready for interview but they are waiting for my embassy to open so they can schedule me, actually the KCC schedules the interview not the embassy.
 
seektruelyme said:
EO just ban issuing visa not interview. The problem for DV winner is the closure of embassy. As long as being interviewed before 10/1, DV winner still can have visa after 9/30. This is my understanding, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

It sounds like you are saying that as long as someone is interviewed by 9/30, a visa can be issued later. This is not the case. Visas must be issued by 30 September. They can obviously send it to you later than that - but it must be actually issued by 30 September.

From the FAQ section of the DV2020 instructions:

Without exception, all selected and eligible applicants must obtain their visa or adjust status by the end of the fiscal year. There is no carry-over of DV benefits into the next year for persons who are selected but who do not obtain visas by September 30, 2020 (the end of the fiscal year). Also, spouses and children who derive status from a DV-2020 registration can only obtain visas in the DV category between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020.
 
SusieQQQ said:
It sounds like you are saying that as long as someone is interviewed by 9/30, a visa can be issued later. This is not the case. Visas must be issued by 30 September. They can obviously send it to you later than that - but it must be actually issued by 30 September.

From the FAQ section of the DV2020 instructions:

Without exception, all selected and eligible applicants must obtain their visa or adjust status by the end of the fiscal year. There is no carry-over of DV benefits into the next year for persons who are selected but who do not obtain visas by September 30, 2020 (the end of the fiscal year). Also, spouses and children who derive status from a DV-2020 registration can only obtain visas in the DV category between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020.
Click to expand...
I would like to share an opinion on this: I understand that all the selected ones "must obtain a visa or adjust their status by the end of the fiscal year", but in recent years there has never been a pandemic. It is also the first time for us and for the DV lottery process. Under normal conditions, each year, selected had 12 months to obtain a visa, now only 5 months. I mean, I understand that this is the law, but I think they could also do something to understand that we are not guilty of what is happening and we would like to have 12 months to get our visas, like everyone before us.
Unfortunately this has not been a normal year for no one of us. So they could take considerations about that. But I know, no one cares about us. Only my thoughts.
 
Soophie said:
I would like to share an opinion on this: I understand that all the selected ones "must obtain a visa or adjust their status by the end of the fiscal year", but in recent years there has never been a pandemic. It is also the first time for us and for the DV lottery process. Under normal conditions, each year, selected had 12 months to obtain a visa, now only 5 months. I mean, I understand that this is the law, but I think they could also do something to understand that we are not guilty of what is happening and we would like to have 12 months to get our visas, like everyone before us.
Unfortunately this has not been a normal year for no one of us. So they could take considerations about that. But I know, no one cares about us. Only my thoughts.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, laws are not like that. Laws are written and applied strictly. There is no wiggle room just because it seems "unfair" to some people. And it's not a matter of opinion, these things are clear.

What Susie explained is correct, although to be precise about wording we could further explain that the point of issuance (which must be before midnight on September 30th) is the critical point. And therefore printing the visa or sending it as Susie explains could be after the 30th. That is the point that Susie is referring to - the point at which the embassy says the case is approved and assigns the visa to the case.

Now, having said that, there is a lawyer that I am aware of that may try to file suit against the government prior to September 30th to get the government to issue visas even if "after" the fiscal year end date. This will only be attempted if the ban is extended. The lawyer will be charging clients a fee which some will see as expensive ($Thousands), and there is no guarantee of success. But again - the reason he is saying to file before September 30th is because it might force the government to approve those cases (those who file suit) before the deadline, simply to avoid the legal mess later. So - it's not much different to be perfectly honest. It's best to simply accept that September 30th is a hard stop. Wishing otherwise is probably just wishful thinking.
 
Britsimon said:
Unfortunately, laws are not like that. Laws are written and applied strictly. There is no wiggle room just because it seems "unfair" to some people. And it's not a matter of opinion, these things are clear.

What Susie explained is correct, although to be precise about wording we could further explain that the point of issuance (which must be before midnight on September 30th) is the critical point. And therefore printing the visa or sending it as Susie explains could be after the 30th. That is the point that Susie is referring to - the point at which the embassy says the case is approved and assigns the visa to the case.

Now, having said that, there is a lawyer that I am aware of that may try to file suit against the government prior to September 30th to get the government to issue visas even if "after" the fiscal year end date. This will only be attempted if the ban is extended. The lawyer will be charging clients a fee which some will see as expensive ($Thousands), and there is no guarantee of success. But again - the reason he is saying to file before September 30th is because it might force the government to approve those cases (those who file suit) before the deadline, simply to avoid the legal mess later. So - it's not much different to be perfectly honest. It's best to simply accept that September 30th is a hard stop. Wishing otherwise is probably just wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
Is this regarding a different lawyer than the one that is already working on a law suit with DV lottery plaintiffs?
 
Soophie said:
I would like to share an opinion on this: I understand that all the selected ones "must obtain a visa or adjust their status by the end of the fiscal year", but in recent years there has never been a pandemic. It is also the first time for us and for the DV lottery process. Under normal conditions, each year, selected had 12 months to obtain a visa, now only 5 months. I mean, I understand that this is the law, but I think they could also do something to understand that we are not guilty of what is happening and we would like to have 12 months to get our visas, like everyone before us.
Unfortunately this has not been a normal year for no one of us. So they could take considerations about that. But I know, no one cares about us. Only my thoughts.
Click to expand...

simon gave a good response, but let me tell you about a case that informs my expectations of this. I don’t recall the case name now but I’m sure googling will pick it up - anyway - it was an adjustment of status DV case, so it was appealable, and the applicant appealed it on the basis that he had been incorrectly denied. The court found that indeed he had been incorrectly refused, but also that the law was clear that no visas could be issued/AOS take place after FY end - so even though USCIS was at fault, he could not adjust on the basis of DV as it was already next fiscal year. Unfair, not his fault, but no DV.

I am hopeful that where possible, once embassies reopen and the ban is over, that they will give priority to DV selectees to get as many visas issued as possible before FY end.
 
Britsimon said:
Unfortunately, laws are not like that. Laws are written and applied strictly. There is no wiggle room just because it seems "unfair" to some people. And it's not a matter of opinion, these things are clear.

What Susie explained is correct, although to be precise about wording we could further explain that the point of issuance (which must be before midnight on September 30th) is the critical point. And therefore printing the visa or sending it as Susie explains could be after the 30th. That is the point that Susie is referring to - the point at which the embassy says the case is approved and assigns the visa to the case.

Now, having said that, there is a lawyer that I am aware of that may try to file suit against the government prior to September 30th to get the government to issue visas even if "after" the fiscal year end date. This will only be attempted if the ban is extended. The lawyer will be charging clients a fee which some will see as expensive ($Thousands), and there is no guarantee of success. But again - the reason he is saying to file before September 30th is because it might force the government to approve those cases (those who file suit) before the deadline, simply to avoid the legal mess later. So - it's not much different to be perfectly honest. It's best to simply accept that September 30th is a hard stop. Wishing otherwise is probably just wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
Can you please tell us who this lawyer is? We may interested in paying the fee. But we need more information. Thank you
 
Britsimon said:
Unfortunately, laws are not like that. Laws are written and applied strictly. There is no wiggle room just because it seems "unfair" to some people. And it's not a matter of opinion, these things are clear.

What Susie explained is correct, although to be precise about wording we could further explain that the point of issuance (which must be before midnight on September 30th) is the critical point. And therefore printing the visa or sending it as Susie explains could be after the 30th. That is the point that Susie is referring to - the point at which the embassy says the case is approved and assigns the visa to the case.

Now, having said that, there is a lawyer that I am aware of that may try to file suit against the government prior to September 30th to get the government to issue visas even if "after" the fiscal year end date. This will only be attempted if the ban is extended. The lawyer will be charging clients a fee which some will see as expensive ($Thousands), and there is no guarantee of success. But again - the reason he is saying to file before September 30th is because it might force the government to approve those cases (those who file suit) before the deadline, simply to avoid the legal mess later. So - it's not much different to be perfectly honest. It's best to simply accept that September 30th is a hard stop. Wishing otherwise is probably just wishful thinking.
Click to expand...

But wasn't he working on a lawsuit to ban the proclamation altogether? Now, he is only willing to file a case on behalf of those who are willing to pay a multiple thousand dollar fee to get their DV without necessarily going after the proclamation itself?
 
i thought this might be helpful for some people. Seems like our chance is getting as slimmer as covid 10 suspension still in active. Or maybe not. mail.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top