Based on the the fact that embassies have limited capacity, one’s probability of being transferred to another embassy might improve by submitting your passports to KCC, as this may help them identify what embassies you are able to be processed. Just an opinion.
I don’t do probability or number crunching, so I’m not going to get into that, I go by what I’ve been able to observe over the years. KCC will not automatically assume one is able to interview in a non-country of current residence simply because they hold the passport of that country, and automatically transfer the case there. When requesting an embassy change, one is required to demonstrate their tie to the country one is requesting to be transferred to, at that point one can send the passport if they so wish in addition to demonstrating they reside in that country. KCC cannot assume a person wants to be interviewed in a certain country simply because they’re a citizen of that country, citizenship is not taken into consideration when scheduling the interview.
KCC is not going to do that proactively. You need to ask them if you want to change embassies. The default for embassy choice is your current address.
After 2 weeks, now my embassy has set up more and more interviews up to AS25000. (mine is AS27***). Is this has possibility for my case?
I agree with you. Sad but true.
Yeah, he doesn’t seem inclined to give named plaintiffs any special treatment.
By contrast, and this is of course just my opinion, I never understood why named plaintiffs did get an advantage. Some years back I remember reading a Q&A with someone from DoS or USCIS, I don’t remember which, and the question was asked why they did not allow people to pay extra and move to the front of the line for immigrant visas, in a similar vein to premium processing for work visas. The response was that all immigrants should be treated on an equal basis and there should be no advantage given to some just because they can afford to pay extra. Well, this is pretty much what happened when named plaintiffs got preference before - effectively they got an advantage because they could pay (even if the payment did not go to uscis/Dos), and that surprised me given what I had heard before. I don’t believe either Mehta or DoS addressed this though. Anyway, again this is just my opinion and also why I personally am more in favor of class action, I understand some here will disagree.
Most DV2021 suffer from this tragedy.
Yes, I said I knew some of you would disagree.
I am realistic here only because I am one of the plaintiffs. There is no true or false of this question.
? there was a total ban on DV (and many other visas) under trump (until the court case got them to issue in sept). Different situation. The current situation is however a lot to do with the backlog caused by the Trump ban.
I disagree , DOS can still process DV if they wanted , Sep 2020 was a good example what was the actual capacity. They chose to hide behind excuses , with no clear plan to reduce backlog. You mentioned it before as an example for Montreal back in March/April , 10 Cases per month isn't a pressure for that consulate, Yet they chose to not process even a single case .