The e3 i mentioned was in Melb and not a requested emergency appt. I just dont think its fair that the Melbourne and Sydney consulate aren't functioning similarly.
Law Offices of Rajiv S. Khanna, P.C.
DV 2021 Oceania Selectees
- Thread starter ausdoughnuts
- Start date
Green&Gold
Active Member
When was their appointment?
I can only guess it has something to do with case numbers then.
Their appt took place on 7 September. Attaching their email here for all to see.
Attachments
Green&Gold
Active Member
Maybe it is to do with resources available at these consulates.
We have no clue what capacity is available at both
We have no clue what capacity is available at both
Completely understand that but it does seem unusual that Sydney has less staff than Melbourne, considering they handle all immigrant visas. Anyway im aware there are plenty of other factors we may not know about but it frustrates me that they are using the public health orders as a reasoning when the orders aren't actually keeping them closed.
Green&Gold
Active Member
I know, not disagreeing.
This whole process is a nightmare.
Heck, I even tried to jump country to get re-scheduled as Sydney cancelled mine in June, got one step closer then Auckland locked down.
Such bad timing all of this has been
Atleast you can say you tried
You will see here that NSW Gov have deemed consular services as authorised. https://www.nsw.gov.au/covid-19/rules/authorised-workers
It's pretty much clear by now that the Consulate have been using the stay-at-home orders as an excuse to not process the remaining DVs (even though they've been exempt from them for quite a while now).
This is why I was trying push them earlier in July / August to get them to reschedule everyone (to no avail).
I also received a reply from my local MP regarding this:
"
Thank you for your correspondence regarding the United States Consulate in Sydney. I am replying on behalf of the Premier and I have noted your comments. I am advised that the Consulate is permitted to open under the Public Health Orders, and to remain closed is a matter for the Consulate.
"
So clearly they are choosing not to issue visas during this time. Coupled with the fact that they are in the process of relocating, it only makes it worse. It's no wonder that so many people are unhappy with them right now. On a side note, I did see that there were a few DVs issued in the month of July (most likely classified as emergency cases). You can check the Monthly Immigrant Visa Issuance Statistics (July 2021) via the travel.state.gov site.
So now the only hope is that Judge Mehta reserves the remaining balance of visas for issuance past the FY2021 deadline. If you've been following the lawsuits closely (as well as @Britsimon's recent updates via his blog and live streams), you can tell that the Judge hasn't been overly impressed with the US Govt. regarding their stance on DV2021 so I'm cautiously optimistic that his final order will seek to relieve as many DV applicants as possible. I do remember Charles Kuck (one of the immigration lawyers representing the Goh case) saying on one of his live streams that he's expecting the Judge to reserve at least 25,000 visas (hopefully more) before FY end so it's definitely a very positive sign. That number itself will be able to cover all the OC folks who missed out in FY2021 so it's something we should all be looking forward to.
Fingers crossed.
This is why I was trying push them earlier in July / August to get them to reschedule everyone (to no avail).
I also received a reply from my local MP regarding this:
"
Thank you for your correspondence regarding the United States Consulate in Sydney. I am replying on behalf of the Premier and I have noted your comments. I am advised that the Consulate is permitted to open under the Public Health Orders, and to remain closed is a matter for the Consulate.
"
So clearly they are choosing not to issue visas during this time. Coupled with the fact that they are in the process of relocating, it only makes it worse. It's no wonder that so many people are unhappy with them right now. On a side note, I did see that there were a few DVs issued in the month of July (most likely classified as emergency cases). You can check the Monthly Immigrant Visa Issuance Statistics (July 2021) via the travel.state.gov site.
So now the only hope is that Judge Mehta reserves the remaining balance of visas for issuance past the FY2021 deadline. If you've been following the lawsuits closely (as well as @Britsimon's recent updates via his blog and live streams), you can tell that the Judge hasn't been overly impressed with the US Govt. regarding their stance on DV2021 so I'm cautiously optimistic that his final order will seek to relieve as many DV applicants as possible. I do remember Charles Kuck (one of the immigration lawyers representing the Goh case) saying on one of his live streams that he's expecting the Judge to reserve at least 25,000 visas (hopefully more) before FY end so it's definitely a very positive sign. That number itself will be able to cover all the OC folks who missed out in FY2021 so it's something we should all be looking forward to.
Fingers crossed.
Last edited:
If someone (who is more eloquent than me) would like to write something - I am happy to repost/share on whatever platforms!
Thank you for your efforts. Yeah, it is really disappointing. Especially given Melbourne has worked through the lockdown and knowing this work cannot be done from home. Then to read the, "apply for DV2023" response is a slap in the face.
I’ve retweeted. Found you through looking up the consulate tag but can’t find your Insta. Can you share your deets for the group? X
Thank you! On IG I'm @jesskearney_
Green&Gold
Active Member
Keep in mind its all speculation at this point.Seems like non-plaintiffs won't be getting any relief from a reservation of visas (based on recent updates). Heart-breaking. Unless the Sydney Consulate decides to reschedule DV interviews, it's pretty much game over for DV2021 folks
However, yes class action aspect was withdrawn. Now, think of it from a Lawyers perspective, what will benefit them the most, getting plaintiffs their green-card so they can collect their $$$ on arrival. We have to wait and see what judge Metha does
Brits latest video makes mention at around 37min, that consulates are allowed to refuse / stop normal services during a lock-down.
Green&Gold
Active Member
Are you a plaintiff on any lawsuit?Seems like non-plaintiffs won't be getting any relief from a reservation of visas (based on recent updates). Heart-breaking. Unless the Sydney Consulate decides to reschedule DV interviews, it's pretty much game over for DV2021 folks
Non-plaintiff.
Britsimon
Super Moderator
The rationale/framework from when an embassy can work, and at what level is described in the "Diplomacy Strong" plan. I have linked below so you can see some of the factors they consider to determine whether an embassy should be in Phase I, II or III. Being in a lockdown with significant restrictions on activities in the local area (like non essential business being closed, no large gatherings, restriction on daily activities or travel) would be used as factors to put the embassy into Phase I status, and in that status they will only do "mission critical" activities. It has nothing to do with (as suggested in the earlier comments in this thread) about whether the embassy itself has been ordered to close or not. It's an ongoing assessment of local conditions.
Judge Mehta did not order that DV be treated as mission critical. I raised that to the lawyers months ago as an important point to argue for, and in the 2020 opinion Judge Mehta described the decision to not consider DV as MC as arbitrary and capricious. However, the lawyers did not shoot for that in DV2021 and only challenged the Tier 4 position (which got blocked for DV2021). The "expeditiously process" part of JMs ]ruling doesn't overcome that either. So in this scenario the embassy will stay closed, and will not process cases while they are in Phase I.
As to non plaintiffs getting relief. It's hard to see a path for that now. Without a class JM is limited in what he can do in protecting people that no one represents. I guess he could theoretically "over reserve" numbers just in case not doing so affects plaintiffs, but based on all his past comments and actions I don't see him doing that. There are some technical factors at play also as shown in this screenshot of a transcript of the case when it was before Judge Chen.
It's a crappy situation, but I wanted to be clear.
Diplomacy Strong
www.documentcloud.org
