• 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 2022 All Selectees (Consular Processing - CP)

Aprodita said:
Hello friends, is there a link available for the updated form of 1-134? Or else where could this online form to be found?
Click to expand...
Here at the bottom you'd see the I134 and the instructions.
www.uscis.gov

Declaration of Financial Support

Use this form to agree to provide financial support to a beneficiary of certain immigration benefits for the duration of their temporary stay in the United States. You must file a separate Form I-134 for each beneficiary.
www.uscis.gov
 
Hey everyone. I have a question about the DV13. The Xarthisius website says around 45k were issued. But on Wikipedia statistics (extracted from official statistics), there were atound 52,500 visas issued. I get that they went into unused Naccra allocated visas.
The question is: What's the reason for this difference? (I get that 1000-2000 visas are AOS)
 
Hie our case number is Af38k and we got our interview date 18 August. I am pregnant and l will be due in october. If l have the baby before l leave for America will it able to get a visa considering that the fiscal year would have ended
 
Butters said:
Here at the bottom you'd see the I134 and the instructions.
www.uscis.gov

Declaration of Financial Support

Use this form to agree to provide financial support to a beneficiary of certain immigration benefits for the duration of their temporary stay in the United States. You must file a separate Form I-134 for each beneficiary.
www.uscis.gov
Click to expand...
Thank you, It says at the beginning "We are only accepting online filing of Form I-134 by individuals agreeing to financially support Ukrainians and their immediate family members as part of Uniting for Ukraine.". So is this the same for everybody? Sorry if my question sounds dumb.
 
Aprodita said:
Thank you, It says at the beginning "We are only accepting online filing of Form I-134 by individuals agreeing to financially support Ukrainians and their immediate family members as part of Uniting for Ukraine.". So is this the same for everybody? Sorry if my question sounds dumb.
Click to expand...
No. Filing it online is only for a program specific to Ukrainians. Ignore that part for your case.
Simply complete it along with the sponsor/host(whatever the person is called). Print the completed form and along with the supporting documents take it to the interview.

P.S. BritSimon uploaded a new video helping how to complete it.

P.S.2 I haven't done it before either. I just completed mine. I'm taking it along with W2/1040, payslips of my sponsor and photo ID to my interview next month.
 
Aprodita said:
Thank you, It says at the beginning "We are only accepting online filing of Form I-134 by individuals agreeing to financially support Ukrainians and their immediate family members as part of Uniting for Ukraine.". So is this the same for everybody? Sorry if my question sounds dumb.
Click to expand...
You’re not filing it online. Print out the pdf.
 
Butters said:
Hey everyone. I have a question about the DV13. The Xarthisius website says around 45k were issued. But on Wikipedia statistics (extracted from official statistics), there were atound 52,500 visas issued. I get that they went into unused Naccra allocated visas.
The question is: What's the reason for this difference? (I get that 1000-2000 visas are AOS)
Click to expand...
You can go straight to the official site without using wiki, though the wiki number is correct https://travel.state.gov/content/da...lReports/FY2021AnnualReport/FY21_TableVII.pdf

@Xarthisius , any comment on the discrepancy in DV13?
 
Last edited:
Tombie said:
Hie our case number is Af38k and we got our interview date 18 August. I am pregnant and l will be due in october. If l have the baby before l leave for America will it able to get a visa considering that the fiscal year would have ended
Click to expand...
If you have a baby between when you get issued your visas and when you enter the US, you do not need a separate visa for the baby. You will need a full birth certificate and passport for the baby, and the baby will also be processed for a green card on arrival. If you come from a country that normally needs visas, you can ask your embassy to issue what is called a transportation letter so that the airline knows it is allowed to board the baby for the flight. You can discuss all this with the CO in the interview too.
 
Interesting comment by someone (a Russian on an EB visa application who transferred to Riga) on another forum:

A few days ago I sent a follow-up email to the embassy and got the response that it is fully booked by DV people and there is no guarantee to schedule an interview for me until the DV program ends (30th of September).

I’m guessing Riga is quite a small embassy and so gettung it “fully booked” may not be too difficult but it’s interesting that they are prioritizing DV. Assume most of their DV applicants transferring there are Russian and Ukrainian.
 
SusieQQQ said:
Interesting comment by someone (a Russian on an EB visa application who transferred to Riga) on another forum:

A few days ago I sent a follow-up email to the embassy and got the response that it is fully booked by DV people and there is no guarantee to schedule an interview for me until the DV program ends (30th of September).

I’m guessing Riga is quite a small embassy and so gettung it “fully booked” may not be too difficult but it’s interesting that they are prioritizing DV. Assume most of their DV applicants transferring there are Russian and Ukrainian.
Click to expand...
Wanna see something crazier: Check out Rio De Janeiro in Brazil.
They accept Russians now (and a handful others). Russians can travel to Brazil easily (Not sure, but I guess Visa free). 60 cases for July and 170 for August.

Riga is a very small embassy. They also accept a handful Russians then stopped, then accepted a dozen for August. It's very easy for them to get overwhelmed.

Ukrainians are accepted to transfer to almost any country they want and many have done so.
 
SusieQQQ said:
You can go straight to the official site without using wiki, though the wiki number is correct https://travel.state.gov/content/da...lReports/FY2021AnnualReport/FY21_TableVII.pdf

@Xarthisius , any comment on the discrepancy in DV13?
Click to expand...
Yeah, CEAC sucks! People don't realize how inaccurate that data is, and yet they keep obsessing about it. To better understand it take a look at NA region in DV22. There are 2 cases processes so far: 2022NA5 and 2022NA7. Compare what CEAC shows with monthly issuances by either post or FSC.

tl;dr Per CEAC only 6 visas were issued (have that status). Official data shows 12 visas. It's a very small sample so it exaggerates the error, but you get the picture. 10%-20% difference doesn't surprise me at all.
 
Xarthisius said:
Yeah, CEAC sucks! People don't realize how inaccurate that data is, and yet they keep obsessing about it. To better understand it take a look at NA region in DV22. There are 2 cases processes so far: 2022NA5 and 2022NA7. Compare what CEAC shows with monthly issuances by either post or FSC.

tl;dr Per CEAC only 6 visas were issued (have that status). Official data shows 12 visas. It's a very small sample so it exaggerates the error, but you get the picture. 10%-20% difference doesn't surprise me at all.
Click to expand...
Just an argument against CEAC for 2022 NA: Maybe 6 are issued by Consular processing and the other 6 were by AOS. There's like 3 or 4 cases that were current when the cutoff was at 10 for NA and only two were scheduled. Maybe the others did AOS. Even one NA case has six people and I think two of them are not issued. Maybe they live in the US and filed for an AOS follow to join afterwars.

I gotta say for 2014-2020 the CEAC data that you have kindly extracted is spot on. There's like 3-5% (1000-2000 visas) less issuances than the official data which I guess can be attributed to the AOS. The DV21 data is also accurate (per declarations from Goodluck/Goh) and the DV22 number of scheduled cases has been accurate too (per declarations from MM in several lawsuits)

Still, I think there's something wrong with CEAC data for DV13.
 
Butters said:
Wanna see something crazier: Check out Rio De Janeiro in Brazil.
They accept Russians now (and a handful others). Russians can travel to Brazil easily (Not sure, but I guess Visa free). 60 cases for July and 170 for August.

Riga is a very small embassy. They also accept a handful Russians then stopped, then accepted a dozen for August. It's very easy for them to get overwhelmed.

Ukrainians are accepted to transfer to almost any country they want and many have done so.
Click to expand...
I saw someone post (I think elsewhere not these forums) that there is a directive that Russians can now transfer to any embassy regardless of residency too. (This is general, not just DV.)
 
Xarthisius said:
Yeah, CEAC sucks! People don't realize how inaccurate that data is, and yet they keep obsessing about it. To better understand it take a look at NA region in DV22. There are 2 cases processes so far: 2022NA5 and 2022NA7. Compare what CEAC shows with monthly issuances by either post or FSC.

tl;dr Per CEAC only 6 visas were issued (have that status). Official data shows 12 visas. It's a very small sample so it exaggerates the error, but you get the picture. 10%-20% difference doesn't surprise me at all.
Click to expand...
Butters said:
Just an argument against CEAC for 2022 NA: Maybe 6 are issued by Consular processing and the other 6 were by AOS. There's like 3 or 4 cases that were current when the cutoff was at 10 for NA and only two were scheduled. Maybe the others did AOS. Even one NA case has six people and I think two of them are not issued. Maybe they live in the US and filed for an AOS follow to join afterwars.

I gotta say for 2014-2020 the CEAC data that you have kindly extracted is spot on. There's like 3-5% (1000-2000 visas) less issuances than the official data which I guess can be attributed to the AOS.

Still, I think there's something wrong with CEAC data for DV13.
Click to expand...
Remember that CEAC data is each consulate individually updating, it’s not top down data entries. We’ve seen before that some consulates are less than accurate with updating statuses properly for every case. So, it doesn’t surprise me that the discrepancy is due to this. I was DV13 by the way and there was nothing special about cases that year that would lead one to think of large errors. Possibly worth tracking if it’s possible, where the errors were, maybe one or two large embassies were just slack with updates.

also butters I believe the official stats xarthisius mentions wrt NA are visa issuances by post only, no AOS in there. (I haven’t cross checked his data, but the monthly official data is visas only, AOS I think only gets released once a year)
 
SusieQQQ said:
Remember that CEAC data is each consulate individually updating, it’s not top down data entries. We’ve seen before that some consulates are less than accurate with updating statuses properly for every case. So, it doesn’t surprise me that the discrepancy is due to this. I was DV13 by the way and there was nothing special about cases that year that would lead one to think of large errors. Possibly worth tracking if it’s possible, where the errors were, maybe one or two large embassies were just slack with updates.

also butters I believe the official stats xarthisius mentions wrt NA are visa issuances by post only, no AOS in there. (I haven’t cross checked his data, but the monthly official data is visas only, AOS I think only gets released once a year)
Click to expand...
Ok, thank you for your patience with me and untangling my messed up mind.

Lastly, If I understand correctly, the number of schedulings done from the CEAC is accurate (i.e. those with a status not "at NVC"), but the actual individual status changes aren't as much accurate?
 
Butters said:
Ok, thank you for your patience with me and untangling my messed up mind.

Lastly, If I understand correctly, the number of schedulings done from the CEAC is accurate (i.e. those with a status not "at NVC"), but the actual individual status changes aren't as much accurate?
Click to expand...
No idea on that, sorry. I don’t use the ceac data personally. Xarthisius probably has better insight on that.
 
Butters said:
Lastly, If I understand correctly, the number of schedulings done from the CEAC is accurate (i.e. those with a status not "at NVC"), but the actual individual status changes aren't as much accurate?
Click to expand...
There are reports of people getting 2nls and their status still being "At NVC" though I haven't seen any hard proof of that and AFAIR it was one embassy and a handful of cases.
 
Butters said:
Here at the bottom you'd see the I134 and the instructions.
www.uscis.gov

Declaration of Financial Support

Use this form to agree to provide financial support to a beneficiary of certain immigration benefits for the duration of their temporary stay in the United States. You must file a separate Form I-134 for each beneficiary.
www.uscis.gov
Click to expand...
Thanks a lot, found it. It is very different to the previous one. Should I fill the first part as the beneficiary and send it to my sponsor? What does it mean by "Complete Part 2. regardless of whether you are filing this form on behalf of yourself as the beneficiary or on behalf of another
individual who is the beneficiary"? Should this part be filled by me as the beneficiary or by the sponsor?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top