So I, like many of you I’m sure, didn’t sleep much last night. I am dissapointed that Biden did not remove 10014/10052. He should have done so – and I believe there was some sort of reversal in the days before the announcement. Just days ago, people within the administration were signaling the bans would be removed.
So the way forward is through legal action and the lawyers immediately took action yesterday in the Gomez and Anunciato cases, informing the Judges of Biden’s failure to remedy 10014 and pressing for immediate relief. We will watch that play out.
So for many of you that is all of this article you need to read. Some of you are angry and frustrated anyway, so just believe that Biden is as bad as Trump. I don’t agree, but you won’t change your minds until you see something different. That’s understandable.
But I did want to capture some thoughts on what might have happened – and why Biden did what he did yesterday. So – if you’re interested, read on. Understanding doesn’t help with the immediate problems, but I at least want to make some sense of it, and would be interested in your opinions.
First I want to pick up and expand on a couple of things I said on my livestream yesterday.
Biden is not a God. He is not a movie star. He will not always please me in the way he acts, I expect to disagree with things he does and will call him out when he does so. That is important, because it shows that he is just a man that happens to be in charge right now, but that’s all. He knows that role, and I think it is important to him. It’s part of the character that I recognize as being important.
Trump created an environment where he demanded absolute loyalty. His followers are fanatical, they wear hats and other clothing with Trumps photo and name. It’s like they are following some sports team. They would blindly agree with him, no matter how obviously wrong his decisions or statements are. They were taught to believe the media was fake, because Trump knew the media would call out his nonsense. People actually believed he was sent by god to reclaim America for whatever BS they wanted to believe. There was even a subculture based around all sorts of conspiracy theory nonsense – the QAnon crap. This elevation of Trump to king like, and perhaps even god like status. People actually believed that the election was rigged, and then once that was disproven there were all sorts of dates when various things would happen to reinstall Trump on his newly fashioned throne.
This was all much more serious and dangerous than some of us might realize. Trump badly handled the COVID response, to the extent that now over 450,000 Americans are dead. Our death rate is TWICE that of Germany. Only the UK appears to have handled the pandemic worse than us, although the UK is at least doing well with the vaccination program. Biden has ramped up our vaccination program massively, but Trump had done nothing. So if we had only achieved the same control that Germany did, we could have saved over 200k lives. That blood is on Trump’s hands. Biden cannot afford to handle the crisis the same way, and he won’t.
Now, if you watched Biden’s signing yesterday you will have noticed he referenced the criticism he has been under in signing so many EOs since he became President. He said:
“And I want to make it clear — there’s a lot of talk, with good reason, about the number of executive orders that I have signed — I’m not making new law; I’m eliminating bad policy. What I’m doing is taking on the issues that — 99 percent of them — that the President — the last President of the United States issued executive orders I felt were very counterproductive to our security, counterproductive to who we are as a country, particularly in — in the area of immigration.”
Now as we know, the lawyers are having enormous success attacking the EOs of the last administration. It’s a frustratingly slow process and TROs or PIs are only possible in certain circumstances, but time and time again we have seen the lawyers pull apart the executive orders and show how they were not well conceived or written.
I the recent Anunciato hearing, the lawyers clearly argued that Trump’s decision on 10014 was to be blocked because the order (unlike the Hawaii case) gave no evidence of the central theme of the order, that immigrants would make the post COVID job situation worse. That is an absolutely KEY piece of the argument to take down 10014/10052. The President is given broad authority on policy to block entry of immigrants as was argued in Hawaii v Trump. The Supreme court accepted that decision, because there was (after two failed orders) some “fact based” reasoning in the order. That is exactly why the disgusting Muslim bans stayed in place until Biden revoked them – and the damage that order did is unrecoverable for thousands of people.
So – the lesson here that Biden, I believe, has learned is that executive orders should be used sparingly, and only when good reason can be demonstrated. That reason should not be based on his own whims as we saw with Trump. There should be evidence, there should be a process.
So I think Biden was stuck between wanting to remove the bans and not wanting to do it without process and evidence. The Muslim ban had to go. It was obviously wrong on ethical grounds, even though it had been tested and found to be legal. As I explained yesterday the DSchengen restrictions are at the other end of a scale. Whilst they are a nuisance, there is at least some logic to them. 10014 and 10052 are somewhere between those two cases. Not as overtly immoral as the Muslim bans, but not as justifiable as the Schengen restrictions.
So how do you handle that middle case? Well I believe what Biden wanted to do was setup Mayorkas to provide the background evidence and reasoning to justify the revocation of the bans, along with many other actions that are impacting immigration currently. Mayorkas would then ask the President to take certain actions based on his findings. That would be a more proper procedure, rather than kinglike decrees coming down without justification.
There is some evidence of that exact approach with Sec Blinken as I retweeted this am.
So I think that’s the plan, but I don’t know the timeline. We don’t have 90 days to wait as mentioned in the order for a report, but Mayorkas doesn’t have to act slowly. So, how quickly can that happen is the unknown, and whether 10014/10052 will be struck down by the courts in the meantime.
Anyway, that’s my perspective. As I said, in the end it may not matter. The lawyers are working to get the bans revoked and they are all very confident they can do so, BUT it’s a good thing to continue the fight on various fronts.
February 7, 2021 at 21:18
Is it possible for Judge Seeborg to give a ruling before Wednesday? or is he now having to wait and see if the anunciato case will be transferred or not?
February 8, 2021 at 05:20
I don’t know.
February 8, 2021 at 00:19
Brit, what about the Gov’s reply to the Gomez letter tmro? Do you think there maybe a chance that they grant some type of relief for dv2020 visa holders?
i really hope so.
February 8, 2021 at 05:24
We will see.
February 8, 2021 at 05:48
Hi Brit, greetings from Honduras. Hope you are doing well. If Anunciato case doesn’t become a class action or is affected by the recent news, as a 2021 winner do you recommend me to join any of this lawsuit as a plaintiff? or is better to wait for dv2021 selectees?
February 8, 2021 at 15:43
Let’s deal with that if it happens.
February 9, 2021 at 03:01
No – just wait for now.
February 8, 2021 at 10:29
Thanks a lot for everything you do! Your blog really helps me not to feel abandoned and lost 🙂
Just a small question – the expiration of the ban means that any interview may be scheduled only after March 31, correct? So we’ll need to wait for 2 additional months before the first interview will actually happen? Wait till June/July?
Did I get it right?
Thank you in advance!
February 9, 2021 at 03:05
I think the factor that affects DV2021 most now is the embassy opening status. But I hope we would see some May interviews. Really – we have to wait and see what happens.
February 16, 2021 at 13:05
DV2021, scans are already checked, CN is current. We’ve contacted the embassy in Ukraine, they answered that they are working and are ready to conduct an interview, but our documents are at the KCC and the problem is that KCC does not schedule any interview. The KCC responds that they do not have any interview plan yet for DV 2021. What is that supposed to mean? The proclamation does not prohibit interviews and visas’ issuing, but the KCC still does not give any directions to the embassies.
February 17, 2021 at 04:53
KCC are not scheduling any interviews because of the ban (10014 AND perhaps the closures). It was good that you asked, but you probably have to wait.
February 8, 2021 at 15:58
Hi Brit thanks for your support. My wife and I are the DV2020 winners. Would you recommend that we add us as plaintiffs to one of the pending lawsuits (do you think this is possible?)
February 8, 2021 at 16:56
I was a dv2020 winner(Asia, large number)
Who didn’t get the chance to interview(only sent ds260 and documents to kcc). I was pending their review when the ban started.
Is there any chance for people in my stage?
Should I contact kcc for processing my documents in case some relief will happen?
February 9, 2021 at 02:45
Obviously you are more at risk if the 9095 is all we get. However, the lawyers are arguing for more visas, so wait and see what we get as an outcome.
February 9, 2021 at 03:12
I am a DV2020 visa holder, and the visa is expiring March 10.
I’ve been reading your comments, and if I understand correctly, it seems results of court order will come around mid to late March.
Meaning that I have no more chance to fly with my immigrants visa?
As time passes by, I get more nervous…
February 9, 2021 at 06:07
No – you are not reading correctly. The mid/late March date is for the Gomez case. Your ability to use the visa you have is being argued right now. Wait a few days. Pay attention to my site – I have discussed this many times.
February 9, 2021 at 11:00
I will pay more attention to your site.
Hope things work well.
February 9, 2021 at 03:55
Hi brits, how can I file for aviddavit of support thanks no
February 9, 2021 at 06:06
Read the FAQ.
February 9, 2021 at 08:24
Can you clarify me the scope of two cases?
Annunciato (March) is for visa reissue and Gomez for PP10014 (February) right?
Do I have to pay to be added as a plaintiff for both?
February 9, 2021 at 20:12
No that is not correct. What is your position?
February 9, 2021 at 20:17
I am a DV2020 winner but I’ve only applied for AILA not for Curtis Morrison. My visa will expire on March, 28.
February 9, 2021 at 21:12
Wait to see what Mehta says tomorrow, and for the Anunciato case.
February 10, 2021 at 00:32
Hi Brit. Sorry I didn’t understand one thing. I am a DV2020 winner. Has the Anunciato case become a class action? Or do I have to become a plaintiff to get the possible benefits?
Thanx a lot
February 10, 2021 at 01:07
Yes, they have requested class cert. No need to become a plaintiff for now.
February 10, 2021 at 07:05
Could you clarify what is the Gomez case.He stands for all the remaining 2020 visas or just 9095 ?
Because my is case is big and I am the Gomez Diversity Class Member. Should I expect something positive for me?
Thank you an advance and stay safe!
February 10, 2021 at 17:36
Gomez covers all DV2020 unissued cases. We won’t have a final decision until mid to late March
February 10, 2021 at 08:02
Does the below questionnaire refer to the DV 2020 winner which doesn’t get their visas but were waiting their interview?
I wanted to fill it but there are question which not correspondent with my situation.
Thank youin advance for your support!
On September 4, 2020, the judge in the Gomez case issued a Preliminary Injunction that ordered the U.S. State Department to process Diversity Visa applications before the fiscal year deadline of September 30, 2020.
However, as of February 3, 2021, Presidential Proclamations 10014 and 10052 remain in place, and Diversity Visa selectees who have been issued their visas still cannot enter the United States.
February 10, 2021 at 17:38
It’s for people that have got their visas.
February 10, 2021 at 10:28
Hope you’re doing great!.
I stumbled on this information,from Gomez and team.
Do you think it’s necessary for us to fill the questionnaire?
Here’s the link below.
February 10, 2021 at 15:34
You can do so, yes.
February 10, 2021 at 17:44
Hi Simon thanks for all your help,
my visa of DV 2020 expires 29 march 2021 , just 2 days before pp10044 expiration, what advise Can you give.
Thanks for all.
February 10, 2021 at 17:58
Wait and see. There are efforts being made to sort this out.
February 10, 2021 at 15:41
Dear BritSimmon, seeing yesterday’s tweets from the lawyers, do we still expect the administration to be done with the EO on March 31st or they will extend it? They seem very attached to it
February 10, 2021 at 17:46
I don’t know.
February 10, 2021 at 22:01
Oh, that is sad, I would have thought you were sure they were going to finish it. What can we do if they extend it? Because if they do, DV2021 will not have a chance to be interviewed at all
February 11, 2021 at 02:35
I don’t actually they they will extend it – but technically, they could. Wait and see.
February 11, 2021 at 05:30
how is it
Covid-19 TestingJanuary 28, 2021COVID-19 Testing Required for U.S. Entry
COVID-19 TravelJanuary 15, 2021For COVID-19 Travel Information click here
COVID-19 AlertFebruary 2, 2021Update on U.S. Passport Operations Skip to main content
Travel.State.Gov U.S. DEPARTMENT of STATE — BUREAU of CONSULAR AFFAIRS
Travel.State.Gov > U.S. Visas News > National Interest Exceptions for Certain Travelers from the Schengen Area, United Kingdom, and Ireland
National Interest Exceptions for Certain Travelers from the Schengen Area, United Kingdom, and Ireland
Last Updated: February 10, 2021
Certain business travelers, investors, treaty traders, academics, students, and journalists may qualify for national interest exceptions under the Presidential Proclamation (PP) covering travelers from the Schengen Area, United Kingdom, and Ireland. Qualified travelers who are applying for or have valid visas or ESTA authorization may travel to the United States even as the PP remains in effect following the procedures below.
Students traveling from the Schengen Area, the UK, and Ireland with valid F-1 and M-1 visas do not need to contact an embassy or consulate to seek an individual national interest exception to travel. Students seeking to apply for new F-1 or M-1 visas should check the status of visa services at the nearest embassy or consulate; those applicants who are found to be otherwise qualified for an F-1 or M-1 visa will automatically be considered for a national interest exception to travel.
Business travelers, investors, academics, J-1 students, journalists, and treaty traders who have a valid visa in the appropriate class, an ESTA authorization that was issued prior to the PP’s effective date, or who are seeking to apply for a visa, and believe they may qualify for a national interest exception should contact the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate before traveling. If a national interest exception is approved, they may travel on either a valid visa or ESTA authorization, as appropriate.
The Department of State also continues to grant national interest exceptions for qualified travelers seeking to enter the United States for purposes related to humanitarian travel, public health response, and national security.
Granting national interest exceptions for this travel to the United States from the Schengen area, UK, and Ireland, will assist with the economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and bolster key components of our transatlantic relationship.
We appreciate the transparency and concerted efforts of our European partners and allies to combat this pandemic and welcome the EU’s reciprocal action to allow key categories of essential travel to continue.
February 11, 2021 at 13:26
I posted that on my twitter feed purely to show that a BLANKET NIE was possible – they have done it before. That is important because it shows the government could do something without each individual case needing to apply for permission.
February 11, 2021 at 08:38
Is it possible to get a decision on 18th Feb or will it be just a hearing? Thank you:)
February 11, 2021 at 13:55
It depends what the lawyers do.
I was very frustrated yesterday because in the last hearing (late January) Mehta had told both sides to communicate and work out a deal. Yesterday it was clear there was no deal reached and the government lawyers were giving Mehta the impression the plaintiffs had not done much to achieve a deal, although a couple of the lawyers said they have been trying. Kuck said afterwards they have been trying hard to work something out.
So they now have a date set for the 18th to hear a motion. If that motion (due to be presented on Friday then responded to before the hearing) is not previously agreed as being acceptable, then the lawyers will be presenting another argument which Mehta has to decide. That will take more time after the 18th. My point yesterday was they should do a deal with the government lawyers and then all they have to do on the 18th is ask Mehta to formalize some deal.
Further frustration was caused because Morrison/Urena had proposed a blanket NIE by email to the government lawyers the day before yesterday. So OK – why had they not made that suggestion earlier?? Why did they have the hearing yesterday without having worked out agreement on that? Then Urena sarcastically asked me to provide the law allowing Mehta to ORDER the blanket NIE (which I had not suggested at all), making out it was some sort of simpleton idea – so I of course responded that I had assumed they had some idea in mind when they suggested it! I’m frustrated because they seem more concerned with tilting at windmills than coming up with solutions that the government lawyers will agree to. The judge told them to work out a deal, Benton York (government lawyer) had opened the door to that in January. Then yesterday was just bickering with no actual solution previously agreed or coherently proposed during the hearing.
The one thing that Urena did propose in the hearing was a mechanism to put some protection on the visas to allow them to be frozen until the decision in the mid March hearing. However, that proposal seemed to come from thin air, I’m not sure it was agreed between the plaintiffs lawyers. But it was proposed at a time during the hearing when Mehta was voicing frustration and there was clear pressure on everyone to get something sorted out. So offering a suggestion of a protection reduced the pressure, and in that particular moment was counterproductive to the negotiation in my opinion. The pressure was useful, and is absolutely justified given the fact that people have their lives on hold.
There were already too many plaintiff lawyers speaking yesterday. Welton, Kuck, Bless, Urena all had points to make, but they did not seem to have a plan for a joint strategy or agreement on who would talk. I think that added to Mehta’s frustration and certainly didn’t move us forward.
So – you ask what will happen on the 18th. Well that depends on whether the lawyers can implement a better strategy than we saw yesterday – and preferably do a deal before the 18th so we are not asking Mehta to go and consider some legal arguments between the sides and come back with a decision later.
February 11, 2021 at 16:17
Thanks Brit for all your support and kind gestures God bless you,but please can you give the plaintiff lawyers and the government lawyers this wonderful idea so that the can team up and stand on a single point and Present their point to judge Mehta for the final decision.please give them this brilliant ideas of yours so that we can get some relief and advice them to stand on the NIE it seem encouraging .Thanks so much
February 11, 2021 at 18:33
The idea was from the lawyers – so they are trying.
February 11, 2021 at 15:23
Hi Brit. Thanks for the support you give us every day. What we saw yesterday is about the Gomez case and Judge Metha. Is there any news on the Anunciato case instead?
February 11, 2021 at 16:27
No, we are all still waiting on the decision. If you have a Twitter, follow Charles Kuck and Brit, that way you can stay up to date
February 11, 2021 at 18:26
No news on Anunciato yet.
February 12, 2021 at 12:39
thanks mr Britsimen. cn AF202045*** am not a plaintiffs in any cases and i have got document confirmation email massage & ready for interviews. what should i do next please?
February 12, 2021 at 20:17
Wait for the outcome of the Gomez case (late March)
February 11, 2021 at 15:27
I just wanted to inform you that the embassy in D.R.Congo is not processing visa for US residents relatives or DV for that matter siting Trump’s PP10014 which tells me no luck for DV unless this proclamation is expired. Here are 2 of their replies to inquiries for cases that I’m helping with:
1.Petioner is a US permanent resident. Beneficiary is a spouse: ” At this stage, we are not processing category F visas. Which amounts to saying that since the presidential proclamation PP10014 signed by Mr. Trump, we no longer do for the moment the family reunification of American residents, only of American citizens.
Please check the US government site regularly: http://www.travel.state.gov. Once these measures are lifted, you can contact us again. ”
2. Petition is US citizen beneficiary is a mother: “Please ask your daughter to re-read Presidential Order PP10014 which has been extended until March 31, 2021: http://www.travel.state.gov. Unfortunately, we cannot process your case at this stage and are waiting for this measure to be lifted. ”
So even though the judge instructed the department of state to issue visas. They simply not doing it. I think we just need to wait until March 31 to see things moving again and hope that Biden doesn’t not extend PP10014.
Thanks a lot for your insights and help to the DV community.
February 11, 2021 at 18:27
Thanks for that. It’s interesting they blame 10014 even though, as you say, they have been told not to do that.
February 11, 2021 at 15:48
Dear Mr Brit
When Judge Seeborg will give his dission.
We are really frustrated and angry with Biden and His bull shit team.
February 11, 2021 at 18:28
I don’t know when we will have the answer.
February 11, 2021 at 20:28
So we can technically say all dv2021 winners cannot be interviewed if the the ban is lifted after March 31st.
Annunciato case can save all the interviews for us?
February 11, 2021 at 21:01
Whatever happens there is not enough time to issue 55K unless Anunciato achieves some sort of order to gain additional time.
February 11, 2021 at 23:57
Well I get lost a bit Anunciato also covers Dv2020visaholders?
February 12, 2021 at 00:21
February 12, 2021 at 19:21
Yes – that is one of their proposed classes.
February 12, 2021 at 06:24
So I heard someone saying….. DV2020 cases without visas already expired ……
is that true?
February 12, 2021 at 19:51
Yes of course. The standard rule is that cases cannot go beyond September 30th. So if you ask KCC or embassies about a DV2020 case they will answer it is over. The Gomez lawsuit is the chance to turn that around, but we have to wait to see the final outcome.
February 13, 2021 at 07:04
Hi Brit I saw on tweeter saying the have already send the motion(NIE) to court and I saw the PDT form .my question is the government lawyers are also in agreement about this ?we pray and believe that the motion should be Granted
February 13, 2021 at 07:07
No, I checked with the AILA team today. At this time the government lawyers have NOT agreed to the motion.
February 13, 2021 at 16:32
Sorry if the question may seem to be silly, but I’m a bit confused.
My wife (as the DV winner) had received an email from Gomez legal team concerning necessity of immediate contact the US embassy with the request of the visa extension to the full 6-months validity (in case it vas issued for the period of less than 6 months).
Do I understand it correctly, that here we are talking about an extension in a margin of a days rather than additional 6 months? Say, if the visa was issued on 23-Sep-2020 with the expiration on 16-Mar-2021, the possible extension would be till 23-Mar-2021, correct?
Thank you in advance for your help.
And, once more, many thanks for your efforts and hard work you are doing to help all DV winners regardless of their status.
February 13, 2021 at 19:48
It’s only those additional days which might be important for other cases. Since your visa still has some weeks, don’t bother trying to extend at this time.
February 13, 2021 at 22:31
Hi Mr. Simon,
(1) Please want to know if the government laywers has agree to the motion?
(2) If they do not agree to the motion, will the decision be held or possible for the 18th?
February 14, 2021 at 01:52
2. I think it will take time after the 18th.
February 15, 2021 at 05:11
I have a little confusion about those lawsuits,
1. Gomez case is still on processing of hearings, won’t be final until Late March or April.
2. Anunciato case is finished the hearings and waiting for the judgment made by Judge Seeborg before End March.
Are that right?
And thank you for your time.
February 15, 2021 at 19:19
Sort of, yes.
February 15, 2021 at 08:17
Hi mr Brit I wish to ask if our visa expires and are to be renewed or extended for another 6months.will we need to pay again another medical fee and visa fee. ???
February 15, 2021 at 19:19
Re-issuance requires new medicals and new fees.
February 15, 2021 at 16:16
Hello Simon, Thank you again for all your advice. I really would rather not ask a hypothetical question, but I wish to know whether there is the possibility that one of the lawsuits could force the government’s hand to allow for re-issuance of DV2020 visas after the March 2021 expiry date(mine being March 17th). I ask this from a purely personal situation in that I plan on entering the U.S. to ‘activate’ my visa, then return back to HK(I realize that there is no way logistically that I will be able to move from East Asia to US long-term by mid-March, there is simply not enough time for me). However, when I return to HK, I would need to quarantine at a local designated hotel for 21 days. The situation is that I am the primary carer for my mother, who suffered a serious spinal fracture last year- finding and training a temporary carer for those 21 days will be challenging and time consuming, and in an ideal world, I would be able to have my DV 2020 Visa reissued at a later date after March 17, 2021? I know that may seem pie in the sky, but I have been so busy with personal issues that I haven’t had the chance to closely follow the pending lawsuits. Thank you so much, Simon, take care now.
February 15, 2021 at 19:24
Hi again Jonathan.
There are two lawsuits that will clarify the position of DV2020 cases with visas issued. I expect we will hear about both of those cases within a few days from now – so for now, wait and see the outcome.
February 16, 2021 at 03:14
Thank you Simon; it just feels for my personal situation like a ‘damned if I do, damned if I don’t’- I just need to navigate a pathway ahead. BTW, did you receive my Lunar New Year e-card that I sent? Happy New Year of the Ox to all! 😀
February 17, 2021 at 04:37
Yes I know what you mean. You need to try and work out a plan, it won’t be ideal – but you have to make a plan for the long term benefit. I did get the card and forgot to open it!! I’ll take a look later tonight. Thanks for the kind thought!
February 17, 2021 at 05:05
Hi Simon, thanks for the reply. I know where Anna is coming from – it’s the uncertainty that is galling as it is difficult to plan accordingly. On top of that, I am working on an assignment course with a beginning of March deadline, so lots on our plates. Curtis Morrison messaged me, and he believes that we may get the Green Light by 25/2. Do you believe that would a realistic outcome? Thank you again.
February 17, 2021 at 05:41
The timeline makes sense – but I’ll wait to see the decision.
February 15, 2021 at 19:24
Days without any news are a real torture?
February 15, 2021 at 21:23
I belong to the Oceania region and a DV2021 winner. So My question is, if my number becomes current will I be getting my 2Nl since I’m from a Covid free country and there’s no travel ban in place for my country.
February 17, 2021 at 04:33
At the moment there are a couple of things stopping interviews. One is the closures of the embassies, the second is the group of bans still in place (including PP10014 that affects you). So we need those things removed.
February 16, 2021 at 08:48
My visa was issued before 23rd of April .I have planned to travel the USA via Abu Dhabi airport and CBP preclearence unit is there. When I contacted CBP officer there, he told me that if we have valid visa they can accept us.
Do you have any idea about that? Is it safe to travel via Abu Dhabi.
February 17, 2021 at 04:42
I know about preclearance, but I don’t know whether you can safely travel there. You only go through preclearance as part of a trip to the USA. You are noyt affected by the ban – so make sure you travel .
February 16, 2021 at 10:12
Hello dear Brit,
With our visas setting to expire in March, the situation is becoming more and more complicated.
Therefore, could you please advise us on whether there is any sense in applying for NIE status to the US post where we obtained DV visas. In fact, it was the embassy in Zagreb (Croatia) whose kind cooperation let us relocate our case over there and arrange everything in a very brief period.
Thank you in advance
February 17, 2021 at 04:43
What would be your justification for the NIE?
February 16, 2021 at 10:41
We all know the answer before asking the question, however we keep asking, and we will be always waiting for your response or to any positive response from anyone – The drowning person clings to his straw.
I would really like to thank you for your good heart and understanding – you words make us think positively and never lose hope.
February 16, 2021 at 20:45
I can’t agree with you more sami. I am now used to the golden principle of Mr Brit.
#Wait and See!
February 17, 2021 at 04:44
February 17, 2021 at 08:00
I am a general physician 2020 DV visa holder, can I ask for NIE ?
I emailed the embassy with no response yet, 12 days.
I emailed the State Dept, they answered me quickly that I should contact the consular bureau of affairs for this matter.
On the consular bureau of affairs, for DV winners, there is the KCC email for more information.
I emailed the KCC yesterday.
Should I email somebody or call somebody else for NIE?
In twitter laywers talked about contacting embassies first, if no response heard, the DHS.
February 18, 2021 at 05:03
You can and should ask, but it is not likely to be granted. You are doing the right things, but relief is more likely to come from other efforts being made on your behalf.
February 18, 2021 at 13:43
HI brit ,hope you are doing good.Im a plainttif at kennedy dv2020 (no visa yet) waiting anxiously about gomez outcome,I know that you cant know yet what will happen before the outcome of final judgment but i would like your opinion:
1.I am EU47XXX and didnt get confirmation email,if Kennedy gets priority on 9k visas should we resend the documents to KCC in order to get scheduled?
2.We sent our documents on october 2019 when we were asked by kcc and never were confirmed ,but they always said that they had them,ds-260 was processed.WE renewed our docs in september hopping for an interview ,so basically our PC will be 6 months old at the end of march,should we get a new one in march so that we dont get delays eventhough PC is generally good for 1 year?
3.My wife is principal applicant she applied for dv lottery when we were engaged with her maiden name(x) ,then we got married before filling ds-260 and she got my name (Y),We filled her ds-260 with her new name (y) and filled her maiden name at “other name used” line,so it was everything good,NOW that we were registred at Curtis lawsuit as plaintiffs we filled the contract with her new name (Y) legal name writen on ds-260(that was processed by kcc),at the final page of ds-260 new name is typed and registred,Is that allright ?can that cause any confussion when asking KCC about our case? PASSPORT AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS ARE IN NEW LEGAL NAME.
I am very sorry for the long questions and if I cause any confussion? stay healthy.
February 19, 2021 at 03:49
1. We have to wait and see the outcome.
2. They are good for 1 year.
3. No problem.
February 19, 2021 at 08:23
thank you so much for the reply Brit,one more question:1. My affidavit I-134 was signed by my sponsor on june 2020 ,if i would be able to get an interview after april ,should he resend me a new affidavit with renewed signed date? Stay healthy
February 19, 2021 at 18:42
February 19, 2021 at 20:23
Can he send me scaned affidavit with email? is there a problem at the embassy if its scaned and not signed with fresh pen? thanks brit 2.the other docs like 1040 tax return is from 2019 is there a problem or should be updated with last year taxes?
February 18, 2021 at 20:22
Hello Brit! Thank you very much for keeping everyone posted about everything that is going on, the situation is very frustating but we have to expect the best outcome.
I wanted to tell you about my situation to see if there is something else I can do or what should I be expecting.
I received my visa in Bogotá on September 23th, and its expiring March 16. I send an email to the Bogota embassy and they replied that by law, any vDV-2020 visa can be issued, make amends or extended after September 30th.
So my questions are:
1. I just have to wait for Biden to remove the ban or for the lawyers to find some relief before the expiration of my visa.
2.After my visa expires, can I do something else to extended?
3. How can I ask for a NIE?
February 18, 2021 at 23:51
hello oriana congratulations. the embassy being closed i agree to give you an appointment. that means then that winners of venezuela hope to have our interview in bogota. we just wait for the prpclamation pp100114 to expire
February 19, 2021 at 03:55
February 18, 2021 at 23:32
Hello Mr. Brit
Thank you for all your efforts to help admonish we dv winners amidst this crisis.
Please I’m a dv 2021 selectee with case number AF70k.
I recently sent an email to kcc making inquiry about why I’ve not yet received an email to send supporting documents.
I just had an email from kcc now asking me to support the documents.
Please I would like to forward you the email they sent through your email so you can confirm for me if I can actually send it.
February 19, 2021 at 04:02
The email should be really clear. Are they asking for documents or not?
February 19, 2021 at 00:16
Hi Mr. Simon,
Please want to know if there was a hearing from the court and what was it?
According to a guy in my Country said that the cour asked everyone wo visa are set to be expire should apply for NIE at their local embassy
Thanks as lot.
February 19, 2021 at 04:03
February 19, 2021 at 06:12
Dear Mr. Brit,
Is any new good news for DV 2020 with big case number?
Thank you in advance!
February 19, 2021 at 18:40
No – the only news we will get is from the Gomez case which won’t be finalized until April.
February 19, 2021 at 23:43
Hi Brit. Thanks for the help you constantly give us! My wife and I have a DV2020 visa which expires on March 28th. What can we and what do you advise us to do?
Thanks thanks thanks
February 20, 2021 at 03:03
Wait. You are about to be helped. Watch my video from earlier today.
February 20, 2021 at 04:01
Hi brit you are doing a great job…we are waiting for your recap about order 19 feb
February 20, 2021 at 07:05