@Burritos75

I am not a lawyer. I do have a University degree. Absolutely NOT law.

So you are what I thought. A person who simply doesn't like me or my political views who made up a fabrication to "debunk me".

You are not the first, and you a butthurt by how easily I saw through you.

I have "views" and I am happy to debate them. I am not always right, and I understand that many factors go into why I see the world the way I do.

As for waivers, I know my stuff. Why? longevity, and a desire to be accurate, using statistics and a wide basis to get my data from. I have always wanted my business to be different, and better. That is a much different goal than "just making money" or being the fastest or largest.

This forum gives me access to many people who are not clients. I let my staff deal with Pardon/fingerprinting etc, and I specialize in waivers. I finish EVERY waiver personally, and I analyze the results of EACH waiver, which is why I post them here. So others can compare their results, and have a wider basis to help them with their waivers, if they chose to do it themselves.

Do I gain business from the forum? Yes, but more importantly I get to see OTHER waivers.

Let me tell you about you. You read the forum looking for information or are a petty competitor. You saw my posts and I rubbed you the wrong way. I am sure you are not the only one. I played a lot of contact sports and I can be blunt and abrasive sometimes. CTE I am sure is a factor.

But you did what every grifter/fraudster does. You tried to debunk a person who is not only an EXPERT, but you lied about something I WANTED to be true. I HATE telling people NOT to apply, but i am honest, because its good for business. When you tell someone NOT to pay you and wait, they TRUST you. Being honest is GREAT for business. Especially when you have to do this application for the rest of your life.

So I looked into the author. And I realized that you didn't SOUND or write like ANYONE else, and you POSTED which meant you WANTED to share, but then when challenged acted like "oh, I am very private".

So I did some research and easily debunked you. If you posted in good faith, to share information, you would be HAPPY to help others (why else post??) except as soon as you were challenged, you suddenly spent a LOT of time and effort explaining "why you could not share", attacking me, and then researched "how to write a letter" without saying ANYTHING you actually DID to get the waiver. No one wants a general outline, they want to know how YOU did it.

None of that makes sense, and to suddenly try and undercut my credentials, and my credibility, when I am obviously trying to ALSO help people means this was never about that, this was about something else.

You also tend to always post at the same time (approx) and you HAD to use AI to be convincing.

As I said, I don't care what you think of me, I am happy to take criticism, but your deceiving people who will WASTE money and LOSE it because you simply wanted to make me look bad,

I notice you did not address that, because you are now embarrassed to so easily be debunked by me, and I notice for this last post, no AI used. The mask has dropped, and your petty self shows through.

As i said people, MY EXPERIENCE is that waiting 3 years is the "safe" time to wait. 1 year and 11 months will PROBABLY not work, and Burritto75 is simply a petty person, who lied about his application. I was suspicious when he first posted, mainly because look at what he posted. No one denied entry would go into such ridiculous detail about the sections and subsections he was denied under, even I avoid that because normal people simply do not post like that. He fucked up by overdoing it.

Also "if anyone wants my help" but absolutely no contact information, and nothing to verify who he/she is. I think I know who this is, based on writing style. I don't use AI to produce anything, but it is GREAT for exposing people.

I am sorry about the false alarm, I think its prudent to wait 3 years if you absolutely want a waiver to be granted for bringing gummies over the border.

Go ahead and continue with your "Noooo this is noooot posssibleee.. you are lyinnggggg.. I am very smartt" write ups. You think writing long mumbo-jumbo establishes you as an expert? Its just garbage.. long, unrelated, garbage.

And the Ai score I asked for was for my subsequent post and not the one you shared for. This was a rhetorical ask, but you wont understand that because your reading comprehension skills are as laughable as your detective skills.

I dont owe anything to anyone. If someone has a question on this topic, they can ask me- and I will answer them anonymously as this is an anonymous forum. I dont have to "come clean" as there is no dirt on me. The only dirt that I have is you throwing it on me. Your "strong opinions" are just that- dirt disguised as opinion. Even if I shared my timeline you can still claim they are fabricated, just because it is contrary to your own lackluster knowledge.

You seem to pass judgements like a person sitting on some kind of a throne. However, your knowledge, current affairs awareness, and intelligence are all sub par, Given that you are a lawyer, at least your communication skills and comprehension skills should have been better. May i ask which college gave you a law degree?

Conclusion and an answer to the question.

When you are "caught" at the border, whether its misrepresentation, prostitution (suspicion of) or bringing gummies, or marijuana "by mistake", you cannot get a waiver IMMEDIATELY. You have to have "some time" between the incident and when you apply.

I deal in "absolutes". I assume you want a VERY good chance of the waiver getting approved. I therefore tell people to wait 3 years. This works IF the waiver is done WELL.

It might be possible to get the waiver after 2 years, although when clients have insisted we try, it seems to fail. I do not have a LOT of data on that because clients usually wait the 3 years.

This is not an exact science. I try and apply experience, and statistics based on what I am seeing. People sharing on here help as well. But I also take great care to make sure people are sharing ACCURATE information.

During Trumps first term, clients with sexually based offences were NOT getting waivers, EVEN if they had been given waivers before. I advised everyone to not apply and waste their money. Just like this suddenly someone pops up and says "they know a guy who used a guy in BC who got them a waiver". But I knew it was nonsense because I was training with a guy who worked at Pearson Airport and he confirmed they were told that they were not giving out waivers for sexually based offences. So I tried to track down the "guy" and of course it turned into a complete fabrication.

Unfortunately, when someone like me posts strong opinions, someone always wants to "show me up". I do not take it personally, but I also want to make sure any inaccurate information is challenged. People are risking money on information they read here.

No comment on the AI score YOU ASKED FOR?

Again "oh well, if i cannot convince you....." and "I need to remain anonymous"...how is posting the timeline revealing your identity?

The AI score is damning. Just be honest and admit what you actually did. You spent so much time and effort dodging, and saying everything BUT the truth, at least explain to the room WHY you did it?

The AI score is right there. Want to explain? No identity need to be revealed.

What did you get out of pretending you got a waiver in 1 year 11 months? Just to "counter" the fact I told people not to apply too soon (3 years) because in a tight economy I don't want people to flush $1100USD down the drain?

Do you understand that you might be putting people in a position to spend money they MIGHT not be able to recover from?

You owe people an explanation, or, if you are being misrepresented by my words, you NEED to PROVE it. Why? Because you INSISTED on providing THIS INFORMATION. No one asked you, you volunteered that YOU on your own, was able to get a waiver for something most people wait 3 years before having a shot at.

You wasted time NOT proving it and then pretend "oh, my privacy is so important". No one asked for your name. No one asked for your identity. You claimed to have written a letter you could EASILY edit to show me, which you spent a LOT OF TIME "talking about" but not showing.

Edit the letter and take out the personal bits and show us, or admit you fudged the time. I don't care WHY.

I value information for all, but I won't tolerate someone being dishonest, where people, CANADIANS, will possibly lose money, time and effort, because you wanted attention. You got the attention. NOW TAKE RESPONSIBILITY, or do the RIGHT thing, and admit the truth. I value Canadians money, time and I work to separate truth from fraud.

Are you going to be honest?

I wont be able to overcome your skepticism so i'll leave it here.

This is an anonymous forum, and i absolutely have all intentions to remain anonymous. If it makes my story or my character not credible, so be it.

Burritto75 I shared the AI score, you may have missed it because of all the adverts. They do tend to make the page hard to read sometimes.

Its not MY forum, and I would never take down such a well written post or ANY post that is respectful. I rebut, I counter, and I let others decide. Your post is VERY informative, your just not being honest with your circumstances/result. People considering actually doing a waiver will find it a very good reference for the personal letter.

Here is the AI score again, like I said, I did include it.

Here is the AI analysis of what Burritto75 wrote.

Deep Analysis report

Human score

5

Human written

0

Mixed

0

AI Generated phrasing

40

AI score

95

Sentence structure

3

Critical
Readability

33

Preparing final summary..

Your text shows several issues, an AI-like tone, repetitive phrasing, uneven rhythm, potential plagiarism, and low readability. These inconsistencies affect its style, flow, and credibility.

AI thinks you wrote 5%. I actually thought you wrote more.

@Burritos75

Let me be CLEAR. People come to the page to get ACCURATE information. When someone says they can get a waiver for what you alleged to have done in HALF the usual waiting time, that is GREAT NEWS.....if true. I WANT that to be true, as do the people WAITING 3 years.

Here is how I know you are full of it.

1. you made yourself a victim (typical strategy when being called out)
2. Lots of people share information with me, because they honestly want to help others. When I praise them, they can't WAIT to show how they did it, especially to someone they clearly can see is an expert on the subject
3. You did exactly what a guy making up a story does. No evidence, just "how I might have done it" and you used AI to make sure you mentioned the right statutes. Why would you go to such an effort? Just stop and say "no". You didn't want to admit you were not being 100% accurate.
4. The trap was the timeline. (see below)

Status History (5)
01/31/2025, 02:00 PM : Status changed to Completed
04/08/2024, 05:31 PM : Status changed to Submitted to ARO
03/31/2024, 05:48 PM : Status changed to Paid
03/31/2024, 05:46 PM : Status changed to Signed
03/29/2024, 06:18 PM : Application Created

Notice this WOULD STILL BE VISIBLE even today, and surely you are using the SAME PROFILE for BOTH applications.

If you sent me the letter, and posted the timeline, then you would have REALLY helped people, and you would have reinforced the DIY narrative.

By the way, you did a great job of researching ( I know you used some of mine for reference) how long a waiver at the time would take. Almost too perfectly actually. It matches exactly the ones i posted at the time. Except they would have probably adjudicated longer for THIS case.

I do not know what your motives are, but you spent a LOT of time making people think this was possible. And how does fictional storylines HELP anyone?

I do not care if people use me, or a service or do it themselves, as long as the INFORMATION is accurate. I want information posted. Even if it counters MY posts.

So please, come clean, or if I am wrong, show some evidence. I was excited about the possibilities, more people applying and not losing their money, and you have instead I fear, wasted everyone's time.

I put in that you were "Canadian" sounding as a bit of a trap as well. A person telling the truth would not have cared LESS about that. You are pissed that you put so much effort into tricking everyone, and I was able to debunk you.

That being said, I STILL would love to be incorrect. So would the people waiting.

pardonguy2@gmail.com

Email me if you like.

Man. Looks like I’ll have to convince you more than I had to convince DHS. I came on this forum to check timelines, saw someone was in a similar situation, and took the time to share my personal experience to help them- without sharing any personal information. This is what people do on online forums and complete anonymity is important for many people on such forums.

You keep asking for my personal statement like its no big deal to share such confidential letter. You may have good intentions but you are still a stranger on the internet. Do you expect me to divulge highly confidential information to you without attorney-client privilege or any other identity protection safeguards? Also, I have nothing to gain from convincing you, or anyone else.

And it seems like you are calling me out for using AI? Sure, I used AI to edit my thoughts and make sure my language was clear, and not to "impress" anyone lol. Would you rather read the long-winded statements from my head? In this day and age, everyone uses AI to edit their written text and language. You use AI yourself, so whats your point here?

To all of your other assumptions as to how I got Canadian citizenship etc, and even more on my writing style, its not worth my time to explain. Someone born in say Australia, England, New Zealand and many other countries can write in a similar writing tone/ proficiency as a Canadian born. Again, I would have taken the time to prove/ share many of it if you were nice, but with your tone and accusations, do you expect me to?

For your knowledge, there are tons of resources where you can gain understanding of the subject- including internet and immigration lawyers. The knowledge I have is because of the tons of research I have done when applying for my first waiver, and currently I am in process for my second waiver. I can spend a hundred hours in order to help someone, yet wish to remain anonymous. Go ahead and you do you. Take down my posts if you think its “too good to be true” just because you have not come across any cases or nobody shared on this forum. I don’t care and I don’t have anything to gain from you or responding to your over-scrutinous questions, which frankly, seem more uninformed than curious. Do me a favor though- please share the AI score of this write up. I'd love to see the comparison, even though it feels a waste of 7 minutes writing.

Here is the AI analysis of what Burritto75 wrote.

Deep Analysis report

Human score

5

Human written

0

Mixed

0

AI Generated phrasing

40

AI score

95

Sentence structure

3

Critical
Readability

33

Preparing final summary..

Your text shows several issues, an AI-like tone, repetitive phrasing, uneven rhythm, potential plagiarism, and low readability. These inconsistencies affect its style, flow, and credibility.

@Burritos75

Thank you for the explanation. Can you please log in and print your timeline?

Again, before I advise people that they might not have to wait 3 years (here or in my business) I want to make sure I can point out to a verifiable case.

If people can wait 1 year 11 months, awesome.

Here is what I do not understand:

my understanding is that a favorable 212(d)(3) outcome can still be possible even though relatively less amount of time (in my case 1year and11 months, so close to two years) has passed, even where the underlying incident involved cannabis importation, because the waiver is discretionary and the officer considers the circumstances of the particular case. A small quantity intended for personal use, a single isolated incident, no evidence of trafficking or intent to distribute, no other criminal history, acceptance of responsibility, rehabilitation, and legitimate reasons for seeking admission can all be relevant to the overall assessment. The other factor could be the changing landscape of cannabis in US society- I think its moved to a lower rank in the controlled substance list. However, still serious enough to trigger inadmissibility.

Ok, so where, since you also claim this is your FIRST waiver, did you get "such an understanding"? Not from ANY stories here. Not from anything I have ever posted, or that anyone else has ever posted. How does a person, no prior waiver experience, even a NEW Canadian, "get such an understanding".

So where did you get this "understanding"?

Also, I have people calling me that have had Nexus cards REVOKED because they looked at the fact the person "Attended Colombia University" and Trump hates that school, and now without ever mentioning it before, you suddenly reveal it as a mitigating factor. Having lived in the US or having went to school there makes you LESS likely to be "trusted", although only people who do this for a living would know this. To someone "new" to waivers, this is a common misconception.

I asked you for a copy of your letter (I would not reveal it obviously) and instead, you write this "general how to" essay. (only after I posted again about you not responding)

You do not sound or write like ANYONE who has simply done a waiver for the first time. Excuse my questions. I want the board to have ACCURATE information, based on REAL numbers.

To everyone else, this does not mean its impossible to get a waiver in 1 year and 11 months.

But here is what we know.

This person writes at a very high level. He JUST became a Canadian Citizen, and admits he was denied and was NOT a Canadian Citizen. Now he adds that he:

In my particular case, I also had a significant history in the United States from previously living there as a student and later on a work permit. I had spent approximately four years in the US without this type of problem

That means he was a Landed Immigrant in Canada (he had to be to get citizenship SO QUICKLY). That also means he was able to be under that status and still have study and work permits in the US for 4 years....and how then is that possible, while still accumulating enough time in Canada to "suddenly" qualify for citizenship?

I ran this through my computer, and It indicates that Burritto75 used AI. It also indicates the writing style, is someone who was "likely born" in Canada. When I read it, its written not by a regular person. Its written to "impress".

I have NO idea why someone would take the time to do this.

Is it "possible" for a person to nail a waiver like this less than 2 years after being "caught" at the border? Maybe. But inconsistent with all the rejection letters people send me when they want a second opinion.

Usually when I ask to see a letter from a person, the person is EAGER to share. What they do not do, is usually post an AI paragraph on "how I might have done it" which ironically reminds me of "OJ Simpsons" book. They want to "share" here, but not privately.....this makes no sense.

I would LOVE to tell more clients to wait less time. More clients not waiting to apply. But I did a deep dive into this and although I WANTED it to be true, it does not SEEM true.

Something does not add up.

My own letter is quite intertwined with personally identifiable content, so I am just producing the framework here, this is by no means a legal advise:

In the personal statement, I:

1. Owned the mistake: I found it important to acknowledge the conduct directly rather than trying to minimize it or make excuses for it.

2. Explained the circumstances behind it: “why the mistake happened”- in my case,
I was travelling from British Columbia to Washington State. Because cannabis was legal or regulated in the jurisdictions I was coming from and travelling to, I mistakenly thought of the trip as moving a legal product between two jurisdictions where cannabis was permitted. I failed to recognize the critical distinction between state/provincial laws and U.S. federal law at the international border.

The purpose of explaining what I believed at the time is therefore not to excuse the conduct or argue that I was legally permitted to do it. It is simply to explain how the mistake happened, while acknowledging that I was responsible for understanding the applicable U.S. federal rules before travelling.

3. Documented that this was a one-time mistake:
I provided documentation (RCMP certificate) showing that this was a one-time incident and that I had no other criminal history.

4. Addressed why a waiver should be granted: As mentioned in the DHS website, For the 212(d)(3) non-immigrant waiver, following are the factors that the officer needs to consider whether deciding to approve or reject:
a. The risk of harm to society if the applicant is admitted;
b. The seriousness of the applicant’s prior immigration law or criminal law violations, if any; and
c. The reasons for wishing to enter the United States.
In my letter, I tried to address each of these directly.
For the first factor, I explained why the incident was isolated and why there was no reason to believe I posed an ongoing risk.
For the second, I did not try to pretend that the incident was insignificant. I acknowledged the seriousness of violating U.S. federal law while explaining the circumstances surrounding the incident.
For the third, I explained my genuine reasons for needing to travel to the United States, including my financial and social obligations there, and the temporary nature of visits.

5. Explained what I learned from the experience.
I concluded by making clear that this was a serious mistake, that I understood the consequences, and that I would make sure it never happened again.

In my particular case, I also had a significant history in the United States from previously living there as a student and later on a work permit. I had spent approximately four years in the US without this type of problem. I don't know whether that history affected the decision, but I believe it was useful to provide the complete picture of my background rather than focusing only on the border incident.

I ultimately received a 212(d)(3) waiver for one year.

The experience was extremely stressful, and I felt very foolish about the mistake at the time. But the biggest lesson for me was that the legality of a substance under state or provincial law does not necessarily determine whether you can bring it across the international border into the United States.

For anyone in a similar situation, I would strongly recommend getting advice specific to your circumstances rather than assuming that another person's waiver experience will produce the same result.

As for the importation issue, my understanding is that a favorable 212(d)(3) outcome can still be possible even though relatively less amount of time (in my case 1year and11 months, so close to two years) has passed, even where the underlying incident involved cannabis importation, because the waiver is discretionary and the officer considers the circumstances of the particular case. A small quantity intended for personal use, a single isolated incident, no evidence of trafficking or intent to distribute, no other criminal history, acceptance of responsibility, rehabilitation, and legitimate reasons for seeking admission can all be relevant to the overall assessment. The other factor could be the changing landscape of cannabis in US society- I think its moved to a lower rank in the controlled substance list. However, still serious enough to trigger inadmissibility.

Looking at the positives from this episode- I now know how unforgiving and stringent the criminal justice system can be.

I'm sure there are others in this situation- I personally know two others. If there's anyone else who wants to share their experience, that will be great, as this is now going to be a life long process (provided they dont shut the waiver program all together- unlikely, but you never know in these times..)!

I wanted Burritos75 to email me because I want to "verify" that this story is accurate. To be caught bringing drugs into the United States and they having no problem applying and getting waiver a year later does not deem realistic. I will let you know and correct this if her reaches out, but until proven otherwise, I am going to go with "if you do something wrong, Homeland Security is NOT going to give you as waiver 1 year later."

Has anyone else had an experience when they were granted a waiver after being caught brining anything in the United States after less than 3 years? Please let us know.

Burrittos75? Lots of people curious here.

@Burritos75

Keep in mind you applied under Biden. Great job though, obviously you did a great job. Importation is VERY serious, so very surprised by this. This is very unusual, I get many people who seek me out and show me that exact situation where they applied and were denied WITHOUT being accused of importation, so I would love to see what you said in your personal letter. Regardless of the "politics", I would be interested in what "tactic" you chose. I always advise waiting, but if there is a faster route, I would love to advise people to take it. I do have people that I have told to hold off, so if there is an avenue that worked, maybe they can try.

Email me please. Pardonguy2@gmail.com

Now the politics have changed. Homeland Security is obviously treating Canadians much differently now. That being said, no one can know what they are actually being directed to do.

I was/am in a similar situation. Said yes to having marijuana (less than 1gram) on the border- boom- got handed two charges: 21 USC 844 (possession) and 21 USC 952 (importation), and a INA212 inadmissibility. This happened in Jan 2023. I applied for a waiver December 2024, was able to get a one year waiver November 2025. Reapplying now.
Similar situation as yours- acquired Canadian nationality after the incident. No other crime before or after. I know at least two more people in similar situation, and for sure we are not the only ones.
The waiver application is straightforward but a bit time consuming- it will require rcmp certificate, reference letters, personal statement, employment proof, ties to Canada etc., so you may choose to hire help to guide through the process.
It seems daunting (and it is), but if you follow the process and get DHS what they want and how they want, getting approved should not be a challenge. The only thing in your case is that it’s still recent, but I think for “one time cannabis only” cases, they may still consider it, as even though it still technically is a scheduled controlled substance, it is seeing much more acceptance in the US society. Of course, longer the time since crime the better, but I have a feeling if you apply after the 1.5 year mark, you should be good. Beware though, if it’s your first time applying, you may get a one year waiver given the current trends.

Sorry, reread and yes you said you are NOW a citizen. So you can apply in 2028, Keep in mind as well that certain countries of birth are treated differently. Somalia, Iran, China, and a couple of others are getting treated much more harshly than others.

2028. Don't bother applying before then.

You actually "have" a record of sorts, you were "caught" trying to bring drugs across the border.

Yes in Canada, legal. Just like in the US carrying a gun to the store, legal. Canada, no.

Once you wait 3 years, you will ABSOLUTELY need someone who knows what they are doing.

Why do I say that? Well, the same person who "thought it would be fine if i declared I have drugs when I cross the border" will not be the same guy who "in their first try, knows exactly how to shape a waiver barely 3 years after doing something wrong".

To ALL CANADIANS. If they are denying people at the border for seeing pro Palestinian things on your phone, or even "Free Palestine" and will deny you for seeing "Trump sucks" , why would you think they will "act reasonably and fairly"?

Trump just BANNED CNN, Politico and MSNBC from the White House.

Homeland Security and ICE are an EXTENTION of Trump politics.

Any application before 2028 will probably fail, and you should literally start preparing evidence that you "no longer use drugs of any kind" so when you apply in 2028 your chances are better.

And that is correct. If you "admit I made a mistake" but don't convince them you no longer use drugs, they will not grant you a waiver.

I have client who get caught with an EMPTY GRINDER, and get denied,

You cannot transport drugs across the border. Biden tried to legalize it, and Republicans in Congress stopped him. This is more serious to Homeland Security (a joke here of course) than an ACTUAL minor criminal record.

Remember why you have to wait. "Enough time has to elapse to allow for a 'change of character'", which ironically is the #1 reason waivers are denied. "You filed an instant application,,,,,not enough time has elapsed to allow a change of character....you have not shown an understanding of the damage drugs do to our communities...they tear apart families, destroy our communities and fund organized crime".

Those words are from at least 80% of waiver that are denied because of "drugs".