@Ajay26 and also @nicecloud
Hello - I’m brand new to this online community and about to place my investment and then submit initial ARI application to AIMA. The crowdsourced data sheet shows that you got your biometrics apptmt scheduled already for Jan 2026 after having submitted your ARI app in early May 2025. Seems pretty good relative to what I’m hearing others say about AIMA’s sluggish processing times. Any pointers you could share?
That’s because they (and hundreds/thousands of much older ARI applicants) got picked up in a huge AIMA housekeeping exercise earlier this week… conveniently after Parliament voted to double years for Citizenship from 5 to 10 
See here:
Yes, Liberty Legal mentioned in their webinar yesterday that a flood of appointments were issued yesterday 10/30. You’ll probably see that updating on the database soon.
Hi @gismaf - It’s very random. I don’t have any particular pointers. I do work with a very competent lawyer, but who knows. Strange fact- my application (the primary investor) was submitted one minute before the massive power outage in Portugal and Spain and we couldn’t file my spouse’s application until the May date. Still no biometric date for my spouse yet. Boa sorte 
@Ajay26 - I see. That makes sense. My contact at Oxy Capital also mentioned that there’s a new legislation that got passed this week → tons of biometric appointments. He also mentioned that we would not be “grandfathered in” even if the constitutional (appeals) court delays that legislation a bit from becoming set into stone.
@Ajay26 - any chance you could share your contact (Portuguese attorney) with me? I was leaning towards NovoMove’s attorney, but have not yet signed anything. They have experience, but seem to have an overly-optimistic interpretation of what’s going on re: legislation. They also never even mentioned the option for applicants to use “administrative injunctions” (mandado de injunção) against AIMA/SEF to speed up processing.
One reason the lawyers may not have mentioned lawsuits is that recent accounts suggest they aren’t working as effectively as they used to. Essentially everyone figured out that a lawsuit was pretty much your only option if you wanted your case to move, and the backlog just moved from one place to another. I haven’t followed the new language regarding the ability to sue (legislation was trying to limit it) as closely as some other things, but it seems like curtailing that has been an ongoing mission.
“Past performance is no guarantee of future results”
Yup…
May be there’s more to this story? check this out:
