Interview

[Aztec&Taino 144]

Why is this post in the K1 forum? It is not a K1 visa issue...

[kinu4real 0]

Well,obviously your frustration becomes rudeness then! Jim has contributed an enormous amount of good, useful information to this website FREE of charge and in his own FREE time. You are the one who is jumping on posts now! If you are not satisfied with the information here-look elsewhere! Sometimes mistakes are made. Like Jim said, we are not lawyers. Everybody contributes what they can to make this website what it is and if you are more informed on a certain matter-share it by all means, but in a non criticizing manner!

Now i am getting irritated by people like you who takes side without reading very well. I only offered an advise b4 you and ur friend start to find faults with me. If he made a mistake all he needed to do was hey sorry i didn't know that and we would not be going back and forth on this and for your infomation i know you guys are not lawyers and even lawyers don't know all and some lawyers even mislead people. All i am saying is if you are not sure about anything or don't know it just say so and stop finding faults wt everyone else cos you have been on this site for a long time. If you are not satisfied wt my posts or advice then you jump on another site as well, this is a free site and it's a free world. I am not being rude but stating a fact.

[ADAMandKAREN 15]

Matthew 7:1-5

[arwen 8]

I am not taking sides!. I don't think you realise how abrupt you come across in your posts. Go back and read them! I am not the only one who has noticed! You can be irritated all you like...what do I care? If you carry on with this attitude of yours, you'll be lucky if anyone even bothers to answer you the next time you ask a question. I will leave it at that!

[Afrikan Queen 11]

I might be the only one, by I agree with you. Sometimes I see questions that I might know but not 100% sure, I don't answer these. If I read something online or on this site then I acknowledge that in my answers. Once I posted a question on this site and received 4 different answers and then told not to stress myself . I wasn't even stressing just asking a question I was curious about. I don't even know if it was worth the try, a waste of time really. However, you don't want to confuse expressing one's opinion with giving facts, sometime it can be hard to know the difference between the two.

By the way, congratulations on your recent approval!

[Gocka 17]

Ive argued with Jim alot in the short time ive been here, mostly political, but I respect him and the amount of knowledge he has is huge. When I ask a question hes one of the first to answer and he puts aside our sqawbles and tries to help.

Its a forum not a law office, only a lawyer can give you a 100% answer becasue by law its malpractice if he gives you a professional opinion that is wrong. If you want a 100% go to a lawyer, but you cant go to a forum and complain when something wasnt totally acurate. No one on here can answer anything in total certainty especialy not on such a complex thing like imigration policy.

Its true that if you know nothing then you should shut up and not mess things up for someone with your baseless answers but Jim is not one of those people and the people on here who give answers 90% of the time are not those people either.

I appriciate all feedback I get whether 100% true or not it leaves me knowing a little more than when i asked.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

I might be the only one, by I agree with you. Sometimes I see questions that I might know but not 100% sure, I don't answer these. If I read something online or on this site then I acknowledge that in my answers. Once I posted a question on this site and received 4 different answers and then told not to stress myself . I wasn't even stressing just asking a question I was curious about. I don't even know if it was worth the try, a waste of time really. However, you don't want to confuse expressing one's opinion with giving facts, sometime it can be hard to know the difference between the two.

By the way, congratulations on your recent approval!

The reason you likely got four different answers is because people here can only answer based on their experiences. And in certain parts of this entire process, the experiences are different for everyone. What might have been an issue in someone else's Visa journey, won't be an issue in yours. People here aren't professionals, and the information will not always be 100% correct because people can only respond based on what they've experienced or what they've read others have experienced.

There is no need, however, to make a post telling people that if they don't know something, to keep quiet. People here WANT to help, that's why they answer. But you have to take the answers with a grain of salt like you would whenever taking advice from an internet forum.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Coconuts

[Afrikan Queen 11]

The reason you likely got four different answers is because people here can only answer based on their experiences. And in certain parts of this entire process, the experiences are different for everyone. What might have been an issue in someone else's Visa journey, won't be an issue in yours. People here aren't professionals, and the information will not always be 100% correct because people can only respond based on what they've experienced or what they've read others have experienced.

There is no need, however, to make a post telling people that if they don't know something, to keep quiet. People here WANT to help, that's why they answer. But you have to take the answers with a grain of salt like you would whenever taking advice from an internet forum.

Exactly, I WANT help. But when someone's telling me to stop stressing myself, that is NOT HELPFUL. Furthermore, their is nothing wrong with this post, I've seen worse. We all can express ourselves freely. I am simply saying I agree with KINU4REAL, just as you are disagreeing.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Joyjoy

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Exactly, I WANT help. But when someone's telling me to stop stressing myself, that is NOT HELPFUL. Furthermore, their is nothing wrong with this post, I've seen worse. We all can express ourselves freely. I am simply saying I agree with KINU4REAL, just as you are disagreeing.

I don't necessarily disagree with the original post. If people aren't sure of their response, they should mention that before offering help. However, in this post, people are simply asking for clarification on what happened and it's not being handled very well on kinu's part. It's coming off as very rude and condescending. IMO, anyway.

[Afrikan Queen 11]

I don't necessarily disagree with the original post. If people aren't sure of their response, they should mention that before offering help. However, in this post, people are simply asking for clarification on what happened and it's not being handled very well on kinu's part. It's coming off as very rude and condescending. IMO, anyway.

Possibly...but I guess I just see things differently. I think he/she is more like frustrated and but is being read as rude. Maybe their just having a bad day, that's how I see it. I think we got .

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Maybe i don't understand English anymore.... What do u mean by leaving the US should have triggered the ban? Is leaving not the same as brief/casual physical absence from the USA. I left US for some weeks and came back but did not trigger the ban cos it fell under casual/brief absence for Family issues since i went for my Marriage. My 1st post from the beginning is just to appeal to people giving advise to make sure they are talking from experience or a known fact and not just to give people like me unnecessary fear cos of bad advise. I am not trying to tell you anything b4 u jumped on my post and started quoting what u don't know or aren't sure of.

INA section 212(a)(6)(B):

(i) In general.-Any alien (other than an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence) who-

(I) was unlawfully present in the United States for a period of more than 180 days but less than 1 year, voluntarily departed the United States (whether or not pursuant to section 244(e) ) prior to the commencement of proceedings under section 235(b)(1) or section 240 , and again seeks admission within 3 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal, or

(II) has been unlawfully present in the United States for one year or more, and who again seeks admission within 10 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal from the United States,is inadmissible.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&CH=act

This is the ban I was referring to. If you are unlawfully present in the US for more than 180 days and less than one year then you have incurred a 3 year ban from the US. If you are unlawfully present for more than a year then you have incurred a 10 year ban. The ban kicks in on the date you leave the US.

Note that there is nothing in section 212(a)(6)(B) that carves out an exception for someone who is eligible to adjust status under 245(i). There is also nothing in section 245(i) that says an eligible alien is not subject to the ban imposed by 212(a)(6)(B). The clause you pointed out simply says that you won't lose your eligibility to adjust status under 245(i) for brief, casual, or innocent absences from the US. It doesn't grant you blanket amnesty from all of section 212. In fact, it specifically says you must be "admissible" to the United States, and section 212 says you are inadmissible because you left the US with enough accumulated unlawful presence to trigger the ban.

Title 8, section 245a.18 of the Code of Federal Regulations specifically describes how INA section 212 affects someone who is applying for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). It describes which sections of INA 212 specifically don't apply, and which sections cannot be waived. All of the other sections which are eligible for a waiver require that a waiver be submitted. The sections that don't apply are related to labor certification and possession of valid visa or travel documents (this is what permits someone who entered the US illegally to apply). There is no specific exception for 212(a)(6)(B). You should have needed an I-601 waiver to adjust status.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&CH=8cfr

Now, I'll be the first one to admit that I may not be the brightest bulb in the room, but I've read sections 212 and 245 of the INA many times, and I think I understand them reasonably well. If there's an exception that would apply to you that would have allowed you to accumulate more than 180 days of overstay and leave the US without triggering the ban then I'm not seeing it.

There are countless stories on this site by people who have done precisely what you've done and they were not allowed to reenter the US because of the ban. There also stories of people who were not caught by CBP when reentering the US, but were caught by USCIS when they tried to apply for an immigration benefit. How you managed to do it is still a mystery to me, unless you are Canadian as was suggested in your other thread.

Now, other than reading and understanding the law, the regulations, and the policies of the agencies involved, I'm not sure what else we could do to ensure that we're giving educated advice.

I would also still appreciate if you would ask your attorney where the exception lies in the law.

[ptgarner1 8]

Maybe all you people who insist on complaining about people trying to help you should just go away... I generally find most of the advice her to be highly accurate.....and by the way...often read about lawyers or paid immigration specialists making terrible mistakes and taking large bills to do even that.

[Jim&Natasha 24]

Now i am getting irritated by people like you who takes side without reading very well. I only offered an advise b4 you and ur friend start to find faults with me. If he made a mistake all he needed to do was hey sorry i didn't know that and we would not be going back and forth on this and for your infomation i know you guys are not lawyers and even lawyers don't know all and some lawyers even mislead people. All i am saying is if you are not sure about anything or don't know it just say so and stop finding faults wt everyone else cos you have been on this site for a long time. If you are not satisfied wt my posts or advice then you jump on another site as well, this is a free site and it's a free world. I am not being rude but stating a fact.

You ARE being rude and self centered here. The attitude you are expressing is that this forum revolves around you and should conform to your wishes. You are also, in effect, calling other helpful posters sloppy and stupid. You didn't say it directly, but it is implicit in what you have said and how you said it.

Whenever I have expected the world to revolve around me, I have been *severely* disappointed. Except when it comes to my dogs.

Appreciate the free advice others post that *is* useful to your specific case, and leave the rest.

Kudos to you for finding a way to get your interview approval. The real lesson for others is in your determination and persistence in continuing to keep looking for rules and laws that applied to your situation, and allowed you to succeed. You ignored those who told you it couldn't be done and persisted until you found a way. Well done! May your marriage be happy and blessed for the rest of your days.

[kinu4real 0]

INA section 212(a)(6)(B):

(i) In general.-Any alien (other than an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence) who-

(I) was unlawfully present in the United States for a period of more than 180 days but less than 1 year, voluntarily departed the United States (whether or not pursuant to section 244(e) ) prior to the commencement of proceedings under section 235(b)(1) or section 240 , and again seeks admission within 3 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal, or

(II) has been unlawfully present in the United States for one year or more, and who again seeks admission within 10 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal from the United States,is inadmissible.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&CH=act

This is the ban I was referring to. If you are unlawfully present in the US for more than 180 days and less than one year then you have incurred a 3 year ban from the US. If you are unlawfully present for more than a year then you have incurred a 10 year ban. The ban kicks in on the date you leave the US.

Note that there is nothing in section 212(a)(6)(B) that carves out an exception for someone who is eligible to adjust status under 245(i). There is also nothing in section 245(i) that says an eligible alien is not subject to the ban imposed by 212(a)(6)(B). The clause you pointed out simply says that you won't lose your eligibility to adjust status under 245(i) for brief, casual, or innocent absences from the US. It doesn't grant you blanket amnesty from all of section 212. In fact, it specifically says you must be "admissible" to the United States, and section 212 says you are inadmissible because you left the US with enough accumulated unlawful presence to trigger the ban.

Title 8, section 245a.18 of the Code of Federal Regulations specifically describes how INA section 212 affects someone who is applying for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). It describes which sections of INA 212 specifically don't apply, and which sections cannot be waived. All of the other sections which are eligible for a waiver require that a waiver be submitted. The sections that don't apply are related to labor certification and possession of valid visa or travel documents (this is what permits someone who entered the US illegally to apply). There is no specific exception for 212(a)(6)(B). You should have needed an I-601 waiver to adjust status.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&CH=8cfr

Now, I'll be the first one to admit that I may not be the brightest bulb in the room, but I've read sections 212 and 245 of the INA many times, and I think I understand them reasonably well. If there's an exception that would apply to you that would have allowed you to accumulate more than 180 days of overstay and leave the US without triggering the ban then I'm not seeing it.

There are countless stories on this site by people who have done precisely what you've done and they were not allowed to reenter the US because of the ban. There also stories of people who were not caught by CBP when reentering the US, but were caught by USCIS when they tried to apply for an immigration benefit. How you managed to do it is still a mystery to me, unless you are Canadian as was suggested in your other thread.

Now, other than reading and understanding the law, the regulations, and the policies of the agencies involved, I'm not sure what else we could do to ensure that we're giving educated advice.

I would also still appreciate if you would ask your attorney where the exception lies in the law.

At first i didn't want to reply cos i got tired of trying to explain myself and i am not going to argue with anyone anymore cos it's there clearly on USCIS website and i spoke to at least 4 lawyers b4 i settled for the one i used and all told me about the brief/casual absence and what you are telling me is that i got approved cos the IO that interviewed me is either stupid or ignorant of the immigration law or i am lying. Which ever is right, i know i got approved and i will not respond to anything again, it's a free world and you can believe whatever you want, it's ok. I still stand by my original post that if anyone is not sure about anything, pls don't confuse us. Everyone's case is different

[Jim&Natasha 24]

At first i didn't want to reply cos i got tired of trying to explain myself and i am not going to argue with anyone anymore cos it's there clearly on USCIS website and i spoke to at least 4 lawyers b4 i settled for the one i used and all told me about the brief/casual absence and what you are telling me is that i got approved cos the IO that interviewed me is either stupid or ignorant of the immigration law or i am lying. Which ever is right, i know i got approved and i will not respond to anything again, it's a free world and you can believe whatever you want, it's ok. I still stand by my original post that if anyone is not sure about anything, pls don't confuse us. Everyone's case is different

Well, everyone likes to *think* they have accurate information, or sometimes they may have information that is accurate but doesn't quite apply to the situation at hand. My first ex-wife would pull stuff out of her backside to say, but because she sounded convincing in how she said it, people assumed she knew what she was talking about. The rule here in our free world is Caveat Emptor. You did exactly that and it worked out for you. Congratulations and good luck from here!

(Oh, and the "free" part is just an optical illusion!)

Edited February 9, 2011 by Jim&Natasha