Urgent Help required - No AOS/EOS/COS

[mathranik 2]

Hello everyone! I am posting this query in a state of panic.

My parents came to the US on the 5th of March 2010, and were given a 6-month stay period. The stay expires on the 1st of September. Now, in the mid of july, my parents visited Canada and came back on the 23rd of July to US. When they came back, their I-94 was reissued, and on the backside of I-94 under the 'record of changes' section, the immigration office wrote with hand- 'NO AOS/EOS/COS'.

Not knowing about it, I applied for their extension of stay on the 3rd of August'2010. Today I came across the remarks on their I-94. and began to panic. I called USCIS, but they didn't have much information about it at all. They asked me to make an infopass appointment.

I would like to know from all of you people how to go about it. What does it mean, if it says this under the 'record of changes' section.

Thanks a lot in advance.

[mathranik 2]

I wanted to add to my previous post that, half an hour ago, I got the receipt from USCIS confirming that they have started processing the application. It has come 10 days from the date of filing. Isn't that swifter than usual?

[Boiler 45,486]

On what basis did they seek an extension?

[mathranik 2]

On what basis did they seek an extension?

On the basis that since my father is 81 years old, it might not be possible for him to come to US soon, and that he would like to spend some time with his son and grandson here. Also, we would like to show him around the US (East coast, etc) in the next couple of months, and that he might be able to stay back until his grandson's birthday that is coming up.

[Boiler 45,486]

They entered on the 5th March

They left for a trip of about 1 week and re-entered on the 23rd July.

Presumably when they re-entered they were given the balance of their initial stay.

10 days later they applied for an extension.

I see 3 issues:

1. If they wanted to stay longer, why did they not seek a longer stay on re-entry.

2. They decided a few days after entry to apply for an extension.

3. Lack of a valid reason.

The annotation is not helpful, but neither is it I believe binding. More a warning.

They may be lucky, but probably not.

I have seen this done to buy a bit more time, but of course the downside is the loss of the visa and difficulty obtaining another. If he does not intend re visiting, no real problem.

[mathranik 2]

They entered on the 5th March

They left for a trip of about 1 week and re-entered on the 23rd July.

Presumably when they re-entered they were given the balance of their initial stay.

10 days later they applied for an extension.

I see 3 issues:

1. If they wanted to stay longer, why did they not seek a longer stay on re-entry.

2. They decided a few days after entry to apply for an extension.

3. Lack of a valid reason.

The annotation is not helpful, but neither is it I believe binding. More a warning.

They may be lucky, but probably not.

I have seen this done to buy a bit more time, but of course the downside is the loss of the visa and difficulty obtaining another. If he does not intend re visiting, no real problem.

I respect your concern, with your comments carrying a warning. I would like to say a bit more about this, and ask a couple another queries.

*1* They were not offered a longer stay on re-entry, nor were they asked a choice. I think that's how it normally goes. They were just given the remainder of there stay when they re-entered.

*2* Yes, around 8 days later.

*3* I looked around this website, and a couple of others too, and found out that if sightseeing is the true reason, it can be a good enough reason most of the times. I may be wrong here, because this ofcourse is not a life-death situation.

If they do leave before there I-94 expires on 1st September, would their visa stay good if they want to revisit in a few months? Do I understand correctly that if they exit according to what their current I-94 demands them to, their extension application's decision would not make any difference on their revisit?

Thanks once again!

[Boiler 45,486]

I am not sure what you are trying to achieve, if they want to live here then you should sponsor them for a GC.

The extension/long trips with a short period out has risks. Nobody can tell you the result or exact odds of any particular approach.

[mathranik 2]

On what basis did they seek an extension?

They entered on the 5th March

They left for a trip of about 1 week and re-entered on the 23rd July.

Presumably when they re-entered they were given the balance of their initial stay.

10 days later they applied for an extension.

I see 3 issues:

1. If they wanted to stay longer, why did they not seek a longer stay on re-entry.

2. They decided a few days after entry to apply for an extension.

3. Lack of a valid reason.

The annotation is not helpful, but neither is it I believe binding. More a warning.

They may be lucky, but probably not.

I have seen this done to buy a bit more time, but of course the downside is the loss of the visa and difficulty obtaining another. If he does not intend re visiting, no real problem.

I am not sure what you are trying to achieve, if they want to live here then you should sponsor them for a GC.

The extension/long trips with a short period out has risks. Nobody can tell you the result or exact odds of any particular approach.

Just so that everyone who tried to help me knows, my parent's extension of stay has been approved. It came in my mail yesterday I know it's odd, considering what was written on their previous I-94, but still - I thank God and everyone who helped me here on VJ!