please read my timeline for type of visa option

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if this was the result of fallout after the President's executive order to DHS to start adjudicating I-601 waiver applications in-country.

In Matter of Arrabally, the BIA's reinterpretation of the word "departure" is ludicrous. Advance parole is permission in advance to be paroled into the United States. If that person is not considered to have departed the United States then why the hell would they need permission to be paroled back in?

Forget the new in-country I-601A process. That isn't even necessary anymore. Just apply for advance parole, leave and reenter the US, and you'll not only correct the previous EWI, but you'll automatically be forgiven for any overstay.

Sheesh!

[isa30 4]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if this was the result of fallout after the President's executive order to DHS to start adjudicating I-601 waiver applications in-country.

In Matter of Arrabally, the BIA's reinterpretation of the word "departure" is ludicrous. Advance parole is permission in advance to be paroled into the United States. If that person is not considered to have departed the United States then why the hell would they need permission to be paroled back in?

Forget the new in-country I-601A process. That isn't even necessary anymore. Just apply for advance parole, leave and reenter the US, and you'll not only correct the previous EWI, but you'll automatically be forgiven for any overstay.

Sheesh!

wow...

I'm just glad more families won't be destroyed and I hope I'm one of them... .

I'm glad you got approved and don't have to deal with this anymore.

Edited June 13, 2012 by isa30

[Julie y Pat 67]

Being able to correct a previous EWI, without leaving the country and incurring a ban would be a step in the right direction. Overstay is forgiven at AOS for applicants who may have misused various types of visas to get into the US, would it be that bad to grant that benefit to someone who may have come here with just the shirt on their back? If they would otherwise have a legitimate case to AOS through a spouse, except for the EWI, in-country waiver adjudication is the answer. Every one complains "the immigration system is broken", but never mention the parts that aren't working and need to be replaced. In-country waiver adjudication is a part that the system needs to run better. For families of US citizens to not actually have to live through the extreme hardships that must be demonstrated for a successful waiver, for an uncertain length of time wouldn't be the end of the world.

[isa30 4]

Being able to correct a previous EWI, without leaving the country and incurring a ban would be a step in the right direction. Overstay is forgiven at AOS for applicants who may have misused various types of visas to get into the US, would it be that bad to grant that benefit to someone who may have come here with just the shirt on their back? If they would otherwise have a legitimate case to AOS through a spouse, except for the EWI, in-country waiver adjudication is the answer. Every one complains "the immigration system is broken", but never mention the parts that aren't working and need to be replaced. In-country waiver adjudication is a part that the system needs to run better. For families of US citizens to not actually have to live through the extreme hardships that must be demonstrated for a successful waiver, for an uncertain length of time wouldn't be the end of the world.

Thank you.

And getting an advance parole entry in my case is not as easy as above message says.

I had to have my brother killed and my mother in the hospital to get it approved (could not make it to brother's funeral ). And only because coming to this country as a minor they could of rejected my entry, since I have been legal with no criminal record they aloud me to enter.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Being able to correct a previous EWI, without leaving the country and incurring a ban would be a step in the right direction. Overstay is forgiven at AOS for applicants who may have misused various types of visas to get into the US, would it be that bad to grant that benefit to someone who may have come here with just the shirt on their back? If they would otherwise have a legitimate case to AOS through a spouse, except for the EWI, in-country waiver adjudication is the answer. Every one complains "the immigration system is broken", but never mention the parts that aren't working and need to be replaced. In-country waiver adjudication is a part that the system needs to run better. For families of US citizens to not actually have to live through the extreme hardships that must be demonstrated for a successful waiver, for an uncertain length of time wouldn't be the end of the world.

I disagree with the bolded statement above - vehemently. At this point in time, there are very few ways that an EWI can obtain legal status in the US. The knowledge that they will never get a green card without leaving the US first is one of the few disincentives to walking across the border. For many (perhaps millions) the knowledge that they will spend their entire lives in the US living as an "illegal", with the cloud of potential deportation always hanging over their head, is the ONLY thing that prevents them from trying to enter the US. Remove this disincentive and illegal entries will increase dramatically.

I think that introducing the I-601A process was a mistake because it encourages people to EWI and wait to become eligible for an immigrant visa while living in the US. Because they can get the waiver approved without leaving they risk nothing by entering and staying. This BIA decision makes it even worse. Everyone who waits long enough will have a family emergency that justifies advance parole. The AP will be approved based on the emergent nature of their situation, and NOT on the same basis that an I-601 waiver would be adjudicated. Since the BIA's interpretation is that using the AP doesn't constitute "departure" then the alien returns, having been effectively paroled into the US. In one fell swoop, their EWI is erased and their overstay forgiven, and they didn't even have to ask for a waiver. They just had to wait for a family member to get sick.

To me, this represents yet another example of the current administration trying to effect immigration reform by changing the ways that laws are enforced, thereby circumventing Congress.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

I have understood Advance Parole to be a parenthetical exit and reentry. I don't understand how AP can be a non-exit but then subsequently a reentry. It seems to me it should be either both exit and reentry, or neither exit nor reentry.

The BIA has nothing to do with the presidency, so I don't see how their decision in appellate court was somehow designed by a separate branch.

Edited June 14, 2012 by Harpa Timsah

[isa30 4]

I have understood Advance Parole to be a parenthetical exit and reentry. I don't understand how AP can be a non-exit but then subsequently a reentry. It seems to me it should be either both exit and reentry, or neither exit nor reentry.

The BIA has nothing to do with the presidency, so I don't see how their decision in appellate court was somehow designed by a separate branch.

Thank you guys for your extensive concern in this case but none answered my question.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Thank you guys for your extensive concern in this case but none answered my question.

I did answer your question about the timeline.

[isa30 4]

I did answer your question about the timeline.

Sorry I meant : JimVaPhuong...

To: Harpa Timsah

Thank you for replying but you are right timeline isn't well set-up for concurrent filers.

The option OTHER doesn't work for my case. ...

I wish they made an option for whom entered with advance parole...

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Sorry I meant : JimVaPhuong...

To: Harpa Timsah

Thank you for replying but you are right timeline isn't well set-up for concurrent filers.

The option OTHER doesn't work for my case. ...

I wish they made an option for whom entered with advance parole...

You understand this "Advance Parole" eligibility thing is less than a month old, right?

[isa30 4]

You understand this "Advance Parole" eligibility thing is less than a month old, right?

No. they just approved it with no waiver since April 17 I THINK.

But there been many approvals before with ewi, advance parole under tps and married to USC.

[grrrrreat 109]

USCIS had taken the position that a person who obtains advance parole and returns lawfully is subject to the 10-year bar. The position was based on the conclusion that the person “departed” the U.S. However, recently, that position has been overturned by the Board of Immigration Appeals in a seminal case,Matter of Arrabally.

Exiting the U.S. with advance parole no longer triggers the unlawful presence bar. InMatter of Arrabally, the BIA came to the conclusion that advance parole is a distinct benefit, and is “qualitatively different from other departures, because it presupposes both that he will be permittedto returnto the United States thereafter and that he will upon return, continue to pursue the adjustment of statusapplicationhe filed before departing.” In other words, leaving the US under a grant of advance parole does not constitute a “departure” for the purposes of triggering the unlawful presence bar. This is a significant victory for individuals who need to travel during the pendency of their adjustment of statusapplication. Matter of Arraballyis also a significant victory for those who have previously been denied adjustment based on their ineligibility for an unlawful presence waiver after departure under advance parole. These individuals may now have grounds to reopen their adjustment of statusapplication, pursuant to newcase law.

The Arrabally case is poorly reasoned and I suspect it will be appealed and overturned. If it is upheld, I suspect that USCIS will stop granting advance parole to adjusters as a matter of routine, and may instead begin requiring some bona fide reasons for needing it. Or USCIS may stop issuing advance parole to overstayers at all.

[isa30 4]

The Arrabally case is poorly reasoned and I suspect it will be appealed and overturned. If it is upheld, I suspect that USCIS will stop granting advance parole to adjusters as a matter of routine, and may instead begin requiring some bona fide reasons for needing it. Or USCIS may stop issuing advance parole to overstayers at all.

Makes sense.. Thats what they do for TPS HOLDERS ” ONLY FOR HUMANITARIAN REASONS” and of course we have to prove that is emergent.

I find it fare if they require bona fide reasons for overstayers or anyone who violated the law. They been doing it to most EWI TPS HOLDERS why not who violated their visa and overstayed

Been there done that and survived.

[grrrrreat 109]

Makes sense.. Thats what they do for TPS HOLDERS ” ONLY FOR HUMANITARIAN REASONS” and of course we have to prove that is emergent.

I find it fare if they require bona fide reasons for overstayers or anyone who violated the law. They been doing it to most EWI TPS HOLDERS why not who violated their visa and overstayed

Been there done that and survived.

Have you gotten a legal opinion on whether your entry under advance parole was sufficient to make you eligible for adjustment of status? I am asking because adjustment requires that you have been admitted and inspected, and I know for some purposes being paroled is not the same as having been admitted. I am not trying to worry you I just have never encountered a situation where someone who initially EWI later entered with AP and wanted to adjust.

Edited June 14, 2012 by grrrrreat

[isa30 4]

Have you gotten a legal opinion on whether your entry under advance parole was sufficient to make you eligible for adjustment of status? I am asking because adjustment requires that you have been admitted and inspected, and I know for some purposes being paroled is not the same as having been admitted. I am not trying to worry you I just have never encountered a situation where someone who initially EWI later entered with AP and wanted to adjust.

Yes. I have. before submitting my applications I made an Infopass at the Local USCIS Office and was told that since May 10TH of this yr they had received a letter that AP through TPS is now considered a legal entry and that they will go by last entry.

"If I entered in 2001 as EWI got TPS after having been in the US for over yr , then Traveled with advance parole can I file I-130 concurrent with I-485 since I'm now married to USC? "

She said that Advance Parole was a legal entry but to give her a minute to make sure that TPS Advance Parole was also considered a legal entry. (she came back over 10 minutes later) and said.

IO: I spoke to Head Officer and was told that In fact TPS advance Parole is considered a legal entry and that since May 10th their office had received a letter from HQ stating that they can now use TPS Advance Parole as a legal Entry....

she also said; cases like mine where frozen until 20 days ago and that I can go ahead and file I-130 and I-485 together along with all supporting documents.

I then asked her if I would require a waiver for EWI she said NO and nor for the unlawful presence because HQ authorized the entry with your Advance Parole so you are no longer EWI ...

She told me I don't need to apply for EAD since mine expires til 2013 (you can only request one 90 days before expiration)

I also asked how long is the process in my case?

she said you are adjusting as a standard AOS so it should take about 2-3 months if no criminal record, she also mentioned that I might not get approved if I have any criminal records...(no problem at all for the past 13 yrs since I entered US)

I know people that have adjusted with approved waiver before.

See Matter Arrabally and Yerrabelly (BIA2012)

Edited June 14, 2012 by isa30