Travelling to Canada with AP

[belinda63 3,047]

Maybe I'm missing something here. Why not just have him get a second job so he meets the requirements to sponsor you? 

[SRNCR 6]

1 minute ago, belinda63 said:

Maybe I'm missing something here. Why not just have him get a second job so he meets the requirements to sponsor you? 

Yeah it's definitely not a sponsorship issue that was all fine. 

[Going through 5,671]

1 hour ago, SRNCR said:

Yes I know. Thank you. 

 

These types of issues take around 4 or 5 years to deny so it wont be a one per year situation and by the time it gets to a point where I've lodged a couple of times it's likely we could live in my country. Medicals are only required with an interview and this wouldnt proceed to interview status so that's not a concern. 

Ah I get it I think....this is more of a stall tactic on your part to buy some time before being admissible? (I don't mean that in a snarky way, but asking if I'm on the right track here before continuing to give advice..)

Edited April 21, 2019 by Going through

[Going through 5,671]

2 hours ago, SRNCR said:

These types of issues take around 4 or 5 years to deny so it wont be a one per year situation and by the time it gets to a point where I've lodged a couple of times it's likely we could live in my country.

Curious where you've read it takes around 4-5 years to render a decision of denial?

[SRNCR 6]

7 minutes ago, Going through said:

Ah I get it I think....this is more of a stall tactic on your part to buy some time before being admissible? (I don't mean that in a snarky way, but asking if I'm on the right track here..)

Yes either that or until I beat the immigration system here lol! If it turns out the original offense will cause a problem (the lawyer we consulted couldnt say yes or no, it's one of those wait and see issues) then we have to prove there is no risk to me. It will likely go to court but also time is a big factor in that. You know, it's easier to say nothings going to happen to me if its been 5, 10 years living together than if it's been 1 year. Either way, it's a buy time tactic. I guess trying to switch to the Employment based green card is a tactic to try and mitigate the problem all together. 

 

Putting it this way, I wonder what people would answer if they failed to adequately respond to an RFE after coming in and out on AP and then got denied after they were back and reapplied? Their last entry would be the AP so wondering what class of admission etc people would put then?

Edited April 21, 2019 by SRNCR

[Going through 5,671]

13 minutes ago, SRNCR said:

Putting it this way, I wonder what people would answer if they failed to adequately respond to an RFE and then got denied and reapplied? Their last entry would be the AP so wondering what class of admission etc people would put then?

If they got denied based on insufficient response to RFE, and then reapplied----they would have already been previously admitted into the US under however they originally came.  For example, if the AOS was applied for based on marriage, the refiling would be an immediate fresh i-485 still based on their existing marriage, with any overstay forgiven to an immediate spouse ---- thereby putting the person under authorized stay once more while the new AOS is pending.  This is also another reason why a marriage-based AOS is typically more streamlined than an employment-based one.

 

The AP doesn't give one any legal status, or any authorized stay, or even any guarantee of reentry into the country after travel----the authorized stay after returning with AP is based on the pending AOS...not the AP document itself. 

Edited April 22, 2019 by Going through

[Going through 5,671]

10 minutes ago, SRNCR said:

You know, it's easier to say nothings going to happen to me if its been 5, 10 years living together than if it's been 1 year.

Meh, I don't know about that---there are cases recently in the news now where people who have been living here for 20 or 30 years find themselves deported, or in removal proceedings and having to leave their spouse/children behind.

[Ontarkie 14,539]

Your case is not normal and you are trying to skirt the system. You are dealing with an Adam Walsh issue. You are already on their radar,  do not expect to live here for 5 10 20 yrs without an issue. Every case that would get an RFE for missing something still does not have the AWA hanging over their head. Even if you do manage to delay things this is not going to end well by playing the system. 

Edited April 22, 2019 by Ontarkie

[Going through 5,671]

Haven't read the OP history, wasn't aware there were AWA issues on top of this.  

 

I suppose all that's left to say is that immigration is not a game, don't treat it as such.  

[SRNCR 6]

8 minutes ago, Going through said:

Haven't read the OP history, wasn't aware there were AWA issues on top of this.  

 

I suppose all that's left to say is that immigration is not a game, don't treat it as such.  

I agree. Good thing I'm not

[Villanelle 4,122]

On 4/20/2019 at 6:17 PM, SRNCR said:

Hello all, 

 

I came to the US on the VWP, which expired January 8th 2019. I lodged my AOS in November 2018. I received my AP March 2019. My lawyer advised me to leave the country before 180 days was up after my VWP status expired. I kind of just want the quickest/ cheapest option so that it doesn't disrupt working too much. 

 

I was just wondering if anyone's been to Canada after overstaying VWP and been fine? I know that the time in Canada counts on the 90 days in the U.S. but is it the other way around? i.e. will I have trouble at the Canadian border? Secondly, the point of the exercise is to get paroled back into the U.S. and have the benefit of the lawful immigration status for a year. Would I be paroled back in in this situation or is it a similar issue as the VWP whereby the time in Canada just counts as the time in the U.S.? 

 

Thanks for your help!

I am worried if your attny suggested you could go to Canada (or anywhere else really) and re-enter giving you a valid admission for work visa process. While individuals who receive a grant of parole are granted entry into the United States, they are not provided an immigration status nor are they formally “admitted” into the United States for purposes of immigration law. An admission occurs when an immigration officer allows a noncitizen to enter the United States pursuant to a visa or another entry document, without the limitation of parole. The distinction between an admission and a parole is a significant one under immigration law. 

[Going through 5,671]

8 minutes ago, SRNCR said:

Hmm interesting that a lawyer would suggest I look at those options then?

Not all lawyers are the most ethical of creatures---forum search around here will tell you of some horror stories where the immigrant ended up paying the price for following their lawyer's "advice".  The lawyer is not held to any consequence when the immigrant is denied, so they really don't have anything to lose..

 

Just playing Devil's Advocate  

 

 

[SRNCR 6]

1 minute ago, username_taken said:

I am worried if your attny suggested you could go to Canada (or anywhere else really) and re-enter giving you a valid admission for work visa process. While individuals who receive a grant of parole are granted entry into the United States, they are not provided an immigration status nor are they formally “admitted” into the United States for purposes of immigration law. An admission occurs when an immigration officer allows a noncitizen to enter the United States pursuant to a visa or another entry document, without the limitation of parole. The distinction between an admission and a parole is a significant one under immigration law. 

Thank you. That's so helpful! I will definitely be consulting with a second lawyer to confirm the advice I was given. 

[SRNCR 6]

Just now, Going through said:

Not all lawyers are the most ethical of creatures---forum search around here will tell you of some horror stories where the immigrant ended up paying the price for following their lawyer's "advice".  The lawyer is not held to any consequence when the immigrant is denied, so they really don't have anything to lose..

 

Just playing Devil's Advocate  

 

 

Oh no, I totally agree I've heard some horror stories. Uscis has some very specific measures against "skirting" immigration law though and changing to an employment based green card when eligible and able doesnt fit under that criteria. The same way coming on an F1 and changing to a H1B doesn't. Simply put, if you weren't lawfully allowed to or it was skirting, you physically wouldn't be able to. As I said, if I realizes this in November last year, well before my status had expired, we wouldnt even be having this conversation because I would have had at least 9 months to deal with the issue. Calling it skirting is bold and, frankly, rude. I know that wasnt you so not having a go at you. 

[Ash.1101 1,756]

2 hours ago, SRNCR said:

No that's not correct. For example, I didnt send it (and most people don't) with my packet. The i485 is checked before issuing EAD AND my case is ready to be scheduled for an interview. They just send a courtesy letter reminding you to bring it to the interview. Most of the time AOS takes more than 1 year and if you lodged before the new 2 year rules came into place you'd be in a situation where you'd have to do the medical a second time if you submitted it with the packet. Hopefully you're not in that situation now!

 

Oh yeah luckily we're past AOS phase. It only took my husband 77 days from the time we submitted the packet to GC approval. It was incredibly fast. 

Good luck with your journey! I hope it works out for ya'll.

Edited April 22, 2019 by Ash.1101