Married with an ESTA (tourist) visa

[Linda91 3]

11 minutes ago, geowrian said:

No, you would need the vaccinations documented on a new I-693 (along with a new medical).

I see, so the only thing you have to pay for is a new form basically? Well, then I rather take the risk of paying for a new documented form , just to be able to give them a complete package. 

[geowrian 22,337]

16 minutes ago, Linda91 said:

I see, so the only thing you have to pay for is a new form basically? Well, then I rather take the risk of paying for a new documented form , just to be able to give them a complete package. 

Well, you would pay for the new medical (the form itself has no filing fee).

[geowrian 22,337]

26 minutes ago, missileman said:

Even if a person took an additional round of routine vaccines, I wouldn't expect any negative side effects from multiple injections of vaccines.  Getting a second round of routine vaccinations just increases the chance that you are protected.....and this article explains it.

 

https://www.familyeducation.com/life/vaccine-schedule/are-extra-doses-vaccines-harmful

"Remember that vaccines used in this country are incredibly safe. There is no increased risk of side effects in an otherwise healthy child. In fact, when children come to this country from overseas, and the shot record cannot be found, the official recommendation of the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) is to start the series over again. The major drawback for the patient is the discomfort of getting the extra injections."

True. Although I guess there's always the risk of having developed an allergy (or have one to different components of a new/different vaccine), or an infection. Minimal risk, sure, but likely one reason why they don't want the general masses getting unnecessary vaccines.

Edited August 29, 2019 by geowrian

[ChasUno 101]

23 hours ago, Linda91 said:

 

Oh I thought ESTA was a visa...I'm on ESTA, isn't that some kind of a tourist visa...

 

 

ESTA replaced the old I-94W, aka the "visa waiver programme". The "w" in I-94W stood for "waiver", which meant that (most) citizens from eligible countries could use the paper I-94W to travel and enter the USA without applying for a Visa from the US consulate in their home country.

 

The I-94W used to be a green slip of card (not to be confused with a "Green Card") that you got given on a plane or ship when traveling to the USA. You filled it in and then presented it with your passport to the CBP/ DHS agent at passport control. The agent still had the power to deny entry if they felt that you were ineligible to enter. It permitted you to enter the USA for 90 days as a tourist with strict requirements of what you could/ could not do i.e. not allowed to work, seek employment, go to school/ study, intend to remain beyond expiration etc., plus you had to leave before 90 days expired else you'd overstayed.

 

ESTA directly replaced the previous I-94W, and had the same requirements. The difference is that you now have to apply online for an ESTA BEFORE you travel, and be approved to travel before you board the plane/ vessel traveling to the USA. If when applying for your ESTA online and it denies you authorisation, you cannot travel to the USA and would need to contact the local consulate to resolve matters/ and/ or apply for an official Visa. Also note the ESTA only authorises you to travel to the USA, it does not guarantee you actual entry as that's up to the CBP officer manning the passport desk. You can still be denied entry when travelling on an ESTA if the officer believes you should not be admitted. Oh, and the old I-94W was free. ESTA is now charged for, payable when you apply for it online. IIRC, once authorized it remains valid for 2 years.

 

In a nutshell:

 

ESTA is a visa waiver programme that allows most citizens from eligible countries to travel to the USA without applying for a Visa. It allows the ESTA holder to visit as a tourist, and with restrictions, for up to 90 days per visit. It is NOT a Visa, and it does NOT guarantee admission to the USA.

[geowrian 22,337]

Just pointing out again that an ESTA is just a travel authorization to board a plane. It has nothing to do with actual entry/status/etc.

[Linda91 3]

I'm filing form I-131 ATM and I'm confused about the part "Physical address" and "in care of name", I'm currently staying at another family members place temporarily, til we got all sorted out. Is "Physical address" the temporarily address I'm staying at or back to my home country? Should I put my name under "in care of name" or leave it blank?

 

Thanks again 

[geowrian 22,337]

4 minutes ago, Linda91 said:

I'm filing form I-131 ATM and I'm confused about the part "Physical address" and "in care of name", I'm currently staying at another family members place temporarily, til we got all sorted out. Is "Physical address" the temporarily address I'm staying at or back to my home country? Should I put my name under "in care of name" or leave it blank?

Use your US address - you are establishing residency. If that's just temporary but it is where you are currently living, you can still use that.

The "In Care Of" is optional. If this was the mailing address instead, some people like to put their name there just for potential extra visibility by the mail carrier.

[Linda91 3]

25 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Use your US address - you are establishing residency. If that's just temporary but it is where you are currently living, you can still use that.

The "In Care Of" is optional. If this was the mailing address instead, some people like to put their name there just for potential extra visibility by the mail carrier.

Thank you!

 

Hope you don't mind, I got another question while we're at it:

On form I-485 Part 3 Address history it says " Provide physical address for everywhere you have lived during the last five years, whether inside or outside the United States. Provide your current address first.."

I'm a bit confused, I'm not registered to my temporarily address here in the US. But it says "provide your current address", and this is where I'm resitting ATM. But the phrase "address history" kinda gives a reflection of just "registered addresses", as the one in my home country. I just don't want to write down the wrong information. 

 

 

 

[geowrian 22,337]

1 minute ago, Linda91 said:

I'm a bit confused, I'm not registered to my temporarily address here in the US. But it says "provide your current address", and this is where I'm resitting ATM. But the phrase "address history" kinda gives a reflection of just "registered addresses", as the one in my home country. I just don't want to write down the wrong information.

There is no such thing as a registered address in the US. You just live there.

 

If you're curious about how mail works, mail is sent to an address. That address is broken into sections to determine the carrier route and get the mail to that carrier's truck. The mail carrier is then responsible for associating the name and address to the mailbox. There's no way to declare or register that "I live here"...you just start putting your name & address on stuff and it will be delivered there.

[Linda91 3]

Just to ensure. On form I-131 Part 3. Processing information, it says "date of intended departure" and "expected length of trip". On a YouTube video they say you're suppose to make something up, just put any dates to fill it, it sounds and it feels like I'd put incorrect information doing so, since I don't have any trip planned yet. Is the video correct?

[geowrian 22,337]

Just now, Linda91 said:

Just to ensure. On form I-131 Part 3. Processing information, it says "date of intended departure" and "expected length of trip". On a YouTube video they say you're suppose to make something up, just put any dates to fill it, it sounds and it feels like I'd put incorrect information doing so, since I don't have any trip planned yet. Is the video correct?

"TBD" and "As needed" is fine as well.

The I-131 is used for many different purposes. Some have more strict usage criteria than others. For AP due to a pending AOS application, a specific reason or date is not needed.

[Linda91 3]

On form I-485, part 8. General Eligibility and inadmissibility Grounds item nr.17 the question is "Have you EVER violated the terms or conditions of your nonimmigrant status?"

I've overstayed my ESTA for a few days now, because we're still in the process of filing all the forms and get all the papers needed from my home country. Should I cross "yes" or "no"?

 

Edited September 1, 2019 by Linda91

[geowrian 22,337]

3 minutes ago, Linda91 said:

On form I-485, part 8. General Eligibility and inadmissibility Grounds item nr.17 the question is "Have you EVER violated the terms or conditions of your nonimmigrant status?"

I've overstayed my ESTA for a few days now, because we're still in the process of filing all the forms and get all the papers needed from my home country. Should I cross "yes" or "no"?

Yes. Day 1 of your overstay was a violation of your nonimmigrant status.

It's not a bar for AOS in your case, but it still needs to be disclosed.

[Linda91 3]

8 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Yes. Day 1 of your overstay was a violation of your nonimmigrant status.

It's not a bar for AOS in your case, but it still needs to be disclosed.

Can I somehow describe my situation on the last page with free space for explanations? Or should i just leave without an explanation? It doesn't really give me an "option" to explain myself, like it does with few of the other questions. 

[Sarah G 170]

On 8/31/2019 at 10:08 PM, Linda91 said:

Can I somehow describe my situation on the last page with free space for explanations? Or should i just leave without an explanation? It doesn't really give me an "option" to explain myself, like it does with few of the other questions. 

When I sent my packet, I included a letter as an extra item which explained my situation, how I had arrived in the US with the intention of visiting and leaving within 90 days, had a return flight booked etc, but that plans had changed and why. I don't know if it makes any difference but I put it in there anyway and just listed it in the contents.