2019/2020 J1 Hardship Waiver issues

[RobCunners 1]

Hi,

 

I am looking for advice on the next step in my wife and I's green card odyssey/debacle. I am from Ireland originally.

 

Timeline:

2013-2019: 6 years on J1 visa (5 years general surgery, 1 year bariatric/foregut fellowship, board certified in gen surg)

 

2018: multiple failed Conrad 30 applications (I am a fellowship-trained surgeon)

 

Early 2019: Spoke with immigration attorney, advised we might have a hardship case for a waiver of the two-year rule. Time was running short as my fellowship was ending July 2019 and with it my J1.

 

April 2019: DS3035, I612 and I130 submitted (concurrent filing of J1 hardship waiver application and I130 spousal petition)

 

May 2019: documents received

 

August 2019: left the country within 30 days of J1 ending

 

December 2019: received I-797 notifying us I130 spousal petition was approved

 

Jan 7th 2020: I612 + I613 received by DOS from USCIS (no RFEs thus far)

 

April 23rd 2020: DOS favorable recommendation (no RFEs!)

 

Currently waiting for USCIS to give final approval for I612/613, pending any RFEs

 

Our attorney outlined two options to now proceed and get the green card;

1. Apply from outside the US (which is where we currently are). Apparently we now have to file an I-824 for action on a previously approved application?? And then proceed with consular processing through the consulate in Dublin?

 

2. Return to the US on a 90d VWP tourist visa, overstay it and concurrently send in I485 and I765. Then sit around twiddling my thumbs for another few months.

 

Issues:

Option 1; why do I need to file an I-824? why doesn't my I130 just proceed to the NVC and get in line there where I submit my DS-260 etc.? The processing time for an I-824 is 6.5-15 months which is NOT in our plan.

 

Option 2; overstaying a 90d visa does NOT seem like a good option. Surely this would be looked upon very unfavourably by USCIS?? Quote from our attorney "because your adjustment of status would be based on your marriage to a U.S. citizen, such an overstay does not count against you". Has anyone else done this or heard of anyone else doing it?

 

Would really appreciate the collective wisdom.

 

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by RobCunners

[Quarknase 1,072]

The second option would be immigration fraud. Entering the country on ESTA of a tourist visa with the intent to Adjust status is not permitted.

[geowrian 22,337]

2 hours ago, RobCunners said:

Our attorney outlined two options to now proceed and get the green card;

1. Apply from outside the US (which is where we currently are). Apparently we now have to file an I-824 for action on a previously approved application?? And then proceed with consular processing through the consulate in Dublin?

 

2. Return to the US on a 90d VWP tourist visa, overstay it and concurrently send in I485 and I765. Then sit around twiddling my thumbs for another few months.

 

Issues:

Option 1; why do I need to file an I-824? why doesn't my I130 just proceed to the NVC and get in line there where I submit my DS-260 etc.? The processing time for an I-824 is 6.5-15 months which is NOT in our plan.

 

Option 2; overstaying a 90d visa does NOT seem like a good option. Surely this would be looked upon very unfavourably by USCIS?? Quote from our attorney "because your adjustment of status would be based on your marriage to a U.S. citizen, such an overstay does not count against you". Has anyone else done this or heard of anyone else doing it?

1) An I-824 is needed if you marked the I-130 as doing adjustment of status instead of consular processing for a visa abroad. Otherwise they will just hold on to the -130 waiting for an I-485 to be filed like you stated on the I-130.

 

2) This is fraud. This is actually very clear fraud if you filed the I-130 marking that you intend to do AOS, left, and then later return to file AOS. The I-130 marked as such shows intent.

 

Did your attorney put #2 in writing? If so, he could be in serious trouble for advising fraud. Why would he suggest overstaying at all if everything was on the up and up? That doesn't make sense.

Ask him what happens if you tell the CBP officer your plans...bet his tone changes quickly. haha

Edited April 29, 2020 by geowrian

[RobCunners 1]

9 hours ago, geowrian said:

1) An I-824 is needed if you marked the I-130 as doing adjustment of status instead of consular processing for a visa abroad. Otherwise they will just hold on to the -130 waiting for an I-485 to be filed like you stated on the I-130.

 

2) This is fraud. This is actually very clear fraud if you filed the I-130 marking that you intend to do AOS, left, and then later return to file AOS. The I-130 marked as such shows intent.

 

Did your attorney put #2 in writing? If so, he could be in serious trouble for advising fraud. Why would he suggest overstaying at all if everything was on the up and up? That doesn't make sense.

Ask him what happens if you tell the CBP officer your plans...bet his tone changes quickly. haha

Thanks to both of the above posters, comments are much appreciated. I obviously spent hours digging about these topics last night.

 

1. Yes, geowrian is correct about the how our I130 was marked. It was marked for 'adjustment of status' which in hindsight was a poor decision as our waiver was never going to be processed prior to needing to leave the country. Thus, we are resigned now to filing an I-824 and waiting it out. Sigh.

 

2. On the face of it, this does indeed seem fraudulent. HOWEVER, our attorney is actually correct, there is a precedent for this; spouses of US citizens who enter on VWP CAN apply for adjustment of status either during or after their VWP has expired. It is not advisable to due during the 90 days as this signals clear intent to mislead. However, there was informal guidance given by USCIS on April 7, 2011at a liaison meeting with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) followed by a formal memorandum from USCIS dated November 13th 2014 which lays out the scenario in which USCIS have the discretion to adjudicate an adjustment status request PRIOR to referring the application to ICE to kick you out. 

 

This is the relevant section from the memorandum;

 

"INA section 245(c)(4) renders aliens admitted under the VWP ineligible to adjust status to that of a person admitted for permanent residence. This provision, however, includes an exception for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens. Thus, an individual admitted under the VWP who is also an immediate relative is not precluded from seeking adjustment of status, even after the VWP period has expired. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has authority to order the removal of a VWP overstay, including an immediate relative, under INA section 217(b) and 8 CFR 217.4(b). Numerous courts of appeals agree that, generally, a VWP overstay may not contest a removal action on the basis that he or she has filed Form I-485. However, these cases concern only the individual’s inability to contest removal. They do not address whether the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can, as a matter of discretion, decline to seek the individual’s removal and grant adjustment if the individual is eligible. Nor do these decisions preclude a VWP overstay who is not subject to a removal order from filing a Form I-485 with USCIS. Whether to grant adjustment to an eligible applicant is a matter entrusted to DHS discretion. USCIS exercises this discretion on behalf of DHS. Policy USCIS field offices shall adjudicate adjustment of status cases filed by immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who were last admitted to the United States under the VWP, in accordance with section 245 of the INA. This includes cases where Form I-485 was filed after the 90-day period of admission. Adjudication shall occur prior to referral to ICE unless: • ICE has issued a removal order;The adjustment applicant is under investigation for, has been arrested for (without disposition), or has been convicted of an egregious public safety offense as described in Part IV of USCIS Policy Memo 602-0050, “Revised Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Removable Aliens” (November 7, 2011); or • There are fraud and/or national security issues that require resolution".

 

This is the actual PDF link; http://www.immigration-lawyer-us.com/images/PM-602-0093.pdf

 

Some useful websites on the topic (disclosure; I have no ties to these websites);

https://citizenpath.com/adjustment-of-status-visa-waiver-program/

https://www.soundimmigration.com/i-came-to-the-u-s-on-esta-can-i-adjust-status/

 

On the whole, this seems like a dicey route to take; you are basically throwing yourself at the mercy of your local USCIS office for several months after your 90d VWP expires. Presumably I would need to file an I-765 concurrently with the I-485, which the USCIS current processing times are looking like 4.5 months minimum. Current processing times for the I-485 are even longer.

 

I am thinking that it is probably better to file the I-824 and get the green card sorted directly from outside prior to returning.

[Quarknase 1,072]

1 hour ago, RobCunners said:

Thanks to both of the above posters, comments are much appreciated. I obviously spent hours digging about these topics last night.

 

1. Yes, geowrian is correct about the how our I130 was marked. It was marked for 'adjustment of status' which in hindsight was a poor decision as our waiver was never going to be processed prior to needing to leave the country. Thus, we are resigned now to filing an I-824 and waiting it out. Sigh.

 

2. On the face of it, this does indeed seem fraudulent. HOWEVER, our attorney is actually correct, there is a precedent for this; spouses of US citizens who enter on VWP CAN apply for adjustment of status either during or after their VWP has expired. It is not advisable to due during the 90 days as this signals clear intent to mislead. However, there was informal guidance given by USCIS on April 7, 2011at a liaison meeting with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) followed by a formal memorandum from USCIS dated November 13th 2014 which lays out the scenario in which USCIS have the discretion to adjudicate an adjustment status request PRIOR to referring the application to ICE to kick you out. 

 

This is the relevant section from the memorandum;

 

"INA section 245(c)(4) renders aliens admitted under the VWP ineligible to adjust status to that of a person admitted for permanent residence. This provision, however, includes an exception for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens. Thus, an individual admitted under the VWP who is also an immediate relative is not precluded from seeking adjustment of status, even after the VWP period has expired. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has authority to order the removal of a VWP overstay, including an immediate relative, under INA section 217(b) and 8 CFR 217.4(b). Numerous courts of appeals agree that, generally, a VWP overstay may not contest a removal action on the basis that he or she has filed Form I-485. However, these cases concern only the individual’s inability to contest removal. They do not address whether the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can, as a matter of discretion, decline to seek the individual’s removal and grant adjustment if the individual is eligible. Nor do these decisions preclude a VWP overstay who is not subject to a removal order from filing a Form I-485 with USCIS. Whether to grant adjustment to an eligible applicant is a matter entrusted to DHS discretion. USCIS exercises this discretion on behalf of DHS. Policy USCIS field offices shall adjudicate adjustment of status cases filed by immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who were last admitted to the United States under the VWP, in accordance with section 245 of the INA. This includes cases where Form I-485 was filed after the 90-day period of admission. Adjudication shall occur prior to referral to ICE unless: • ICE has issued a removal order;The adjustment applicant is under investigation for, has been arrested for (without disposition), or has been convicted of an egregious public safety offense as described in Part IV of USCIS Policy Memo 602-0050, “Revised Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Removable Aliens” (November 7, 2011); or • There are fraud and/or national security issues that require resolution".

 

This is the actual PDF link; http://www.immigration-lawyer-us.com/images/PM-602-0093.pdf

 

Some useful websites on the topic (disclosure; I have no ties to these websites);

https://citizenpath.com/adjustment-of-status-visa-waiver-program/

https://www.soundimmigration.com/i-came-to-the-u-s-on-esta-can-i-adjust-status/

 

On the whole, this seems like a dicey route to take; you are basically throwing yourself at the mercy of your local USCIS office for several months after your 90d VWP expires. Presumably I would need to file an I-765 concurrently with the I-485, which the USCIS current processing times are looking like 4.5 months minimum. Current processing times for the I-485 are even longer.

 

I am thinking that it is probably better to file the I-824 and get the green card sorted directly from outside prior to returning.

The memorandum excerpt that you posted relates to applicants that are already within the country. E.g. you are in the US, were admitted because you came to VISIT and truly intended to leave after a short period of time, and explained such at the POE.

The critical point is not wether the IO approves your petition, the critical point is your intent at point of entry.

You are currently outside of the US. If you use VWP to enter the US with the intent to adjust status, you will have to tell this to the officer at the port of entry when they ask you about the reason for your visit. Telling the truth will likely cause them to deny you entry. NOT telling the truth can make you ineligible to immigrate for good. There's no grey area here.

I hope this helps.

[geowrian 22,337]

4 hours ago, RobCunners said:

2. On the face of it, this does indeed seem fraudulent. HOWEVER, our attorney is actually correct, there is a precedent for this; spouses of US citizens who enter on VWP CAN apply for adjustment of status either during or after their VWP has expired. It is not advisable to due during the 90 days as this signals clear intent to mislead. However, there was informal guidance given by USCIS on April 7, 2011at a liaison meeting with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) followed by a formal memorandum from USCIS dated November 13th 2014 which lays out the scenario in which USCIS have the discretion to adjudicate an adjustment status request PRIOR to referring the application to ICE to kick you out. 

Incorrect still. One is eligible to apply for AOS from VWP if already in the US. That is what those memos reference.

They are NOT eligible to do so from abroad or to use the VWP as a means to file for AOS. See INA 214(b) and INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I), along with potentially associated expedited removals (including a 5 year ban) for people who have tried this. The issue is entering with preconceived intent, not the ability to do AOS afterwards. That is where it becomes fraud.

Edited April 29, 2020 by geowrian

[RobCunners 1]

5 hours ago, geowrian said:

Incorrect still. One is eligible to apply for AOS from VWP if already in the US. That is what those memos reference.

They are NOT eligible to do so from abroad or to use the VWP as a means to file for AOS. See INA 214(b) and INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I), along with potentially associated expedited removals (including a 5 year ban) for people who have tried this. The issue is entering with preconceived intent, not the ability to do AOS afterwards. That is where it becomes fraud.

Perhaps I needed to clarify what I wrote earlier; one needs to be in the country on VWP in order to apply for AOS, yes. You cannot do that from abroad.

 

With regards to preconceived intent, if you told CBP at POE that you were planning to apply for AOS, I agree you would likely be denied. But presumably some people have said they intended to leave (e.g. had booked returns flights etc.), didn't and either overstayed their VWP or were there on a B-1/some other visitor visa. They then filed their I-485 (having had a previously granted I130 petition presumably) and successfully argued that something happened or changed that made it necessary for them to attempt to obtain AOS having previously indicated they would leave. To be clear, I am not pursuing this option (I could not live with the possibility of ICE turning up at the door and being deported), but it is something that people have successfully accomplished (otherwise, why would there be the need for that memorandum?!). Additionally, our lawyer told me this evening that she has helped upwards of a dozen clients who entered in this fashion on both VWP and B1s who got their AOS adjudicated favorably and did not get deported or have any further immigration issues. Again, to reiterate, not what I am considering nor what I would advise to anyone reading this but can be done. 

[geowrian 22,337]

There was never any question about being able to AOS once inside the US. Nobody stated otherwise.

What was stated is that entering with intent to AOS is fraud. Whether that fraud prohibits somebody from qualifying for AOS once inside the US is a separate issue, but not relevant here as this website only covers legal paths.

I fear this thread has already veered too close to crossing that line just by discussing that path.

 

As a side note, a booked return or onward flight is not optional for VWP travel. It is actually required. That said, nearly every person that entered by air and overstayed, violated status, filed for AOS, etc. had a return flight. The return flight shows no intent to return home. The lack of one (i.e. in the case of a non-VWP traveler) may or may not show intent to stay.

[Villanelle 4,122]

1 hour ago, RobCunners said:

Perhaps I needed to clarify what I wrote earlier; one needs to be in the country on VWP in order to apply for AOS, yes. You cannot do that from abroad.

 

With regards to preconceived intent, if you told CBP at POE that you were planning to apply for AOS, I agree you would likely be denied. But presumably some people have said they intended to leave (e.g. had booked returns flights etc.), didn't and either overstayed their VWP or were there on a B-1/some other visitor visa. They then filed their I-485 (having had a previously granted I130 petition presumably) and successfully argued that something happened or changed that made it necessary for them to attempt to obtain AOS having previously indicated they would leave. To be clear, I am not pursuing this option (I could not live with the possibility of ICE turning up at the door and being deported), but it is something that people have successfully accomplished (otherwise, why would there be the need for that memorandum?!). Additionally, our lawyer told me this evening that she has helped upwards of a dozen clients who entered in this fashion on both VWP and B1s who got their AOS adjudicated favorably and did not get deported or have any further immigration issues. Again, to reiterate, not what I am considering nor what I would advise to anyone reading this but can be done. 

"our lawyer told me this evening that she has helped upwards of a dozen clients who entered in this fashion"  

 

In this fashion-  "have said they intended to leave...(snip)...something happened or changed that made it necessary for them to attempt to obtain AOS "

 

Yes in that fashion they are able to do such. That is not what you would be doing. You would be lying if you said you intended to leave and its not an unplanned change but rather its a plan to use VWP to enter and file AOS. Does that make more sense? Your lawyer should not have suggested that to you. If they did and you have it in writing- consider reporting them to the bar, they should not be practicing law like that. You should also recheck all your forms to make sure they didnt use any other 'tricks' on your documents. 

[RobCunners 1]

11 hours ago, Villanelle said:

"our lawyer told me this evening that she has helped upwards of a dozen clients who entered in this fashion"  

 

In this fashion-  "have said they intended to leave...(snip)...something happened or changed that made it necessary for them to attempt to obtain AOS "

 

Yes in that fashion they are able to do such. That is not what you would be doing. You would be lying if you said you intended to leave and its not an unplanned change but rather its a plan to use VWP to enter and file AOS. Does that make more sense? Your lawyer should not have suggested that to you. If they did and you have it in writing- consider reporting them to the bar, they should not be practicing law like that. You should also recheck all your forms to make sure they didnt use any other 'tricks' on your documents. 

 

12 hours ago, geowrian said:

There was never any question about being able to AOS once inside the US. Nobody stated otherwise.

What was stated is that entering with intent to AOS is fraud. Whether that fraud prohibits somebody from qualifying for AOS once inside the US is a separate issue, but not relevant here as this website only covers legal paths.

I fear this thread has already veered too close to crossing that line just by discussing that path.

 

As a side note, a booked return or onward flight is not optional for VWP travel. It is actually required. That said, nearly every person that entered by air and overstayed, violated status, filed for AOS, etc. had a return flight. The return flight shows no intent to return home. The lack of one (i.e. in the case of a non-VWP traveler) may or may not show intent to stay.

Ok, I am going to nip this conversation in the bud as I think this is heading down a road that could be misconstrued or taken out of context. To be crystal clear, my lawyer has NOT advised me to even consider committing fraud, I am not considering it and nor would I advise anyone else to consider it.

 

Our plan is to get our I612 confirmation, then pursue an I-824 to switch our I130 to consular processing (and see if we can get it expedited). Concurrently, I am going to pursue cap-exempt H1b opportunities as a backup if our I824 is taking forever.

 

Will update when we have some further progress. Many thanks for the input thus far.

[Villanelle 4,122]

Im going to guess then that the attny advised you that overstay would not prevent you from adjusting - but they told you this back when you were in the US right? . As you can see now since you left the US that fun fact is N/A since you can not enter to adjust. Im not really sure why you left? Any overstay would have not been an issue. Also not sure why you marked the 130 as AOS vs consular?  I think a big issue here is not understanding immigration is 'fluid'. Depending on the exact specifics different policies apply. Any change in circumstances can make previous advice N/A.  Seems like your attny was setting you up to overstay and do AOS but you didnt understand that so you left. Im also not sure on why you are going to wait to send the 824? What is your reasoning behind that? Unless there is something I am missing- generally speaking its best to file things ASAP and then you can delay if needed on your end but I assure you for CR/IR visa process if you get all the way to the interview and they cant approve it due to a waiver being needed- they will ask for the waiver and wait for it to come back. This is not a case where if you get to the end and are not approvable they will deny it and close it and tell you to start at the beginning again. Technically its being found 'ineligible' rather then being denied and again you will have an opportunity to overcome the ineligibility. Your plan of waiting to file and then asking for an expedite would only make sense if theres a reason why you couldnt file now- which I dont see any besides trying to cleverly come up with a way where you can enter in a valid manner and then experience a change in circumstances allowing you to apply for AOS. And trust me there is no way to do that!  Entering with a plan to take advantage of unforeseen circumstances is still viewed as entering with a plan. 

 

I have no idea how long H1b would take or if its appropriate. I can tell you immigration will review your entire file and they dont look too favorably upon those that appear to be desperate for a visa by applying for it under any and all means. If your motivation for wanting to be in the US is based on family unity- then pursue a visa whos purpose is family unity- the CR/IR. If your motivation is work- pursue a work visa. 

[RobCunners 1]

On 4/30/2020 at 4:27 PM, Villanelle said:

Im going to guess then that the attny advised you that overstay would not prevent you from adjusting - but they told you this back when you were in the US right? . As you can see now since you left the US that fun fact is N/A since you can not enter to adjust. Im not really sure why you left? Any overstay would have not been an issue. Also not sure why you marked the 130 as AOS vs consular?  I think a big issue here is not understanding immigration is 'fluid'. Depending on the exact specifics different policies apply. Any change in circumstances can make previous advice N/A.  Seems like your attny was setting you up to overstay and do AOS but you didnt understand that so you left. Im also not sure on why you are going to wait to send the 824? What is your reasoning behind that? Unless there is something I am missing- generally speaking its best to file things ASAP and then you can delay if needed on your end but I assure you for CR/IR visa process if you get all the way to the interview and they cant approve it due to a waiver being needed- they will ask for the waiver and wait for it to come back. This is not a case where if you get to the end and are not approvable they will deny it and close it and tell you to start at the beginning again. Technically its being found 'ineligible' rather then being denied and again you will have an opportunity to overcome the ineligibility. Your plan of waiting to file and then asking for an expedite would only make sense if theres a reason why you couldnt file now- which I dont see any besides trying to cleverly come up with a way where you can enter in a valid manner and then experience a change in circumstances allowing you to apply for AOS. And trust me there is no way to do that!  Entering with a plan to take advantage of unforeseen circumstances is still viewed as entering with a plan. 

 

I have no idea how long H1b would take or if its appropriate. I can tell you immigration will review your entire file and they dont look too favorably upon those that appear to be desperate for a visa by applying for it under any and all means. If your motivation for wanting to be in the US is based on family unity- then pursue a visa whos purpose is family unity- the CR/IR. If your motivation is work- pursue a work visa. 

So it is a long story but in brief; as 2 separate Conrad 30 waivers in different states had failed (I am a specialist so harder to come by), we the ended up doing the hardship waiver (should have done it immediately after marriage but had gotten some erroneous advice from a previous immigration attorney). I was actually all teed up to do a second year of fellowship which would have given us time to complete waiver while in the country, then go the AOS route. Almost to the day when we sent everything off, I found out my second year of fellowship fell through as I would have run out of time on my J1 in mid-June and the program weren't willing to cut it short (understandably, as you need to complete the year to be signed off). I didn't pay enough attention to the forms to realise that processing from outside the country is a different box to tick, nor our attorney did go through ALL the different scenarios that might have ensued from that point (I have addressed this with them, but doesn't help us now...). So in the end, we left the country end of August 2019 as our hardship waiver was meandering it's way through USCIS. We did file the I-130 concurrently, and that was approved last December.

 

To answer your question about the I-824, we filed that a few weeks ago. Don't even have a USCIS number for that yet.

 

DOS apparently sent a favourable recommendation to USCIS 4/23/20, still pending on USCIS page... infuriating. Presumably Covid is slowing everything down.

 

There are compelling personal issues for our urgency to get back to the US that are of a sensitive nature, not willing to share those here. Separately, my wife has an upcoming interview for a job that she cannot turn down which will likely start in the fall, so we would really like to be close to getting back by that point.

 

Once we receive official notification of the waiver from USCIS, planning to email them to see if I-824 and NVC processing can be expedited at all... no harm in asking I guess...

[OncDoc 0]

Why don't you talk to your attorney about requesting USCIS to expedite the case since you are a physician and with the Covid-19 will be able to help out in case of surging infection. 

[geowrian 22,337]

No harm requesting an expedite. You would need one with USCIS for the I-824, and then a separate one once it reached NVC. You may qualify for both, either, or none...they are given on a case by case basis and are separate.

No need for an attorney for the expedite....it will be approved or not based on the merits of the request and nothing more.

[RobCunners 1]

16 hours ago, OncDoc said:

Why don't you talk to your attorney about requesting USCIS to expedite the case since you are a physician and with the Covid-19 will be able to help out in case of surging infection. 

 

13 hours ago, geowrian said:

No harm requesting an expedite. You would need one with USCIS for the I-824, and then a separate one once it reached NVC. You may qualify for both, either, or none...they are given on a case by case basis and are separate.

No need for an attorney for the expedite....it will be approved or not based on the merits of the request and nothing more.

Have done so already, our attorney ghost-wrote an email that we have ready to send once the USCIS gets its act together and we receive official confirmation of the waiver. Agree with geowrian on double request for expedite, planning on sending to both in due course.

 

My wife is an NP and the job she is interviewing for is front line (night-time critical care in a tertiary level academic center). We were going to send this email when we have a PDF copy of her contract to attach, which I think would lend more weight to it; thoughts on this?

 

I-824 is submitted as i mentioned above, that hasn't even registered yet with USCIS.