Does pregnancy justify an expedite at the NVC

[Athea 12]

20 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

If you are going back to the Philippines to give birth and wait for a visa, make sure you take back all the stuff you need from the dad for CRBA (I think you should be able to compile at least some of it ahead of the birth). Carefully read this page and the following pages including the links in them to ensure you habe what you need for the embassy. https://ph.usembassy.gov/u-s-citizen-services/child-family-matters/birth/ If the father can meet the requirements then you will apply CRBA and a US passport for the baby at the same time.  If the father is for some reason unable to transmit citizenship (if he does not meet the requirements) then you can add the baby to your case and the baby can get a green card with you. Either way it will not be a problem to bring the baby.

Thank You Susie for this advises. but I do have 1 question. Is the father really need to be present just to signed the CRBA form in consulate abroad. What if he cant travel because of work. 

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

8 minutes ago, Athea said:

Thank You Susie for this advises. but I do have 1 question. Is the father really need to be present just to signed the CRBA form in consulate abroad. What if he cant travel because of work. 

Did you read the instructions properly? There should be a link to a form for him to fill in and get notarized if he can’t be there.

[HRQX 4,145]

20 hours ago, SusieQQQ said:

Definitely disagree considering the total lack of problems about actual immigrant intent we see reported here. Lots of warnings about it, and lots of family based adjustments happening with zero problem.

I think @aaron2020 mentioned it because the risk is technically there for an IO to determine intent at the I-485 interview for non-IR cases. See Matter of Ibrahim: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2012/08/14/2866.pdf "The benefits of Matter of Cavazos, supra, are limited to immediate relatives, and an application for adjustment of status by a fifth-preference immigrant who entered the United States as a nonimmigrant with a preconceived intention to remain is properly denied in the exercise of discretion." "The Immigration and Nationality Act makes immediate relative status a special and weighty equity. The Congress has accorded immediate relatives important dispensations not available to visa-preference applicants. Section 201(a) of the Act exempts immediate relatives from the Act's numerical limitations on immigration. Further, section 245 of the Act which provides for adjustment of status, denies that benefit to aliens other than immediate relatives who after January 1, 1977, continue in or accept unauthorized employment prior to the filing of an application for adjustment of status. Section 245(c)(2). In view of this most favorable status accorded by Congress, we believe it appropriate to accord greater weight to immediate relative status than to visa-preference status when making discretionary determinations under the Act. Therefore, the benefits of Matter of Cavazos, supra, will be limited to immediate relatives.

The respondent in this case is not an immediate relative: he is a fifth-preference immigrant. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed."

Edited October 21, 2021 by HRQX

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

1 hour ago, HRQX said:

I think @aaron2020 mentioned it because the risk is technically there for an IO to determine intent at the I-485 interview for non-IR cases. See Matter of Ibrahim: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2012/08/14/2866.pdf "The benefits of Matter of Cavazos, supra, are limited to immediate relatives, and an application for adjustment of status by a fifth-preference immigrant who entered the United States as a nonimmigrant with a preconceived intention to remain is properly denied in the exercise of discretion." "The Immigration and Nationality Act makes immediate relative status a special and weighty equity. The Congress has accorded immediate relatives important dispensations not available to visa-preference applicants. Section 201(a) of the Act exempts immediate relatives from the Act's numerical limitations on immigration. Further, section 245 of the Act which provides for adjustment of status, denies that benefit to aliens other than immediate relatives who after January 1, 1977, continue in or accept unauthorized .employment prior to the filing of an application for adjustment of status. Section 245(c)(2). In view of this most favorable status accorded by Congress, we believe it appropriate to accord greater weight to immediate relative status than to visa-preference status when making discretionary determinations under the Act. Therefore, the benefits of Matter of Cavazos, supra, will be limited to immediate relatives.

The respondent in this case is not an immediate relative: he is a fifth-preference immigrant. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed."

What is a fifth preference immigrant? Anyway it seems moot as the filing fee appears to have put OP off the idea, but that reminded me that I know of 4 or 5 DV selectees who came in on tourist visas in the last few months of FY21 when it was clear their consulates were not going to have interviews, and they all succeeded in adjusting, including one who applied within a week or two of entry. I must say that reading those experiences made me very skeptical of this issue being a real life problem because those should have been obvious candidates for rejection yet none of them were denied. Yes I know there was a court case about this issue but honestly, how many people do we see denied adjustment because of intent at entry? Definitely see people refused entry because of suspicion of intent but once they’re in…

 

[Athea 12]

2 hours ago, HRQX said:

I think @aaron2020 mentioned it because the risk is technically there for an IO to determine intent at the I-485 interview for non-IR cases. See Matter of Ibrahim: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2012/08/14/2866.pdf "The benefits of Matter of Cavazos, supra, are limited to immediate relatives, and an application for adjustment of status by a fifth-preference immigrant who entered the United States as a nonimmigrant with a preconceived intention to remain is properly denied in the exercise of discretion." "The Immigration and Nationality Act makes immediate relative status a special and weighty equity. The Congress has accorded immediate relatives important dispensations not available to visa-preference applicants. Section 201(a) of the Act exempts immediate relatives from the Act's numerical limitations on immigration. Further, section 245 of the Act which provides for adjustment of status, denies that benefit to aliens other than immediate relatives who after January 1, 1977, continue in or accept unauthorized employment prior to the filing of an application for adjustment of status. Section 245(c)(2). In view of this most favorable status accorded by Congress, we believe it appropriate to accord greater weight to immediate relative status than to visa-preference status when making discretionary determinations under the Act. Therefore, the benefits of Matter of Cavazos, supra, will be limited to immediate relatives.

The respondent in this case is not an immediate relative: he is a fifth-preference immigrant. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed."

If the AOS only applies to immediate relatives then why there are adjustment of status for family preference categories filing charts.  

[HRQX 4,145]

4 hours ago, SusieQQQ said:

What is a fifth preference immigrant?

Per changes from the Immigration Act of 1990, the old fifth preference is the current fourth Family-sponsored Preference category (i.e. Brothers and Sisters of Adult USC):

• https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/101/s358/text "Section 203 (8 U.S.C. 1153) is amended ..."
• INA § 203 before the 1990 changes: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-79/pdf/STATUTE-79-Pg911.pdf "Sec. 203." on Pages 2 through 5
• https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2012/08/14/2866.pdf "On June 3, 1976, he filed an application for adjustment of status based upon a fifth-preference visa petition filed by his sister and approved by the Service in October 1975."

3 hours ago, Athea said:

If the AOS only applies to immediate relatives then why

I didn't say that.

 

I was just noting that there are certain caveats for non-IR adjustment of status cases:

• https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-b-chapter-6
• https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-b-chapter-4
• https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-b-chapter-3
• Matter of Ibrahim: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2012/08/14/2866.pdf

Edited October 21, 2021 by HRQX

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

1 hour ago, Athea said:

If the AOS only applies to immediate relatives then why there are adjustment of status for family preference categories filing charts.  

He’s not saying it is only for IRs, he’s saying IRs are treated differently in the process.

[Ontarkie 14,218]

~~Off Topic post removed. Please stick to the OP's questions~~

[Julio247 6]

On 10/19/2021 at 11:23 PM, aaron2020 said:

Hi,

 

Read this pinned thread.  Pregnancy is not a valid reason for an expedite.  https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/671722-no-pregnancy-is-not-grounds-to-expedite-your-process/

 

If the USC father has lived in the US for at least 5 years, then your baby will be a US citizen regardless of whether you're married or not.

Who filed for you?

That is talking about USCIS.... but. The question is for NVC... not for USCIS