Overstay F1 Covid 19 10 year bar

[coolcat20 5]

Just now, Demise said:

Yeah they should've been informed but things like this don't come up often so a lot of the rank and file employees don't know every intricacy of immigration law.

 

In this case you'd apply for something else, go to the interview, point out that the agent incorrectly concluded that you are subject to a 10 year bar, bring proof of your prior F-1 and admission for D/S, copy of the Foreign Policy Manual sections detailing how it works, and after having someone higher up which might have to involve them get a legal opinion from DC, you should be approved.

It is definitely worth a try. Do you mind re attaching the policy you are referring to?

Sorry what do you mean by DC? 

 

[Demise 1,304]

Just now, coolcat20 said:

It is definitely worth a try. Do you mind re attaching the policy you are referring to?

Sorry what do you mean by DC? 

 

Here, by DC I mean District of Columbia, US's capital where most federal departments have their HQs either in it or somewhere nearby, when met with a question where the consulate has no idea what to do, they should ask further up the chain.

19 hours ago, Demise said:

https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM030211.html

 

9 FAM 302.11-3(B)(1)(b)(2):

b. (U) DHS has interpreted "period of stay authorized by the Secretary of Homeland Security," as used in this context, to include:

(2) For individuals inspected and admitted for "duration of status" (DOS), any period of presence in the United States, unless DHS, an IJ, or the BIA makes a formal finding of a status violation, in which case unlawful presence will only being to accrue the day after the formal finding is made;

 

9 FAM 302.11-3(B)(1)(d):

For persons who have been admitted for duration of status (DOS) (as is usually the case with individuals in A, G, F, J, and I visa status), unlawful presence will not accrue unless DHS, IJ, or the BIA finds a status violation in the context of a request for an immigration benefit or during removal proceedings.  This finding of status violation by the DHS, an IJ, or the BIA will cause a period of "unlawful presence" to begin.  In DOS cases where DHS or an IJ or the BIA makes a formal status violation finding, the individual begins accruing unlawful presence on the day after the finding (i.e., the date the finding was published /communicated).  For example, if an applicant presents a letter from DHS dated December 1, 2008, that says the applicant was out of status starting on May 28, 2001, the applicant began to accrue unlawful presence as of December 2, 2008, not May 28, 2001.

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Demise

[coolcat20 5]

8 minutes ago, Demise said:

Here, by DC I mean District of Columbia, US's capital where most federal departments have their HQs either in it or somewhere nearby, when met with a question where the consulate has no idea what to do, they should ask further up the chain.

 

Sorry lol! Thank you. Sorry for the dumb question, but would you have to ask them to contact one of these departments in DC or do you do it by yourself?

[Demise 1,304]

Just now, coolcat20 said:

Sorry lol! Thank you. Sorry for the dumb question, but would you have to ask them to contact one of these departments in DC or do you do it by yourself?

Present the stuff to the first employee you see, if they agree great, if not ask for a manager to look it over, if manager agrees great, if not ask them to check with the Office of Legal Adviser, because their policy says one thing and they are trying to say something else. Be polite but firm and bring the receipts for this claim.

[Dashinka 24,640]

52 minutes ago, coolcat20 said:

Got it. Any idea how it's looking for Sweden?

Sweden falls under the first column in the visa bulletin.

 

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/visa-law0/visa-bulletin/2023/visa-bulletin-for-april-2023.html

[limegreenbowler 45]

I believe the finding was made incorrectly, but honestly, it really doesn’t matter much. There is no appeal process for NIV rejections, though you’re welcome to contact the State Department’s LegalNet about it. You were almost certainly also refused 214(b), which is unwaivable, and even without a formal bar, you’d likely find yourself shadow banned for at least ten years for visa misuse under 214b—your ties to your home country aren’t really going to be relevant to most officers because you seriously misused a visa and your credibility about using one properly in the near future is low.

[SalishSea 17,970]

53 minutes ago, Demise said:

Present the stuff to the first employee you see, if they agree great, if not ask for a manager to look it over, if manager agrees great, if not ask them to check with the Office of Legal Adviser, because their policy says one thing and they are trying to say something else. Be polite but firm and bring the receipts for this claim.

You’re making it sound like the OP can just saunter in to the consulate with this stuff.  
 

Is that how it works?

 

Are you suggesting he will get a B visa after all?

[Demise 1,304]

4 minutes ago, SalishSea said:

You’re making it sound like the OP can just saunter in to the consulate with this stuff.  
 

Is that how it works?

 

Are you suggesting he will get a B visa after all?

No, B visa is toast because yeah 214(b), and since there's no formal appeal process for this stuff the only real way is to challenge the previous finding is while trying to get some other visa (H-1B, EB-3, F4, DV, etc) and address it there that the ban was incorrectly applied and in fact they're not subject to it.

 

If the consulate doubles down on it then get it in writing and file I-601 if it's an immigrant visa, USCIS should deny that stating that there is no ban and go back in there and raise hell.

Edited April 28, 2023 by Demise

[SalishSea 17,970]

1 hour ago, coolcat20 said:

Sorry lol! Thank you. Sorry for the dumb question, but would you have to ask them to contact one of these departments in DC or do you do it by yourself?

The burden is on you.   They’re not going to do any of your legwork to help you get a visa.