jan22

This is not true. CSPA is applicable to F2A children when their LPR parents petition for them, not just derivatives.

The Consulate has no authority over approving or denying Humanitarian Parole. That Is a USCIS process. (Note: The Consulate may be involved in issuing a travel documment for the HP, but that is after USCIS has processed and approved it.) Review the "Requesting Parole for Children" at https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/humanitarian-parole/guidance-on-evidence-for-certain-types-of-humanitarian-or-significant-public-benefit-parole-requests. It directly addresses the issue discussed here.

It counts if it is not just physical, but also legal, custody.

How much was tbe charge? I would contact the credit union to get more information about the source of the charge to verify it and ensure it is a valid charge. USCIS has nothing to do with " visa processing" -- that is the State Department's role and only begins after the I-129f is approved and the case forwarded to NVC, where it is then forwarded to the Embassy.

Prior to 1994, someone who naturalized was expected to intend to live permanently in the US per Section 340 of the INA. If they moved to a country outside the US within one year of naturalization, it was considered prima facie evidence of a lack of that intent, and was grounds to "denaturalize" the person. However, this was removed from the INA in 1994, in Section 104 of the Technical Corrections Act. The cited 1964 case law on the residency rights of natural born vs naturalized citizens was, obviously, decided prior to the 1994 change to the INA on the grounds that natural born citizens could not lose citizenship because of overseas residency. The amended law now makes clear that residing overseas is not grounds for losing US citizenship. I don't believe that narrow decision on the law plays a part in changing the requirement to be a "natural born" citizen (i,e., those who were born as US citizens, with no need to naturalize) to run for President. That is a constitutional requirement (Article II, Section 1, Clause 5), although he claims he can overcome that requirement on constitutional grounds. I'm not sure how any court can declare the Constitution to be unconstitutional, so I don't know how he's planning to be successful, but..who knows! There certainly is not enough time to propose and pass a constitutional amendment to change that provision prior to the next election.

Good...there are enough things to cause heart attacks during this process -- but this isn't one of them! Not sure current processing times for green card -- a few weeks, I believe. But, the stamp she will receive at the POE to "endorse" her visa will serve as proof of her green card status for a year, so she'll be good to travel when she needs to.

But I believe your MIL is not "already in the US", right? The approved I-130 will allow her to apply for the IR-5 immigrant visa -- at her November interview. When she enters the US with that visa, she immediately is an LPR. No I-485 needed.

You used the term "deported". Terms are important. If you were, in fact, deported or given expedited removal, you likely cannot enter the US for 5 years without a waiver. If, however, you were allowed to withdraw your application for admittance, you have no ban on entering the US and will not need a waiver. Since your Iawyer interacted with CBP to try to get tbe record corrected, he/she should know whether you were deported or removed versus allowed to withdraw and, therefore, whether you need a waiver or not.

Your age would not disqualify you for a visa for a J-1 internship. Your nine years of experience would. The J-1 internship exchange program requires the candidate to be a current student or within 12 months of having graduated. The whole purpose is to gain real life experience while also experiencing the US business culture. See https://j1visa.state.gov/programs/intern-program for more infornation.

The HRR only stops a person from being approved for certain work visas and immigrant visas. It does not prohibit tourist visas for visits to the US or student visas for additional study in the US, for example. But, at the end of the time in the US, the expectation is for the person to return to their home country. While in the US, there is no restriction on activities (except crimes, of course!) so the US government is not going to stop you from getting married -- but there still is the presumption that you will leave the US at the end of your authorized stay to fulfill the obligation you agreed to when accepting the J-1 program participation. ( And, BTW, you are right -- it can be done cumulatively, not all at once). Nobody here can say that it is safe to assume the only reason for the denial of the waiver is just because of the US government funding. That is most likely at least part of the reason. However, you haven't said under which basis you applied for the waiver. Each of them have specific information that must be submitted. For example, if you filed on the basis of "Extreme Hardship to a US Citizen Spouse or Child" --which is the most common basis used -- you must have already filed an I-612 waiver with USCIS. USCIS sends its determination that there would be extreme hardship (beyond the "mere" separation from spouse or child) to the Waiver Review Division at the State Department. If USCIS does not find that you have identified extreme hardship and, therefore, does not approve the I-612, the State Department would not be able to approve the HRR waiver. If you haven't already done so, I would encurage you to read the State Department information on waiver of the HRR carefully: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/study/exchange/waiver-of-the-exchange-visitor/how-to-apply-waiver.html#hardship.

Not sure exactly what your question is asking, but will try to clarify and see if it helps. Some J-1 visas have a Home Residency Requirement (HRR) that requires them to return home and spend two years physically present in their home country after completing their J-1 program (per Section 212(e) of the INA). That requirement should have been noted on her visa. Until that HHR is met, or a waiver of that requirement is approved, the J-1 visa holder is not eligible for certain non-immigrant work visas or any immigration visas. The J-1 is a cultural/educational exchange program -- the J-1 recipIent is going to the US to gain knowledge and experience to take back to tbeir home country. Because of that purpose, some HHRs are because the home country wants the person to return and share/use their experience. Therefore, getting a No Objection Statement for a waiver of the HHR is a part of the application process for a waiver of the requirement. It is, however, only one part of the waiver process. The US side of the exchange must also agree to waive the HRR. Usually, when the home country does not object, the US government approves the waiver. However, when US government funds were used to support the J-1 program, it is very unusual for the US to agree to a waiver, and the J-1 recipient is required to fulfill the HRR prior to immigrating to or adjusting status in the US.

There will be no Adjustment of Status approved until either A waiver of the two year home residency requirement (HHR) is approved, or Your wife returns home for two years to fulfill the HHR. What was the funding source for the J-1? That can make a difference. If it was US government funding, for example, it is unlikely that a waiver will be approved.

Unless something has changed in the past few years, most (all?) Embassies/Consulates allow parents to apply for the CRBA and passport at the same time. Assuming the parents want to do so, they adjudicate the CRBA application and, if it's approved, the parent then pays the passport application fee and the application is processed. This saves time for the parents and the Embassy, as all can be done on the same day, at the same interview. This process doesn't work as well, of course, if it's a country with a lot of fraud where most CRBAs are not approved on the day of application/interview. The second paragraph is excellent advice. All of the evidence of physical presence in the US needs to be for ti mm e before t b e baby us birn, so -- start gathering it now.

But if you are aleady 20, you will be 21 before DV 2025 even begins (i.e., October 1, 2024), so you would no longer qualify for a derivative visa. That doesn't matter, however, since you cannot receive a derivative visa if there is no principal applicant (your mother) from whom you derive your status. The Principal Applicant must enter before or at the same time as any derivative. Simply put -- mother doesn't immigrate, it's imposdible for son to go along with her or follow after her.

Classes for Fall 2023 have already started at most (all?) schools. What is the start date on your I-20?

There are a few details that makes what you "already know" you can do into something that you can't actually do. You need to do a lot more research. For example, here are a couple of points to be considered: As an LPR, your spouse will be in a visa category that is numerically limited -- only so many can be approved each year. You would not be able to adjust status until a visa number is available for your Priority Date (PD) -- the date that you will file the petition after you are married. Unless you can go back in time and be in the US, get married (or have married prior to US entry), and file the petition no later than 01 September 2023 (i.e., almost a month ago) you cannot file to adjust status. That is the PD that is "current" for filing for an adjustment of status as the spouse of an LPR. If you try to enter the US as an LPR with your spouse with a visitor visa, the immigration officer will question your/her intentions. When she answers truthfully -- as she must -- that she plans to stay and adjust her status, she will most likely be denied entry, as she should be. If you had an approved petition with a Priority Date that was current, and your spouse had entered the US to visit but had a sudden change of plans that required her to stay in the US, she would then qualify to apply to adjust status.

I believe the OP is referring to an F1 student visa, not an immigrant visa. OP: Did you (or the applicant) pay the MRV fee and schedule the interview appointment?

NVC has no authority to revoke the approval. Since the case is at the Embassy, any notice/ letter should be sent there, with a copy to USCIS, as others have already said.

These shouldn't cause any additional delays if the shutdown occurs. Hopefully, you will hear good news soon!

212 (a)(1) is not the refusal code for inadequate documentation....

Might depend a bit on what the 221(g) documents were. The administrative processing might slow down a bit overall, but with your documents already submitted, I dont think it should affect you much, if at all.

Oops -- just saw the update (glad to see it!) and the date of the original thread. Glad it worked out. I'm leaving my response, though, for future readers. There is no indication that the ConOff did not do their job. Actually, the fact that the visa was issued would indicate just the opposite - that the ConOff did precisely their job, which was to interview a visa applicant and evaluate their current situation to detemine they have overcome the previous ineligibility and now qualify for a visa. If Congress had intended an overstay to be a permanent ineligibility, they would have written the law that way. They did not do so, so the visa applicant who can show how things have changed during their 10-year ban so they can now demonstrate strong ties to their home country is qualified to be issued a visa. OP: I would go for the cheaper ticket or the most convenient flight schedule. All CBP officers have access to the same database, with the same access to information about the prior overstay and the ConOff's notes from the visa interview when the visa was issued. It is likely that she will get "a look" or two from any CBP officer and a little extra scrutiny -- especially on the first entry with the new visa -- regardless of the POE. But, ultimately (unIess there is something else we are not aware of), she will get admitted and the scrutiny will be reduced once she shows continued proper use of the visa.

Yes, the officer should have marked the case as a 221(g) refusal in their system. Any case an officer adjudicate must be either issued or refused in some form -- even if that adjudication ends in a decision that more information is needed, in your case via an interview.

While the operation of the physical Embassy building is included in the Congressionally-approved budget, the buildings do not suspend all operations during a government shut-down and, therefore, remain open and operational during a government shutdown. More importantly, Consular Affairs — like USCIS — is a fee-funded operation. Therefore, consular services continue during the government shut down. Some of the procedures that require information from other sources, however, may slow down.

What is the Priority Date (PD) of the petition, i.e., when was the petition first filed?