Mike E

No. You are expected to prepare this as you are the petitioner.

Use the letters that are normally used where she lives.

1. USCIS cannot dictate to the department of state. 2. Given the forum you posted this in, it seems you are a U.S. citizen. If so, even if you manage to get an IR-2 visa for your daughter, if your she later wants to become a U.S. citizen as an adult, she will end up in a Kafka-esque nightmare when she files N-400. USCIS will claim she became a U.S. citizen the moment she entered the U.S. on her IR-2 as a minor as per the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, because she will not be able to prove you did not have legal custody: Whereas if she instead files for her passport and/or N-600 (certificate of citizenship) the government will want proof you had legal custody. Probably best to wait until she is age 18, if you do not want to get proof of legal custody. Were you a U.S. citizen before she was born?

@sara88 it is ok for naturalization. Not OK for CBP. File for re-entry permit

That might be a problem

Then I say “this” does not apply to you. Was this an RFE?

1. You have all the civil documents, correct? 2. Do you have legal custody documents? 3. Were you married to her other parent before she was born?

Apparently this is the director of the passport agency: https://www.linkedin.com/in/orlando-l-rivera-a0917242 I would try writing that person or Secretary Blinken. I would also try calling the passport agency phone number and request to speak to a manager. says the passport agency will pay for a replacement.

Yes

That question makes no logical sense. B-1/B-2 visas are issued by U.S. Department of State embassies and consulates, and require DS-160 to be filed, and usually require an interview. This is what a B-1/B-2 visa looks like: Do you have one of those? That stamp indicates your class of admission. It is not a visa. Canadians are generally exempt from being required to get B-1/B-2 visas. There are a minority who do have them, mostly limited to frequent business travelers, and BC residents with vacation homes in Washington state. I am Canadian, and have met just one Canadian who had a B-1/B-2 visa.

No you do not. You are visa exempt. It is not considered a visa. Answer is “no”

Seems problematic, since you are denigrating your qualifications and you have not certified it. You can translate yourself and use prose. consistent with the regulation, which says: Translations. Any document containing foreign language submitted to USCIS shall be accompanied by a full English language translation which the translator has certified as complete and accurate, and by the translator's certification that he or she is competent to translate from the foreign language into English. So with the translation you would include this statement: I, ____________, certify * this to be a complete and accurate translation of the document entitled _____________, from __________ to English, and * that I am competent to translate from ____________ to English. Signed ______________ Dated _______________

Enjoy petro-terrorism

No. Simple traffic stops are not detentions. Verbal warnings are not citations. If he reports it, he runs the risk of an RFE, documenting it, which can delay oath for months or years.

270 days absence in 5 years is nothing. There is no legal basis to deny naturalization for so absence. At 800 daya one should start to worry.

1. On Part 2 “your full name”, did you enter your name? 2. On Part 4, “Beneficiary’s Full Name”, did you enter your brother’s name?

LPRs are legally guaranteed entry.

How did you get your green card?

I’ve seen cases of LPRs absent for over 10 years who enter the U.S. with zero consequences. America is a constitutional republic with due process for nearly everyone, including LPRs. Revoking status of LPRs who have been away too long is expensive and takes years. And courts are loathe to make it any easier to revoke. Easier said than done. And because of that, and because millions of LPRs abuse due process, the laws and process to become an LPR have become more onerous over the past 40 years. You would be appalled at how easily I got LPR status in the 1980s.

So just guessing here based on the lack of information: So I-130 is approved, and now NVC wants I-864. I-864 was submitted using household income. NVC wants more info. Possibly I-864a from the husband is the way to go as @Dashinka suggests, but it is hard to say.

Why can’t she? Where is the mother today?

The law does not waive financial responsibility of the petitioner. So since responsibility is not waived, there has to be a theoretical way to enforce it. So what you are really asking is why the law requires the petitioner to be a sponsor if there is a joint sponsor? I surmise that law was written that way to * maximize the number of throats the executive branch could choke in the event the beneficiary used public charge. * reduce the inflow of marginal or fraudulent immigration cases: cases where the immigrant was unlikely to succeed. So for example, someone — whose American spouse is not living in U.S. — is either not likely to succeed or is in a marriage of convenience.

Find another joint sponsor who currently earns enough W-2 income (i.e. will earn enough in the next 12 months) and for tax years 2022, 2021, and 2020 earned enough W-2 income.

The correct answer is the rule has nothing to do with family reunification, and instead is a requirement placed on anybody who signed I-864 on behalf of beneficiary receiving the immigration visa. This includes the primary sponsor (aka petitioner) and any joint sponsors. See the following which cites the actual regulation: The reason is that if the financial sponsor is not domiciled in the U.S. at the time the immigration visa holder enters the U.S., then the U.S. government cannot enforce the terms of I-864. So new immigrants would be free to illegally enjoy public charge, and the government would have no recourse. This would have a material impact on the federal budget.