Demise

So those things are similar but unrelated and can run at the same time. In removal proceedings seeking VAWA you've generally got two options and you can both: You can file I-360 with USCIS and file I-485 with the court. Jurisdiction over I-360 always rests with USCIS. Jurisdiction over I-485 rests either with USCIS (not in removal proceedings or not in pre-1997 deportation proceedings) or with the Immigration court (if in removal/deportation proceedings). You can also file EOIR-42B to seek cancellation of removal, which is what you've done in this case. Now, both of these have similar but not identical requirements, cancellation of removal for example lets you get around the 2 year deadline to file after death/divorce, it also allows you to seek adjustment even if you were never married to the abuser as long as you have a child together, cancellation of removal also requires a finding of extreme hardship with VAWA cases. So what now, well you've got a few options: 1. You can file I-485 with the court, refer to this instruction sheet: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/legal-docs/DEFA-pre-order-instructions.pdf or, 2. Alternatively if you don't mind abandoning the EOIR-42B you can file a motion to terminate with the immigration court, and if you get that then removal proceedings will end and you can just file I-485 with USCIS. To answer this directly, no that's not exactly correct. I-360/I-485 and EOIR-42B are two different processes, both result in a green card but they're independent from each other. There is no requirement for you have a pending EOIR-42B to file I-485 with the court. Nor does an EOIR-42B require an I-485, if an EOIR-42B is approved then that approval will result directly in an issuance of a green card.

Hey so I wasn't able to get a copy of their denial notice but I got this reply from the person in question (K-2 who tried DACA AP to wipe the original K-2 entry): "I got the denial notice. USCIS basically wrote me a denial letter saying DACA is not valid immigration status, and going back to the states with AP does not overwrite the legal entry of K-2, so they rejected my AOS application." So, ngl, still not sure what the best course of action is here. Try to AOS and if that fails be ready to do I-824, once that's approved pay for DS-260, then file I-601A, then once I-601A is approved file DS-260.

It's a bit more complicated than that. It doesn't protect you on its own, but in absence of other options you can make a request for deferred action.

Then you will disclose that travel during the naturalization interview, they will add that to the calculations, and unless you're right on the edge of time actually spent in US (minimum 18 months out of 3 years) you'll be fine. Basically: 1. You need to be an LPR for a period of time (3 years under VAWA, 5 years under the general provision) (this is the continuous residence requirement referenced below) 2. You need to have resided in US for at least half of the time (18/36 months or 30/60 months) 3. Trips under 6 months do not break the continuous residence requirement 4. Trips over 6 months but under 12 months may break continuous residence requirement. Basically then it's up to you that you didn't intent to break it and still maintain a job, home, etc in US, or family members stayed in US. If you can rebuff it your naturalization eligibility date stays the same, if you cannot rebuff it then your naturalization eligibility date slides back 6 months. 5. Trips over 12 months do break continuous residence and then you have two options: a. Try to file 2 years 1 day after return (VAWA) or 4 years and 1 day after return and then try to rebuff the break since the absent period in scope is over 6 months and under 12 months so basically the same requirements as in point 4 apply. b. Wait 2 years and 6 months (VAWA) or 4 years 6 months after return to file. tl;dr: Be in US for at least half the time and don't take trips over 6 months if you want to naturalize fast. Disclose trips after filing N-400 at the interview.

I mean custody is only a requirement for citizenship. Nothing really prevents a noncustodial parent from doing I-130/I-485. Can always try some kind of split custody agreement, like dad gets every second weekend and try if that'll be enough for N-600. Law only says legal and physical custody, not sole custody.

Not in this case. It is a factor for children born out of wedlock while the father is a citizen and acquisition of citizenship at birth. Even that requires the father's acknowledgement of paternity and consent to support the kid until 18, not that he does actually follow through with it. For Child Citizenship Act (acquisition after birth via a citizen parent) then all of these have to hold true at once at some point: 1. Parent is a US Citizen 2. Child is a permanent resident 3. Child is under 18 4. Child is residing in legal and physical custody of the citizen parent So yeah, in this case the best option would be to file a standalone I-130 and proceed via consular processing, issuance of the visa would require mother's consent and ideally you'd want another statement from her that she is fine with the kid living with the father. Then once the kid is in US file N-600 and apply for a US Passport, strictly speaking he only needs a passport but N-600 is a good additional proof to have, especially if somewhere down the line he'll want to work for the federal government and it's easiest to apply for it when everything is fresh rather than try to hunt down all the old documents later. It also wouldn't be the worst idea for the father to add the kid to his insurance, do some check ups, enroll the kid in school. Like if mother wants to come over an F-1 visa that might be a better idea rather than try to shuffle the kid around. Just come to some kind of split custody agreement once she does.

I wouldn't worry too much about the DS-2019 in this case. The J-1 visa itself should list whether you are subject to 212(e) or not. DS-2019 in other adjustment cases (e.g. via work) serves mainly as proof of continuous lawful status that's not required here. Regarding the birth certificate: That's associated with the I-485, I-765 is basically based solely upon a pending or concurrently filed I-485. Yes, it has to be translated if it's not in English. USCIS doesn't prohibit self-translation however it's best to get it done by a third party. The translator doesn't have to be licensed or anything, they just have to attach a signed statement that they're fluent in English and the language of the document and that the attached translation is accurate. Regarding the "thin file", basically don't have many joint documents, once you get an EAD and SSN just get that sorted and bring them to an interview. Like when it comes to the proof of the marriage the only thing you have to submit at the initial stages is the marriage certificate.

I wouldn't say that it is impossible but it'll be very hard. Biggest issue would be dodging a finding of marriage fraud, or more correctly "having entered into marriage with intent of evading immigration laws" which can get her banned under INA 204(c) and that is a tough bar because there's no waivers available for it and it doesn't expire on its own. Only way around it is to disprove that finding in the course of some other subsequent visa petition which can very well end up with having to provide a lot more evidence for the legitimacy of the previous marriage(s) than for the current one. So like what happened with the first one, why was that one annulled? Was an I-130 filed? Second one, what happened there exactly? How did the ex allege fraud? It's all a totality of circumstances. Lets say with the first one they got married, decided that they don't vibe with each other and went their separate ways and no I-130 was filed, in that case the marriage wasn't ever really even attempted to be used for immigration purposes so it'd pass the smell test. Second one could be very well be a case where a marriage doesn't need to be healthy in order to be legit and ended up being a coabusive mess. Then you know, if you marry 3 different US citizens in a 5 year period then it really looks like you're just trying to get anyone with a pulse and US citizenship who can sponsor you. Now, I'm not saying that is definitely the case but that's how USCIS will look at it and it'll be on her to prove that all of those marriages were entered into in good faith and not just for a green card.

Do a FOIA with CBP. It will take a bit but it's free to file. https://www.cbp.gov/site-policy-notices/foia/faq-foia

Unless something changed recently he shouldn't be subject to a bar. F-1s are generally issued with an I-94 for "Duration of Status" (D/S). Due to a quirk in regulations (this part was never migrated properly to the policy manual so 40 AFM p. 76 remains controlling. For Dept of State that handles visa issuance for abroad that'd be 9 FAM 302.11-3(B)(1) . Basically, persons admitted for D/S do not begin to accrue unlawful presence until one of the following happens: 1. USCIS makes a formal finding that the person fell out of status in the course of some other benefit application (e.g. files for AOS and gets denied) 2. Immigration judge orders removal In case of which it begins to count from the following day, so the finding is not retroactive. If there's less than 180 days of unlawful presence then there's no re-entry ban for it and in this case it sounds like it was exactly 0 days. Definitely do print out the relevant FAM section above and the prior I-94 since it might take some arguing but as the law and regulations exist he shouldn't be subject to a re-entry ban unless he somehow got admitted as an F-1 for a concrete period of time. So the question whether to wait is moot since there's no ban to wait out, if there was then yes, the ban expires on its own and he'd need to at worst prove that he left US on a certain date and there's no additional forms to file. There was an attempt to make the unlawful presence start ticking automatically back in 2017, but after a lawsuit that was vacated.

I looked and saw nothing. Even if, all of his previous bans did exempt already existing permanent residents.

Taking an aside from the thread at hand: This is kinda the difficult point where the site TOS (depending how strictly you read it) meets the law as applied. Sure, I-601A does give you no status, but also I-601A exists specifically to let you stay in US while the waiver is pending (compared to the I-601 that required you to leave first, get banned, attend a consular interview, and then file, then once approved attend another interview). This is similar to something like 245(i) grandfathering with a backlogged petition where waiting in US until you can file for AOS is the best option for you. Now, I would never recommend that someone should overstay or otherwise violate their status, but if that violation has already happened then you have to react accordingly and give the best advice through whatever path exists in the law. Anyways back to the topic at hand. OP, here's USCIS policy manual for what USCIS looks for: https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-9-part-b-chapter-5 Also keep in mind that extreme hardship sounds scary but it's not an insurmountable standard to clear and everything gets reviewed as a totality of circumstances, so a pile of things that wouldn't really be all that horrible on their own will generally be enough to move the needle enough for an approval.

N-662 is what they give you if you request a name change as a part of N-400. If you don't have it then you don't have it and marriage cert would be the right document for this case (possibly more, basically all the documents bridging the name listen on your birth certificate to your current legal name). I'd also include a cover letter that you didn't change your name as a part of N-400, instead that happened by marriage, so you were never issued an N-662.

Have them travel to US. CBP can do one of three things: 1. Admit them as LPRs. 2. Parole them for removal proceedings. 3. Pressure them to sign I-407, in case of which they will need to decline and wait out CBP, which will lead to one of the two outcomes above. So if they end up getting readmitted as LPRs they'll be good to go, just have them wait out the 5 years and naturalize. If they are paroled for removal proceedings then you can file new I-130s for them with USCIS, then they'll file new I-485s with the court and they'll be able to just re-adjust. Yeah fun fact, USCIS doesn't allow you to re-adjust. Immigration courts do, so filing a new I-130/I-485 is in fact a defense to removal.

Yeah sorry, meant to say "met in person".