Mahwah resident Osserritta Robinson is an immigrant from Jamaica whose husband, a U.S. citizen, died in the 2003 Staten Island Ferry crash.

Immigration officials denied her green card application because the couple had been married eight months instead of the required two years.

An appeals court upheld the decision, but Robinson’s attorney tells The Record of Bergen County that he’s petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court.

An advocacy group, Surviving Spouses Against Deportation, says 170 widows and widowers face deportation because their citizen spouses died before two years of marriage.

[via AP.org]

University of Oregon student Nathaniel Spinney and his wife, Sarah Rutherford, are still living apart — 16 months after tying the knot on a farm in her native Nova Scotia.

The consequences of their impulsive but admittedly foolhardy decision to lie about their newlywed status have also prevented Rutherford, 26, from completing her master’s degree program at Fuller Theological Seminary in California.

“It seems unintelligible now that we would think we could do something like that and get away with it,” said Spinney, a 25-year-old Eugene native and UO math major.

They could face another 3½ years of separation. Rutherford received a five-year “exclusion” from the United States as her penalty for providing false information to U.S. border agents.

She and Spinney met and fell in love when both spent a summer working for a Christian service organization that provides free repairs and renovations to the homes of impoverished Native Americans living on remote reservations.

He said he feels terribly guilty that his banned bride has shouldered the brunt of the consequences because he failed to file the proper paperwork for a fiancé visa in time for their wedding. And it was his idea to fib about their marital status as they attempted to cross back into the United States — with a carful of wedding gifts — in time for his fall 2007 UO classes.

“We came to the border, and a kind of panic set in,” he said. “We decided we would just cross as if we were still engaged, and then take care of everything legally once we got to Eugene.”

They had entered the country together that way before and “it hadn’t been an issue, because she was just a visitor,” he explained. And so they slipped off their wedding rings and falsely described their status.

“I assumed that Canada was like ‘America Light,’ that it wouldn’t be much of an issue,” he said ruefully. “It was a bad assumption to make.”

Rutherford’s Canadian passport was selected for extra scrutiny, Spinney said — perhaps because she’d canceled her student visa that spring to go home and prepare for the wedding. Border agents took the pair into separate rooms for questioning. Both promptly ’fessed up, he said. But the damage was done.

Rutherford was turned back at the border and notified that she would not be able to enter the United States for five years.

Since then, Spinney has visited his bride several times in Canada and the couple lived together temporarily in Calgary, after she found a job there. But anything longer than three months would be an overstay of his visitor visa, he said, and they didn’t want to run afoul of another country’s immigration laws.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman Tom Schreiber acknowledged that Rutherford’s five-year ban “sounds harsh.”

“But, sitting on our side of the fence, once you know someone’s tried to deceive you, the question comes up: ‘Is this a fraudulent relationship?’ ” he said. “I’m not saying that’s the case here, but once you’ve lied, a whole lot of credibility goes out the window.”

Rutherford now faces “a two-pronged process” to get back into the United States, Schreiber said.

“She has to overcome her five-year inadmissibility,” he said — a process that requires a $545 fee to even seek a waiver. If one is approved, she must then pay $355 to apply to Citizenship and Immigration Services for an alien relative visa.

The couple have hired Eugene immigration attorney Raquel Hecht to handle the exclusion appeal and help them file a “K-3” application, which allows the spouse of a United States citizen to obtain a “green card” allowing him or her to legally live in the country while awaiting permanent residency status.

Hecht said it’s a shame that border officials chose to throw the book at the newlyweds.

“They’re so arbitrary about how they treat each person,” she said. “I had another case with exactly the same facts from a different border, and the guard just said, ‘Look kids, don’t lie to me — go home and do this right.’ ”

But even without the hurdle of an exclusion, that couple waited eight months before the non-U.S. spouse was allowed into the country.

Hecht said such couples are essentially punished for their decision to marry in the noncitizen’s country, rather than here.

“Sarah and Nathaniel could have not left the United States, done their marriage here, filed for her green card here and never had a day of separation,” she said. “It’s crazy.”

The couple have paid nearly $2,000 in legal costs so far, and expect to spend at least $3,500 by the time the process is finished. At the same time, they feel fortunate to have families who can help them out with expenses as they try to negotiate through the immigration process.

“You start to think about other families going through a similar process, maybe a father who’s come here for work who wants to bring his wife and children,” Spinney said. “If we didn’t have parents who could financially support us in this way, we wouldn’t have a lawyer or be able to pay the fees. We’d be totally lost. And the immigration information out there is so convoluted, I couldn’t even imagine trying to do this if I didn’t speak English fluently. It would seem an impossible task.”

Spinney’s advice to other U.S. citizens contemplating international marriages?

“You have to be real flexible with your wedding plans,” he said. “Getting a fiance visa takes a real long time and when you get it, it’s only good for three months. And to be sure you’re doing it all legally and correctly, you might want to hire a lawyer.”

[ via registerguard ]

Not even government red tape, more than 6,500 miles and not being able to have a spoken conversation.

David Eldridge, 61, is ready to get married. But his bride-to-be, 51-year-old LiYing Fan, still is in Beijing, teaching martial arts and waiting to complete the process of acquiring a visa to move to the United States.

Eldridge — a resident of St. Louis, Mich., and a Gratiot County commissioner — says he met his beloved on an Internet dating site in November 2007.

The two have communicated through an online text translator, but there was one problem when they began speaking on the phone: He speaks no Chinese, and she speaks no English.

Doesn’t matter, Eldridge says.

“Voice can be a relationship killer but hers was sweet and pleasant,” he told the Morning Sun of Mount Pleasant for a story published Monday.

The couple finally met when Fan visited the United States last year as part of a cultural exchange. Her sister, who lives in Milwaukee, traveled to Pasadena, Calif., to meet her. Eldridge went, too.

When they met, Eldridge said, “everything I felt and thought was put into concrete. … It’s funny how you can communicate when you don’t speak the same language.”

Eldridge then began putting together the paperwork for a fiancee visa and learned on New Year’s Day that it was approved. Fan now must undergo a physical exam and interview at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing before she can come to the United States, possibly in April or May.

Eldridge has two daughters from a previous marriage and 10 grandchildren. Fan’s son died at a young age. Both have been married twice before.

They plan a small ceremony in Michigan, he says, partly to avoid the additional red tape that would come with a wedding in China.

[ AP/ Chicago Tribune ]

For that matter, people who are natives of the U.S. and whose skin happens to be brown also have reason to be nervous.

That is because the trend of resentment over the steadily growing immigrant population here has gone beyond the intolerance of individuals and threatens to become ingrained in our state and local legal codes.

Government-sponsored racism is an ugly thing.

The signs of this alarming trend, of course, include the well-publicized effort to limit all Metro Nashville communications and publications to English. But other instances have emerged, as well. As reported in The Tennessean earlier this month, a legal permanent U.S. resident who lives in Franklin saw his state ID and green card confiscated at a driver’s license office on unfounded suspicion that the documents were fake. The state Safety Department’s explanation that it is agency policy to investigate “suspicious” documents was sorely lacking.

In Davidson County, a U.S. citizen from Puerto Rico and her immigrant fiance were denied a marriage license simply because the fiance could not produce a Social Security card. Even though state policy was for county clerks to accept a valid passport or visa in the absence of a Social Security card, and the fiance had a valid passport, the couple was denied.

The Franklin man eventually got back his documents, but in the interim had to fear leaving his house without documents and was unable to visit family in Mexico. The couple had to sue the state of Tennessee, and eventually the state attorney general agreed that the marriage-license policy was unfair.

Read Full Article…

The 30-year-old was to fly from Edmonton to Houston, where she was to marry her Texan fiance on Sept. 20. As Tyrrell excitedly approached the customs gate at Edmonton International Airport, her only worry was her satin wedding dress might be too big for a carry-on.

The customs officer had no problem with Tyrrell’s dress but he wouldn’t let her board her plane. Nearly six hours later, Tyrrell found herself driving home to Beaumont instead of flying towards the altar.

“I was supposed to have a fiance visa,” she said. “Because I didn’t have the paperwork or what not, it was recommended that they withdraw my application to enter the States.”

Tyrrell’s fiance Joe Marks had already consulted with U.S. immigration officials however, and they advised him not to get a fiance visa. He said he was given two options: either get a fiance visa or marry in the U.S. and then deal with the paperwork later.

At least two officials recommended the latter option, Marks said.

“They said that would be the easiest way to do it because we’d be circumventing the fiance visa,” Marks said. “They said it would be no problem. Obviously, we were under the impression that we were doing the right thing.”

The couple should have consulted with a lawyer just to be safe, said a spokesman with the U.S. Department of State.

“It’s always good to consult with a professional,” said Steve Royster with U.S. consular affairs. “I would want the assurance to know that Ihad talked to a professional that was looking out for my interests.”

Royster said couples like Marks and Tyrrell face two legal avenues: obtain a fiance visa or marry outside of the U.S. and then petition for an immigrant visa for the non-U.S. citizen.

For Tyrrell, it’s now too late to get a fiancee visa in time for her Sept. 20th wedding. The couple is canceling the ceremony and will lose around $7,000 in wedding deposits and expenses.

Marks complained to his local immigration office on Tuesday and they told him he was probably misinformed. They also said the whole mishap could have been avoided if Tyrrell simply hadn’t admitted to why she was entering the States.

For Tyrrell, this option didn’t even occur to her.

“I didn’t feel that I needed to lie, you know? I was excited, I wanted everyone to know,” she said. “We’ll still get married but it’s a big damper… apparently love is not all you need.”

article via Canada.com

The new address for deliveries by private courier is:
USCIS:
Attn: Please check Form Instructions for the proper Attn: information
131 South Dearborn, 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60603-5517

Express courier services have agreed to forward packages to the new site for 90 days (until Aug. 24, 2008). During this transition period, USCIS will accept and process without delay all cases otherwise properly filed.

Forms processed at the USCIS Chicago Lockbox include those associated with family-based adjustment of status, all Petitions for Alien Relative (Form I-130), and Temporary Protective Status.

Filing instructions for these forms are available in the Immigration Forms section, located at the top of this page.

Form I-751 is used by individuals who were granted conditional residential status through marriage to a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident and who desire to petition USCIS to remove the conditions on their residence.

Petitioners who live in the following states or territories should file their Form I-751 with the California Service Center (CSC): Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, California, Colorado, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. The mailing address for CSC is:

USCIS
California Service Center
P.O. Box10751
Laguna Niguel, California 92607-0751

Petitioners who live in the following states or territories should file their form I-751 with the Vermont Service Center (VSC): Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Washington, D.C., Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, and West Virginia. The mailing address for VSC is:

USCIS
Vermont Service Center
75 Lower Welden St.
St. Albans, Vermont 05479-0001

Petitions filed with the Nebraska or Texas Service Centers after this announcement but prior to a change in the form instructions will be forwarded to the California or Vermont Service Centers, respectively, without any need for action by the petitioner. However, there could be a slight delay in the adjudication of the petition as a result of the transfer; so, petitioners are encouraged to file directly with the appropriate service center as outlined above. If a petitioner receives a receipt notice from the Nebraska or Texas Service Center, his or her case will be transferred to the California or Vermont Service Center for adjudication. The petitioner should receive a notice advising him or her that the case has been transferred.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Jacqueline Coats’ husband drowned after he dove into a fierce Pacific Ocean riptide to rescue two boys. Now the immigrant from Kenya might be forced to leave the United States because he died before filing her residency application. She is among more than 80 foreign-born widows across the nation who face possible deportation because their husbands died before immigration paperwork was approved.

Some attorneys want to challenge the government’s policy of rejecting green card requests if an immigrant’s American spouse dies before the application is processed. At least one lawyer plans to file a class-action lawsuit.

“This is a wrong that definitely has to be righted,” said immigration attorney Ralph Pineda of Orlando, Fla.

A group of California congressional lawmakers filed a bill in January asking the Congress to grant Coats legal status, but similar measures for other immigrants have seldom passed.

“It is an outrage and an injustice to the memory of this courageous hero that his wife should suffer the loss of family and livelihood once again,” said Democratic Assembly member Mary Hayashi.

The government has also generally denied applications for permanent residence — so-called “green cards” — for surviving spouses of U.S. citizens if the death occurs during the first two years of marriage.

read more here.

BRADENTON –It was about 3:50 a.m. Tuesday when Keith Campbell got the call he had been waiting on.

On the other end was his wife of nine years. Akiko had received word from the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo she would be allowed to reenter the United States.

After six months in limbo, she and her two sons would be coming home to Bradenton.

“Finally, I can come home!” Akiko wrote in an e-mail. “I called Keith immediately. We cried and shared the joy over the telephone.”

The family spoke to each other and celebrated via webcam early Tuesday – Keith from the family home in Bradenton and Akiko with sons Leo and Micah from her native Japan.

“We did it,” Keith said later. “What can I say, it’s wonderful.”

click here to read entire article.

A quieter but equally desperate quest unfolds in Northeast Ohio, where advocates of immigration reform are more likely to be people like Marcela Gallardo.

She was 52 in 1995, a newly sworn-in American citizen, when she applied to have her children join her from the Philippines. Twelve years later, she’s still waiting for visas for them.

“It’s very hard,” said Gallardo, who promotes her cause by filling out forms, paying filing fees and praying. “I want to be with my kids, too. I’m getting old now, and I need them here.”

As a naturalized U.S. citizen, Gallardo is entitled to bring over her children. Some day. Her family must wait in line for visas that are especially scarce for the Philippines, India and China – nations that happen to be primary suppliers of immigrants to Greater Cleveland and Ohio.

In recent years, Asia became Ohio’s largest immigrant source, eclipsing Europe and leaving Mexico and Central America far behind.

So while advocates for immigration reform in California and Texas shout “Amnesty Now” and protest border fences, immigrants to Ohio are more likely to say “Families First” and to ask “How About Us?”

They seek reforms to the legal system of immigration and action on visa backlogs that make them wait years to reunite with family, to accept job offers, to get on with their lives.

Their cause does not capture as much attention in the national discourse, a slight that both puzzles and distresses the Asian immigrant community as Congress prepares to resume its debate on immigration reform.

“They’re worried a new law will not consider people like them,” said Margaret Wong, a Cleveland immigration lawyer with many Asian clients. “They’re worried it will only cover Latinos and not Asians. The needs are very different.”

read the rest of the article here.