please read my timeline for type of visa option

[grrrrreat 109]

Yes. I have. before submitting my applications I made an Infopass at the Local USCIS Office and was told that since May 10TH of this yr they had received a letter that AP through TPS is now considered a legal entry and that they will go by last entry.

"If I entered in 2001 as EWI got TPS after having been in the US for over yr , then Traveled with advance parole can I file I-130 concurrent with I-485 since I'm now married to USC? "

She said that Advance Parole was a legal entry but to give her a minute to make sure that TPS Advance Parole was also considered a legal entry. (she came back over 10 minutes later) and said.

IO: I spoke to Head Officer and was told that In fact TPS advance Parole is considered a legal entry and that since May 10th their office had received a letter from HQ stating that they can now use TPS Advance Parole as a legal Entry....

she also said; cases like mine where frozen until 20 days ago and that I can go ahead and file I-130 and I-485 together along with all supporting documents.

I then asked her if I would require a waiver for EWI she said NO and nor for the unlawful presence because HQ authorized the entry with your Advance Parole so you are no longer EWI ...

I also asked how long is the process in my case?

she said you are adjusting as a standard AOS so it should take about 2-3 months if no criminal record, she also mentioned that I might not get approved if I have any criminal records...(no problem at all for the past 13 yrs since I entered US)

I know people that have adjusted with approved waiver before.

See Matter Arrabally and Yerrabelly (BIA2012)

I would definitely like to see that letter from HQ regarding entrance on advance parole being an admission for adjustment purposes.

You keep citing Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, but it's a completely different case from yours. The aliens in that case were admitted and inspected with nonimmigrant visas, not EWIs, when they filed for adjustment of status. The advance parole was issued due to the pending adjustment, not because of TPS. The question there was only whether they had incurred 10 year bans due to departing the U.S. after accumulating overstay. The court held that leaving the U.S. with advance parole does not constitute a departure for the purpose of the 10 year ban. It did not hold that entry into the U.S. with advance parole (granted due to TPS) was an admission for adjustment of status purposes.

[isa30 4]

I would definitely like to see that letter from HQ regarding entrance on advance parole being an admission for adjustment purposes.

You keep citing Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, but it's a completely different case from yours. The aliens in that case were admitted and inspected with nonimmigrant visas, not EWIs, when they filed for adjustment of status. The advance parole was issued due to the pending adjustment, not because of TPS. The question there was only whether they had incurred 10 year bans due to departing the U.S. after accumulating overstay. The court held that leaving the U.S. with advance parole does not constitute a departure for the purpose of the 10 year ban. It did not hold that entry into the U.S. with advance parole (granted due to TPS) was an admission for adjustment of status purposes.

That's exactly what I thought and that's the reason why I made Infopass to ask USCIS what forms to file in my case.

again I know people that successfully adjusted and where required to submit a hardship waiver, waiver was approved and now they are LPR .

The only difference in my case from their is, I no longer require a waiver for EWI or UL.

been with NOW Hubby for over 3 yrs and just been married 2.5 months

And I pray to god I get approved.

[Jaqui 0]

Hi Izzy!

[isa30 4]

Hi Izzy!

izzy? lol... how do you know my name?

[isa30 4]

izzy? lol... how do you know my name?

sorry

Hi Jaqui...

[grrrrreat 109]

That's exactly what I thought and that's the reason why I made Infopass to ask USCIS what forms to file in my case.

again I know people that successfully adjusted and where required to submit a hardship waiver, waiver was approved and now they are LPR .

The only difference in my case from their is, I no longer require a waiver for EWI or UL.

been with NOW Hubby for over 3 yrs and just been married 2.5 months

And I pray to god I get approved.

Good luck. Please do let us know how it turns out.

[isa30 4]

Good luck. Please do let us know how it turns out.

Thank you...

I will. It seems that for this forum this is something new. But hopefully my info helps others.

[grrrrreat 109]

Thank you...

I will. It seems that for this forum this is something new. But hopefully my info helps others.

This forum doesn't specialize in very complicated immigration problems, and most would consider adjusting after EWI to be that. We also don't get too many TPS immigrants either.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I have understood Advance Parole to be a parenthetical exit and reentry. I don't understand how AP can be a non-exit but then subsequently a reentry. It seems to me it should be either both exit and reentry, or neither exit nor reentry.

I don't understand it either. USCIS is saying "We're giving you permission in advance to be paroled into the US", but then the BIA says that when you left you didn't really "depart", so why would you need permission to be paroled? The logic they used confounds me.

The BIA has nothing to do with the presidency, so I don't see how their decision in appellate court was somehow designed by a separate branch.

The BIA is under the Department of Justice, which is a cabinet level executive branch department. They are subject to executive orders from the president. The current administration has been very active issuing executive orders that don't actually change the law (they don't have that authority) but change the way that the law is interpreted and/or enforced by executive branch agencies. One such executive order resulted in the I-601A process that's being put into effect soon. Another executive order instructed DHS to focus on deportation proceedings specifically against aliens who were guilty of crimes other than unlawful presence, though there is some question among immigration attorneys whether DHS has been following this order. Many say that removal proceedings against their clients, who have not been convicted of any crime, have not been suspended as the executive order implied they would be.

In my view, these executive orders are politically motivated. The President wants to appear to be sympathetic to the plight of illegal immigrants in order to appeal to Hispanic voters. However, he doesn't want to actually do anything concrete about the situation because he knows it's a political hot potato. He promised immigration reform would be a top priority in his first year in office. Not only did he not propose any changes to the law, he didn't actively back any bills proposed by any Democratic members of Congress. He gave tacit approval to the DREAM Act both times it came up, but didn't actively campaign for it's passage.

[Hypnos 6,576]

Obama didn't actively campaign for the DREAM Act because he likely saw that doing so would be full of negatives (Republicans being able to say "The President is soft on immigration!") with few positives (it would not pass the House with the Republicans stymying progress on any Bill that even skirted around the word "amnesty").

If the Democrats manage to take back the House and hold the Senate in November's elections that I am hopeful that comprehensive immigration reform (both on the enforcement and administrative side) will finally happen. It is sorely needed.

A lot of people forget that the last amnesty was actually enacted by a Republican President, Ronald Reagan, in 1986. I doubt something like that could happen again in today's political climate, the GOP has simply moved too far to the right in order for such a thing to be possible.

I'm surprised to not see a thread on today's immigration news from the President that he is enacting an administrative version of the DREAM Act. Maybe it's hidden on VJ somewhere...

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Obama didn't actively campaign for the DREAM Act because he likely saw that doing so would be full of negatives (Republicans being able to say "The President is soft on immigration!") with few positives (it would not pass the House with the Republicans stymying progress on any Bill that even skirted around the word "amnesty").

If the Democrats manage to take back the House and hold the Senate in November's elections that I am hopeful that comprehensive immigration reform (both on the enforcement and administrative side) will finally happen. It is sorely needed.

A lot of people forget that the last amnesty was actually enacted by a Republican President, Ronald Reagan, in 1986. I doubt something like that could happen again in today's political climate, the GOP has simply moved too far to the right in order for such a thing to be possible.

I'm surprised to not see a thread on today's immigration news from the President that he is enacting an administrative version of the DREAM Act. Maybe it's hidden on VJ somewhere...

The DREAM Act came up when the Democrats still controlled both houses, and it failed to pass. It's highly unlikely they'll retake the House in November. The party in power usually loses seats, which is what happened in 2010. When the economy is down then the party in power often loses a LOT of seats. I wouldn't be surprised if the Republicans not only increased their majority in the House, but actually managed to take control of the Senate.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was supposed to be a stick and a carrot. The stick was increased enforcement (for example, hiring illegal immigrants became a criminal offense). The carrot was supposed to be amnesty for some 2.8 million illegal immigrants. Proponents of the act, including Reagan, claimed it would solve the problem of what to do with the illegal immigrant population currently in the US, while simultaneously eliminating the incentive for more illegal immigrants to come. It backfired. Current conservative estimates are that the illegal immigrant population is around 11 million, or four times as many as there were in 1986. Some estimates are much higher. Even strong supporters of Reagan admit that the IRCA was a disaster that didn't accomplish what it was supposed to accomplish, and some believe it had the opposite effect and actually encouraged more illegal immigrants to come.

The President's executive order today reenforces my earlier post. This is a purely political maneuver on the President's part. He could have issued that order 3 1/2 years ago. He also could have issued it both times the DREAM Act came up and was defeated in Congress. He waited until now because he desperately needs to get Hispanic voters minds off of the economy.

[Hypnos 6,576]

The DREAM Act actually passed in both chambers of Congress; only the Republican roadblock of requiring a supermajority in the Senate prevented it from becoming law. I also think it's unlikely (but possible) that the Democrats will retake the House, but they stand a much better chance of holding onto the Senate, although again with Republican abuse of the filibuster that isn't as useful as it sounds these days.

I don't think it's a coincidence that Obama chose this close to the election to take the executive action he did today. I wish he had threatened to do this the first time the DREAM Act was blocked in Congress, but I think he underestimated just how hard the GOP would work to block almost any and all of his agenda. Yes it's a political act to do it now, but I'd still rather he had done than not done it.