30/60dau rule

[lemon666 0]

Mom and dad applied for the B2 visitor visa in April 2016 and got approved. In June ,i applied for becoming a US citizen.Dad arrived NY on B2 visa in september 2016. And after 10 days of my dad's arrival, I become a US citzen. Mom arrived NY on B2 visa in November 2016. In December 2016, I submitted the 130 and 485 application for them. just found out there is 30/60day rule after I submitted the applications. Does the 30/60day rule apply to an immediate relative of US citizen? At the interview, will they deny the case? (They actually visited me on B2 visa several times years ago, when I was a geen card holder.

[Roel 7,191]

Did you parents came to the USA with the intent to stay and live there permanently? What did they say to the immigration officer when they arrived?

[lemon666 0]

they got 10-year valid B2 visa in 2011 and they come to visit me and my two babies, they told officer the purpose is to visit us. And at that time I am a green card holder. they dont hav intent to apply for green card. becasue they need to go back to home country to work at that time and they come and go several times, each time only stay less than 4 months.

This year , they hold the previous B2 visa to enter, there is no interview to get the visa and when then came in, no one ask for the purpose of the trip.

[geowrian 22,335]

they got 10-year valid B2 visa in 2011 and they come to visit me and my two babies, they told officer the purpose is to visit us. And at that time I am a green card holder. they dont hav intent to apply for green card. becasue they need to go back to home country to work at that time and they come and go several times, each time only stay less than 4 months.

This year , they hold the previous B2 visa to enter, there is no interview to get the visa and when then came in, no one ask for the purpose of the trip.

I'm not here to start something, but I will note if they came here on a B2 (a non-immigrant visa) with intent to immigrate, that's fraud. They will likely be questioned about it during the AOS process (likely the interview or via an RFE).

Edit: Before somebody else chimes in, I'm aware that intent alone is not a reason to deny AOS. But I will point out that they will likely be questioned about it and it may trigger additional scrutiny.

Edited December 22, 2016 by geowrian

[geowrian 22,335]

Dang it...it won't let me edit the last comment. XD

I think I may have misunderstood something. Are they in the US right now? Do they intend to return home? The reason I ask is because, of course, you can visit using the B2 and still apply for an immigrant visa. I understood the issue as they are coming to the US for the purpose of staying there, despite it being a non-immigrant visa. If that was incorrect, then my bad.

[JFH 12,189]

*~*~*moved from "CR-1 spouse visa process and procedures" to "AOS from work/study/tourist visas" as the people in question are currently in the USA*~*~*

[EM_Vandaveer 2,364]

Intent alone is NOT a reason to deny an immediate relative of a USC's AOS application. This is USCIS' own policy.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

Did you parents came to the USA with the intent to stay and live there permanently? What did they say to the immigration officer when they arrived?

this is irrelevant

I'm not here to start something, but I will note if they came here on a B2 (a non-immigrant visa) with intent to immigrate, that's fraud. They will likely be questioned about it during the AOS process (likely the interview or via an RFE).

Edit: Before somebody else chimes in, I'm aware that intent alone is not a reason to deny AOS. But I will point out that they will likely be questioned about it and it may trigger additional scrutiny.

no, it won't likely. I haven't seen a case onvk where it has.

I'm not here to start something, but I will note if they came here on a B2 (a non-immigrant visa) with intent to immigrate, that's fraud. They will likely be questioned about it during the AOS process (likely the interview or via an RFE).

Edit: Before somebody else chimes in, I'm aware that intent alone is not a reason to deny AOS. But I will point out that they will likely be questioned about it and it may trigger additional scrutiny.

no, it won't likely. I haven't seen a case onvk where it has.

[aaron2020 11,651]

I'm not here to start something, but I will note if they came here on a B2 (a non-immigrant visa) with intent to immigrate, that's fraud. They will likely be questioned about it during the AOS process (likely the interview or via an RFE).

Edit: Before somebody else chimes in, I'm aware that intent alone is not a reason to deny AOS. But I will point out that they will likely be questioned about it and it may trigger additional scrutiny.

Why would USCIS give them a hard time when USCIS is bound by law not to consider any of it? What would USCIS hope to gain from jeopardizing the case and setting themselves up for a lawsuit?

Please don't make stuff up.

[geowrian 22,335]

I think this sums it up pretty well. Nothing I stated is "made up". It's my assessment of the information:

http://www.peerallylaw.com/en/content/view/562

Basically, you can to enter the US on a B2 and have AOS accepted even with the intent to immigrate so long as you do not provide misrepresentation (i.e. if questioned at POE as to intent, you cannot lie). The 30/60 day rule provides a procedure for USCIS to determine misrepresentation if the visitor takes an action contract to the B2 visa within 30 days of admission, or a rebuttal presumption within 60 days of admission even if the visitor was not questioned at POE. This 30/60 day rule is not a strict law, and a good immigration attorney can challenge its application (I asked an attorney today at a party, actually). As I noted in my comments, intent does not solely disqualify AOS, but it can result in additional scrutiny and hassle that somebody who went through the proper process would not have to face. Nobody wants to be in that position, and nobody should be suggesting that somebody commit visa fraud. The proper process here is to file an immigrant visa (i.e. I-130) to obtain the proper visa prior to arriving in the US with the intent to stay there. That said, if the parents are already in the US, then filing for AOS is the next step. "Violating" the 30/60 rule can result in additional scrutiny, even if it does not mean a denial.

Entering on a B2 with the intent to immigrate is still visa fraud, though. It just doesn't mean people necessarily pay a consequence for it (i.e. if they are not asked about it). I'm certain others here would disagree with this, but that is my interpretation.

Edited December 23, 2016 by geowrian

[EM_Vandaveer 2,364]

I think this sums it up pretty well. Nothing I stated is "made up". It's my assessment of the information:

http://www.peerallylaw.com/en/content/view/562

Basically, you can to enter the US on a B2 and have AOS accepted even with the intent to immigrate so long as you do not provide misrepresentation (i.e. if questioned at POE as to intent, you cannot lie). The 30/60 day rule provides a procedure for USCIS to determine misrepresentation if the visitor takes an action contract to the B2 visa within 30 days of admission, or a rebuttal presumption within 60 days of admission even if the visitor was not questioned at POE. This 30/60 day rule is not a strict law, and a good immigration attorney can challenge its application (I asked an attorney today at a party, actually). As I noted in my comments, intent does not solely disqualify AOS, but it can result in additional scrutiny and hassle that somebody who went through the proper process would not have to face. Nobody wants to be in that position, and nobody should be suggesting that somebody commit visa fraud. The proper process here is to file an immigrant visa (i.e. I-130) to obtain the proper visa prior to arriving in the US with the intent to stay there. That said, if the parents are already in the US, then filing for AOS is the next step. "Violating" the 30/60 rule can result in additional scrutiny, even if it does not mean a denial.

Entering on a B2 with the intent to immigrate is still visa fraud, though. It just doesn't mean people necessarily pay a consequence for it (i.e. if they are not asked about it). I'm certain others here would disagree with this, but that is my interpretation.

30/60/90 day "rule" is not USCIS operating procedure. It's a Department of State "policy". Someone filing for AOS does NOT deal with DoS but with USCIS.

[Ontarkie 13,902]

~~ Inappropriate post removed and some quoting. Stick to answering the question or do not post.~~

[geowrian 22,335]

30/60/90 day "rule" is not USCIS operating procedure. It's a Department of State "policy". Someone filing for AOS does NOT deal with DoS but with USCIS.

I'm just going by what multiple immigration lawyers have stated publicly. That said, I obviously do not provide legal advice...just input and some references that I believe are pertinent the the question.

http://www.hummelaw.com/Blog/2014/January/The-30-60-Day-Rule.aspx

See the "Special Rule for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens." section. Intent cannot be used as a sole factor in denial of an AOS application, but can be used in conjunction with anything else found against the beneficiary in a denial of the petition. Others here may have a different opinion, but I felt it is relevant to post an immigration attorney's write up on the specific matter asked by the OP.

I'll bow out here as I think I provided all that I can to the OP. I don't want to see this thread get off course about the merits/faults of this reference or anything else.

Best wishes to all involved.

[EM_Vandaveer 2,364]

I'm just going by what multiple immigration lawyers have stated publicly. That said, I obviously do not provide legal advice...just input and some references that I believe are pertinent the the question.

http://www.hummelaw.com/Blog/2014/January/The-30-60-Day-Rule.aspx

See the "Special Rule for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens." section. Intent cannot be used as a sole factor in denial of an AOS application, but can be used in conjunction with anything else found against the beneficiary in a denial of the petition. Others here may have a different opinion, but I felt it is relevant to post an immigration attorney's write up on the specific matter asked by the OP.

I'll bow out here as I think I provided all that I can to the OP. I don't want to see this thread get off course about the merits/faults of this reference or anything else.

Best wishes to all involved.

In conjunction with something else, sure. That something else would be sufficient for denial on its own, though.

So it does not make a difference if there was intent or not.

[mallafri76 1,012]

Considering the political forces about to take over in the US, I am just astonished that people continue to jeopardize their lives and future by entering on a tourist visa or VWP and applying for adjustment of status.

OP, you don't think it's gonna look a little suspicious that your parents regularly visited you while you were a permanent resident but the second you become a USC, they visit and oops, changed their mind to stay and adjust status?!?!