PLEASE HELP! DACA with prior deportation

[Rem79 0]

Ok going to attempt to reply to all relevant comments above... bear with me.  I'm unaware of the meaning of some acronyms used here too.  Like "EO".  (Very new to this site.)

 

• Moving to Mexico is an option, but we are looking to avoid it so he doesn't have to leave his children.  
• He has never lied on any of his paperwork or applications, so I don't think misrepresentation is going to be an issue. 
• Based on the bullet points "Boiler" posted above, he does qualify for DACA. 
• He is not considering attempting to obtain a U Visa... was just given as info.

So now..... since his I-130 was accepted with his wife as the sponsor, is there anything they should be doing, or applying for, to move things along a little faster?    

[Boiler 43,451]

11 minutes ago, Rem79 said:

Ok going to attempt to reply to all relevant comments above... bear with me.  I'm unaware of the meaning of some acronyms used here too.  Like "EO".  (Very new to this site.)

 

• Moving to Mexico is an option, but we are looking to avoid it so he doesn't have to leave his children.  
• He has never lied on any of his paperwork or applications, so I don't think misrepresentation is going to be an issue. 
• Based on the bullet points "Boiler" posted above, he does qualify for DACA. 
• He is not considering attempting to obtain a U Visa... was just given as info.

So now..... since his I-130 was accepted with his wife as the sponsor, is there anything they should be doing, or applying for, to move things along a little faster?    

He has control of the clock, it is up to him, assuming he does not get deported again.

[geowrian 22,335]

17 minutes ago, Rem79 said:

So now..... since his I-130 was accepted with his wife as the sponsor, is there anything they should be doing, or applying for, to move things along a little faster?    

EO = Executive Order.

 

He doesn't qualify for AOS since he has no status to adjust from (Entry Without Inspection: EWI). So the only way for him to gain legal status is to interview for a visa at a consulate abroad. The approved I-130 (once NVC processing is complete) lets him do this. He needs to show a bona fide marriage to the petitioner (not just legally married, but proof that it is a legitimate marriage not just for immigration purposes). However, he will be refused the visa due to the 9C bar. Once 10 years outside the US have passed, he may qualify for a waiver...although given the state of the marriage, presumably he may have a new petition/petitioner by then.

 

The alternative is to wait it out and see what happens with DACA and/or immigration reform.

[Rem79 0]

Boiler, not sure what you mean, "he has control of the clock..."

 

Geo: Sounds like he needs to stay put (in his marriage) from what you're suggesting.  It is bona fide, as they reside together, have accounts together, children, a mortgage, etc.  Additionally, she is unaware of my existence and they are living as a married couple.  Unhappily married, but married nonetheless.  

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

There was a much publicized case here in the Detroit area where a couple started the AOS process back in 2005 (IIRC) fought it with the help of lawyers and was deported late last year.  I thought the same thing, why not go back when the 10 yr bar was uncovered instead of fighting it for twelve years.

What case was that Bill?

[belinda63 2,981]

Since he does not have a legal status the 1-601a should be filed as it is a waiver. He will then have to leave the US to interview in Mexico. When he leaves the US he will trigger his ban which is probably a 9c. That means he is not eligible for a waiver until he is outside the US for 10 years.

 

[Boiler 43,451]

7 minutes ago, Rem79 said:

Boiler, not sure what you mean, "he has control of the clock..."

 

Geo: Sounds like he needs to stay put (in his marriage) from what you're suggesting.  It is bona fide, as they reside together, have accounts together, children, a mortgage, etc.  Additionally, she is unaware of my existence and they are living as a married couple.  Unhappily married, but married nonetheless.  

The 10 years does not start until he voluntarily departs, so the sooner her departs the sooner it is over. He should ensure he evidences his departure.

[Boiler 43,451]

2 minutes ago, belinda63 said:

Since he does not have a legal status the 1-601a should be filed as it is a waiver. He will then have to leave the US to interview in Mexico. When he leaves the US he will trigger his ban which is probably a 9c. That means he is not eligible for a waiver until he is outside the US for 10 years.

 

He will need a I 212 to come back, but that is a long time away.

[Rem79 0]

Well, he's avoiding going to Mexico at all costs, so it seems we just need to wait out the decisions of Congress surrounding DACA recipients.  

[geowrian 22,335]

10 minutes ago, belinda63 said:

Since he does not have a legal status the 1-601a should be filed as it is a waiver. He will then have to leave the US to interview in Mexico. When he leaves the US he will trigger his ban which is probably a 9c. That means he is not eligible for a waiver until he is outside the US for 10 years.

No point getting the I-601A since it becomes invalid if refused for another inadmissability, which would be the case here. The 10 year wait, an I-212, and an I-601 would be needed.

[Boiler 43,451]

4 minutes ago, Rem79 said:

Well, he's avoiding going to Mexico at all costs, so it seems we just need to wait out the decisions of Congress surrounding DACA recipients.  

OK, you mentioned the I 130 several times so not not sure why that was filed.

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

5 minutes ago, Rem79 said:

Well, he's avoiding going to Mexico at all costs, so it seems we just need to wait out the decisions of Congress surrounding DACA recipients.  

Likely DACA will be going away.

[mcdull 474]

24 minutes ago, Rem79 said:

Boiler, not sure what you mean, "he has control of the clock..."

 

Geo: Sounds like he needs to stay put (in his marriage) from what you're suggesting.  It is bona fide, as they reside together, have accounts together, children, a mortgage, etc.  Additionally, she is unaware of my existence and they are living as a married couple.  Unhappily married, but married nonetheless.  

How is it bona fide when you explicitly said they got married because the wife was pregnant and they don't love each other?

 

[Boiler 43,451]

1 minute ago, mcdull said:

How is it bona fide when you explicitly said they got married because the wife was pregnant and they don't love each other?

 

[mcdull 474]

frailty, thy name is woman!

Edited March 5, 2018 by mcdull