Jump to content

36 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

We got approved for an I601A waiver (wife).  She went for her consular interview at the US Consulate in Honduras.  During the interview, they informed her that she was inadmissable due to 2126E basically smuggling another person into the United States.  The person in question is her daughter that was 16mos old at the time.  After a number of discussions with my lawyer, she does not feel the element of financial gain exists for this to be a legitimate barring circumstance.  Needless to say, we are refiling, and there is a very likely chance we go to the back of the line, and have to get the 601A re-approved, as well as the 212 waiver approved.  I have been in touch with more lawyers, some have heard of this, some have not, but the Immigration Advocate at my congressman's office said it before I did.  Another lawyer told me it is happening very often in Ciudad Juarez as well.  Unfortunately, it looks like the Trump administration has left the I 601A in place as a means to get people to essentially self deport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Visitor User said:

I-601A approved to overcome the 3/10 year ban?

Approved for accumulating unlawful presence. This happened after being notified of the scheduled consular interview at the consulate. Had interview appt, went to Honduras, had physical, went to interview on 2/20/2019, told no visa due to the smuggling charge. They don’t schedule the interview until after the waiver is approved. Now she’s stuck for who knows how long. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, blondietuco said:

Needless to say, we are refiling, and there is a very likely chance we go to the back of the line, and have to get the 601A re-approved, as well as the 212 waiver approved.

The I-601A only covers unlawful presence. You need an I-601 for the new inadmissibility + now to cover the unlawful presence inadmissibility.

 

33 minutes ago, blondietuco said:

Unfortunately, it looks like the Trump administration has left the I 601A in place as a means to get people to essentially self deport.

The I-601A has helped many, many, many unlawfully present individuals obtain legal status without having to be separated for long periods while waiting for a regular I-601.

 

6 minutes ago, Visitor User said:

I-601A approved to overcome the 3/10 year ban?

For reference, the I-601A only covers unlawful presence. Nothing else.


Timelines:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago

9/27/17: received by USCIS

10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received

10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received

10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update)

1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed

1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received

1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice

10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice

10/25/18: Formal approval

10/31/18: Green card received

 

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/17: sent

12/14/17: NOA1 hard copy received

3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification)

3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved!

3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received

4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy

4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy

4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, blondietuco said:

Approved for accumulating unlawful presence. This happened after being notified of the scheduled consular interview at the consulate. Had interview appt, went to Honduras, had physical, went to interview on 2/20/2019, told no visa due to the smuggling charge. They don’t schedule the interview until after the waiver is approved. Now she’s stuck for who knows how long. 

Smuggling charge was on record when they ran the background check? Did she use a lawyer?

Edited by Visitor User

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Visitor User said:

Smuggling charge was on record when they ran the background check? Did she use a lawyer?

Used a lawyer. There was no smuggling charge. Her daughter was sitting on her lap on a bus that crossed the border into Mexico in 2000. That is what they are calling smuggling. It’s absurd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, blondietuco said:

Used a lawyer. There was no smuggling charge. Her daughter was sitting on her lap on a bus that crossed the border into Mexico in 2000. That is what they are calling smuggling. It’s absurd. 

 

The definition of "smuggler" does not require any element of financial gain to be applicable:

 

Any alien, who at any time knowingly has encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted, or aided any other alien to enter or to try to enter the United States in violation of the law, is inadmissible.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-17138/0-0-0-17444.html#0-0-0-1785

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was this international travel event something disclosed to the lawyer before filing the I-130 or I-601A? Or at any point prior to departure from the US?

Edited by geowrian

Timelines:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago

9/27/17: received by USCIS

10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received

10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received

10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update)

1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed

1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received

1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice

10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice

10/25/18: Formal approval

10/31/18: Green card received

 

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/17: sent

12/14/17: NOA1 hard copy received

3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification)

3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved!

3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received

4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy

4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy

4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ate said:

 

The definition of "smuggler" does not require any element of financial gain to be applicable:

 

Any alien, who at any time knowingly has encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted, or aided any other alien to enter or to try to enter the United States in violation of the law, is inadmissible.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-17138/0-0-0-17444.html#0-0-0-1785

 

I’m aware of what they’ve used. My lawyer is the one who said the grounds were incorrect beyond the field manual. I’d also be willing to bet at least half the folks using this waiver had someone with them at the time. Are you an attorney offering assistance for a fee?  Are you saying my attorney is an idiot?  The waiver was working until about a year ago. I’m just trying to let folks know there was a new REDACTED field manual issued in early 2018 with a different initiative. And by the way, there used to be a requirement for financial gain. Sorry for seeming like an ###, but you seem to be taking a position of oh well you have a dumb ### lawyer and deserved to get ######. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Was this international travel event something disclosed to the lawyer before filing the I-130 or I-601A? Or at any point prior to departure from the US?

Yes it was. She fled her home country nineteen years ago. It was also disclosed in the affidavit to apply for the waiver to begin with. The event occurred 19 years ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be precise, the FAM applies here, not the AFM. The AFM is part of USCIS under DHS. The FAM is part of DOS, which handles visas.

Specifically, this situation is defined under 9 FAM 302.9-7(B)(5) (https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM030209.html)

"(CT:VISA-543;   03-27-2018)

(U) Encouraging, inducing, or assisting any other alien, even close family members, to enter the United States illegally can result in ineligibility y under INA 212(a)(6)(E). .  This is in contrast to the previous version of this law (INA 212(a)(31)) which was interpreted to exclude actions on behalf of close family members where the sole motive for the actions was family affection and not financial or other “gain.”"

 

Raises the question of why the lawyer was not familiar with the change as it was released to the public almost a full year ago.

Edit: I take that back. After some research, that provision has been there since at least 3/3/2016 (https://web.archive.org/web/20160417233010/https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM030209.html), which was during the prior president's term.

Edited by geowrian

Timelines:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago

9/27/17: received by USCIS

10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received

10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received

10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update)

1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed

1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received

1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice

10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice

10/25/18: Formal approval

10/31/18: Green card received

 

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/17: sent

12/14/17: NOA1 hard copy received

3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification)

3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved!

3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received

4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy

4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy

4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, blondietuco said:

I’m aware of what they’ve used. My lawyer is the one who said the grounds were incorrect beyond the field manual. I’d also be willing to bet at least half the folks using this waiver had someone with them at the time. Are you an attorney offering assistance for a fee?  Are you saying my attorney is an idiot?  The waiver was working until about a year ago. I’m just trying to let folks know there was a new REDACTED field manual issued in early 2018 with a different initiative. And by the way, there used to be a requirement for financial gain. Sorry for seeming like an ###, but you seem to be taking a position of oh well you have a dumb ### lawyer and deserved to get ######. 

 

And you seem to be reading too much into what I wrote.  I'm simply sharing the definition of "smuggler" used by USCIS for the benefit of anyone reading this public forum.  No need to be so defensive.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blondietuco said:

Used a lawyer. There was no smuggling charge. Her daughter was sitting on her lap on a bus that crossed the border into Mexico in 2000. That is what they are calling smuggling. It’s absurd. 

Was any immigrant petition filed on or before 4/30/01? She was a little baby though and not capable to making own decisions. I am not sure own blood related baby would be called smuggling? Did they qualify for Asylum? Also, wouldn't the baby be covered under consular processing as a child?

Edited by Visitor User

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, geowrian said:

To be precise, the FAM applies here, not the AFM. The AFM is part of USCIS under DHS. The FAM is part of DOS, which handles visas.

Specifically, this situation is defined under 9 FAM 302.9-7(B)(5) (https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM030209.html)

"(CT:VISA-543;   03-27-2018)

(U) Encouraging, inducing, or assisting any other alien, even close family members, to enter the United States illegally can result in ineligibility y under INA 212(a)(6)(E). .  This is in contrast to the previous version of this law (INA 212(a)(31)) which was interpreted to exclude actions on behalf of close family members where the sole motive for the actions was family affection and not financial or other “gain.”"

 

Raises the question of why the lawyer was not familiar with the change as it was released to the public almost a full year ago.

 

12 minutes ago, geowrian said:

To be precise, the FAM applies here, not the AFM. The AFM is part of USCIS under DHS. The FAM is part of DOS, which handles visas.

Specifically, this situation is defined under 9 FAM 302.9-7(B)(5) (https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM030209.html)

"(CT:VISA-543;   03-27-2018)

(U) Encouraging, inducing, or assisting any other alien, even close family members, to enter the United States illegally can result in ineligibility y under INA 212(a)(6)(E). .  This is in contrast to the previous version of this law (INA 212(a)(31)) which was interpreted to exclude actions on behalf of close family members where the sole motive for the actions was family affection and not financial or other “gain.”"

 

Raises the question of why the lawyer was not familiar with the change as it was released to the public almost a full year ago.

The lawyer probably goes by the difference between “can” and “shall”. One is concrete, the other allows for interpretation. Does not change the fact that thousands have availed themselves of this waiver and it is being shut down. None of this changes the fact that I served in the USMC, pay more in taxes than most members of Congress make. But I still get on by this ###### up country. So, yeah having my four year old asking me every day what happened to mommy might have me a bit raw. The 601A was meant to reduce family separation time. The 212 stuff has to be filed while outside the country. Seems contradictory, so even if the lawyer knew, that path was shut down. My stepdaughter got her Visa no problem. Whose to say  she didn’t smuggle her mother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1 601a came in about 6 years ago and gave people in the US with just the illegal presence issue basically a fast track method of avoiding the I 601 year of waiver processing.

 

As has been said it just applies to that and I have seen many many cases where the limitation has been misunderstood.

 

Having said that I am not sure about the smuggling aspect, I know that smuggling generally has no waiver except in this sort of case. I think I have seen this years ago.

 

You mentioned how they entered into Mexico, how did they enter the US? 

 

 


“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Didn't find the answer you were looking for? Ask our VJ Immigration Lawyers.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...