falmaind

On 6/19/2018 at 12:10 PM, tlatrice70 said:

Hello my fellow May filers,  I look forward to sharing my journey with you all. Can someone tell me what the priority date means?

Hello tlatrice70

PD is the date your valid application was received and accepted. This date is used as a way to decide your 'spot' in the 'line'. Who is ahead of whom for their priority to get service. This is not a strict priority just a general rule to follow. IWhen you lookup processing times, the PD is used to identify how long a case has taken. They are called 'normal processing times'. Now if your case has not made progress after the 'normal processing' time has passed, you can call USCIS to investigate. Before that time they will just tell you that its within 'normal processing' time.

Application process was not too bad. Interview took a long time coming but once the interview happened it was not difficult because our situation /documents I listed above added up. 

We were approved

Finally Did Oath on 3rd of May 2018    

It took us 1 year minus 5 days. 360 days that is from the day we mailed the package

Highlights of USCIS's impeccable performance

1. Multiple requests to find out what was going on with the case (after it fell into past normal processing) were never returned
2. Address change request over the phone -> Bungled it up. Updated mailing address instead of the physical address 
3. 2nd Attempt at correcting the address over the phone -> Very helpful sounding agent spends very patient 10 minutes taking all the new/old address information..... 3 weeks later get an email saying "Could not process as new address not provided" LOL
4. Once Address was done correctly VIA ONLINE form (should have done this in the first place).......... Listen to this one
   1. Application was filed in El Paso
   2. All notices came to El Paso
   3. Interview took place in El Paso
   4. Oath? Lets send you over to OAKLAND. Yes I got my oath ceremony in Oakland, CA. Had to book a $650 RT ticket on 10 day notice. 
   5. I was prepared to show up to oath and be told "Our bad, your certificate is not here".... BUT that did not happen and i'm a happy cookie now  

12 minutes ago, ajs1984 said:

(I think maybe why you are getting combative responses from myself and others is your unnecessarily aggressive and assumptive tone. Where actually there is a great deal of 'grey area' here, you make it sound like it is black and white.)

(maybe try reading back where the aggressive and assumptive tone started)

Quote

 

Yes, if you followed the form (not the form instructions) correctly, and were non-DACA, you didn't fill out parts 3-6 because it asks you to skip them. This means you shouldn't have provided a reason.

 

But, since USCIS has designed this form so confusingly, it is not surprising that some people fill those bits in. After all, what does "non-DACA" mean? Some people might just want to be exhaustively honest and fill in everything. After all, if there's a box, why wouldn't you?

Thats just a silly reasoning. You should be informing that person not to be exhaustive. Instead of "why wouldn't you". I'm simply trying to help someone who will land here while searching google. 

Quote

 

This isn't a very nice thing to say, and to me it doesn't seem likely to be correct. The officer reviewing the form is probably just ignoring parts 3-6, because it's CIS policy to do so for non-DACA applicants. It would be much worse if they RFE'd everybody who filled in their confusing form slightly incorrectly, wouldn't it? As neither of us can know for sure, I prefer my nicer version.

This is assuming the "vacation" was added when that box had merit to be filled.

The grey area is filling in boxes when they should be left blank

Quote

 

Not really. Scandi said this (emphasis mine):

 

A part follows that Scandi put 'vacation' as a reason on the form. One of those 'completionist' form fillers. But in the same way people are telling you that any reason goes, which you could/did argue is hearsay, so too is your assumption that putting a reason that is non-emergent (or 'frivolous', as you put it) damages your chances of approval. I don't think you have any evidence that this is true, whatsoever.

all the evidence on forums is hearsay. Goes both ways sir

Not really worth my time any longer honestly

To someone searching up on this topic. You have two scenarios:

DACA  : Vacation is not acceptable as reason

NON- DACA : leave reason blank. But if you put "vacation" you are tempting fate. Why tempt fate... and delay your process

26 minutes ago, ajs1984 said:

Yes, but your are missing the point that the I-131 form instructions document is telling you need an emergent reason, when the form does not provide any way to communicate what your emergent or non-emergent reason is. If you filled out Part 4, 1a to provide this reason, you filled the form out incorrectly (as the form itself says to skip to Part 7 if you are non-DACA).

Thank you. So again "vacation" is never the right response. Either you leave it blank. Or fill a Non-frivolous reason

Quote

So this becomes a philosophical argument about letter of the law vs intention of the law. And it seems, since you don't have to write a reason on the form, USCIS cannot be using your reason to approve or deny your application. This supports Scandi's interpretation that any reason goes.

Scandi is recommending putting in "vacation".... but as you proved earlier, it should be left blank... Why invite trouble? And for those who shouldn't be leaving blank. "vacation" is expressly  not acceptable response as per instructions document for 131. It needs to be non frivolous which vacation is not.

26 minutes ago, ajs1984 said:

The agency involved in approving the I-131 petition (USCIS) is different from the agency enforcing the use of Advance Parole for re-entry (CBP). As USCIS does not require a reason to be specified for non-DACA applicants in the case of an adjustment application, it is moot whether the instructions state a reason is required, as no reason need be codified on the application paperwork, and so, no reason can be inferred by USCIS.

 

At the border, the CBP handbook will kick in, as well as the officer's discretion. I agree that this could go any way. However the CBP website does clearly state the admissible reasons for travel with AP:

 

""Aliens in the United States should, prior to departure, obtain Advance Parole in order to re-enter the United States after travel abroad if they have:

• Filed an application for adjustment of status but have not received a decision from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services;
• Hold refugee or asylee status and intend to depart temporarily to apply for a U.S. immigrant visa in Canada; and/or
• An emergent personal or bona fide reason to travel temporarily abroad.""

This list is clearly an A, B or C type list; A does not require C. Therefore, if you have a pending adjustment of status, you don't need an "emergent personal or bona fide reason" any more than you need to "hold refugee or asylee status".

 

It's probably best not to state your opinion or the opinion of lawyers as any kind of fact. The facts in this case are contradictory on the government documents we have at hand. But it is quite safe for me to state my opinion that a botched USCIS instruction document will never be enforced by CBP -- it is the CBP's own rules, regulations and allowances that will be (as well as the Code of Federal Regulations).

Upon further reflection I think you are wrong here.

There are 2 Actions. 1) Granting of AP 2) Enforcing of re-entry based on whether the traveller has AP or NOT

1) USCIS has the authority to process the AP application (not CBP). So No, their document is not botching anything

2) CBP's job is to enforce requirement of having AP if you want to re-enter. They do not care what are the requirements of acquiring and AP (and they should not). they just need it present and available.  And with what you have quoted, it is describing (under A) one of the conditions in which AP would serve as a valid document to re-enter.

  So These two points of information are  NOT contradicting. They are fine as is. Nothing is botched. Folks who did get AP approved with "vacation" as a reason were lucky as their application was processed by incompetent agent. (At least not competent enough to know USCIS's own rules).

If more information is un-earthed I may stand corrected

2 minutes ago, ajs1984 said:

The agency involved in approving the I-131 petition (USCIS) is different from the agency enforcing the use of Advance Parole for re-entry (CBP). As USCIS does not require a reason to be specified for non-DACA applicants in the case of an adjustment application, it is moot whether the instructions state a reason is required, as no reason need be codified on the application paperwork, and so, no reason can be inferred by USCIS.

 

At the border, the CBP handbook will kick in, as well as the officer's discretion. I agree that this could go any way. However the CBP website does clearly state the admissible reasons for travel with AP:

 

""Aliens in the United States should, prior to departure, obtain Advance Parole in order to re-enter the United States after travel abroad if they have:

• Filed an application for adjustment of status but have not received a decision from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services;
• Hold refugee or asylee status and intend to depart temporarily to apply for a U.S. immigrant visa in Canada; and/or
• An emergent personal or bona fide reason to travel temporarily abroad.""

This list is clearly an A, B or C type list; A does not require C. Therefore, if you have a pending adjustment of status, you don't need an "emergent personal or bona fide reason" any more than you need to "hold refugee or asylee status".

 

It's probably best not to state your opinion or the opinion of lawyers as any kind of fact. The facts in this case are contradictory on the government documents we have at hand. But it is quite safe for me to state my opinion that a botched USCIS instruction document will never be enforced by CBP -- it is the CBP's own rules, regulations and allowances that will be (as well as the Code of Federal Regulations).

I think the issue is two fold here... you have addressed one.

Other is, your I-131 application. Just like many who have got their "vacation" I-131 approved there are those whose was denied. So Up to each applicant how much headache they want to take on. My recommendation is to minimize your headache

14 minutes ago, Lynyogini said:

I did some research about that after my original oath ceremony date was cancelled due to inclement weather. I simply googled upcoming oath ceremony schedule dates in my state. Where do you live? Or what is your field office? 

Field office is El Paso, TX

I did try google, but results are for Dallas I believe

Is anyone aware of any online information source which may show upcoming oath ceremony dates? My N400 was recommended for approval during interview. I do understand that is not any guarantee. But I need to plan some travel out of town and know the date of ceremony for my field office would be helpful in planning.

Thankyou

edit: I think i posted this in the wrong sub-forum.... maybe an admin could move this

Just now, Orangesapples said:

Punish the employers who take advantage of illegal workers. Instead of investing money in a wall, invest them in nation wide labor commissions that do extensive checks and impose severe punishment to employers that employ people without the necessary documents. Make the punishment proportional to the size of the business so that it hurts big companies enough for them to not consider employing illegals. The employers who are unwilling to pay for domestic workers are at fault the most. Your rage should be directed towards them, not towards the poor people who are doing whatever they can to feed their families. Workers need more rights. Employers need more consequences. 

I am not among those who sees the illegals as less than human. I'm an just trying to explain my lowered level of empathy.  I don't think it is right (if it is true) when border security agents destroy rations left for "would be" border jumpers.

I am all for employer prosecution. And ICE did target bunch of 7-11 locations recently. But they can do more. a lot more in terms of employer prosecution. Agreed

2 minutes ago, dawning said:

That may already be happening... the statistics I have heard indicate that the number of illegal immigrants in the US has been decreasing for several years, and among those the percentage that are undocumented (never had any kind of visa) is getting lower.  I do know that agricultural business people in my community are worried what the political climate will do the supply of workers for this year.

 

Either way, I think the moral question still stands:  you can get upset that undocumented immigrants go to the emergency room and can't pay for it.  But the fact that they were exposed to pesticides (or whatever other occupational hazard you want to insert here) for years to get food on your table might make you (that is to say all of us) partly responsible?

I think you are still not seeing my point (which is ok).

These people came here willfuly and threw themselves at our economy? Yes?

We did not ask them to do these jobs

I would rather have legal labor which would ask higher wages and I would pay higher food prices.

I would feel full responsibility IF I had invited these folks. Massively underpaid them. so much so that they cannot afford healthcare. Yes then I would be full of guilt.

Its not entirely equivalent. But in a very rude way to describe the situation is what if someone throws themselves in front of your car.. I would feel bad the person is injured but I would not have the same level of guilt if I had run into the person...

29 minutes ago, Scandi said:

Many of us put "visit family" and/or "vacation" and were approved just fine. 

For those who wish to take this advice. Do at your own risk. The document flies in face of the "vacation" claim

11 minutes ago, dawning said:

I live in California and know enough about the labor intensive agriculture here to know that it would grind to a halt without undocumented workers.  I can't answer your question about the economy as a whole, whether it would collapse, but I do think it would be seriously shaken if they all disappeared tomorrow, and the food supply could be impacted for sure in the short term.

I wholly agree with your observation. But It is not ir-replacable. The illegal workforce has slowly seeped into the economy. So if they vanish overnight, it is going to be shock to a lot. Yes. But if they vanish as slowly as they came, market may adjust with higher prices, but no where close to collapse.

26 minutes ago, Scandi said:

If you can read that well you can also see that the part you quoted is for those who have the status under point 4 in that section, not for those who have a pending i-485.

 

So AGAIN, if you have a pending i-485 you do NOT need a reason, an emergency, a tarvek date etc to file for i-31 and get it approved.

Then the consulate was wrong. It happens, even the USCIS employees themselves are wrong in many cases.

Sorry I may have skipped some of my reading classes, maybe you can explain this sentence.

Which word in the following statement would be synonymous to  taking a vacation?

If you are in the United States and seek an Advance Parole Document, you may apply if:
(1) You have a pending application to adjust status, Form I-485, and you seek to travel abroad temporarily
for “urgent humanitarian reasons” or in furtherance of a “significant public benefit,” which may include a
personal or family emergency or bona fide business reasons.

That word "emergency" is flashing with Red lights at me. 

But I'll keep looking for a Thesaurus which has "vacation" listed as a valid substitute for "emergency". I trust you 

Others may correct me but I think K1 will be quicker (Fiancee)

26 minutes ago, Scandi said:

Not true. When you file form i-485 you don't need a reason to also file for i-131. You don't need an emergency, you don't need a date for travel or even have any plans to travel. You can apply "just in case you want it", and you don't need to mention a reason for why you want it on the form.

 

You can travel just fine with it, doesn't matter if it's vacation or emergency. If you really want to put down a reason on the form you can write "vacation" (like I did), "honeymoon" or whatever you feel like.

Please do NOT spread mis-information.

Here is it directly from the I-131 instructions page 5 (IT reads as follows ---> NOTE: Travel for vacation is not a valid purpose. You must NOT file Form I-131 with your deferred action request or your package will be rejected and returned to you. )

You may have gotten lucky

Wow, this sucks. I have not experienced this. I'm thinking out loud here, maybe you could print the address on a sticky note in very small font which you could stick on this section. At the same time try to cram in as much as possible.....

But hopefully someone can give you a better solution which they know would work.

3 minutes ago, dawning said:

I know people on this forum tend to hate on undocumented immigrants, but I still don't get why it's perhaps acceptable to benefit from someone's brilliant (and highly educated) minds, but it's ok to take advantage of strong backs and financial need of people who cross from poorer countries?  Large parts of our economy are based on having undocumented workers desperate to earn money, but it's considered ok to use 'em up and deport them. 

The reason for the hate is the mode of their arrival. Were they not here, would our economy collapse? No. They are making themselves available and undercutting those who are here legally. They are throwing themselves at the US of A. What if I came to your house and painted it without your permission or without you asking of me... and then I expected a fair compensation... would you pay me? (maybe once). Would you pay me everyday? no you would get sick of me

3 minutes ago, dawning said:

Sorry, I know this thought is outside what was mostly being discussed so far, but the discussion of what it means to be a community and not just a business made me think of it.

1 minute ago, nurmeer said:

 

Thanks. Where did your friend get married, in USA or back home?

travelled here for rotations on a 6 month visa. Met someone married in US (court). Had social wedding in US as well. 

Just now, MiraW said:

The reason my friend put down was "Visit parents in home country", she was approved. Oh and she didn't even use it in the end.

Another one was "My sister had a baby and I'm the godmother", also approved. She did use it to travel back home once.

I'm not saying AP should be treated as a green card, but it doesn't need to be for an "emergency travel".

I guess I would reword "emergency travel" to "non frivolous travel". I know of folks getting denied when they mention vacation for example

11 minutes ago, nurmeer said:

Yes, I did not come to usa with the intention to get married. I came to visit my siblings and do my hospital rotations since I am a doctor, i am still doing my rotations on a valid 6 month visa to apply for residency in usa. I want to know which path should I take? If i do a court marriage, but get married later on will that suffice? What proof would I need to show for a bonafide marriage(i know of joint lease, accounts, picture etc). Also this visit was not with the intention to get married so if i apply for travel document, can i get it in 90 days so I can go back and forth to my home country?

I have a family friend who went thru exact same situation. But he had a family wedding with a large party within 3 months of civil (court marriage). while waiting for AOS. That may have helped the case. 

His interviewer was unnecessarily harsh nonetheless. So will depend on your luck. Make sure take information of what is residency and the whole process. My friend took wikipedia pages describing what is process to become an MD for a FMG and why rotations are important etc etc.

10 minutes ago, MiraW said:

This is not true. I-131 is free to file with I-485 or pending I-485, and it doesn't need to be an emergency travel. 

 

It will be denied if you say "I want it in case we plan to go on vacation"

But they are not going to check and verify (not worth the resources) once AP is approved  whether you are using it for the previously stated purpose

13 minutes ago, mustang85635 said:

Lol this comment just clearly confirmed what I already thought . We are just to far apart and yes you are clearly emotionally involved because you want your parents here so no you are not going to be against it . 

Just look at all the countries that scrapped it recently . Some quick research and you will see that Canada and New Zealand where the last ones to halt it indefinetly or scrap it altogether because of the significant cost on the society . Mainly in form of health care related but also other welfare costs . Thats as good as a proof you will ever get throw in some common sense and you will see it for yourself . 

I"m not hiding it. You can look at my post history for my situation. My situation does not change my position.  The only difference it would have made (If I did not have parents who I want to be here is). I would have less energy for all this.

Clearly throwing the bums out from our society isn't ringing well with you... are you emotionally involved? You completely ignored what I predicted you would ignore. Thankyou 

If you came to this visit with intent to eventually marry, You cannot do AOS. I suppose you already know that. You'll have to convince them you came for another visit and decided to go for the marriage. And you'll be stuck here until AOS process is complete (unless you file for Advance Parole which can be only used for emergency travel)

On 1/28/2018 at 9:21 AM, SSKK said:

I think you are right. Hope I can collect all the necessary forms for Tax 2017 and get the transcript ASAP.

 

Thank you for your opinion. 

Given the current timelines I may still file. I do'nt know how soon IRS may get you your transcript. You could try filing your taxes early. And then submit your return with W2 and any other tax documents if IRS doesn't generate a transcript within a week. They may be happy with that