fdhs
-
Posts
38 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Partners
Immigration Wiki
Guides
Immigration Forms
Times
Gallery
Store
Blogs
Posts posted by fdhs
-
-
Starting with the easy part:
QuoteWill the application be hard to do at this time because I will not have any thing to prove that I will re-establish residency in the US (i.e. no job offer yet, no lease, etc).
You first have to worry about proving intent to reestablish domicile in the US for the I-864 (affidavit of support), which will be in quite a long time (maybe in 1+ years time). This should give you enough time to take steps to show intent to reestablish domicile. Residing outside the US will not make your application that much more difficult. Since you are both together in Switzerland, it could be viewed as actually helping show you have a bona fide relationship.
QuoteDo you know if there's any better chances for her visa getting approved sooner because she has been living in Switzerland and not in Iran?
Well, since the US doesn't have a consulate in Iran, and it does in Switzerland, the process might be a bit easier for you (in that she won't have to travel abroad to a consulate).
The main issue is the travel ban. You will have to get a waiver from it. I don't know how easy/likely this is. It looks like this might be the thread for you to find out more from other members about this:
https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/681063-travel-ban-support-group
Good luck!
-
17 hours ago, Sunfl0wer said:
A question for those who have been approved for exceptional circumstances. The petitioner gets an appointment to file the I130 it seems like, after that happens, does the beneficiary go for the interview At a later date? Anyone know a timeline for this type of situation?
Providing they approve the exceptional circumstances, the processing of the I-130 should go quickly (since there isn't a pile of them that the embassy has to go through). It took us about 1-2 weeks to get exceptional circumstances + I-130 approved.
You then have to get the medical + schedule the interview for the beneficiary at the embassy - this can take some time, depending on how many free times the embassy has for interview, etc.
Overall, from the thread about exceptional circumstance filings, I think 1-2 months seems standard.
-
40 minutes ago, Paul & Mary said:
Your I-130 will be collected at a Consulate in Canada but adjudicated by the USCIS Field Office in Mexico City.
It will actually be adjudicated in Canada by the State Department (i.e. embassy/consulate). The embassy has first got to get permission to do this from the USCIS office in Mexico City.
All contact the OP will have will be with the embassy.
-
As you probably have seen, on the site for exceptional DCF they give a pretty good explanation of the process (they include the email addresses at the bottom of the page, so I guess that is what you do first). I sent a short email to the embassy explaining that I would like to do exceptional circumstances DCF due to short time for job relocation. They then asked me to post them the listed items to the embassy.
They list
Quote- Provide a detailed explanation of why their case merits an exception and include any paperwork in support of this.
as one of the things to include when applying for DCF, so it would be good to get some sort of letter from the employer with the details of the position.
It's hard to know whether they will approve or not. There are probably a few different factors involved, including what type of job it is. They also want a completed copy of the I-130 to look at before they decide whether to actually accept and process it, so I suspect that the ease of approving the I-130 also plays a role.
It's also good to start thinking about the I-864 (Affidavit of support). There's a high probability that you won't be able to use your current or future income for it, so either having assets or joint sponsors ready is probably a good idea!
I found this post/thread very useful
Good luck!
-
13 minutes ago, Enemyz said:
My wife is confused what name she should list on I-130a does she put her maiden name or her married name. I've tried to google this, but I haven't had any luck finding I know on the I-130 you can put married name then under other put maiden, but there is no option for that on the I-130a.
It should be her current legal name. If her maiden name was legally changed when she married, then she should put her married name.
(It will be the same name as you put for her in Part 4 items 4a-c on the I-130. You will put her maiden name on the I-130 Part 4 Items 5a-c if her family name was legally changed at marriage)
-
14 minutes ago, CappuccinoMo said:
Hi There
I see you replying to lot of VJ memebers
A quick question please, in the same order above : my husband is US citizen, we didn't include my Birth certificate (beneficiary) in our i130 Package, is that an issue?
Thank you in advance for your help
You're fine. The beneficiary's birth certificate isn't needed for the I-130 petition*. It will be needed later (for the visa).
*provided that the beneficiary isn't in the USA already.
-
10 hours ago, pushbrk said:
In my culture, anything untrue is a lie.
Ok, but in a legal setting, a lie is a deliberate misrepresentation of fact. Lying to the government here would be immigration fraud, which I definitely am not suggesting the OP should do.
11 hours ago, pushbrk said:The OP has not indicated any such employment. The word "this" in the sentence you quoted gives a different meaning than if I had used "A" or "Any".
My point here was that there should be several ANDs and additional clauses in your statement; I was being facetious, sorry.
10 hours ago, Jojo92122 said:Nice picking out half a sentence and focus on that "where you plan to reside for the foreseeable future." Why didn't you quote the first half of that sentence? Why did you leave out "Indicate the country where you maintain your principlal residence?" Isn't the first part of the question important?
I should probably have written " Indicate the country where you maintain your principal residence and where you plan to reside for the foreseeable future." The point is that domicile means more than just where you reside. (This part is relevant, because, as noted above, depending on the definition of "foreseeable future", it is impossible to answer the question. What would you have written if it had said "Write the name of your brother and spouse"? (assuming that you are not married to your brother)
10 hours ago, Jojo92122 said:Answer the questions that are ask. Don't be cute or play word games.
Your advice is horrible.
Please elaborate on why my advice is "horrible". In my very first post in this thread I gave three clear answers to the OP's questions. @pushbrk took exception to one of my answers, and so we began to discuss what the correct answer is. During this discussion, @pushbrk's stance changed from
On 6/20/2018 at 12:54 AM, pushbrk said:Petitioners, beneficiaries, applicants ALL need to ALWAYS tell the truth. You just told this one to lie. Not good.
to
11 hours ago, pushbrk said:All that speaks to why what YOU did in similar situations, while technically wrong, in my opinion, is also immaterial and will be ignored in favor of evidence of INTENT to re-establish domicile.
which is a slightly different tone (in my opinion). From my point of view, this was simply an interesting discussion, and find @Jojo92122's addition to be unnecessarily rude.
I maintain that my suggestion is not incorrect; the relevant language in Section 213A of the INA is
Quote) Sponsor Defined.-
(1) In general.-For purposes of this section the term "sponsor" in relation to a sponsored alien means an individual who executes an affidavit of support with respect to the sponsored alien and who-
(A) is a citizen or national of the United States or an alien who is lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence;
(C) is domiciled in any of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any territory or possession of the United States;
(D) is petitioning for the admission of the alien under section 204 ; andThe instructions for the I-864 state
QuoteIf you are not currently living in the United States, you may meet the domicile requirement if you can submit evidence to establish that any of the following conditions apply:
My interpretation gives the chain of implications: fulfilling requirement 3 listed in the I-864 instructions means that you satisfy the domiclie requirement (C) above, i.e. you are domiciled in the USA. This is not inconsistent with more common definitions (i.e. in tax law) of the term "domicile", which generally use terms like permanent residence or indefinite residence instead of the fuzzy "plan to reside for the foreseeable future" in the instructions for the I-864.
-
14 hours ago, pushbrk said:
This person has never lived in the USA, so is NOT domiciled in the USA.
Wrong implication. A U.S. citizen who has never lived in the USA, but works for the U.S. government or other organization listed in the I-864 instructions, IS domiciled in the USA.
-
46 minutes ago, pushbrk said:
That is works for you does not make it "right". It's "wrong" for the OP, because it isn't true. "Is" and "meet" are used in the present tense. What they will correctly do is provide evidence and explanation in the "future tense".
This kind of thing is actually why many lawyers got an undergraduate degree in English. LOL It's also that kind of understanding some of us use in order to find and deal with the ambiguities of instructions MEANT to cover all circumstances but that clearly do not. You need to know the rules in order to know when to deviate from them, so to speak.
Ok, well - I defer to your greater experience in these matters...I would object to your statement that I "just told this one to lie" insofar that I gave an explanation of what I believe is a reasonable course of action that is not inconsistent with the I-864 instructions and the DOS's answers to the FAQs. I also explained what I did in circumstances that are not too dissimilar to those of the OP.
(Sorry to the OP for your thread slightly derailing- I hope you got the answers you needed)
-
8 minutes ago, pushbrk said:
This sentence, "Indicate the country where you maintain your principal residence and where you plan to reside for the foreseeable future." has distinct meaning. Note the present tense and the word connective conjunction "and". A person who has NEVER lived in the USA, submitting an affidavit of support TODAY, for a visa that will not be used until 4 to 10 months from now, cannot truthfully indicate that they both DO....AND....PLAN to reside in the USA in the future. If and was replaced with OR, then it would be a problem too, as "where you maintain" is a present tense statement.
I agree that for a sponsor in that circumstance, the question is a bit ludicrous, as they cannot possibly maintain (in the present tense) a residence in the USA at all, but their current address is also definitely NOT where they intend to live for the foreseeable future either. This is why, what is correct, and what works are at odds. Clearly, EITHER will work, and Consular Officers understand the paradox involved.
Well- surely it depends on what the exact definitions "domicile" and "foreseeable future" are?
The next sentence "If your mailing address and/or place of residence is not in the United States, but
your country of domicile is the United States, you must attach a typed or printed explanation and documentary evidence
indicating how you meet the domicile requirement" also has meaning-it indicates that domicile is not the same as residence. If either condition 1 or 2 of the conditions for the domicile requirement while abroad were fulfilled, the petitioner-sponsor would write US as the country of domicile, so I assumed that the same would be true of condition 3.I still don't see that it's wrong to do as I suggested. (Perhaps I was being needlessly paranoid, but when I was filling it in, I was concerned that a bureaucrat would simply look at the form, see a non-US country listed as domicile, and then not approve without looking at the included explanation).
Also note that how much weight is put on the domicile requirement varies from country to country-the Canadians in particular will tell you that it is not sufficient to state your intent to establish domicile. (This doesn't appear to be such a big issue for Sweden, though).
-
7 hours ago, pushbrk said:
This person has never lived in the USA, so is NOT domiciled in the USA. Their task is to show intent to establish (not re-establish in this case) domicile in the USA.
A more succinct version of the argument in my previous post is that when the I-864 instructions talk about the "domicile requirement", it means that for the I-864 to be approved, you are required to write "US" in Part 5 item 4. The justification of writing "US" there is then given by point 3 in the instructions "You intend in good faith to reestablish....".
This is just my interpretation of the instructions - I'd be happy to find out why it's incorrect
-
6 hours ago, pushbrk said:
Wrong. This person has never lived in the USA, so is NOT domiciled in the USA. Their task is to show intent to establish (not re-establish in this case) domicile in the USA. If they have an address in the USA, the DS260 will ask for their intended address and it can go there. If they have no US address, then so be it.
Petitioners, beneficiaries, applicants ALL need to ALWAYS tell the truth. You just told this one to lie. Not good.
No. It's not lying. From the I-864 instructions:
QuoteIndicate the country where you maintain your principal residence and where you plan to reside for the foreseeable future. If your mailing address and/or place of residence is not in the United States, but your country of domicile is the United States, you must attach a typed or printed explanation and documentary evidence indicating how you meet the domicile requirement. If you are not currently living in the United States, you may meet the domicile requirement if you can submit evidence to establish that any of the following conditions apply:
If you intend to back to the US, then isn't this "where you plan to reside for the foreseeable future"? The DoS also seems to indicate that you have to write "US" here; on their FAQs for the I-864 it says:
QuoteCan a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident (LPR) petitioner who is not domiciled in the United States be a financial sponsor?
No, U.S. law requires that sponsors be domiciled (live) in any of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any territory or possession of the United States.
Anyway, I did as follows (and didn't have any problems): wrote my current address in Sweden at all places where an address is needed and possible to enter a non-US address. For Part 4, item 5, we wrote "United States". As this is not the same as our current address, we included (per the instructions) a typed letter with the following text "Although the sponsor currently resides at blah blah blah, Sweden, he intends to establish domicile in the US no later than (a date). As evidence of this, the following are included:"
At which point, I listed a job letter, plane ticket, and lease starting in 4 months' time (and included copies of them as evidence).
Also from the FAQs:
QuoteHow can a financial sponsor establish a domicile?
When a sponsor has clearly not maintained a domicile in the United States, he/she must re-establish a U.S. domicile to be a sponsor. The aspiring sponsor may take steps, including the examples given below, to show that the United States is his/her principal place of residence:
- Find employment in the United States
- Secure a residence in the United States
- Register children in U.S. schools
- Relinquish residence abroad
- Other evidence of a U.S. residence
If the sponsor establishes U.S. domicile, he or she must return to the United States to live before the sponsored immigrant may enter the United States. The sponsored immigrant must enter the United States with or after the sponsor.
Again indicating that one should write "United States" as domicile.
-
34 minutes ago, CcLH said:
I need some help with a few questions that came up while preparing form I-864.
Part 4, item 5: I am living and have lived most of my life in Sweden. I have never lived in the US, but me and my husband plan to move there as soon as he gets his visa approved. What should I answer to “Country of Domicile”? In the description it says “indicate the country where you maintain your principal residence and where you plan to reside for the foreseeable future.”
Part 5: Sponsor’s household size. Here I fill in 1 in items 1, 2 and 3. Since the principal immigrant is my husband, our household size would now ad up to three. We are however only, two. How should I fill this out correctly?
Part 6: I am employed in Sweden, at an institutet not related to the US. I have never been employed in the US and this employment will not be maintained when moving to the US. What should I fill out in items 1-7? And if I shouldn’t write my Swedish employment, what should I write in item 6 (unemployed since) if I never worked in the US?
Part 7: Is it possible to only use the principal immigrants assets as proof of support, if the numbers meet the requirement? Meaning no income or assets from any sponsor, nor income from the principal immigrant.
Any help I can get is appreciated!
For Part 4, item 5, you write "United States". This will be different to your current address in Sweden, so (as it says in the instructions for I-864) you will need to write a printed explanation of your intent to reestablish domicile, as well as including evidence that you intend to move to the US.
Part 5 item 3 should be left empty-this is for persons NOT included in the affidavit, and your husband already is (since he is the principle immigrant).
Parts 6 & 7: it is absolutely fine to just use the assets of your husband. You can write the name of your current employer, but leave the income blank or write "will not continue" in Part 6 number 10. You can leave the rest of part 6 empty, and just complete part 7 listing your husband's assets.
-
32 minutes ago, Whitey1944 said:
So I guess I'll go ahead and have my brother register as our cosponsor, and use his address as our permanent US domicile
If you meet the financial requirements then your brother will not be needed as a joint sponsor. The I-864 ask for "country of domicile", not a physical address in the country. In order to file the I-864, you must write "United States" as your country of domicile. Since you live in Japan, this will not be the same as your current physical address, so (as the instructions for the I-864 state) you must include a printed explanation explaining that you intend to reestablish domicile in the US. You will also need to include evidence for this.
34 minutes ago, Whitey1944 said:Our assets are currently in Japanese banks, etc. I imagine it'd be advisable to transfer all or most to a US bank account, which I have maintained for many years.
Yes, a good idea.
-
23 minutes ago, Whitey1944 said:
Hi again, Dee ellle.
You indicated that I wouldn't have any problem with the US domicile requirement if my brother was willing to assume joint sponsor status. I asked and he agreed. Then I found a domicile FAQ on the NVC site that stated the following: Q: If a petitioner does not have a domicile in the United States, can a joint sponsor file an I-864? A: No. The petitioner must meet all requirements to be a sponsor (age, domicile and citizenship), except those related to income, before there can be a joint sponsor."
If this is true, do you think my brother can become my wife's petitioner, and use his domicile as our US domicile? I will call NVC tomorrow morning and get their answer, but if you have any thoughts on this I would appreciate hearing from you.
Thank you.
No, your brother cannot petition for your wife. Regarding the domicile requirement: since you live overseas, you aren't required to prove that you have domicile in the US. Instead, you can prove that you intend to reestablish domicile.
-
We just completed a similar process. Many thanks to @pyridine for posting all the details of your experience - you saved us a lot hassle! (more on that later!)
Background: I am the child of a US expat living in Sweden. In April, I applied for a job in the US (a very good job with a "famous" US employer).
Our timeline:- May 1: receive employment letter, with start date July 1.
- May 2: email US embassy asking for instructions how to apply for exceptional circumstance DCF at Stockholm embassy.
- May 2: (half an hour later) embassy replies, telling us to mail in I-130, a copy of the bio page of petitioner's passport, completed G-325As with passport-style photos for both petitioner and beneficiary, as well as a letter explaining our claim to exceptional circumstance (short relocation for a job) and evidence for this. The embassy also informed us that all this will be forwarded to USCIS London.
- May 3: Mail in the required documents.
- May 14: Email embassy asking if they'd gotten our docs.
- May 15: Embassy replies, confirming that they'd received our mail, and that they'd just sent a follow-up enquiry to USCIS London to find out what was happening.
- May 16: Embassy tells us that USCIS has given permission to do DCF, and that we need to send in a money order of $535 for the I-130 filing fee and a copy of the bio page of the beneficiary's passport.
- May 18: Embassy receives money order and copy of passport.
- May 21: Embassy informs my wife that they've approved the I-130, and sends her the checklist for the interview.
- May 24: We inform embassy that we've collected the required documents and that the medical has been scheduled for June 7.
- May 25: Embassy says that June 12 is available for an interview, if it is suitable for us.
- June 12: Interview at embassy in Stockholm. Everything goes well. Wife gets 221(g) pending medical results.
In the embassy checklist, under the instructions for the I-864, the embassy writes "If the U.S. Petitioner has no current U.S. income, he/she will also need to either need to provide proof of assets or find a financial joint sponsor who completes an additional Affidavit of Support with supporting documents."
Thanks to @pyridine, we knew about this at the beginning of May, which allowed us to make preparations! Since we are quite young (mid-to-late twenties), we didn't have the assets directly available. However, my future employer gave me a large advance, which, combined with our savings was more than enough assets.
We made up 2 AoS (the first counting this advance as income-which was more than enough, the second counting it as an asset). The embassy didn't want the income one.The Stockholm embassy has been really helpful throughout the whole process! All our emails have been quickly answered.
-
17 hours ago, LizM said:
Dr. Einar apparently recommended Paul to have his Tdap shot later abroad because it would be "easier". That's definitely not true so I wonder were that came from, but anyway, it's the Tdap that he's missing.
Hmm...my wife had her medical with Dr. Einar yesterday. He didn't seem too bothered with the vaccines then either...Swedish protocol is for the Td booster to be given every 20 years, not 10 like the US, so that might be why he didn't care about that (my wife had her last td 10 years ago this August, so we thought that he might make her have another now...). However, he did say that if he was going to be pedantic, she should have the meningococcal-but that she could take it in the US if it caused problems. This confuses me because according to that table, meningococcal isn't needed (my wife is definitely older than 18)...
-
51 minutes ago, Boiler said:
Seems like whatever happened did not happen in Denmark, details are unclear.
Yes-I was thinking that if the ex-husband (also father of the child?) is also a Danish citizen, this might help (as one piece of evidence) to show that there was no legally binding marriage between them.
Otherwise, maybe affidavits from the witnesses at the ceremony explaining what happened (and also that the couple has now divorced)?
-
Maybe buy him a one-way plane ticket around the time you are planning on leaving? I'd also look into some timelines for how long things take for DCF in Frankfurt, and plan for him to resign his job/give notice before the interview. Then a letter of resignation (and confirmation of this from his current employer) might help...
Otherwise, him finding and accepting a job in the US before you leave would be a big plus.
-
My Danish is not so good, but shouldn't getting a "Civilstandsattest" as described here https://www.borger.dk/samfund-og-rettigheder/Folkeregister-og-CPR/Det-Centrale-Personregister-CPR be a good first step? This would show that you are not married (at least legally) in Denmark.
-
Quote47 minutes ago, diaz1880 said:
Ok because some people are telling me that I still need a co sponsor so I was confused and wanted to really make sure.
If you currently make over 125% of the poverty level, then your income is enough.
HOWEVER, the purpose of the I-864 is to provide information as to whether the beneficiary is likely to become a public charge (and also make the petitioner liable for the benefits if the beneficiary needs them). If you've only had your current job for a short while, and previously haven't made that much, then it might be a good idea to find a joint sponsor.
On a side note: you are slightly hijacking the OPs thread (asking a different question)...the OP doesn't seem to mind, but it's good to make your own thread-it makes things easier to read.
-
Happy to help
My wife has her interview next Tuesday...so we're both getting a bit excited/nervous/restless 
-
Yes, sorry-don't write zero. I'd just leave it blank - (If you fill in the file electronically- using, for example, adobe, it automatically adds whatever you write there to the household size, so you shouldn't write a 1). A dash should be ok (I think). I wouldn't worry too much about falsification of information-your intent is quite clear, and the instructions tell you not to count people twice.
QuoteThis is a common source of confusion.
-
Your household size is 2. You should leave part 5 no. 3 blank (or zero). This is for people not sponsored in the affidavit (and you spouse IS sponsored).
DCF Options for Sweet Sweden
in Direct Consular Filing (DCF) General Discussion
Posted
We went through this process a little more than a year ago. Answering the OP's questions:
1) No travel to London is needed. The embassy in Stockholm just has to get permission from London USCIS to let them process the I-130.
2) Yes, that is what we sent.
3) No idea how they make this call. My letter outlining the exceptional circumstances read
4) Yes, it is listed as such in the memo for exceptional circumstances DCF.
5) I guess the only disadvantage is that if you get married and they don't let you do DCF, then you have to send the I-130 to Chicago and get a CR-1 visa. If I'm not mistaken, this takes longer than the K-1 visa which you could apply for now.
Two things to keep in mind:
1) If you get married, you will need the personbevis from skatteverket as the marriage certificate. It can take a few weeks for your marriage to get entered into the system.
2) They don't let you use your future income when meeting the affidavit of support requirements.
A job offer is literally listed as one of the exceptional circumstances on the I-130 page: