AnnaLee24

To be clear are you asking about a passport from Myanmar so you can file an I-130 (which isn’t needed as other posters have noted)? You do need to get a Myanmar passport for your child just so they have it, you won’t need it for the CRBA but you will need to get your child a US passport after you get the CRBA. When your child leaves Burma they should have two passport but have to have a US one.

4 minutes ago, HRQX said:

OP said "I-129F." The petition was processed and approved by USCIS.

But the DOS is the owner of that record. That is their information they are tasked with holding and archiving in the future. 
 

if someone got a speeding ticket and went to court and needed a copy of the police report a year later they wouldn’t go to the court for the police report, they would go to the police department. J

20 hours ago, HRQX said:

You could try a FOIA request: https://www.uscis.gov/records/request-records-through-the-freedom-of-information-act-or-privacy-act The form would ask for fiance's A-number which may be on the I-129F approval notice.

Are there official instructions that say that? IMO a copy of packet isn't needed.

Wouldn’t they need to file the FOIA with the DOS if they want a copy of their visa form? 
https://foia.state.gov/Request/Visa.aspx

The most important thing at the moment is that you are listed on his travel orders. If you aren’t on his orders immigration will not count your time overseas as maintaining residency 

13 hours ago, PGA said:

How does one get an acceptable voting record for Florida to prove US Domicile?

 

Voting records are used along with other things to establish domicile in a certain state, but voting is a big one. Voting records, car tags, drivers license, what state your will is written in, if you pay income taxes to X state. State domicile is used for a long list of government things that have nothing to do with immigration.

43 minutes ago, Ayrton said:

OP is already in the US waiting for AOS Interview.

Yes but she is moving.

Adding: so in the future there is a record of her noting that she will be out of the country but by no fault of her own, only reason is to be with her husband is why she was not in the US. If she brings the evidence that will force a record of it. So in the future if any legal issues arise there is a very clear records she did not 

abandon her residency.

A civil contract is still a very temporary thing. People on contract jobs, especially for the military, are not expecting to live in that area. It is like going on a LONG work trip. I would go and take all evidence. Your husband won’t be getting housing allowance (military families get housing allowance still if spouse is overseas), so it doesn’t make sense for him to keep a house in the US or you to move there yet without him. I would go to the interview, take all evidence of him at his current job like pics, contract, if he is prior military take pics and proof, proof of him keeping residency in the US, make them understand he has never kept residency outside of the US and this is just a lucky thing for him he got a contract job. If you are not already from the ME then it’s easier to prove you wouldn’t be moving there for any reason to be with him.

Long story short, go to the interview, throw all your evidence out, and either pray, light some incense, poke some pins in a doll, whatever gives you good mojo but definitely cross your fingers.

You could save anyone’s phone number as the name of the contact. Like if Rick’s number was 1 (111) 111-1111 you could save his name as 1 (111) 867-5309. So now when Rick calls you the number 1 (111) 867-5309 shows up on your phone. I’m going to say it doesn’t matter at all. 

I’m curious what the VJ old timers thoughts are on this case. It is a 9th circuit of appeals case that was argued two weeks ago concerning an ex-wife suing her ex-husband for support. She didn’t agree with the amount that should be given to her. The ex-husband tried to include in her income a grant for education that was given to her because of a disability. The ex-husband tried to argue she lied on her I-94 because she has a disability and could be at a risk for removal and she has chosen not to become a citizen so she can enforce the I-864.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=oR23DQLFjmQ

There is one more thing. When Covid calms down your husband might be able to Hop a military flight and pick up your dog. Scheduling a military flight is hard to plan but can work. The Facebook page JBSA Lackland // JBSA Randolph Passenger terminal Facebook page post space A flights. They haven’t flown hops in a while but keep a look out on it.

If you want to get married do it. I would get married, go get your dependent ID (this will be your official US government ID from then on), sign up for Tricare, join Aviano military spouses page and ask if someone is willing to fly to bring your dog back with them when they PCS back to the states. If your fiancée was based there he should have some contacts he can talk to. If you do go back to Italy you can get a job on base and since Italy is super umm... *particular* about who works on base you will easily get a job since you are a spouse and I assume Italian. Also depending who your husband knows you might be able to get some of your items shipped back to the US with their house hold goods when they move back to the US.
 

Since he is military he will get more BAH after y’all get married. Immigration isn’t cheap, do that first, get your military documents in order, then decide what your next step is.

Right now Atlanta has a flight out tomorrow to Amsterdam. If you are really looking to get back then I would lookup inbound flights to the airports in the Netherlands and see which ones are still running. Book off of that info. Flightradar24 is helpful.

Federal employees will get paid if they are working or not. What you might have a case if working from home provided any benefit to the US government, 

When does your green card expire?

Maybe they think getting a 2019 tax transcript will take to long so they just requested what could be provided.

I think maybe this is the form they are referencing. From what I can tell it forces you to pay US tax on all money made outside the US or claim you aren’t a resident.

https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-8802

9 hours ago, Chaka Quaker said:

Thanks, however, you do know that for you to have a US passport, you need to be a US citizen

True. Passport is a secondary form of evidence though, since someone has to prove their citizenship to get a passport. They don’t give passports to new born babies they give birth certificates.
 

It’s kinda like someone saying, “I don’t the have birth certificate you requested but here is my social security card I’ve had since a kid, I had to have a birth certificate to get that.” 
 

Passports don’t prove citizenship, they are evidence someone proved their citizenship to the DOS to get a passport. But USCIS is specifically requesting 

On 3/9/2020 at 8:41 AM, Chaka Quaker said:

“Your spouse's birth or naturalization certificate or certificate of citizenship.”

as additional documentation.

It shouldn’t be hard to get those items together, why not take them?

3 hours ago, Chaka Quaker said:

It actually expired last year and he got a new one   

I would take his Canadian birth certificate, parents birth certificates, marriage license, & proof he lived in the US as a child (if required).

Something is throwing a red flag in USCIS’s data mining or record matching, look at page 48. If you don’t at least try to prove he is a USC at the interview you will probably get a RFE.

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/2018-dataminingreport.pdf 

1 hour ago, Chaka Quaker said:

No. 

Well that is odd. Does it expire soon? Passports aren’t really the best way to claim citizenship at birth since they can be revoked, lost, or renewed if to much time has passed. Like if he wasn’t able to renew his passport and start from scratch? He would have to get a Certificate of Citizenship.
 

Have you looked over the N-600 or N-600K and made sure his situation will fulfill all the requirements? 

Is his passport expired?

1 hour ago, SusieQQQ said:

Are you purposely missing the point of my post? The “new immigrant inspection procedure” after 180 days has been in place for years. So has the burden of proof of overcoming public charge. Changing the way public charge is determined is just a tweak to background legislation. Even for brand new immigrants, definitely subject to “new immigrant inspection procedures”, when has a CBP officer ever second guessed public charge?  
 

 

Edit... oh wait ..maybe the wording confused you ...are you thinking it’s the “immigrant inspection procedure” that is “new”, rather than that the “inspection procedure” is conducted as thought it is a “new immigrant”? It’s the latter, the wording has been in place for years. The CBP page you linked above was last updated on 27 Sept 2019 by the way, long before the new public charge rule came into effect.
 

Prior to the recent public charge guidelines “the way public charge is determined” did not require public charge to adjudicated when seeking admission. I’m sure you are aware LPR can not be considered as “seeking admission” unless one of six exceptions apply, one of which is when an LPR is gone longer more than 180 days. Before the new guidelines went into effect there was no protocol in determining public charge for LPR’s seeking admission at the POE, now there is, I-944.

5 hours ago, SusieQQQ said:

 I’ve been and been with LPRs entering before and after 180 days absence and there is no difference in treatment or factors looked at. 

If you have been with LPRs after being out of the US +6 months since public charge has went into effect that is good news.

Kinda hard to believe that USCIS took the time to defend that LPRs would need to be tested as an applicant for admission in the public charge rule and CBP took the time to update their procedures. 

“LPRs who are out of the U.S. for more than 180 days are subject to new immigrant inspection procedures as per 8 USC 1101.”

https://help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-1191?language=en_US

but stranger things have happened.

16 hours ago, SusieQQQ said:

This. While technically you reapply for admission after 180 days (as @AnnaLee24correctly highlights), I’ve never in practice heard of any difference in the way CBP treats returning LPRs before or after the 180 day mark, as long as the absence is less than a year.

I’m guessing time will tell since the new public charge regulations are still rolling in. To me it seems the public charge guidance was written to give consequences for staying out of the country past the 180 day mark. 

On the next page the public charge rule addresses naturalization.

”The public charge ground of inadmissibility does not apply in naturalization proceedings. DHS notes, however, that USCIS assesses as part of the naturalization whether the applicant was properly admitted as a lawful permanent resident and therefore was eligible for adjustment based upon the public charge ground of inadmissibility at the time of the adjustment of status.176”

What I gather is when a LPR is admitted after being absent 180 days > LPR is treated as applicant for admission (per INA section 101(a)(13)(C)) > admissions fall under the public charge rule. Reading the rule it seems like this will come up at the POE but the option was left open to assess the lawfulness of the re-admission under public charge during naturalization.

2 hours ago, Paul & Mary said:

They are already LPRs.  There is no "Public Charge" determination on entry or renewal.

Then what does pg  41327 public charge rule imply?

”Congress specified when lawful permanent residents returning from a trip abroad will be treated as applicants for admission, and also specified who bears the burden of proof in removal proceedings when such an alien is placed in proceedings. In general, the grounds of inadmissibility set forth in section 212(a) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a), including public charge inadmissibility, do not apply to lawful permanent residents returning from a trip abroad.163 Congress set forth the circumstances under which lawful permanent residents returning from a trip abroad are considered applicants for admission, and therefore, are subject to admissibility determinations, including an assessment of whether the alien is inadmissible as likely at any time to become a public charge.164 If CBP determines that the returning lawful permanent resident is an applicant for admission based on one of the criteria set forth in section 101(a)(13)(C) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(13)(C), including that the alien has been absent for more than 180 days, and that the alien is inadmissible under one of the grounds set forth in section 212(a) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a),....”

It goes on but that is a lot to quote. From what I gather that after 180 days the LPR is treated as seeking admission, which falls under public charge.

24 minutes ago, Jamie and Ben said:

 

34 minutes ago, AnnaLee24 said:

Do you think it means if you've used it since Feb. 2020 for question 12 also?

 

The first line in question 11 says “for the purposes of this form public benefit means...”

so I would think question 12 wouldn’t apply but I would be very transparent and write “see attachment” in question 12’s explanation. Write a blurb you are not sure if this question means ever or just since 2/24. Get your husband to request his social security benefits letter and benefits application information include that and explain that he was on benefits 10 years ago, here is proof, also proof he hasn’t used any since. I if I was looking at that application I would think “okay, this person had a hard time, got assistance but has shown the ability to get off and stay off public benefits”. A good example how public benefits should work.

Link to how to get a benefits letter