TinTin and Samby

This statement below was found at this link : http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/in...What_Cash_Value

If the poverty guidelines change between the time the petitioner signed the I-864 and the issuance of an immigrant visa, must the petitioner/sponsor and joint sponsor, if required, submit a new I-864?

No. The I-864 will remain valid indefinitely absent other evidence of failure to meet the public charge provisions and should be evaluated based on the poverty guidelines in effect on the date of filing of the I-864 with the National Visa Center, (check on this cable says date of signature by sponsor.) the U.S. embassy or consulate in support of an immigrant visa application. The consular officer will determine whether the income stated by the sponsor and documented in the tax return and any other evidence meets the poverty guidelines in effect as of the time of the I-864 was filed. If the income stated by the sponsor does not meet the poverty guidelines then the consular officer may request the sponsor may submit current year income information.

Hi ugou,

Unfortunately, this is referring to a change in the published poverty guidelines. That is not your situation. Your situation refers to a change in your income. As suggested by others here, you have 2 options: 1) see if you can use assets to cover the difference (remember each $1 in income deficiency must be made up with $3 in Assets. or 2) get a co-sponsor.

Good luck to you!

-Samby

Honey attracts bees better than vinegar. It pays to be nice. That's my only observation. Overall the SSA employees are accustomed to handling the routine situations and when something unusual comes along, like this case, they tend to freeze up.

How is this not routine??

Bobby, you're a bit too black & white for me. Nothing in this world is that black and white, particularly this immigration process.

The OP is asking what status to put ON THE APPLICATION FOR AOS. Therefore, it *IS* the current status to write "AOS Applicant". Again, I would not recommend writing " F1 Overstay" on this form.

-Samby

I would not advise writing "F1 Overstay" on any form. "Adjusting Status" or "Adjustment Applicant" is a much better recommendation.

"Adjusting Status".

The RFE is asking for proof of the income stated on the tax return. What (exactly) was submitted with the I-864?

Hi Karin and Otto, I think Nich-Nick has this right. The RFE is not asking for proof of income stated on the tax return. It is asking for proof of current income, which the OP listed as $39,000.

Regards,

Samby

I think we are good, her K-1 was to expire in early Sept. and we filed and we recieved her AOS NOA in Late Feb. so that is like 176 days.....

The K-1 expired upon entry. The I-94 is the document to go by.

1. Make sure you are counting days from I-94 expiration until AOS NOA. The K-1 Visa dates are meaningless for this purpose.

2. 176 isprettyu close...so triple check your count. Count actual days, not just "months". Even 1 day over, and you're over!

Good luck,

Samby

Surprising news!!! We recieved her Welcome Notice in the mail today along with her EAD!!

From what I can tell, she should have her Green Card in less than 3 weeks... This is really odd in that she did not get interviewed. We went straight from Biometrics to AP to EAD to Welcome Notice....

Hi Er1c, When you have a chance, could you update your timeline with the AOS dates? Thanks!

Hi All,

I went to the local USCIS office today under an INFOPASS appointment and they re-confirmed Kathryn41's and Bobby_Umit's interpretation of the triggering of the ban. They were suprised that our AP was approved, as it clearly was 7 months (more than 180 days) from expiration of TinTin's I-94 and the NOA date of the I485 AOS application. They said that when they processed AP requsts locally, they would not approve AP requests in this situation in order to avoid the potential confusion of the petitioner believing they were authorized for return, but, as Kathryn41 and Bobbu_Umit state, are at the whim of a border patrol officer to invoke or not the 3 year (or 10 year) ban that technically would be in pace even if the AP was used.

Thanks again to all who shared their understandings and experiences on this topic. I appreciate it.

Warm Regards,

Samby

Congrats Nelly228 and Craneman!

Thanks to all for sharing your insights. I'm going to go into the local office this week on an infopass and see what they have to say....(not that their word is necessarily reliable, but at least we will have another data point.)

Warm Regards,

Samby

I would like to hear other's interpretation of this situation. I do not beleive that Kathryn41's interpretation is accurate in this instance. My understanding (though I am certainly not certain) is that the out of status time (beginning with the expiration of the I-94) is negated at the AOS APPLICATION stage, not the APPROVAL stage. Therefore, any travel during ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS (assuming advance parole is in hand) is safe. Could other's comment on their understanding? Thanks.

Warm Regards,

Samby

I would like to hear other's interpretation of this situation. I do not beleive that Kathryn41's interpretation is accurate in this instance. My understanding (though I am certainly not certain) is that the out of status time (beginning with the expiration of the I-94) is negated at the AOS APPLICATION stage, not the APPROVAL stage. Therefore, any travel during ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS (assuming advance parole is in hand) is safe. Could other's comment on their understanding? Thanks.

Warm Regards,

Samby

No, she is correct.

This is what the AP instructions state: (I am using the data provided by the OP)

If your unlawfully present for more than a year, your subject to a 10 year ban. (which the OP is, since they waited for more than a year to file for AOS) (this is Section A under Travel Warning Regarding Unlawful Presence)

What is unlawful presence?

Section C states - Unlawful presence is defined " or, after the period of authorized stay has expired"

In the OP's case, they went pass the authorized stay of the I-94, before they filed for the AOS.

Only by filing for the AOS will it put your status in "pending" and stop the clock.

Many people state that this overstay will be forgiven - however, the instructions/rules/laws do not state this at all. They do state what happens if you are out of status. You are relying on one person checking your paperwork to allow you do do this.

Section E states that if you acquire 180 days before the date of you were considered in authorized stay, you can trigger the ban. Only by sending in the AOS would that place the OP in a period of authorized stay.

The instruction goes on to state you would need to apply for a waiver if found inadmissible.

(All this info is listed in the I-131 instructions)

So - rule of thumb is, don't wait for AOS, get it in before your authorized stay expires.

(yes - I know this is worst case scenario - but that is the way I roll.)

I'm aware of what the instructions say in the I-131 application form. I have read them many times. My reading of them doesn't support your conclusions. As you state, "only by sending in the AOS would that place the OP in a period of authorized stay". THis is exactly the point that I am making. The OP (and I) have sent in the AOS and we are both officially in the "protected" status of "Pending Adjustment". So if the travel commences after receiving NOA from application of AOS, then the travel is undertaken while the person is in a protected status and therefore shouldnt be subject to any bans. If the travel occurred before the AOS NOA **AND** the return to the USA from that travel occurred after 180 days (or 365 days) subsequent to the expiration of any prior legal status, then the bans would be invoked. This is my reading of the instructions. I would appreciate other's responding with their interpretations and understanding. Thanks.

Warm Regards,

Samby

good news....update your timeline

?? My timeline was updated before my post.......

That's great! Congratuations!

Warm Regards,

Samby

I would like to hear other's interpretation of this situation. I do not beleive that Kathryn41's interpretation is accurate in this instance. My understanding (though I am certainly not certain) is that the out of status time (beginning with the expiration of the I-94) is negated at the AOS APPLICATION stage, not the APPROVAL stage. Therefore, any travel during ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS (assuming advance parole is in hand) is safe. Could other's comment on their understanding? Thanks.

Warm Regards,

Samby

Just sharing some good news:

Applied for AOS, AP ad EAD in Early Feb.

NOA's and Biometric appointment letter received.

As is the case for most, AOS case status showed up on the USCIS website, but not AP case nor EAD case.

Did a drop in for Biometric's 3 weeks earlier than scheduled appointment - no problems.

5 days later received notice in mail that Biometrics needed to be repeated due to poor quality fingerprints. - notice included new Biometric appointment date.

Did another drop in for the 2nd Biometric appointment several weeks earlier than scheduled appointment - no problems.

AP and EAD applications routed to Missouri, per normal.

AOS case transferred to California - received mail notice and online case status updated. Still no online information available regarding AP and EAD cases.

April 1 - Made Infopass appointment at local USCIS office to request previously submitted AP application be expedited on an emergency basis due to impending overseas business travel. - office very accomodating, no issues or questions.

April 9 - received AP in the mail and, much to our happy suprise, also the EAD. (50 days from application)

Still no online case status info on AP and EAD.

Online Status of AOS still shows last activity of Transfer to California.

Warm Regards,

Samby

Where do you find documentation that gives a specific period of time (ie MORE THAN 6 MONTHS) after expiration of I94 by Which time AOS needs to be filed? I am not aware of any specific time frame. My understanding is that once AOS is submitted and NOA is issued, you are officially in a protected status regardless of how long it had been since your I94 previously expired.

Warm Regards,

Samby

Hi Wisdom,

TinTin received notification 7 days after taking the first set of fingerprints at her biometric appointment that those prints were not good and that she had to come back for a second attempt. We returned to the same location a second time where they retook all her fingerprints. Three days later, I called the FBI Status line to confirm if the 2nd set of prints was accepted and the results were forwarded onto USCIS. They were. We are happy.

Good Luck.

Warm Regards,

Samby

CONGRATULATIONS, guys!!!!

Warm Regards,

Samby & TinTIn

Help! I have a shirt wrapped around my face as I write this post. Some sort of small fish she cooks in oil, produces lots of smoke. It smells like the warmest day in gym class, only 100 times worse. It has been two days now, and I can't even go in the house without covering my face.

-Bullwinkle

DON'T BE SOOO SHALLOW! HAVE'NT YOU HEARD OF PINAYS COOK DRIED FISH AT HOME BEFORE YOU MARRIED HER? YOU'RE IN TROUBLE NOW!

Hey Manika - no cooking that smelly dried fish in da house, married or not! Orno lang, sa dirty kitchen, OUTSIDE!!! WINK WINK

Warm Regards,

Samby

Between the age of 27 and 49, you just need:

- TD serie of 3 shots with at least one TD-aP shot (Pertussis, aka whooping cough)

- Varicella

- MMR

These were required when you applied for K1, so you probably have them, except maybe for the td-ap shot.

And the vaccinations could have been done when you were a child. As long as they are reported on an immunization document, you are fine. Also, you might have had the actual disease, which counts as immunization, but is harder to prove.

Before age 27, they also require the 3 doses for HPV (women only)

Angela did her TD-aP shot here in the US, it wasn't clear she had it in Brazil.

I presume I no longer need Varicella because I have a history of it. My vaccination record during my K1 application is noted about the varicella history. Probably need T-dap again, but I'm pregnant, so the doctor should waiver.

Just sharing our experience: TInTin was pregnant and therefore was not a candidate for T-Dap, however the standard TD vaccination was required, as the CDC does not recognize pregnancy as a reason to not have the TD vaccintation. She had to have the TD vaccination (being careful to not allow the clinic to administer the more typical T-Dap variety) before the CS would sign off on her Vaccination Supplement.

in Summary, they would not provide a waiver for the standard TD vaccination even though TinTin was pregnant becasue the CDC does not list preganancy as a contra-indication for the administratiton of the TD vaccine. (reminder, this is the standard TD only vaccine, not the more common T-DAP variety that is usually administered.

Warm Regards,

Samby

What the english means in the question is:

Where was the location (place) where you were inspected by immigration officers during the "last time you entered" the USA. It you entered the USA only 2 times before, for example in Jan 2007 at JFK and in May 2008 at LAX, then the answer to the question is LAX. It is the location (place) where you were instpected by immigration officers during your last (most recent) time you entered the USA.

Warm Regards,

Samby

Results of INFOPASS appt........

Got there 45 minutes early, stood in line for 5 minutes waiting for prescreening by the head officer in charge, instead of giving us a number and making us wait 2 hours to see a clerk she took us to the window and ordered the clerk to give us the room number of CBP Deferred Inspectons Office, then she sent us there. We took the elevator to the 4th floor, sat in the CBP office for 5 minutes , were called to the window where a CBP officer asked for Yuri's passport/visa/I-94. We gave her the passport and packet. She opened the packet and compared the first page with the passport info and asked if we were ready to file our AOS. We said yes, she gave us the contents of the envelope and told us to mail the entire packet along with our AOS. I told her that I had understood that the CBP were the ones to send the packet to USCIS. She said no, the CBP was only responsible for opening the packet and making sure that the contents matched the immigrant and his passport/visa info before they issued the I-94. She said they are supposed to give the immigrant back the contents of his envelope for filing with the AOS.Now we have the contents of the envelope and will mail them along with our AOS with a letter of explanation attached. We spent a total of 30 minutes from start to finish (including parking, walking and a potty break) and were out of there 15 minutes before our actual schedualed appointment .

So what's in the mystery envelope? All the forms and documents that I mailed to USCIS, all the forms and documents Yuri handed over at his interview along with the original and 4 copies of his medical exam and computer printouts of the journey of our packet (when it was touched and by whom).

Very strange indeed. Seems like yet another example of the continuous stream of misinformation coming out of the representtives of the agencies that are suppossed to be guiding us through the process. It's so tiring having to educate all of those ninnies about the process and rules they are suppossed to be the experts in..... ughh!!!

Warm Regards,

Samby

Guys, I have a question... What if your husband doesn't want you to work?

he just wants you to stay at the house and be a dedicated housewife?

what are you goin to feel?, do?....

I will start to consider him a control freak and an abusive husband!

Seriously, your husband has no right whatsoever to ask you not to work and to just stay at home and be a dedicated wife. It's more of an economic abuse which may constitute an act of violence against a woman. To work. explore all your possibilities and maximize your potentialities are your basic rights that your husband should respect and which you must protect.

#######?

Economic Abuse?

Constitute act of vioence?

Did you google that answer from someplace? It seems out of line and not related to this thread......

That's based on RA 9262, a Philippine law known as anti-Violence against women and their children act. I don't have to goggle it. I know the law very well and had prosecuted quite a few men who did such form of violence against women.

Oh give me a break........Carumba!