Demise

I think it's just selection bias more than anything else. Most people get approved and go live their lives. The day we don't need this thread anymore will be a day I'll be celebrating.

In family cases the priority date is the day that I-130 was filed. DS-260 generally comes before DQ so at least we can guess that was filed. When in this case ultimately doesn't matter now that I looked at it again. I asked mainly because I didn't see that he was DQ'd and DS-260 has to be filed before 1 year after the priority date becomes current to lock in the CSPA age. So all in all, it will all boil down to if the priority date becomes current before the oldest kid turns 21 + whatever time the I-130 was pending (e.g. if it was pending exactly 2 years then before he turns 23). So we kinda just need the approval date to see how much wiggle room they've got. Also lastly: Both your brother and nephew need to remain unmarried until they're in US as LPRs. Funnily enough a different section of CSPA handles this scenario. An F2B whose petitioning parent has subsequently naturalized can choose which category to go via (either F1 or F2B). The process is pretty simple, he'll provide proof of the parent's naturalization and write a letter to the NVC that's either "My petitioning parent naturalized, please move me to F1", "My petitioning parent naturalized, please keep me in F2B". This can be done at any time, so it's best to just wait until one of the categories crosses or at least is about to cross the cutoff. Only exception for this if the beneficiary married. If parent was still an LPR at the time then the petition is dead. If parent was a citizen at the time then it'd drop to F3 and termination of marriage would move it back to F1 with no option to go back to F2B.

F1, F2A, and F2B can have derivative children. So as long as the brother isn't married then out of wedlock kids can tag along. Anyways back to the questions OP: What's the priority date (i.e. when was the I-130 filed)? When was the I-130 approved? What's the oldest's date of birth? Was a DS-260 filed yet, if so - when?

Had to go digging fairly heavily to find this because the form instructions do point that a CLPR who turned 14 is not required to file, but I wasn't sure why exactly (instructions and policy manual also suck for very specific edge cases), so here you go: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-264/section-264.5 (b) Permanent residents required to file. A permanent resident shall apply for a replacement Permanent Resident Card: (8) When the bearer of the card reaches the age of 14 years, unless the existing card will expire prior to the bearer's 16th birthday; Since she's got it when she was still 13, and it's valid for 2 years, it will expire shortly before her 16th birthday, so she's not required to file because the card will expire before her sweet 16. So unless the card gets lost or destroyed, the next form to file will be I-751 when that's due.

I'd just file ASAP. You will need to come to US to attend the interview and ceremony since getting sworn in from abroad is not an option in this case. There's no requirement that the spouse is currently abroad "Establish your spouse is a U.S. citizen who is, or will be, regularly stationed abroad as a U.S. service member for a period of one year or more;". Also according to the instructions found at https://www.uscis.gov/military/citizenship-for-military-family-members. You should call their military helpline (877-247-4645) and request an expedite. Who knows, maybe you'll get lucky and get rushed through before it's time to go.

From the N-470 page: "If you are eligible for naturalization under section 319(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) because you are married to a U.S. citizen working for certain organizations overseas, you are exempt from establishing the naturalization residency and physical presence requirements. Therefore, you are not required to file Form N-470. ..." Going further: https://www.uscis.gov/military/citizenship-for-military-family-members https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-g-chapter-5 It looks like the best option would be to go via 319(b): No N-470 required. If spouse will be stationed abroad for over a year, without any prerequisite time period where you will need to travel back to US to attend the interview and ceremony, declare in good faith that you will continue to live with your spouse abroad after naturalization, and return to US once their foreign deployment ends. Declaration in good faith is basically a declaration of intent, if circumstances change for some reason, then well, they changed and they won't yoink your citizenship away. In this case you may or may not be required to file I-751, depends if you've been a CLPR for at least 1 year and 9 months at the time of the oath of allegiance (if yes - yes, if no - no). You will still need to provide the normal proofs that the marriage is legit as for I-751 even if you're exempt from filing it. Other possibilities like 319(a) (3 years married to a US citizen provision) and 316(a) (general 5 year provisions) require you to have resided in US for at least half the statutory period without breaks in continuous residence (no absences over 1 year, and with absences over 6 months being able to prove that you didn't abandon your permanent residency). So if you'd want to follow to join your spouse abroad those might be better, you'd live in US for 1 year, file N-470, go join them, and file I-751 and N-400 when able to. Only upside here is the ability to get naturalized while abroad. My take is just go with the special provision for military spouses (319(b)).

I think this needs some clean up. So I'll make some presumptions and you tell me if they're right. Lets just call the person who this is about (friend's brother's wife) "A". A came here on a K-1 visa. A married her late husband. They filed for AOS based on the K-1 and subsequent marriage. They were about to have an interview with USCIS and tragedy struck and A's husband died. So, I don't believe that 204(l), which normally preserves immigration benefits in cases where the beneficiary is in US applies to K-1s. If it does please do correct me but I do recall a similar case here. But there is a way to work around it - file an I-360 as a widow of a US citizen. Then regarding the current I-485 it depends: If it was already denied - file a new one concurrently with the I-360. Otherwise she can file a new I-485, or get a transfer to underlying basis from an I-129F to Widow(er) I-360. The exact specifics depend but generally if the interview is coming up - go to it, if she has the I-360 receipt notice bring it with her, if not then bring the husband's death certificate and let them know that she filed or is about to file I-360 and ask that they hold the I-485 in abeyance. If the interview already got postponed - write to the office that has the I-485 (at this stage likely the local office), explain the situation, include a copy of I-360 receipt notice. Regarding what the US family can do is bankroll the forms and ideally a lawyer for her. But there are options at least. They won't need to sign an I-864 or anything, widow(er)s are exempt from that.

Do an infopass? Not sure if they schedule them in NYC, last time I've been at Federal Plaza it was basically a walk-in thing with a line like at the DMV. You can also try to call the help line and try to get the date/time at very least. Showing up with no notice is better than not showing up at all.

So here's the jist of it all: Internally the I-485 stays denied until an I-290B is approved, where the I-485 will be reopened and re-adjudicated. I-290B is currently pending. I-601 is waiting in queue to be assigned, they weren't able to rule on expediting it because you didn't include evidence with the privacy release you sent to your senator. So if you want to follow up on this, you want to include proofs for whatever reasons you asked for an expedite and ask the senator to request an expedite on the I-601 again.

Overstayed what, that is the main question. Secondary question is overstayed when. Ordinarily he will likely need an I-601 due to a 10 year ban for unlawful presence. It can be sought on either IR1 or K-1, the process basically looks the same as normal until the consular interview, where he'll have to go, get denied, then file I-601 with USCIS, then when I-601 is approved reschedule with the consulate, attend another interview and hopefully get the visa approved then. I wouldn't recommend trying to DIY a hardship waiver, tell your friend to get a lawyer, but ultimately, yeah it is possible. Now there are some cases where it doesn't apply and that's in cases where either you are admitted with no concrete expiration date and there's two groups where that's the case: 1. Admitted for "duration of status", I-94 instead of having an expiration date it'll just say "D/S" (F, J, and M nonimmigrants) 2. Not issued an I-94 to begin with (Canadian tourists, possibly some others?) Due to a quirk in the regulations the two groups above do not accrue unlawful presence until one of the following happens: 1. USCIS makes a formal finding that they're out of status, which only happens if they apply for something else and get denied. 2. IJ orders removal. Then it starts to count from the following day. So in case like this someone can overstay an F-1 for years, never apply for anything with USCIS and never end up in removal proceedings, leave, and not get banned. @Crazy Cat K-1s are eligible for the I-601.

Cursory - surface level. Now, I will just say it - I haven't naturalized yet, I haven't been to any naturalization appointments otherwise, I've been kinda on and off with this site since I got my green card, so I have no idea what it actually looks like on the ground. If you're worried bring a lawyer with you.

Gonna post my DM reply here just for the record: Just to add: For B21, BX1, B26, BX6 - you'd need to attach proof that ex naturalized more than 3 years ago. For Z14 you'd need to attach proof that ex is a citizen, has been a citizen for 3+ years, and proof that you were married. For IR1, IR6, IF6 following an I-751 battery/abuse waiver you'd need the I-751 approval notice stating as such. They shouldn't really ask more than cursory questions about the stuff in the prior VAWA.

Believe me, nothing is more grating than news reporting on something you are actually knowledgeable about. They conflate different terms constantly and rarely know anything about anything. Then again the average viewer of cable TV is a complete moron and their knowledge of immigration is limited to the fact that great grampa showed up at Ellis Island one day. That's also how the current president is able to go on TV and whine about illegal immigration due to a group that is unequivocally not illegal immigrants - you know, all the asylum seekers on the southern border who'd show up at the crossing, present themselves for admission, get paroled in, and remain legal while their asylum cases are working their way through the backlog. Hell, even the parole revocations don't magically make them illegal immigrants because pending asylum still makes you legal. However, yes DACA would've given her authorized stay but not much aside that. DACA AP is extremely iffy with an outstanding order, from the cases I've seen that'd normally result in getting detained coming back and you would ultimately get paroled back but you'd also end up also executing your removal order. If it's a normal order then in that case you can file for AOS and include an I-212, with in-absentia order then you've got a problem because the only way to get rid of that 5 year ban is to reopen the removal proceedings. They also won't give you a reopen just to seek an AP prospectively of future AOS. Also, I really don't trust the current administration to abide by grants of DACA. They've kidnapped a guy with an approved withholding of removal to the very country the withholding order said he is not to be deported to.

Strictly speaking #5 if you take VD for the period of VD only, otherwise #6. Still, in any case you have to remember that if you've been in US illegally to begin with you have to act accordingly. I originated from the DACA community so the question there wasn't "how do I stay above water" it was "I've already sunk, how do I resurface". There's the law as written (you shouldn't be here to begin with), law as applied (I-601A might not grant you any kind of legal presence, but it exists solely to let you stay in US while the waiver application is pending, I-130 might not grant you anything on its own but it makes getting rid of a final order easier, etc), and the reality - if you are already in a mess like this leaving will just give you two re-entry bans. Still, she's done the correct things given the circumstances: got petitioned as soon as legally able to and likely planned to do an I-601A on either F2A or IR since you can do it in either case. Now, I would never recommend that someone enter without inspection or otherwise violate the terms of their visa, but well, it already happened, and you have to act accordingly.

So, speaking from experience - they will interview you for a standalone I-130 if you were in removal proceedings previously (or pre-1997 proceedings). Regarding DACA - good question, some googlefu points to Alvarado being 42, so she'd be at the upper end of age eligibility. Still, it's iffy traveling on AP with a prior order. Still, you have to remember that most people aren't really well versed in immigration law, they know half of what their lawyer told them. It's also possible she didn't meet the education requirements or was just concerned about presenting herself to the government, finally there are people who just sleepwalk through life like that. Regarding the re-petition, I think that her husband petitioned for her shortly after becoming an LPR (in F2A), and then filed an amended I-130 after naturalizing, that then moved the petition from F2A to IR. Still, she was whisked away by ICE after an interview where the USCIS officer said that everything looks good and would likely approve the I-130. So it's less that it was approved at the time, more that absent ICE chicanery the whole thing could continue along. I guess the overall game plan was: 1. Attend the standalone interview for I-130 and get approved 2. Use the I-130 to reopen the old proceedings. 3. Get an admin closure to file I-601A 4. Get the I-601A approved. 5. Recalendar and then either terminate or take VD. 6. Attend the consular interview and get the IR1 visa.

Strictly speaking nothing legally prevents you from doing that, but it does look pretty suspicious. First VAWA got denied because you've de facto committed bigamy. Now, I won't pretend to be an expert on matrimonial law but divorce from the first marriage didn't cure the second one unless you've basically remarried with the second spouse after getting the divorce from the first (since the second was void from the start, so it never really existed). So yeah, that first VAWA denial was justified. Now you're married to a third spouse from whom you're trying to seek a second VAWA. Like, I don't think it's insurmountable but do get a good lawyer and be ready to questioned pretty heavily about the validities of the second and third marriage because they might try to hit you with a 204(c) (marriage fraud). For what it's worth, messy situations happen, legal mistakes happen (especially with countries that end up having multiple coexisting legal systems (e.g. civil, sharia, and tribal)), lightning might strike twice, but you will need to dot all the i's and cross all the t's, and likely convince USCIS that you were sure that you were divorced at time of the second marriage, and you didn't enter into the second and third just for papers.

You can. Just scan the yellow letter and attach it and a scan of I-485 receipt notice as evidence. Or alternatively if the system is faulty maybe it'd make more sense to just send in a paper application.

VAWA Cancellation of Removal (EOIR-42B) is subject to the 4,000/yr cap. VAWA Adjustment of Status (I-360/I-485) is either not subject to numerical caps or gets counted into F2B (depending if the spouse was a US Citizen or an Permanent Resident). Honestly, the best solution in this case would be to motion for a termination with the court and then file I-485 with USCIS. Second alternative is to file I-485 with the court, you first file just the form I-485 (and possibly filing fee, not sure if they want one) with USCIS's Irving, TX lockbox. They will issue you a receipt notice. Then you take the receipt notice and file the I-485 and all related documentation with the court. Then the actual review of the I-485 will happen in court during an individual hearing, with the judge issuing a decision on the I-485. Then once a judge approves it, you wait a few days, schedule an infopass appointment, bring the judge's order and the I-485 receipt notice to the infopass, they will mark off the I-485 as approved, and print you your green card. Either way, Cancellation of Removal is likely heavily backlogged, so going via I-485 with either USCIS or the court will be faster.

You mention just the I-130 so I presume that it was a consular processing case, in case of which you or she should write to the consulate in question that the I-212 was approved, include a copy of the notice, and ask that they schedule her for another interview. This case should not be subject to automatic termination due to not doing anything with it for over 1 year (INA 203(g)) because the refusal reason was due to an admissibility (9 FAM 503.13-2(a)(2)(b)(8)). In the unlikely event that the case was sent back to the USCIS you should check on their website to make sure that it didn't otherwise get revoked and file I-824 seeking to have it sent back to the NVC.

Honestly in general I'd recommend just avoiding unnecessary travel until you have the green card in hand, however Matter of Arrabally (BIA, 2012) remains controlling and travel on AP doesn't trigger unlawful presence related re-entry bans. Only real concerning scenario that could happen is the current administration trying another blanket ban if you're from one of the countries they don't like (like the prior muslim ban) since those did exempt permanent residents but were completely silent on those in possession of advance parole.

First and foremost you should have her file a FOIA with CBP to see what exactly happened there, basically did they give her an expedited removal or did they have her withdraw her admission and depart on her own. First one comes with the 5 year ban, second comes with no ban. Now, it's unlikely that the consulate got it wrong, but you never know. I do question the 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) as that's more of a "didn't have the correct documents" bar to entry, though I guess it could be applied as "you are likely to work in US, but you don't have the right visa for that". On the bright side that's something that doesn't come with any further time bans on its own. So basically do the FOIA and see what falls out. If she was allowed to depart on her own then you'll want to schedule another appointment with the embassy and bring proof of that. If not then write to the embassy at least once a year asking that they keep the case open and she'll plan to immigrate after October 2026 when her 5 year ban expires. I don't see a misrep (212(a)(6)(C)(i)) anywhere here. While it's a good question if a misrep happened anywhere in the process doesn't seem like the consulate decided to slap her with that.

So those things are similar but unrelated and can run at the same time. In removal proceedings seeking VAWA you've generally got two options and you can both: You can file I-360 with USCIS and file I-485 with the court. Jurisdiction over I-360 always rests with USCIS. Jurisdiction over I-485 rests either with USCIS (not in removal proceedings or not in pre-1997 deportation proceedings) or with the Immigration court (if in removal/deportation proceedings). You can also file EOIR-42B to seek cancellation of removal, which is what you've done in this case. Now, both of these have similar but not identical requirements, cancellation of removal for example lets you get around the 2 year deadline to file after death/divorce, it also allows you to seek adjustment even if you were never married to the abuser as long as you have a child together, cancellation of removal also requires a finding of extreme hardship with VAWA cases. So what now, well you've got a few options: 1. You can file I-485 with the court, refer to this instruction sheet: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/legal-docs/DEFA-pre-order-instructions.pdf or, 2. Alternatively if you don't mind abandoning the EOIR-42B you can file a motion to terminate with the immigration court, and if you get that then removal proceedings will end and you can just file I-485 with USCIS. To answer this directly, no that's not exactly correct. I-360/I-485 and EOIR-42B are two different processes, both result in a green card but they're independent from each other. There is no requirement for you have a pending EOIR-42B to file I-485 with the court. Nor does an EOIR-42B require an I-485, if an EOIR-42B is approved then that approval will result directly in an issuance of a green card.

Hey so I wasn't able to get a copy of their denial notice but I got this reply from the person in question (K-2 who tried DACA AP to wipe the original K-2 entry): "I got the denial notice. USCIS basically wrote me a denial letter saying DACA is not valid immigration status, and going back to the states with AP does not overwrite the legal entry of K-2, so they rejected my AOS application." So, ngl, still not sure what the best course of action is here. Try to AOS and if that fails be ready to do I-824, once that's approved pay for DS-260, then file I-601A, then once I-601A is approved file DS-260.

It's a bit more complicated than that. It doesn't protect you on its own, but in absence of other options you can make a request for deferred action.

Then you will disclose that travel during the naturalization interview, they will add that to the calculations, and unless you're right on the edge of time actually spent in US (minimum 18 months out of 3 years) you'll be fine. Basically: 1. You need to be an LPR for a period of time (3 years under VAWA, 5 years under the general provision) (this is the continuous residence requirement referenced below) 2. You need to have resided in US for at least half of the time (18/36 months or 30/60 months) 3. Trips under 6 months do not break the continuous residence requirement 4. Trips over 6 months but under 12 months may break continuous residence requirement. Basically then it's up to you that you didn't intent to break it and still maintain a job, home, etc in US, or family members stayed in US. If you can rebuff it your naturalization eligibility date stays the same, if you cannot rebuff it then your naturalization eligibility date slides back 6 months. 5. Trips over 12 months do break continuous residence and then you have two options: a. Try to file 2 years 1 day after return (VAWA) or 4 years and 1 day after return and then try to rebuff the break since the absent period in scope is over 6 months and under 12 months so basically the same requirements as in point 4 apply. b. Wait 2 years and 6 months (VAWA) or 4 years 6 months after return to file. tl;dr: Be in US for at least half the time and don't take trips over 6 months if you want to naturalize fast. Disclose trips after filing N-400 at the interview.