Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About amm7s@mtmail.mtsu

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. With all due respect, I am not getting combative because I'm being told something I don't want to hear... I am getting frustrated, because when I do exactly what is suggested of me, and go directly to the source (USCIS / INA 222(g)) and find information from those sources that contradicts the statements made here, it is ignored and dismissed. I am getting frustrated, because when I speak to lawyers (4 different lawyers at this point) who tell me point blank period that her visa is not invalidated, because the portion of INA 222(g) that I am inquiring about is exactly what applies to her, and *all* of those lawyers are advising that we follow through with our July plans, it is wholly dismissed by the people here responding. I came asking for advice and feedback, but from the beginning, the responses seemed insistent that she could not come back, when I asked for clarification, I was accused of protestation, and when I went to the source and found articles from INA 222(g) that positively supported our case, I was called argumentative, and when I have spoken to lawyers who 100% of them I've spoken to have stated to me very firmly that her visa is not revoked and she can use it to come back over here, even with the extension denial, it is dismissed. The attitude on this forum does not come off as one that tries to analyze a situation and help find answers or results, but rather one of "I'm right, you're wrong, if you don't like it, tough". I understand that everyone on this forum has dealt with these types of issues in some capacity, which is why I have come here in the past to ask questions, and come here to ask this question, but the insistence that I am wrong, despite having verbiage from the INA 222(g) itself to support my case, and the advice of numerous lawyers, I'm just dismissed as argumentative. So be it.
  2. Why bother coming to offer help when all you are going to do is misread my posts and give incorrect information?
  3. I left nothing out. You're leaving out points in your own quote: If an alien files a timely and non-frivolous application for extension or change of status, and departs the United States after the date specified on the Form I-94 but while the application is pending, he or she will not be subject to 222(g) regardless of whether the application is ultimately approved. If the application is found to be frivolous, section 222(g) will apply. She left while it was pending. The decision came 6 months after she left the country. The wording above clearly states that she is not subject to 222(g) regardless of the decision, because she left while it was still pending.
  4. If you are looking at INA 222g: "Alien admitted until specified date; submits a timely and non-frivolous application for extension or change of status; departs U.S. after expiration of Form I-94, but before a decision on the Form I-94 extension/change of status application. [Not Subject]" "If an alien files a timely and non-frivolous application for extension or change of status, and departs the United States after the date specified on the Form I-94 but while the application is pending, he or she will not be subject to 222(g) regardless of whether the application is ultimately approved." http://myattorneyusa.com/visa-overstays-and-ina-222g I would imagine this is the portion of INA 222g they are referring to, since this is the most accurate account of her situation. She applied for extension in April. I-94 expired in May. She departed in November. Her decision was given in May.
  5. I'm not protesting. I am seeking clarification, and I am quoting things that I have read / heard, including directly from lawyers. Including lawyers just today who have told me that her tourist visa is not automatically revoked. If seeking clarification is "vigorous protestation", then I really don't know what else to say. Thank you for the information.
  6. Yes. She had a pending request, and departed before the 240 days. She actually departed before 180.
  7. Yes, but she had an active extension pending. It's been my understanding, from lawyers and other sources that an extension application means you are in legal status while you await the decision.
  8. What about this that she sent me: "As long as you filed the extension application before the expiration date of the current I-94 form, you are in legal status as long as the application is pending or for 240 days, whichever comes first"
  9. Even if she left before 180 days? Doesn't she have legal status while she is waiting for an extension to be approved / denied? Does an extension denial mean she can't re-enter the country? She was here for less than 180 days past her original I-9 expiration.
  10. Hey all, I'm wondering if anyone can give me some feedback or advice. I'm asking here because my fiance and I are planning on pursuing a CR-1 visa, and I am curious if this will impact her 1. coming back into the country on her B1 visa to visit and 2. getting approved for the CR-1 visa after we're married. My fiance entered the United States on a valid multi entry tourist visa back in November 2019. She was scheduled to depart in February, but rescheduled it for March. Unfortunately, the COVID shutdowns happened and her flights back home to the Philippines were cancelled and she wasn't allowed to get back. Her I-9 was originally valid until May, but because she had multiple flights back home cancelled, she filed an I-539 for an extension in April. She finally was able to get a flight back home, and departed in November 2020, less than 180 days past her I-9 expiration. We've been waiting to hear back about her case, and finally today she received a decision that her case was denied. She has not yet received the note explaining why she was denied. We have been talking about having her come back over here in July on her visa for a visit. What could be the reasons for her denial? Is this denial going to harm those chances for her to come back? Will this impact our future pursuit of a CR-1 visa?
  11. Well she's not coming back in tomorrow. We won't be planning a trip for another few months at least. Probably over the summer. Her last trip here wasn't her first. She's been here multiple times, with a history of always leaving on time. She has family here that she visits, and that is established already. She only over-stayed due to COVID, and that was with multiple attempts to leave on time, before finally applying for an extension before her stay expired in the first place.
  12. But when they open back up, they would have a 1 year back log to catch up on, right? Which would by default back us up even longer. As far as her overstay - even with an extension request, and multiple attempts to reschedule her flight home before her authorized stay was up, and were cancelled beyond her control due to COVID?
  13. Coming back to this, I did speak with her about switching to the spousal route instead of the K1 route. She does seem to be on board with it, but she is nervous about her entry into the US in the first place, having a fiance here that she would be marrying to apply for a spousal visa. Specifically, her concerns seem to be about her entry interview when she arrives in the US. I'm not familiar enough with this stuff - I've never even so much as traveled internationally before, so I don't really have much advice to give her. She's very cautious about her status because she doesn't want to do anything that could jeopardize her ability to eventually come over here permanently, as even beyond me she has family over here that she wants to be near.
  • Create New...