Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Family last won the day on February 8

Family had the most liked content!

Immigration Timeline & Photos

Family's Achievements

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. If she has extended family in MX where she can comfortably wait out the I-601 after interview…the process does not have to be scary. ..and she will get approved…considering the I-601 A was granted . I understand it’s inconvenient…but she would be able to return as an LPR . ..there is no reform or amnesty in sight . If you have ever known friends /family or acquaintances that legalized after long stretches …first they want to do is visit home country. ..tell her to try looking at it as an extended holiday.
  2. National Opioids Settlement National opioid settlements have been reached with defendants Janssen, Cardinal, McKesson, AmerisourceBergen, Teva, Allergan, CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart. This website provides copies of those agreements as well as additional documents and information concerning the proposed settlements. The agreements themselves control the terms of the settlements, and entities eligible to participate in the settlements should consult with counsel about participation. The site was created and is maintained by the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee https://nationalopioidsettlement.com
  3. What happened at the border contacts and how CBP treated it can be found on the CBP FOIA . ‘You can update a copy ( black out name and info ) Can you please clarify WHERE she is doing her interview ? I assumed consular process and I-601 A…are we on same page ?
  4. I am basing my response on her one entry being EWI /entry without inspection . ..but others have asked you to confirm , kindly do so. If she is CDJ/MX and any of her children EWI d ( before or after her)…then she will get the smuggling Inadmissibility . If from other South America countries…not so much risk. They void the I-601 A and she would wait in MX while a new I-601 is filed .
  5. Tennessee v. Powell, Case No. I-CR-086639-B (Cir. Ct., Williamson County, Tenn., undated). In a criminal case in which Mr. Justice represents the defendant, the government filed a motion in limine to prohibit the defense from referring to the prosecution as “the government,” asserting it was prejudicial. Justice replied that such a ban would violate the first amendment, but went on to argue, that should the court agree with the government, er, the prosecution, what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander: Should this Court disagree, and feel inclined to let the parties basically pick their own designations and ban words, then the defense has a few additional suggestions for amending the speech code. First, the Defendant no longer wants to be called “the Defendant.” This rather archaic term of art, obviously has a fairly negative connotation. It unfairly demeans, and dehumanizes Mr. Donald Powell. The word “defendant” should be banned. At trial, Mr. Powell hereby demands be addressed only by his full name, preceded by the title “Mister.” Alternatively, he may be called simply “the Citizen Accused.” This latter title sounds more respectable than the criminal “Defendant.” The designation “That innocent man” would also be acceptable. Moreover, defense counsel does not wish to be referred to as a “lawyer,” or a “defense attorney.” Those terms are substantially more prejudicial than probative. See Tenn. R. Evid. 403. Rather, counsel for the Citizen Accused should be referred to primarily as the “Defender of the Innocent.” This title seems particularly appropriate, because every Citizen Accused is presumed innocent. Alternatively, counsel would also accept the designation “Guardian of the Realm.” Further, the Citizen Accused humbly requests an appropriate military title for his own representative, to match that of the opposing counsel. Whenever addressed by name, the name “Captain Justice” will be appropriate. While less impressive than “General,” still, the more humble term seems suitable. After all, the Captain represents only a Citizen Accused, whereas the General represents an entire State. Along these same lines, even the term “defense” does not sound very likeable. The whole idea of being defensive, comes across to most people as suspicious. So to prevent the jury from being unfairly misled by this ancient English terminology, the opposition to the Plaintiff hereby names itself “the Resistance.” Obviously, this terminology need only extend throughout the duration of the trial — not to any pre-trial motions. During its heroic struggle against the State, the Resistance goes on the attack, not just the defense. WHEREFORE, Captain Justice, Guardian of the Realm and Leader of the Resistance, primarily asks that the Court deny the State’s motion, as lacking legal basis. Alternatively, the Citizen Accused moves for an order in limine modifying the speech code as aforementioned, and requiring any other euphemisms and feel-good terms as the Court finds appropriate. https://lawhaha.com/legal-oddities/pleadings-and-other-documents/
  6. If prior contacts at border resulted in VR / caught , printed and sent back there is no issue, She has only one entry. I can see atty cautioning for any number of other pitfalls…but no one would waste $$ on I-601 A with a 9 C history..on the books, so to speak. ‘
  7. If the first contact and border encounter was just an attempted entry then it’s a “voluntary return” . Usually she would have been detained a few hours , fingerprinted sent back to Mexico . Many tried multiple time and got caight often before ultimately getting in EWI. Attorney would have screened for multiple entries ( hopefully wCBP FOIA) before the hefty Waiver I-601 A legal fee….right?
  8. You are right on the age alert. .fot the I-864 , sponsor must be 18. ..so even if processing is lightning speed, no AOS til OP is 18. ‘The I-129 F at USCIS stage won’t have a problem as there is no requirement. At consulate …seems like it could be roll of the dice …as I am assuming OP is a student and likely dependent on parents. Beneficiary can try scouting some employment offers from US companies around the time of interview and OP parents can do an I-134 as well https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM050207.html c. (U) Public Charge, Evidence of Support: (1) (U) A K visa applicant and any accompanying children must meet the public charge requirement of INA 212(a)(4) like any other visa applicant. While evidence of support is usually requested, there is no absolute requirement that an affidavit of support or other public charge documentation be presented. It is only necessary that you conclude that the applicant is not likely to become a public charge. It would not be unusual, therefore, for a healthy applicant of working age, applying alone, to establish eligibility during the visa interview without the need for substantiating documentation. (2) (U) Form I-864, Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the Act, cannot be required. Applicants may submit a letter from the petitioner’s employer or evidence that they will be self-supporting. Form I-134, Affidavit of Support, may be requested when you deem it useful. https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM060114.html
  9. Focus on getting I-130 approved. Once you clear that , argue child needs to interview in PI together with his mom.
  10. Face the issues as they arise . I recommend adopted name ( and thus Nigerian passport) to start with USCIS…as the adoption decree needs to get past them first . You select PI for consular process and argue need for Manila post if USCIS/ NVC (and can ask Manila to accept case) IF it gets assigned to Nigeria . As it stands child , dual citizenship will allow child to travel and process in either country if push comes to shove .
  11. The only reason I can imagine you were even considering using your son PI /pre adoption name / passport is because of anticipated exit when he gets the IV visa…or do you have other concerns?
  12. As far as what name to use…I would go with the adopted name /Nigerian passport , since I am assuming you are claiming adopted parent not step parent. Show them the alias on PI passport. When IV gets approved, if Philippine exit is a problem…you can always exit with other passport… And here it is, PI Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that they will recognize foreign adoptions. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c8d1aeec-2351-4b5c-be96-1f3312c137dd Is the adoption of a Filipino child in another country recognized in the Philippines? The Court of Appeals has since made contradictory rulings on this question, but the Supreme Court upheld the principle conclusively in 2020. In its definitive ruling in the case of Suzuki vs. Office of the Solicitor General,[ii] the Supreme Court rejected the argument that an adoption was only valid if made within the legal framework on adoption of either Republic Act No. 8043 (the Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995) or Republic Act No. 8552 (the Domestic Adoption Act of 1998).
  13. Located the thread you mentioned…I do not think anyone realized your stepson was from a different country. https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM050203.html b. (U) Adoptions should permanently sever previous parental ties. Therefore, a caretaker relationship in which the adopting parents intend to return the child to their natural parents or former guardians in the future would generally not constitute a bona fide parent-child relationship. Also, as provided in INA 101(b)(1)(F), no natural parent or prior adoptive parent of an orphan may obtain any immigration benefit because of their relationship with an orphan.
  • Create New...