TOM&Riz

Tommy and Riz,

Thanks for reply. I wanted to get married shortly after arriving in PH, and plan on staying with her long enough to apply for the permanent residency, which i think is 6 months. Any idea how long this will take to get approved? Must I have the permanent residency complete and in hand before using a DCF? Or can I use the DCF after living with her for 6 months ( to establish residency ) there without actually having the PR card in hand?

I guess maybe the 6 month wait for residency, then the 3-5 month wait at the consulate would be equal to the wait if filed with the USCIS right after marriage? Either way I do have the privilege of being at her side and living with her as my spouse while we wait for the filings to be approved. I am just looking for the shortest time after next march tha twe could leave together to the states.

your welcome, actually you can apply for an ACR the day you arrive,and you should as the wheels of justice turn mighty slow there, check the Ph BI wedsite www.immigration.gov.ph

yea other then saving a few bucks and having the experience you will probably gain 2 or 3 months process time.

From my limited understanding (so far) of this process, I get that I (US citizen) would file an I-130 on behalf of my Canadian spouse and another I-130 on behalf of his minor son - and we could do that by DCF at the Toronto consulate and expect (almost) immediate approval. I don't anticipate any problems with that part - we have all the proofs of genuine relationship, have been married and living together in Canada for almost 4 years, etc. One question I do have about this part of the process, though, is his proof of "sole custody" of his son. My husband has had full physical custody of his son since his wife left them 9 years ago, when the boy was 5. (This was documented in a marital separation agreement filed in September 2004, but their divorce was not finalized until July 2006.) The boy's mother has visitation - she pays child support. What type of documentation does my husband need for his son to be able to immigrate to the States? The boy is now 14 years old and able, in our Province, to decide with whom and where he wants to live. Is the Court order that shows physical custody with my husband enough for USCIS, or does the mother have to give authorization?

My second question is, assuming all that goes well, what do I do about the income/asset requirements of the I-864? I am currently working part time in Canada and I only make about $11K annually. I haven't lived/worked in the US since we got married. From what I can gather, the income requirement for 4 people (me, my hubby, his son and my US citizen daughter) is $27,562. I wasn't even making that when I last worked in the States, so even if I was willing to leave my family and go back to the States to secure employment (I'm not), I probably wouldn't be able to get a job that would meet the income requirements anyway. I have no assets either - but my mother is in the States and owns her home outright. However she is 85 years old and on a fixed social security income of only $800 something per month, so I have no idea whether she's eligible to co-sponsor. My husband is making in excess of $70K in Canada with an employer he's worked for for 30 years (part of the reason we originally decided to live here). He would have a job offer before immigrating to the States from his former (Canadian) boss, who now owns a business in California but I'm fairly certain he wouldn't be able to be working for him prior to our filing the I-864.

So what do I do? Am I screwed for sponsoring my family unless I leave them behind in Canada and go home in hopes of finding a job, in this economy, that pays $30K per year???

As far as his son, you will need a crba i believe, but I will let someone more familiar with that process answer that, as far as your ability to support your family, you have a few avenues, USCIS and DOS is more concerned with future employment and ability to support then what has happened in the past, if your husband is able to secure an employment letter from his boss stating he will have ongoing employment in the US you are golden, your mother will not be able to co-sponsor you solely but, you can find another co-sponsor to add to make up the shortfall of income. there are many good members that can chime in here on VJ to help you with your journey, good luck

Ok if me and my wife im Canadian she is American decided to do DCF. What are the first steps, do you start by filling out the I-130. Were do i do this. I hear Montreal is the only place in Canada that processes them. But i live in Nova Scotia so does that mean that mean that i file the I-130 in Halifax? Should i start by setting up an appointment or what?

Might want to get the ins and outs of canadian DCF from Trailmix, has your wife lived with you there in NS for over six months with documentation to prove that ?

Hello all,

First post and I have not yet started my timeline, but will in about 2 months when the process gets started.

Briefly, I am US citizen, about to go to Philippines to stay with fiancee in August, and married in September/October time frame. I will stay and live with her there until she finishes her education in march 2011. Given the fact I will be there longer than 6 months and can possibly get a permanent residency, I am considering just filing with the Consulate directly. Has any one here done this and what, if any, would be an advantage or disadvantage compared to just filing a spousal visa right after marrying? I have a legal place to return to in USA when I get ready to return.

Thanks, any advise is appreciated.

We have just moved back here to the US from Tagum City Philippines after living there for a year, here's the scoop, for whatever visa you plan on using to live there just document that, if you plan to get an ACR card that will help you, however if you file DCF there, and I highly recommend that, plan on staying there just a bit longer as 1) you can file after conditions are met being married to a filipina, having lived in her country with her for at least six months and able to prove domicile there so if you are getting married in sept/oct. plan on sending your application after you have been there for 6 or seven months and staying there until you have at least received your NOA 1. By going DCF your only shaving maybe 1200 off the total cost of a LPR visa but the experience of living with your wife in her country and fighting her battles with life and finding a better way as well as the visa process in person is absolutely priceless. Good luck to you, and if you need any information we or most anyone here that has experience on this way of applying for a CR1/IR1 I am sure will be more then happy to answer your questions.

Hey...

there are like a million different co-sponsor threads here but: for some reason, they all offer differnt advise:

you need pay stubs / you do not need pay stubs/ the petitoner has to send in his birth-certificate/ only the co-sponsor has to turn in his birthcertificate.

So, my question is: does somebody have a list, that is accurate and up-to-date?

Thanks...

www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AffSuppAFM062706.pdf

Ahhh Tommy...how many of those communicable diseases did St. Lukes check Riza for?

How about you? How many communicable diseases were you checked for when you returned from the Philippines?

How about all of the other U.S. citizens who travel overseas? Do you suppose they were checked for any diseases?

By the way, your link, and the links in your link, did not give any evidence whatsoever that illegal aliens spreading communicable diseases is a "major issue" or is "yet another disaster."

So much for reading comprehension, critical thinking, and logic.

Next!

Tahoma you may want to ask your wife how many she was checked for, as for our experience my wife was checked for all of them.

Me on the other hand was immunized against these diseases when i was a child as I suspect you were

Most US citizens were immunized when they were children or they couldn't enroll in kindergarten

You really are defensive in your replies, Tahoma, we all have different mindsets, that's what sets us apart, there is no need to slander or try to degrade anyone for having different opinions

My whole point is, why do I have to go through this lengthy expensive process to live with my wife and the guy up the street whom I have to help pay his medical bills and the costs to deport his relatives, it's quite obvious the federal government is failing at enforcing the laws of our country, this bill only is an attempt to enhance this process.

Stand With Arizona (and Against Illegal Immigration) One of the seldom mentioned but major issues related to the illegal alien invasion is the unchecked flow of communicable diseases that are routinely assessed in those entering legally. Dr. Manny reviews the disease threats, and another article below assesses the impact of cost of this yet another disaster related to the Feds' failure to secure the border and enforce immigration laws: http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_diseases.html

HAHA Tahoma you have issues to deal with, The Arizona law is already in existence by Homeland Security, the Arizona law is only ratifying who can enforce it, you really need to read before you comment, your embarrassing yourself

He must mean DOS - Dept of State. Not DOJ - Dept of Justice.

Thank You Bobby DOS is what I meant -

Is a Authorization for Release of Federal Tax Data

neccessary and could somebody give me a link to a example-form?

Thanks

No, you will be required to provide tax statements, or transcripts yourself under penalty of perjury. USCIS and DOJ already has access to your tax information as it is considered public information

Or, maybe the warrants are procured because the property that ICE seeks to enter is owned or might be owned by USCs.

Thought you would find this interesting and that our membership and other tea parties should know about this. Mary Jane Ayres is a State Representative and I have confirmed that the editorial opinion did run the Ozarks Sentinel.

Way to GO Missouri--show 'em how it's done!

So, tell me again, what’s wrong with the Arizona law?

Simple solutions to not-so-complex problems.

The "Show Me" state has once again showed us how it should be done. They need more exposure on this. Let's pass it around.

In 2007, Missouri placed on the ballot a proposed constitutional amendment designating English as the Official language of Missouri. Nearly 90% voting in favor! English became the official language for ALL governmental proceeding in Missouri. It also means no individual has the right to demand government services in a language OTHER than English.

In 2008, a measure was passed that requires our Highway Patrol and other law enforcement officials to verify the immigration status of any person arrested, and inform federal authorities if the person is found to be here illegally. It allows Missouri law enforcement offices to receive training to enforce federal immigration laws. The bill makes it clear that illegal immigrants will NOT have access to taxpayers' benefits such as food stamps and health-care through Missouri HealthNET.

In 2009, a measure was passed that ensures Missouri's public institutions of higher education do NOT award financial aid to individuals who are here illegally. The law also requires all post-secondary institutions of higher education to annually certify to the Missouri Dept. of Higher Education that they have NOT knowingly awarded financial aid to students who are unlawfully present in the United States.

So, while Arizona has made national news for its new law, it is important to remember Missouri has been proactive in addressing this growing problem.

Missouri has sent a clear message that illegal immigrants are NOT welcome in our state and they are certainly NOT welcome to receive public benefits at the cost of Missouri taxpayers!

Article in "The Ozarks Sentinel" Editorial Opinion - Nita Jane Ayres, May 13, 2010

Sure, but that applies to any search, and not just immigration related searches. We've all seen those episodes of "Cops" where the perp jumps out of his car and runs through homes in the neighborhood, with cops following close behind.

My original statement was that the 4th amendment applied to federal immigrations the same way it applies to any law enforcement officer. In a situation where a local cop would be required to get a search warrant, an immigration enforcement officer is also required to get a search warrant.

The allegation was that illegal immigrants are not protected by the 4th amendment, implying that immigration enforcement officers don't need a search warrant. I've heard the 4th amendment claim before, but I've never heard anyone imply that this grants authority to federal law enforcement officers to make warrantless searches. The claim is based primarily on two Supreme Court cases. In the first case, the Court determined that the 4th amendment protections don't extend beyond the US borders for someone who is merely visiting the US, whether they are in the US legally or not. In the second case, the Court determined that evidence obtained in an alleged illegal search does not have to be suppressed in a civil court case. This would apply even if the respondent was a US citizen.

I'm looking for any court case that validates the allegation that immigration enforcement officers don't need to obtain a search warrant. I've googled dozens of cases where homes were raided by ICE, and in every case they either had a search warrant or were given permission to search by the person who answered the door.

Jim so are you implying that it just doesn't happen ? you and I both know better, the facts are that even if admissible evidence of an illegal raid was conducted and 4th amendment rights were violated, the point is moot because the complainant will be deported to a land that doesn't follow US law

Jim these links are on findlaw that requires a password, The real point is... the wording of the 4th, it says "The People" and who is covered under United States amendments and the constitution, are illegal foreigners covered under the US law ?

**FN31. James G. Connell, III & Rene L. Valladares, Search and Seizure Protections for Undocumented Aliens: The Territoriality and Voluntary Presence Principles in Fourth Amendment Law, 34 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 1293, 1295 (1997) ( "[C]ourts have cited Verdugo-Urquidez for the proposition that the Fourth Amendment does not automatically protect undocumented aliens even if the challenged search and seizure took place in this country.").

Although Verdugo-Urquidez was not himself an illegal alien (because his presence in the country was the result of conduct by U.S. authorities), [FN28] the language used to describe why the Fourth Amendment did not apply to protect him could very easily refer to someone from that group as well; [t]he Fourth Amendment, the Court stated, only enures to the benefit of "persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community." [FN29] Certainly many illegal aliens, especially those who have just crossed the border, would have a hard time showing they have developed a "sufficient connection" to the United States. Indeed, the Court admitted in Verdugo-Urquidez that "[o]ur statements in Lopez-Mendoza are ... not dispositive of how the Court would rule on a Fourth Amendment claim by illegal aliens in the United States if such a claim were *396 squarely before us," [FN30] and lower courts have not been hesitant to apply Verdugo-Urquidez to the latter group. [FN31]

If that means that illegal aliens have no Fourth Amendment rights, consider the implications. Of all the people in the United States, including violent criminals, only those who lack proper documentation can be searched and seized without justification.

The 4th amendment is a right afforded citizens of the United States, if it is confirmed that illegals are primary residents that right or amendment does not pertain to them ...

here is the text -

Another matter of scope recently addressed by the Court is the category of persons protected by the Fourth Amendment--who constitutes ''the people.'' This phrase, the Court determined, ''refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with [the United States] to be considered part of that community.'' 28 The Fourth Amendment therefore does not apply to the search and seizure by United States agents of property that is owned by a nonresident alien and located in a foreign country. The community of protected people includes U.S. citizens who go abroad, and aliens who have voluntarily entered U.S. territory and developed substantial connections with this country. There is no resulting broad principle, however, that the Fourth Amendment constrains federal officials wherever and against whomever they act.

This is not correct. ICE is not above the 4th amendment. They need a warrant or the permission of the occupant to enter a home. ICE can issue arrest warrants on their own, but an arrest warrant cannot be used to force entry into a home. They need a search warrant, and that can only be issued by a judge.

Most of the time, when someone's home is entered without a search warrant it's either because they were intimidated into agreeing to let the officers enter, or they stood in the open doorway talking to the officers (an open doorway is considered an invitation to enter). This is why attorneys always recommend you either talk to the officers through the closed door, or you go outside and close the door behind you. If the officers have a valid search warrant then they won't bother talking to you first - they'll just kick the door down. This applies to federal officers (including ICE), as well as state and local officers.

The National Immigration Law Center has several pamphlets describing what your rights are when you have an encounter with federal immigration officers. While I don't agree with their opinions on immigration law and reform, their advice on your legal rights is spot on.

The 4th amendment is a right afforded citizens of the United States, if it is confirmed that illegals are primary residents that right or amendment does not pertain to them ...

Also, sorry just one other question. Should for some reason his assets and most recent tax return not be sufficient, he doesn't have anyone else living with him. How do you get a co-sponsor if they aren't living in the same house?

The consulate only considers gross income before taxes for the benefit of a valid I-864, they also take into totality the circumstances surrounding and many factors weigh in like age, future potential income and the likelihood of the immigrant becoming a public charge -

the poverty line for two persons in a household is $18,212.00, if he shows receipt of $20.000.00 you are fine, I sent a letter along with bank statements explaining to the consul that although my income was close to the poverty line I have always lived within my means. That sort of statement goes a long way

Anyone family or friend can become a co-sponsor as long as thier income is sufficient for thier family with you included in the household. It is not necessary for them to live with the principal sponsor

I am UKC and my husband is USC. I want to just get familiar with the I-864 process. My husband started his own business a few years back and the first couple of years he didn't earn above the poverty line, but this past year he did. He also owns his own house and quite a signficant amount of money in savings and stocks and shares. Will it be a problem when submitting the 3 years tax returns that show 2 years under the poverty line, if we submit the assets as well?

Many Thanks

Yogi35

The USC will only need provide the last years Tax return statements or transcripts, the USCIS looks more toward future earnings rather then past earnings -

(i) Documentation.

(1) Federal Tax Returns. Each sponsor must submit either a transcript or a copy of his or her most recent US. Federal individual income tax return (Form 1040, 1040A or 1040EZ), including all Schedules filed with the IRS. If the sponsor submits a copy of the tax return, he or she must also include copies of any and all IRS Forms W-2 and 1099 that reflect income used to qualify. The second note under paragraph 20.5(e)(2) provides guidance regarding what to do if a W-2 or 1099 is missing. Note, however, that it is not necessary to submit the Forms W-2 or 1099 if a transcript, rather than a copy, of the tax return is submitted. State or foreign income tax returns are not acceptable; if submitted, they must be returned to the intending immigrant.

The sponsor must submit with the Form I-864 the sponsor’s U.S. Federal income tax return for the most recent tax year (that is, the completed tax year immediately preceding the date the sponsor signs the Form I-864). USCIS may generally expect a sponsor, after April 15 of any given year (or April 16 or 17, in a year in which April 15 is on a Saturday or Sunday), to have completed his or her tax return for the previous year. If the sponsor requested an extension, the sponsor should provide proof of filing for the extension. If the sponsor did not file a tax return, the sponsor must prove that he or she was not required to file. If a sponsor should have filed, the sponsor must file retroactively and provide proof of filing. Note that U.S. citizens generally have an obligation to file a tax return on non-U.S. earnings even if there was no tax liability.

EXAMPLE 1: Sponsor signs the Form I-864 on March 1, 2006. The US Federal income tax return for 2005 is not due until April 17, 2006. Therefore, the sponsor must submit his or her 2004 U.S. Federal income tax return.

EXAMPLE 2: Sponsor signs the Form I-864 on May 5, 2006. The sponsor must submit his or her 2005 U.S. Federal income tax return.

EXAMPLE 3: Sponsor signs the Form I-864 on May 5, 2006. However, the sponsor also filed with IRS a Form 4868, obtaining an extension of the 2005 income tax filing deadline. The sponsor must submit his or her 2004 U.S. Federal income tax return.

Source: HQRPM 70/21.1 Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM)

Guys,

Do I need to include 12 months worth of my bank statement if I want to use it as an asset?

(1) Bank Deposits—Applicants relying on bank deposits to meet the

public charge requirements should present as evidence a letter

signed by a senior officer of the bank over the officer's title,

showing:

(a) The date the account was opened;

(b) The number and amount of deposits and withdrawals during

the last 12 months;

© The present balance. This information may prevent

attempted abuse such as an initial deposit of a substantial

sum of money being made within a relatively short time prior

to the immigrant visa application; and

(d) How the money, if in a foreign bank in foreign currency, is to

be transferred to the United States

source: U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 9 - Visas

Interesting how you sugarcoat what potentially could be a much more intrusive situation for a legal permanent resident, or even a U.S. citizen. Would you feel the same way if it happened to your loved one? How about if it happened a second time? Do you even realize that some American citizens have no ID?

Also, I have friends who have been repeated victims of racial profiling. It's a humiliating and degrading experience. Chances are pretty good that some law enforcement officers in Arizona will act no differently than some officers here. Racial profiling will happen.

In addition, the new law will not even put a dent in the number of illegals. It solves no problems.

So, the question remains: with so much downside to the "driving while brown" law, is it worth the benefit of deporting a few illegals? I think not.

However, it will be nine black robes who ultimately will decide the constitutionality of this law.

you keep saying "new law" this is NOT a new law only who can enforce the current law ...

100% A lot of flag-waving, chest-thumping, and lightly racial accusations on what illegals do to neighborhoods, public schools and health care. No matter what people say here, this law wont get passed and sadly to all the wishful believers that want the rest of the U.S. to join in, it wont. Simply not enough boots, and not enough Illegals who will follow that law anyway.

I wouldn't count my chickens before they hatch, there are enough states jumping on board and the will of the American public is being heard and will show come november , bye bye Nancy Pelosi and crew

I think we need to look at the real circumstances when it comes to pulling out the race card. Arizona has a HUGE problem with illegals. Last I checked, there weren't too many Asians, or African-Americans running across the border. So, to say this law is racist is total BS. If Northern states were to adopt the law, would we have Caucasian Canadians being detained for being here illegally? Or if adopted by Florida, how many Hatians would be "targets"? I dare to bet that the mix of demographics will change from state to state based on where the illegals are coming from. Based on color? Possibly, but ONLY because of where said illegals are coming from. I support this law 100%.

Right on

"Cox, one of five Republicans running for Michigan governor, said Michigan is the lead state backing Arizona in federal court and is joined by Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands."

Hello everyone,

I am trying to meet the guideline for adjustment of support. Do I need to fill out both I-864 and I-864A if my parents are helping me with joint support. Also, do I need to use a specific IRS form to explain why I did not file tax for the last three years (I was in school, so I did not make over $4000) or a normal written explanation is fine?

This is from the USCIS site: If you did not have to file a tax return, attach a written explanation and a copy of the instructions from the IRS publication that shows you were not obligated to file. For general information on income tax obligations, visit the IRS website.

Hello Tuanv, you will fill out a I-864 as the princible sponsor reguardless of your income, if BOTH of your parents are co-sponsoring each with seperate incomes then your father will fill out a I-864 and your mother will fill out a I-864A, your mother will only need to fill out an I-864A if your fathers income is not enough to satisfy the 125% poverty limit for a family of three, (father,mother,wife) -

Note: Typical proof that a sponsor was not required to file a tax return for a particular year would consist of a written statement from the sponsor, signed under penalty of perjury, attesting to the amount of his or her income for the relevant year and to the fact that a tax return was not required by law. USCIS adjudicators handling Form I-864 issues should be aware of the income threshold for the requirement of filing a tax return for the last several years, so that an RFE for evidence of the law is not necessary. In particular, the Instruction booklets for each year’s Forms 1040, 1040A, and 1040EZ specify the income threshold below which a person is not required to file a return.

source: HQRPM 70/21.1.13 Chapter 20.5 of the Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM)