Jump to content

sjr09

Members
  • Content Count

    2,835
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Tahoma in Looks like obama has screwed us all   
    I see you've been waiting for five whole days...my condolences.
  2. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Sarah Elle-Même in Looks like obama has screwed us all   
    It's clear you don't know anything about the Deferred Action Program. Go learn something since you will be waiting, waiting, waiting (like all the rest of us) you have time on your hands: http://www.dhs.gov/deferred-action-childhood-arrivals .
    FYI wait times are long from a combination of factors, not just this new program. It is mostly because USCIS has laid off half their employees and dramatically cut funding in the last 2 years. That you can thank Congress for.
  3. Like
    sjr09 reacted to JimVaPhuong in Proof of ongoing relationship   
    Front-loading isn't meant to help get the petition approved. Front-loading is meant to help at the visa interview. Getting the petition approved only requires that you provide sufficient evidence to prove you've met within the past two years.
    Front-loading is meant to accomplish two things at the interview. First, it helps ensure that the consular officer sees your evidence since they aren't required to view any of the relationship evidence you bring to the interview. Second, and probably most important, front-loading is meant to address potential red flags in your case. Red flags are situations that are known to raise the consular officer's level of suspicion at a particular consulate. If any of those red flags exist in your case then the consular officer will probably give your case more scrutiny, and could potentially even deny the visa. If you front-load sufficient evidence to address those red flags, and explain them in a way that reduces or removes any suspicion, then it substantially lowers the ability of the consular officer to deny the visa based on those red flags.
    When a consular officer denies a visa then they return the petition to USCIS with the recommendation that the approval of the petition be revoked. Basically, the consular officer is saying that USCIS would never have approved the petition if all the evidence were known. A consular officer doesn't have the authority to re-adjudicate a petition that was approved by USCIS. In other words, they can't return a petition just because they would have made a different decision than the USCIS adjudicator when reviewing the petition for approval. When they deny a visa and return a petition then they are either saying that the beneficiary is clearly ineligible and USCIS screwed up when they approved the petition, or that the evidence for revoking the approval of the petition was discovered after the petition was approved; e.g., at the consular interview. USCIS does occasionally screw up and approve a petition they shouldn't have approved, but most often a petition is returned because the consular officer is saying that the evidence wasn't known to USCIS at the time the petition was approved. Front-loading is a tool to counter this.
    In other words, if being introduced by the beneficiary's uncle is considered an indicator of potential fraud at that particular consulate, and the evidence of how the couple were introduced was discovered at the interview, then the consular officer could use it as a basis for denying the visa. On the other hand, if the fact that the couple were introduced by the beneficiary's uncle were included in the front-loaded evidence, and explained that the introduction was 'innocent' and conformed with local social customs, then it would be difficult for the consular officer to use this as a reason to deny the visa. Clearly, if the evidence is included with the petition then the consular officer can't claim USCIS didn't know about it when they approved the petition.
    What I'm getting at is don't waste your time packing your petition with piles of chat logs and emails. The CO won't look at it. Carefully choose your front-loaded evidence, and include evidence that either strongly supports the validity of your relationship and that you think it's important for the CO to see, or evidence that addresses specific red flags in your case.
  4. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Ban Hammer in Vermont has pre-emption   
    sounds more like he's setting the record straight.
  5. Like
    sjr09 got a reaction from Tuti & Baher in Worse Case Scenario   
    Out of the frying pan and into the fire. I would focus on getting your divorce completed, finding a job, and building your relationship.
  6. Like
    sjr09 reacted to rlogan in money problems in paradise...   
    We see this a lot, and as a matter of fact my wife's sister is running a Sari-Sari store with support from a foreign boyfriend right now. It isn't our business to interfere but this is the most likely outcome: letting people take things on credit and letting family or friends just take things without paying. At a minumum though what happens frequently is the family spends the sales revenue instead of buying new stock so the foreigner continually buys the stock and the family keeps the sales proceeds. In that case it isn't a business, just a money-laundering exercise. The business is operating at a net loss because of pilfering and bad credit, in which case it is less expensive to just send them money so you aren't subsidizing the whole neighborhood.
    I'm not saying you are in this situation, but it is a good thing to be discussing on this subforum.
  7. Like
    sjr09 reacted to VanessaTony in Marriage not working out   
    You have no legal obligations aside from whatever comes from the divorce.
    You don't HAVE to buy her a ticket home, legally, but it would be nice of you to do so especially as her abandoning her status means the I-864 would be terminated.
  8. Like
    sjr09 reacted to visasandheadaches in Passport in lieu of crba ?   
    Please stop posting on this topic,...your doing more harm than good even if you have good intentions..
  9. Like
    sjr09 reacted to aaron2020 in Passport in lieu of crba ?   
    No, you are wrong. The child of a marriage DOES NOT automatically assumes citizenship.
    Automatic means NO PAPERWORK to submit to the US government to claim US citizenship.
    Sending paperwork in MEANS IT IS NOT AUTOMATIC AND MUST BE APPLIED FOR.
    A foreign born MUST FILE A CRBA TO CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP. There is no exception for the child of a marriage.
    Let's contrast this with the Child Citizenship Act where citizenship is automatic. No need to file any paperwork.
    http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/CCA_102504.pdf From the PDF: "Acquiring citizenship automatically means citizenship is acquired by operation of law, without the need to apply for citizenship."
    Please show a citation where the statement you made is true. Please show me any law that distinguish that a child is automatically a US citizen and does not have to CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP because the parents are married.
    This is from the US Embassy. Strange that the US Embassy would have a procedure for a foreign born child to claim US citizenship and requires providing a copy of the parents' marriage certificate if applicable. WHY HAVE A PROCEDURE FOR THE CHILD OF A MARRIAGE TO CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP IF IT IS AUTOMATIC?????????? IF IT WAS AUTOMATIC, THEN WHY MUST THE PARENT SUBMIT A CRBA TO CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP?????????
    http://yemen.usembassy.gov/yemen/birth_abroad.html
    http://yemen.usembassy.gov/cus/possible-derivative-claim-to-us-citizenship.html
  10. Like
    sjr09 reacted to bigdog in Allowed check-in luggage (Delta)   
    Google can be your friend to search for flights.
  11. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Ryan H in GETTING MY FILIPINO MOTHER-IN-LAW TO VISIT US IN THE UNITED STATES   
    These items are not necessary, not needed, and would make no difference for your mother in-law's visa application. Her visa application will be decided based on what her ties to the Philippines are.
  12. Like
    sjr09 got a reaction from Bumbero in Merry Christmas Philippines   
  13. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Darnell in Curious about photocopies with 130   
    third party signed affidavits (Keep original for later)
    It's my understanding that you file originals , these affadavits, with the I-130.
  14. Like
    sjr09 reacted to KayDeeCee in DO I NEED TO SHOW TAX RETURNS?   
    It IS a requirement. It is stated in the I-864 instructions. See page 8 of the instructions. "If you were not required to file a Federal income tax return under U.S. law because your income was too low, attach a written explanation." $0 makes it too low.
    Question #25 asks about income from the past 3 years of tax returns. They would need to put N/A in those 3 lines because they did not file and had no income. They need to provide a statement as to why they did not legally file the last 3 years. It is a simple thing to do, and follows the form instructions.
    Better yet for #25 in their case is to put 'N/A-SEE ATTACHMENT' and add their statement as to why they did not legally need to file as the attachment.
  15. Like
    sjr09 reacted to VanessaTony in husband cheated WANT divorce and ALIMONY   
    okay so you moved back to PI and thus gave up your residency in the US correct? How long have you been living back there? When did you last visit the US?
    if you want to divorce, divorce. Do not commit immigration fraud by trying to obtain citizenship based on a marriage you have stated you want to end. You aren't living together. He sends you money though. How do you think you'll pass the relationship requirements? You are aware they can revoke your citizenship if they find out you lied right?
    Don't risk it. Either get him to file for divorce, or wait for the 5 year mark when your marriage doesn't matter.
  16. Like
    sjr09 reacted to aaydrian in husband cheated WANT divorce and ALIMONY   
    It seems real coincidental and very convenient that the first 2 years you were married and STILL in the Philippines you were happy, yet at the beginning of the last 3 years of you marriage ie right when you entered the US & received your greencard your marriage started making you miserable. Smells fishy. As mentioned you could get yourself in trouble if someone decides to look twice at your case due to all your claims and demands. Don't be greedy. Cut and go, wait a few more years then apply for citizenship.
  17. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Kevo in money problems in paradise...   
    Tough question...on one hand if it's a legit emergency and you don't help out you're pretty much going to damage the relationship with your new extended family. On the other hand, you can't be expected to be their savior and families in the Philippines are usually very large - you can probably expect to always have an emergency somewhere on the horizon.
    That said, I personally would decline. I have kids from a previous marriage I need to support and with college coming up in a few years I can't afford to give away that large of an amount. But, I would probably offer to help out, for example maybe send $1000-$2000.
  18. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Cathi in I-864 form   
    They will go by your current income, so send copies of most recent pay stubs, and a letter from your employer.
    funny this coming from someone who I have seen give the incorrect advice several times. His question was about a joint sponsor and I answered it.
  19. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Peace.... in I-864 form   
    Sorry not to be rude but your statement is a bit funny to me bolded above, as I had to correct a misleading answer you quoted regarding claiming a dependent on the i864 which was misleading to the OP as well in a different forum.
  20. Like
    sjr09 reacted to apple21 in a little help pls?   
    It's not mandatory to have a US joint bank account at this point since your spouse is still in the Philippines.
    Are you sending her money in the Philippines? If yes, then she can bring the remittance slips/receipts as proof and present it at her interview.
  21. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Artisan in Fiance visa denied   
    Except you are wrong. Pornography is illegal in the Philippines under Art. 201 - Offenses Against Decency and Good Customs. Prostitution covers not just physical intercourse, but also any lascivious conduct under Art. 202. In addition it is illegal for 'The willful engagement, maintenance, control, or operation, directly or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system, for favor or consideration.' The punishment for doing so is 6 to 12 years in prison, a fine of between P200k and P1M, or both.
    In addition the US can block immigration on the grounds of 'Good Moral Character' of which any commercialized vice may be considered by the CO in charge of the interview.
  22. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Enigma11561 in Interview Question Heads Up   
    Tough question since nothing ever happens in Ohio.
  23. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Darnell in Fiance visa denied   
    Keep wondering
  24. Like
    sjr09 reacted to belinda63 in Fiance visa denied   
    So she was engaged to an American, denied a fiance visa, did the boyfriend appeal? Why did he give up on her? Six months later she finds another American man and becomes serious with him. Forgets to tell him (for a while) that she was recently engaged and denied for prostitution. I'd say write the whole thing off now before you invest anymore time or money on her.
  25. Like
    sjr09 reacted to Artisan in Fiance visa denied   
    This is complete BS. A perfect model of Aryan beauty that works as a fully legal and tax paying prostitute or madam in Germany or the Netherlands is prevented from immigrating to the US just the same as a bar girl from Thailand or the Philippines. Just because you hold a different moral standard doesn't mean the US government should follow the same Devil down the primrose path. Prostitution is no more a valid method to avoid poverty than dealing drugs or running numbers. Our society, as a whole, considers all of these so called 'victimless crimes' as morally bankrupt activities and bars anyone guilty of them from entering the country.
×
×
  • Create New...