Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver announcement – January 3, 2013

Posted on by Ruby Powers in Consular Processing, I-601 Waivers, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform, State and Local Immigration Rules Leave a comment

After a year of waiting all of 2012, we have it folks! The provisional unlawful presence waiver is being published today, January 3, 2013 and will become effective on March 4, 2013 (60 days later).

For more info

Secretary Napolitano Announces Final Rule to Support Family Unity During Waiver Process

Release Date:
January 2, 2013

For Immediate Release
DHS Press Office
Contact: 202-282-8010

WASHINGTON—Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano today announced the posting of a final rule in the Federal Register that reduces the time U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives (spouse, children and parents), who are in the process of obtaining visas to become lawful permanent residents of the United States under certain circumstances. The final rule establishes a process that allows certain individuals to apply for a provisional unlawful presence waiver before they depart the United States to attend immigrant visa interviews in their countries of origin. The process will be effective on March 4, 2013 and more information about the filing process will be made available in the coming weeks at http://www.uscis.gov/.

“This final rule facilitates the legal immigration process and reduces the amount of time that U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives who are in the process of obtaining an immigrant visa,” said Secretary Napolitano.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) received more than 4,000 comments in response to the April 2, 2012 proposed rule and considered all of them in preparing the final rule.

“The law is designed to avoid extreme hardship to U.S. citizens, which is precisely what this rule achieves,” USCIS Director Mayorkas said. “The change will have a significant impact on American families by greatly reducing the time family members are separated from those they rely upon.”

Under current law, immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are not eligible to adjust status in the United States to become lawful permanent residents must leave the U.S. and obtain an immigrant visa abroad. Individuals who have accrued more than six months of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver to overcome the unlawful presence inadmissibility bar before they can return to the United States after departing to obtain an immigrant visa. Under the existing waiver process, which remains available to those who do not qualify for the new process, immediate relatives cannot file a waiver application until after they have appeared for an immigrant visa interview abroad and the Department of State has determined that they are inadmissible. 

In order to obtain a provisional unlawful presence waiver, the applicant must be an immediate relative of a U.S. citizen, inadmissible only on account of unlawful presence, and demonstrate the denial of the waiver would result in extreme hardship to his or her U.S. citizen spouse or parent. USCIS will publish a new form, Form I-601A, Application for a Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver, for individuals to use when applying for a provisional unlawful presence waiver under the new process.

Under the new provisional waiver process, immediate relatives must still depart the United States for the consular immigrant visa process; however, they can apply for a provisional waiver before they depart for their immigrant visa interview abroad. Individuals who file the Form I-601A must notify the Department of State’s National Visa Center that they are or will be seeking a provisional waiver from USCIS. The new process will reduce the amount of time U.S. citizen are separated from their qualifying immediate relatives. Details on the process changes are available at http://www.regulations.gov/.

For more information, visit www.uscis.gov.


Immigration Reform – This time, it’s different An election drubbing changes minds

Posted on by Ruby Powers in Immigration Law, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform Leave a comment

November 24, 2012 Economist

Article here

WHEN Congress last wrestled with immigration reform, in 2007, John Boehner, then the leader of the Republican minority in the House of Representatives, denounced the bill under consideration as “a piece of shit”. George W. Bush, the president of the day, supported it, but many Republicans opposed it, mainly because it granted an amnesty of sorts to some of America’s 12m or so illegal immigrants. Over the next five years immigration reform languished in Congress, a victim of Democratic distraction and Republican opposition. Yet earlier this month Mr Boehner, now speaker of the House, declared himself “confident that the president, myself and others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all.”

Barack Obama also seems optimistic. He recently said he expected a bill on the subject, including a mechanism to normalise the status of illegal immigrants, along with tougher penalties for hiring them and even-tighter border security, to be taken up in Congress early in the new year. Lindsey Graham and Charles Schumer, respectively a Republican senator and a Democratic one, have resumed talks on a bill they abandoned two years ago. Several conservative pundits who had been implacably opposed to anything that smacked of lenience towards illegal immigrants are suddenly declaring themselves untroubled by the idea. This week two prominent Republican strategists set up an outfit called Republicans for Immigration Reform.

The impetus for all this activity was the drubbing Hispanic voters have just given to Republican candidates with a hard line on immigration. Hispanics made up 10% of the electorate this year, up from 9% in 2008. They are almost certain to account for an ever bigger slice of voters at each successive election for decades to come. Mitt Romney, who had suggested making life so miserable for illegal immigrants that they would “self-deport”, mustered only 27% of Hispanic votes. Meanwhile Mr Obama, who had lifted the threat of deportation and offered work permits to certain young immigrants brought to America as children, won 71%.

Mr Romney was hardly the only offender. Republican legislatures and governors around the country championed harsh local laws in an attempt to crack down on illegal immigration. Republicans in the Senate have repeatedly obstructed the DREAM Act, a formal version of Mr Obama’s reprieve for young illegals. During the primaries the Republican presidential candidates competed to sound toughest on illegal immigrants. “We’re in a death spiral with Hispanic voters because of rhetoric around immigration,” Mr Graham said this week. Janet Murguía, the head of the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic pressure group, agrees: “If Republicans care about getting into the White House again, they’re going to have to engage with the Hispanic electorate.”

Not all Republicans are convinced. Steve King, an obstreperous congressman from Iowa, plans a lawsuit to try to get the president’s initiative on young illegals rescinded. Many Republicans doubt that they would win over many Hispanics even if they changed their stripes on immigration. Ronald Reagan, for example, signed an amnesty in 1986 but the Republican candidate at the next election, George Bush senior, still got just 30% of the Hispanic vote. Indeed, if reforms include granting citizenship for illegals, Republicans risk creating more Democrats, while alienating white working-class supporters who worry that outsiders are taking their jobs. Abandoning the party’s stance on immigration in the hope of winning over some Hispanics “is like jumping off a cliff to see if someone catches you”, says Dan Stein of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which advocates reduced immigration and opposes an amnesty.

Angie Kelley of the Centre for American Progress, a left-leaning think-tank, acknowledges that it will be hard to find many Republican votes for any deal that involves an amnesty. Most Republican representatives, in particular, occupy safe seats, and thus serve at the pleasure of Republican primary voters, whose views on the subject are much more rigid than those of the electorate as a whole. But Ms Murguía argues that enough Republican votes can be picked off to form a majority coalition along with the bulk of Democrats. There are strong economic arguments to be made in favour of reform, she points out, and the business lobby is keen. Some other typically Republican constituencies are also coming round, including law-enforcement groups and some evangelical Christians. And even if immigration reform does not make it through the incoming Congress, Ms Murguía insists, the fact that it has returned to the agenda so quickly and with support from such unexpected quarters is a clear sign of things to come.


McCain, Hatch, Rubio offer optimism on immigration on return for lame duck

Posted on by Ruby Powers in DREAM Act, Immigration Law, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform Leave a comment

By Cameron Joseph – 11/13/12 08:25 PM ET
Entire Article

Three key Senate Republican players on immigration returned to a lame-duck session of Congress on Tuesday offering optimism that a deal on immigration could be made next year.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said he believes it’s “very likely” the Senate will come up with a comprehensive immigration bill that could include enforcement and a way of dealing with illegal immigrants in the country.

A pathway to residency or citizenship for those illegal immigrants was the major stumbling block to immigration reform efforts in the last decade.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said “everything ought to be on the table” in the immigration talks, while McCain said there’s a “sense of urgency” in the GOP to deal with the issue.

Sen. Marco Rubio said he was “hopeful” lawmakers would be able to work on something, but added his position remains that Congress should take action on strengthening border security first.

“As I’ve said, in my opinion, the first steps in all of this is to win the confidence of the American people by modernizing the legal immigration issue and by improving enforcements of the existing law,” he said. “And then, obviously, we’re going to have to deal with 11 million people who are here in undocumented status.

“I think it’ll be a lot easier to figure that out if we do those other steps first. But like I said, there are going to be a lot of opinions on this.”

Republican soul searching on immigration has stepped up after President Obama’s victory in last week’s presidential election. Obama soundly defeated Republican nominee Mitt Romney among Hispanic voters.

In the wake of the election, conservative talk-show host Sean Hannity and pundit Charles Krauthhammer have both urged Republicans to work on an immigration plan that would include a pathway to residence for those in the country illegally.

“There’s a sense of urgency in the Republican Party for obvious reasons, and I’m sure that everybody’s ready to deal. But the specifics? Too early,” McCain said Tuesday when asked about a comprehensive bill that included a pathway to citizenship.

“There are a lot of very important legal considerations that have to be made, but I’ve always been empathetic towards resolving this problem one way or the other,” said Hatch.

McCain had abandoned his support for a comprehensive bill during a 2010 primary challenge from former Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.).

But on Tuesday, he sounded more like the McCain who championed a comprehensive immigration reform plan backed by President George W. Bush.

“Oh, I think it’s very likely that we get it resolved, but there are going to be some tough negotiations,” he said.

Rubio, a Hispanic who is trusted and beloved by the GOP base, could be the most important player to watch in the negotiations.

He seemed more hesitant to embrace the concept of a big package than McCain or Hatch but didn’t close the door on a single, comprehensive bill. In the past, that’s usually meant a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants in the U.S., stricter border enforcement, a temporary worker program for industries such as agriculture and a crackdown on those who hire undocumented immigrants.

“People are interested in it. It’s going to take some time,” he said. “It’s an important issue for the country economically, it behooves us to have a 21st century immigration policy.”

Rubio said he “didn’t have anything to announce today” on how involved he’ll be with the issue, but said he was “hopeful we’ll be able to work on something.”

The Florida senator had begun to work on a Republican version of the “DREAM Act” last year before President Obama ordered temporary visas be given to some undocumented immigrants brought here as children.

Hatch, an original sponsor of the DREAM Act, voted against it in 2010, largely because of concerns about a 2012 Tea Party primary challenge.

This story was posted at 8:25 p.m. Tuesday and updated at 9:13 a.m. Wednesday.


Obama Promises Immigration Reform if Re-Elected, According to Iowa Paper

Posted on by Ruby Powers in Immigration Law, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform, State and Local Immigration Rules Leave a comment

October 24, 2012

Washington –  In an interview with the Des Moines Register, U.S. President Barack Obama said that if he wins the election in two weeks it will largely be thanks to his strong lead among Latino voters.

Read more: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2012/10/24/obama-promises-immigration-reform-if-re-elected-according-to-iowa-paper/#ixzz2AK5xFMID


Romney adviser leading immigration lawsuit

Posted on by Ruby Powers in DREAM Act, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform Leave a comment

An informal adviser to Republican Mitt Romney is representing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees suing the Obama administration over its plan to stop deporting many young illegal immigrants and grant them work permits.

By ALICIA A. CALDWELL

Associated Press

WASHINGTON —

An informal adviser to Republican Mitt Romney is representing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees suing the Obama administration over its plan to stop deporting many young illegal immigrants and grant them work permits.

Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state, filed the lawsuit on behalf of 10 ICE employees Thursday in federal court in Dallas. The 22-page filing contends that the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals plan violates federal law and forces ICE employees to break the law by not arresting certain illegal immigrants. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE Director John Morton are named as defendants.

“It places ICE agents in an untenable position where their political superiors are ordering them to violate federal law,” Kobach said. “If they follow federal law, they will be disciplined by their superiors.”

Kobach, who also advised Arizona lawmakers on the state’s controversial immigration bill, said he is representing the employees as a private lawyer and not in his capacity as a Kansas state official. He wrote in the lawsuit that ICE agents have been ordered not to arrest illegal immigrants who claim to be eligible for the administration’s new deportation policy.

Kobach also was a delegate to the platform committee for next week’s Republican National Convention.

In June, Napolitano and President Barack Obama said that some illegal immigrants could avoid deportation and be granted a work permit for up to two years. Under the program, immigrants have to prove that they arrived in the United States before they turned 16, have been in the country for at least five years, are 30 or younger, are in school or have graduated or have served in the military may be eligible. They cannot have a criminal record or otherwise be considered a threat to public safety or national security.

Matt Chandler, a DHS spokesman, said the department uses prosecutorial discretion to focus its efforts on arresting and deporting criminal immigrants, and the newest policy is in line with that effort.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services started accepting applications for the program on Aug. 15. Immigrants have to pay a $465 paperwork fee for the program.

DHS officials have not said how many people might be eligible under the program, though the Pew Hispanic Center and others have estimated that about 1.7 million people could be covered.

An internal DHS document obtained by The Associated Press shows that the government estimated receiving about 1.04 million applications in the program’s first year, with about 890,000 being immediately eligible.

The document estimated that the program could cost between $467.7 million and $585.4 million. The department anticipated collecting about $484.2 million in fees.


Paperwork hitch landed this immigrant in ‘hell on Earth’

Posted on by Ruby Powers in Immigration Law, Immigration Trends, Interior Enforcement, Legislative Reform Leave a comment
By Lisa Riordan Seville and Hannah Rappleye, NBC News

When Floyd Herbert Abdul, a native of Zimbabwe living legally in the United States, was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Nov. 24, 2006, he was plunged into a bureaucratic system that he describes as “hell on Earth.”

“They do so much to literally dehumanize you,” he said. “If you’re not strong mentally, then you lose it.”

The reason for Abdul’s nightmare: He never received a letter informing him of an upcoming immigration hearing because the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, or ICE, sent the letter to an outdated address.

As a result, Abdul, a political opponent of Zimbabwe dictator Robert Mugabe who is seeking political asylum in the U.S., spent over four months in detention, first in Atlanta, then at the Etowah County Detention Center in northeast Alabama. Etowah, a jail that also holds county inmates, has for years concerned human rights activists. They say the quality and quantity of food, lack of access to the outdoors and jail-like conditions are inappropriate for immigrant detention, which is not designed as punishment.

MORE


Undocumented immigrants confront author of strict immigration laws

Posted on by Ruby Powers in DREAM Act, Immigration Law, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform, State and Local Immigration Rules Leave a comment
Bob Miller/for NBC News

Isela Meraz and Fernando Lopez lead a group of undocumented Hispanics in protest against anti-immigration laws during a briefing on the civil rights effects of state immigration law held by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in Birmingham, Ala.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — Protesters opposed to strict state-level immigration laws confronted one of the key writers of such legislation as he testified at a U.S. Department of Justice civil rights hearing here on Friday.

Holding up small banners with the words “undocumented” on them, four self-proclaimed undocumented immigrants stood up one at a time to denounce the laws, interrupting the testimony being given by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped author the measures in Alabama and Arizona.

Kobach, who advised those states before being elected to statewide office in Kansas, and others were invited to speak about the impact of such laws by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, an independent commission of the federal government.

But the session was interrupted by protests.

“I have received a lot of discrimination. I am Maria Huerta, undocumented and without fear. I have no fear! You have to respect our rights. They are civil rights,” the 65-year-old woman, originally from Mexico, cried out just before throwing the hearing agenda on the floor. “I leave it there. Keep it. You don’t know how to respect human suffering.”

Huerta is among a group of undocumented immigrants traveling across the country in a caravan to highlight their situation and those of others still living in the shadows. Before landing in Alabama, the ragtag caravan made stops in Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee. Their ultimate goal is the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., where they intend to press their concerns.

Moments before Huerta spoke, another group of five women stood up and turned their backs on the commission as Kobach began his testimony. They wore shirts that spelled out “stop hate.”

Bob Miller / for NBC News

Secretary of State Kris Kobach of Kansas addresses the commission during a briefing on civil rights effects of state immigration laws held by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in Birmingham, Alabama on August 17, 2012.

Emotions ran high later when protesters called Kobach, a “liar,” with Mayra Rangle, 32, telling commissioners: “It’s a shame you invited him and him,” as she pointed to those invited to speak.

After the hearing, Kobach said the protesters had the right to voice their opinions, but the interruptions were disrespectful.

“It’s inherently rude and it disrespects the American process of deliberation and careful policy making,” he said. “It’s really unfortunate when one side in a debate results to personal insults instead of bringing information and making a coherent point.”

When asked why he didn’t respond to them when challenged, he said: “I was there to respond to the panel not the protesters.”

During the protest, the civil rights commissioners argued about the presence of the demonstrators, with Commissioner Todd Gaziano, a Heritage Foundation fellow, denouncing the lack of security and Commissioner Michael Yaki, of Michael Yaki Consulting, noting the demonstrators were acting in the form of non-violent protest.

Bob Miller/for NBC News

Civil Rights commissioner Michael Yaki addresses a crowd of mostly undocumented immigrants in downtown Birmingham, Ala.

Gerardo Torres, 41, a Mexican who lives in Phoenix, said after the hearing that those who wrote the immigration laws were out of touch.

“I don’t think they have ever been in contact with regular people,” he said. “At the end of the day, I think they just go back to their gated community. … They are not in touch with reality.”


Benefits of Deferred Action – Thoughts from the week of August 15, 2012

Posted on by Ruby Powers in DREAM Act, Immigration Law, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform Leave a comment

On the afternoon of June 15, 2012, we had heard a very exciting announcement. On June 16, 2012, I had my 31st birthday which is great because that is the age cut off for deferred action so I can remember that date/age easily.  We then tried to get ready for USCIS’s program, 60 days later. We started pre-screening potential clients and telling them to start collecting documents to prove entry, continuous residence, no criminal history, etc.

Now that the forms were provided on August 14th and the program started on Wednesday, August 15, 2012, the firm has been very busy, like most other immigration firms.  But what I am the most excited about, is that often in these consultations, I find that people qualify for consular processing/waivers and would benefit from the provisional waiver rule which has been promised to be available by the end of 2012 or qualify for marriage-based adjustment and could have their green card in about 3 months if they just applied in country.

I explain to potential clients that Deferred Action is NOT a legal status and should not be PLAN A for a path to legal permanent residency or citizenship. In fact, it isn’t guaranteed and if they obtain it, it is only good for 2 years. It reminds me a lot of Temporary Protected Status, no legal status but work authorization and renewed every few years.

After lots of consultations this week, I am most grateful because it is making people really think about their status and options and hopefully to talk to a qualifed immigration attorney about their case in detail.

We are holding Skype and phone consultations every day of the week right now from 7am-1pm CST. We will have in person consultations starting September 10th, most M-F 9am-5pm.  Before a consultation, a potential client schedules a time, pays the $50 fee online, completes our Deferred Action intake form on our Consultation page, and then faxes or emails any criminal record or key document to their case in advance so I can review it in conjunction with their intake form answers and the consultation.

If a potential client wants to hire us, we send a contract via email for their review with payment information and then when we receive the payment and signed contract, we send the client a list of documents and questionnaire.

We are grateful that the estimated 800,000 to 1.2 million people in the US may qualify for work authorization and peace of mind from immigration detention.  We do hope that people take this time to address what many are afraid to talk or think about, their immigration status.

Thanks for reading and have a great day!

Ruby L. Powers

Houston Immigration Attorney


Fees, other rules clarified for new immigrant policy

Posted on by Ruby Powers in DREAM Act, Immigration Law, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform, Processing of Applications and Petitions Leave a comment

Immigrants who came to this country as children will have to pay $465 to apply for deferred action, the so-called administrative DREAM Act, the Obama administration announced Friday.

Alejandro Mayorkas, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, laid out guidelines ahead of the Aug. 15 launch of the new policy that allows some young immigrants who are in the country illegally to apply for two-year work permits.

The agency clarified that to apply, immigrants must have been born after June 15, 1981, arrived in the U.S. before they turned 16 and lived here continuously since June 15, 2012. They must meet certain educational requirements or be a veteran at the time they apply.

Applicants, including those in removal proceedings, will be able to apply for both parts of the program, deferred action and a work permit, Mayorkas said.

‘The biggest concerns’

Perhaps the most important part of the announcement was the administration’s assurance that USCIS won’t ship applicants’ information to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcementagents unless they are national security threats, lie on their applications or are “serious” criminal offenders, advocates said.

“We’re going to issue a very clear statement that information used in the (deferred action) request will not be used for enforcement purposes,” a senior administration official said in a conference call with reporters.

“I think that was one of the biggest concerns,” said Benita Veliz, 27, a graduate of St. Mary’s University in San Antonio whose deportation case was closed last year but who has not been eligible for a work permit.

“For them to be able to assure applicants for the information not being able to be used against them is very important for people to be able to take advantage of the policy.”

It had also been unclear if brief trips abroad would mean applicants violated the rule that they live in the U.S. continuously for five years, said Crystal Williams, executive director of theAmerican Immigration Lawyers Association.

“If you left the country briefly for something like a family wedding or to go to grandma’s funeral, that won’t have to go to interrupting your residence,” she said.

800,000 affected

USCIS, which is funded by fees and not taxpayer money, hasn’t started hiring staff and will do so based on demand, the administration official said.

Department of Homeland Security officials have estimated about 800,000 people will be affected by the new policy, although other groups say the number is larger.

 

jbuch@express-news.net


HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE USCIS STAKEHOLDRES’ MEETING ON DEFERRED ACTION

Posted on by Ruby Powers in DREAM Act, Immigration Trends, Legislative Reform, State and Local Immigration Rules Leave a comment

8/03/2012

 

  • ·         Program will start August 15, 2012. Application Requests submitted/received before that date will be rejected.
  • ·         The documents submitted must prove that the Requester (they are not claling them “applicants.” Deferred Action is a request, and as such, subject mainly to discretion):

 

o   Was under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;

o   Came to the United States before reaching her 16th birthday;

o   Has continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;

o   Was physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making the request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;

o   Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or her lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;

o   As of the day of the Request is in school, has graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, has obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or is an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and;

o   Has not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

 

  • ·         All Requests to be submitted to USCIS 4 Service Centers, except, if the Requester is in the custody of ICE at the time of Request, then the Request is filed with ICE.
  • ·         The Fee is $465, including EAD. EAD will be issued for 2 years.
  • ·         NO FEE WAIVER AVAILABLE, however, “Fee Exceptions” will be considered on a case by case basis for Requesters:

 

o   under 18 years of age; or

o   homeless; or

o   in foster care; or

o   with no parental/familial support net and income is below 150% Poverty Guidelines; or

o   disabled; or

o   has more than 25K in debts that are medical or educational

 

ü  Fee Exceptions must be submitted PRIOR to the Deferred Action request and wait for approval from USCIS before submitting the DA request

 

  • ·         There is NO appeal to denials. Again, this request is purely discretionary in nature. However, it is unclear if sua sponte motions to reconsider will be entertained. Mayorkas seemed to be a bit thrown by that question.
  • ·         Felony is any local, state, or federal offense punishable (regardless of actual sentence imposed) with more than 1 year.
  • ·         Significant Misdemeanor is any offense punishable (regardless of actual sentence imposed) with more than 5 days but less than 1 year, and involving:

 

o   Domestic Violence;

o   Sexual Abuse;

o   Burglary;

o   Possession/Trafficking of illegal firearms;

o   Possession/Trafficking of a controlled substance; and

o   DWI (this drew gasps)

 

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

 

  • ·         Affidavits can be used to supplement evidence, not in lieu of it. Mayorkas stated that USCIS will only entertain affidavits to cover gaps in physical presence issues
  • ·         “Brief, Casual and Innocent” pre-8/15/12 absences from US could be overlooked, but not absences after 8/15/12, unless the Requester obtains an Advance Parole
  • ·         Advance Parole can be requested only AFTER the requester obtains a grant of Deferred Action, no FEE WAIVER. However, USCIS will only entertain AP requests based on employment, medical or military basis. None of that “I want to visit my mom” or “my cousin is getting married in Mali.”

 

APPLICATION

 

  • ·         Form still in development, pending OMB’s approval. It will be available online on 8/15/2012, and not before
  • ·         Guidelines will also be published online on 8/15/2012
  • ·         Fee includes biometrics as well
  • ·         I-765 can be filed concurrently so far; USCIS may change its mind by 8/15/12
  • ·         No interviews will be conducted (but keep reading)
  • ·         Fraud on the application will be swiftly dealt with. USCIS will request an interview for any case they deem “iffy,” including suspicion of fraud.

 

DISCLOSURE

 

  • ·         The information on the application will be protected and cannot (general rule) be used to commence Removal Proceedings. It also applies to Requester’s parents and other family members. BUT PLEASE NOTE:
  • ·         ALL requesters AND their relatives are subject to NTA-issuance guidelines, Revised Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear  and ICE may be notified.

 


Facebook

YouTube

LinkedId