Travelling with GC - Arrival & Departure

[longGC]

I have not yet travelled with GC. I have some questions. People who have already travelled may answer some of these. This will help people on this forum to understand the process in different POE and abnormalities, if any.

Q.1 While departing, who checks GC? As far as I remember it is always airline staff who saw my passport while I was taking boarding pass and checking-in my baggages?

Q.2 While departing, do they swipe the card? If yes, then who and where? After I checked in baggage, my ticket was scanned by airport staff before boarding the plane. There may be random checking of passports again at boarding station.

Q.3. Is PR card checked during transit terminals? For example, in Europe while travelling eastwards and in Far East while travelling west words. While changing planes in Europe, the airline staff does check my boarding pass and passport. Once I was asked whether I have a GC while transitting from Gatwick, UK on the way to US.

Q.4 On arrival, the immigration officer asks for GC. Does he scan (swipe) the card? If yes, does he swipe all the time (or do they sometimes just see it and let people go)?

Q.5 Is there anything else that I am supposed to know other than above information, while arriving or departing?

[nkm-oct23]

Q.1 While departing, who checks GC? As far as I remember it is always airline staff who saw my passport while I was taking boarding pass and checking-in my baggages?
Sometimes the airline will enquire about your GC or I-94. Not always, though.

Q.2 While departing, do they swipe the card? If yes, then who and where? After I checked in baggage, my ticket was scanned by airport staff before boarding the plane. There may be random checking of passports again at boarding station.
No, you don't go thru any immigration check while departing. Only passports are checked at security.

Q.3. Is PR card checked during transit terminals? For example, in Europe while travelling eastwards and in Far East while travelling west words. While changing planes in Europe, the airline staff does check my boarding pass and passport. Once I was asked whether I have a GC while transiting from Gatwick, UK on the way to US.
Usually in transit points in Europe the airlines might check your GC.

Q.4 On arrival, the immigration officer asks for GC. Does he scan (swipe) the card? If yes, does he swipe all the time (or do they sometimes just see it and let people go)?
He usually scans it unless you are travelling by road from Canada/Mexico.

Q.5 Is there anything else that I am supposed to know other than above information, while arriving or departing?
You will be asked about the duration of your trip.

[longGC]

Thanks nkm.

When I went for passport stamping at local USCIS, they took my I-94 card. I hope airline does not ask me while departing.

One more Q.

- When arriving, do we fill-up I-94 card as we did while on H1 and AP? Or as a PR we fill up a different form?

[GC mama]

There is no I-94 for GC holders.

--------

Originally Posted by longGC

Thanks nkm.

When I went for passport stamping at local USCIS, they took my I-94 card. I hope airline does not ask me while departing.

One more Q.

- When arriving, do we fill-up I-94 card as we did while on H1 and AP? Or as a PR we fill up a different form?

[longGC]

Thanks to **** and GC mama.

1. The way they know when a person departed is through passenger manifest which airline provides.

AND

2. The way they know a person arrived is through card swiping.
The card swiping is a direct entry into system but 1. above can be error prone as it involves airline, paper work, then manual entry into system by someone in USCIS.

Please correct me where I am wrong.

[kamboi]

[QUOTE=longGC]Thanks to **** and GC mama.
2. The way they know a person arrived is through card swiping.
The card swiping is a direct entry into system but 1. above can be error prone as it involves airline, paper work, then manual entry into system by someone in USCIS.QUOTE]

When card is swiped is it only to make sure the card is not fake and gives just vital info, or does it show your entire history on how you got the card i.e. through what process: family, employment, asylum , etc...?

[redforgreen]

What is passenger manifest and how do they find accurate information (even if transferred electronicaly). All I give to Airline is my name to get the ticket. Based on name only one cannot identify a person completely.

In the similar lines I was wondering, what is INS's way of finding exactly how long an LPR was out of country (information required during naturalization, or validating a LPR is not violating the requirement of max stay allowed outside US)

[manasa18]

I am travelling with my family on AP which is valid until 2/5/05, it is almost 5.5 yrs last i visited india and my passport has a visa which is expired and my H1B visa (7th year expires on july 18th 2004) and right now i am with EAD and AP
My question is
1)Do I have any problems if travel under AP with EAD and I-485 pending from last 1 year


Please let me know

Thanks
Manasa

[pralay]

Originally Posted by redforgreen

What is passenger manifest and how do they find accurate information (even if transferred electronicaly). All I give to Airline is my name to get the ticket. Based on name only one cannot identify a person completely.

I don't think they can identify, but they can have a "good guess". When it comes to GC holders, visa holders who were previously entered USA, most of the time that "guess" correctly identify the person - based on name, origin of travel, country of citizenship etc. Actual and official identification happens at POE.

Originally Posted by redforgreen

In the similar lines I was wondering, what is INS's way of finding exactly how long an LPR was out of country (information required during naturalization, or validating a LPR is not violating the requirement of max stay allowed outside US)

Currently there is no well-defined policy (in my best knowledge) to know that. I travelled three times using my GC (all from LAX). Second time, Lufthansa airlines asked me to fill-up a form while checking-in. On form I had to write name, A#, country of citizenship, passport number. However, first time (Singapore airlines) and third time (United airlines) nobody asked me to do so. So I assume it's upto the airlines to comply with this procedure.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by manasa18

I am travelling with my family on AP which is valid until 2/5/05, it is almost 5.5 yrs last i visited india and my passport has a visa which is expired and my H1B visa (7th year expires on july 18th 2004) and right now i am with EAD and AP
My question is
1)Do I have any problems if travel under AP with EAD and I-485 pending from last 1 year

This is not the right forum for this issue. There are couple of I-485 forums. Anyway...yes, you can safely travel with AP. Keep both the original AP papers with you. Also keep couple of photocopies of your AP (some airlines people ask for that and they don't have photocopy machine...too bad...never give them originals), EAD card, your drivers license and a copy of your I-485 receipt.

[cgiz]

If airline don't ask passengers departing from the US for green card, how do they figure out the person's A#? That's impossible.

All that they have is passenger name, that's it.

My friend's parents just departed San Francisco airport by Korean air without being ask for green card for recording. They have safely been back to the US already.

[cgiz]

Hi LongGC,

Can you share with us on how you work with I-485 Adjustment of Status being denied due to laid off by sponsoring employer? How did you get around with BCIS in getting the GC then?

Thanks.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

That's because they get this information through other means.

Do you have any document/article?

Yes, they can get info from other means. But as long as I myself is not providing the information, there is a good possibility that it won't be accurate all the time. Whatever information I present myself is the most accurate information. Someone can varify the accuracy of information presented by me, but cannot bypass my presentation.

Let me give you just a similar analogy - credit record. Equifax, Experian etc are pretty good and efficient companies who maintains credit record prvoided by various banks and loan comapanies.They are not lousy govt organization like USCIS/DHS. Still an number of credit records are not accurate and it's very often a person needs to check his/her credit record and correct it if required. Whenever some infomation is provided by 3rd party is more prone to inaccuracy. Remember, your credit score is nothing but a "best scientific guess" for your credit worthiness.

Same fashion, what's the assurance that the information provided by airlines or "other means" (as you mentioned) won't be inaccurate? That's why I used the word "guess".

If it's so easy to get accurate information from "other means" - lots of procedures on the world were not required at all. And, eveything could be named "investigation" - H1 investigation, I485 investigation. Talk about police state.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

Hmm, no. You don't seem to have much experience with databases...
Even if the airlines don't know, CIS can figure that out, by reference through the passport number..

You don't seem to have much experience in traveling (borrowing your word). Let me share my own experience. I was traveling on United Airlines from LAX-Chicago-Frankfurt. As LAX-Chicago is domestic flight, they did not ask for passport. In O'hare I did have to show passport because I just had to go one gate to another gate because I already have my boarding pass for Chicago-Frankfurt flight (they check passport and take back I-94 for international flight only at checkin counter). Then in flight I remember that I did not return my I-94 (I was in I-485 stage that time). So I returned I-94 to one of the crew member in flight. Bottomline is that, I did not have to show my passport to anybody. And that's is after 9/11.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

But I find it funny that you condemn police states, but argue for exit controls which would presumable be more intrusive than the current ones. Talk about inconsistency... You obviously haven't thought this through...

Nope, there is a difference. Any border entry-exit system should not be intrusive, but it's just to keep track of who is in and who is out. We already keep track of who is "in", but we don't who is "out".

America is place of immigrants. Historically it was not interested on keeping track of of who are leaving, but who are coming in.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

I
Then you should be interested to give them the accurate information yourself...

That's what I am talking all along. Whatever the information I present standing in front of an immigration officer is more accurate than an information from "other means". That's why I was talking about exit-checking system. I failed to understand in what way information from "other means" is not intrusive, but an point-of-exit system is intrusive.

For example, considering an existing system - if I am fill wrong info in I-94, I myself is responsible. If CIS tomorrow get rid of I-94, rely on "other means" and some wrong info comes up - who is responsible? That's where question of accuracy comes up. There is a difference between "intelligence" and "information". Whatever comes up from so-called CIS database feeding manifest is "intelligence" and they are primarily focused for security.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

As I told you, CIS keeps track on who is out. Even more so after 9/11. And, as far as I'm concerned, that's an invasion of my privacy.
So anything more is by definition more intrusive. With every post you confirm that you haven't thought this through...
And if that's so, then why do you advocate tracking???

Well, your privacy gets damaged more severely when you are leaving USA assuming that nobody is watching you, then someone is actually watching you by "other means". It gives a false notion that CIS does not know you are leaving. On the contracy they are spying on you. But on the other hand, if there is a defined point-of-exit system exists, you can choose not to go to that point to keep your privacy.

A point-of-exit system no way "more", but it's "publicly defined". Therefore, it has accountability to public - you, me and any US citizens. On the other hand any "other means" info does not have any accountability to public.

It's similar to getting a drivers license. If you want to keep your privacy don't apply for license. You don't need to provide them your picture + thumb-print, hence keep your privacy.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

So, the situation with CIS having data that has the potential of being inaccurate is nothing special. In general, cross-checking is a time-honored method to find inaccurate data. And that's one of the reasons they ask questions at the POE, even though their system shows how long you were abroad...

Cross-chcking with what?

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

So, what's your problem? Get a degree in computer science. You can learn all about data mining in class...

Well, don't feel too proud of that degree because lots of people doing better job than you (if you have any at all) even without having that. If you feel annoyed, open refrigerator and put some ice on your head. Nobody is forcing you to reply my messages (unless that's your paid job after having a computer science degree).
Probably in addition to CS degree, you need an "ego-management degree".

BTW, I do have degree you mentioned above and I do know data-mining. I respect your knowledge on immigration, but some of recent postings are filled with personal ego and derogatory comment about others "limited" knowledge. I would be ignoring your posting in future. Period.

[longGC]

Hi LongGC,

Can you share with us on how you work with I-485 Adjustment of Status being denied due to laid off by sponsoring employer? How did you get around with BCIS in getting the GC then?

Thanks.

I have answered in detail in my posts, if you could locate in Advanced Search.

Once the 485 is denied, you have 30 days to file MTR - Motion To Reopen. After that you are in status and you can work on EAD until the decision on MTR is made. There is no way to 'get around' but I had to 'go through' the system.( and I can say that I went through hell ).

[longGC]

When I travelled while on H1 and AP, this is what happened,

Departure - The airline staff asked me for passport and saw that I have valid US visa or AP. They did not scan the passport or note down its number. Then they issue me a boarding pass.

At the time of boarding, occassionally they ask me for passport but they just look at it and return.

On one of my trips they did not take I-94. I was not knowing about the procedure. When I arrived from the trip, I gave to POE officer. I guess not every international passenger uses I-94 and therefore it is easy to miss by airline staff.

Arrival - I was asked passport and AP papers. The officer asks me few questions but I have no way to now what he sees in computer as it is not at my eye level. But one thing is sure, he does not scan my passport. I do not have any bar code on my pasport.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

I doubt that, because your posts show a complete lack of knowledge about handling of data.

Hmmm. If you are in computer industry, you will see that reality is lot different from your data strcutures/algorithms/RDMS books. I did not doubt about the technology. I doubted about implementation by CIS (if they did at all) and the data accuracy. Technolgy itself cannot make data accurate, but the process that uses that technology.

Originally Posted by ****

You tried to push your exit controls idea, and all I did was to show you that there already is the main reason for exit controls, i.e., data collection. The only other reason for exit controls is to prevent people from leaving, like in a police state.

Oooopppssss. Don't twist my word with your vivid imagination. I haven't used the word "control" that will "prevent" people from leaving. What I talked about is just a "recording" who are leaving. I think you have hard time to understand that data-collection without a data reference presented by the person involved is more prone to error and less reliable for cross-checking. That's the very reason they ask criminal/arrest related history in N-400/I-485 applications, even though they can "collect" all these info without asking that kind of questions.

[longGC]

Please pardon my ignorance. What is CBP?

[nkm-oct23]

CBP=Customs and Border Patrol

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

You haven't. But that would be the result of exit controls.

That depends and you can assume with your own pre-occupied idea that already resides in your head (for example, door-nazi). But I am not talking about that kind of system (FYI).

Originally Posted by ****

The way ensure accuracy is not to create another bureaucracy that collects more data, and subsequently mishandles it. The correct way is to provide a way for the person the data is about to check the data and correct inaccuracies.

There is already bureaucracy in existing system. Only difference is that currently data is collected by airlines and used by BCBP. But in case of exit-system data is collected by BCBP and used by BCBP.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

And that justifies to bring in more bureaucracy???

Who is talking about creating more bureaucracy???? Shifting some tasks from airlines employees to some BCBP employee is not creating more bureaucracy. Yes, BCBP has to recruit more employee do that job. But that's not "more bureaucracy". Probably you don't know the the meaning of bureaucracy.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

More than you think. My home country is infamous for their bureaucracy...

That does not imply that understand well (or at all).

[pralay]

Originally Posted by ****

Me thinks you like big government

Nope. I don't like big govt. Well...I take it back. I really don't care about the size of govt as long as it spends my tax dollar effectively and properly, performs well and let me enjoy my freedom as much I want. And, I don't think someone else should perform jobs on behalf of a govt - especially when it comes to military, security, immigration, welfare etc. Any business has its goal which is totally different from what govt wants for the country. That's why I don't like airlines performing a job for DHS/BCBP because their priority and goal is just throwing as many people possible inside their planes and make more profit. Maintaining immigration/security is not their high priority. So any "side task" is as it means - side task. If job X does not exists that's separate issue - and better. But if job X exists and required, I prefer it to be done by DHS/BCBP, not airlines.

Originally Posted by ****

I, on the other hand, want the government out of my life as much as possible.

Don't be too paranoid. There is countries in the world where govts do not exist. And people are not doing all that good there - in term of freedom, in term of economy, in term of development. Yes, some balance required - to keep govt out of our daily life. But "as much as possible"? No way.

[longGC]

From ****'s posts and his language, I am close to say that he had spent considerable time in UK.