30-60-90 rule

[McPheever]

could someone please expain to me what it is???

[Triple Citizen]

Suppose someone enters on a B-2 visa and after "x" days applies for AOS either through marriage, or any other family sponsorship.

If x < 30 = USCIS will accuse the applicant of committing fraud/misrepresentation and the burden of proof lies on the applicant
If 30 < x < 60 = USCIS may accuse the applicant of committing fraud/misrepresentation and the burden of proof lies with the applicant
If 60 < x < 90 = USCIS may accuse the applicant of committing fraud/misrepresentation but the burden of proof will lie with USCIS
If x > 90 = USCIS will most likely not accuse the applicant of committing fraud/misrepresentation

[PraetorianXI]

Nicely put

[nehasharma]

Very nice explanation Triple Citizen..Thanks for the information.

[samcal]

austriacus refered me to this thread. Good to know about the 30-60-90 rule. I was not ever about it earlier.

Ghori Janab, Is this a rule of thumb through people's experiences or is it a set policy documented somewhere.

Wanted this information to understand the risk v/s rewards for a specific situtation.

Very much appreciate the help.

My previous post:

Filing for 130 + AOS soon after the parents come reach US on B2 tourist visa.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Has there been any issue with Parents coming on B2 tourist visa and then applying a 130 + 485 from here. I tried to search on the forum and came across a few where there were issue with spouse and marriage on a B2 but any issue with Parents on a B2 to GC with AOS +130.

There are couple of cases where I live where the parents did this earlier this year and got their GC in 4 months. I know that it does not mean that this is right way therefore asking to find out if there were indeed any rejections on this account.

Also, is it advisable to wait for atleast 2-3 months after they come to the US before applying for their 130 + AOS.

[PraetorianXI]

Some people say it is merely guideline (not an actual law-like-rule) but it is documented in some USCIS documents.

It is also based on experience by most people that have had dealings with USCIS.

[McPheever]

Thank you vey much!

[myredskins]

Q- I have a question regarding applying for a green card for my parents. I am a US citizen and they are currently in the U.S. with valid B-2 visas. Their visa stamps have a note, "No intent to change or extend status." Does this note mean that they cannot apply for a green card? If they can, how soon can I file the documents after they enter the US?

A- I-94 cards are not notated that way unless the consular officer has a doubt about whether your parents really had nonimmigrant intent. (For further discussion of nonimmigrant, see our article entitled "Issues of Intent.") Your filing of an I-130 petition on their behalf immediately after their admission in B-2 status would raise the question of whether they misrepresented their intentions at the visa interview.

Generally USCIS follows a 30-60-90 day rule wherein, if an immigrant petition is filed within 30 days of admission, they assume they committed fraud at the visa interview. Within 60 days they could go either way in their determination and will look to other factors to tip the balance either for or against the applicants. After 90 days, they assume your parents' intent simply changed after they entered the U.S. The intent issue could come up at future nonimmigrant or immigrant visa interviews, or if they naturalize at some point in the future.

In your case, given that the consular officer seems to have questioned your parents' motives, it would be best if no action were taken to start the process until 4 months after entry as B-2 visitors.

[simsim31]

We all talk about the intent issue at the time of getting the B1/2 visa.........what if someone already had a B2 visa and has been back and forth a couple of times before and now they want to adjust status(based on family relationship)?

[PraetorianXI]

I would ask Triple Citizen about this. If they were given a restricted I-94 and it means "no AOS"... then it does not matter if they spend 1 or 6 months in the US, they can not adjust status with that I-94.

[samcal]

Yes, Simsim, good point.

Does the 30-60-90 rule apply for someone who has the B2 visa for 8 years and has already travelled to US on that 5 times earlier than the current travel. Would they still need to wait for atleast 2 months?

[samcal]

Yes, Simsim, good point.

Does the 30-60-90 rule apply for someone who has the B2 visa for 8 years and has already travelled to US on that 5 times earlier than the current travel. Would they still need to wait for atleast 2 months?

[GotPR?]

Originally Posted by samcal

Yes, Simsim, good point.

Does the 30-60-90 rule apply for someone who has the B2 visa for 8 years and has already travelled to US on that 5 times earlier than the current travel. Would they still need to wait for atleast 2 months?

Let's see what you think. You face immigration officers at the POE, they ask what your purpose of visit is. You answer you came to the US for applying for GC under B1, Do you think officer will let you in even though you have had B1 for 8 years ?

[PraetorianXI]

Originally Posted by GotPR?

Let's see what you think. You face immigration officers at the POE, they ask what your purpose of visit is. You answer you came to the US for applying for GC under B1, Do you think officer will let you in even though you have had B1 for 8 years ?

Exactly the point. Is not about the intent when you apply for the visa (even though that determines whether you will get the visa or not in the first place).

It is about your intent when you ask for admission at a POE. If you come with a B1/B2 visa (non-immigrant) and declare an intent to stay or AOS (immigrant) then you will be denied entry to the USA.

[Triple Citizen]

This is not a documented policy. It is a rule of thumb that seems to be used in practice by USCIS.

Originally Posted by samcal

Ghori Janab, Is this a rule of thumb through people's experiences or is it a set policy documented somewhere.