You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
In removal proceeding cos i didn't mention child's birth in my filings, pls help!!!
- Thread starter ikesoke
- Start date
Incognegro
Registered Users (C)
Yes, please get a lawyer, dont try do this yourself. You will regret it for the rest of your life.
Now you are being evasive. WHAT WAS THE ACTUAL SECTION OF LAW THAT WAS CITED AS THE BASIS FOR DENIAL?
I read through ALL posts through #22 and in all that blah, blah, blah, the original poster has NOT ACTUALLY STATED WHAT SECTION OF LAW WAS CITED FOR A DENIAL!
I read through ALL posts through #22 and in all that blah, blah, blah, the original poster has NOT ACTUALLY STATED WHAT SECTION OF LAW WAS CITED FOR A DENIAL!
Sure you are helpful in this forum, but arent you being a tad bit rude?
If he has chosen not to give certain information, that's he's prerogative, no need to come at him like that. It's uncalled for.
Dude, get a lawyer. It's money you wont regret spending. No one is a lawyer, no one can help you. Get a competent immigration lawyer that knows what the hell they are doing. In fact thats what you should be doing now, instead of hanging in this forum.
Good luck, I truly hope things work out for you.
Good luck, I truly hope things work out for you.
I read through ALL posts through #22 and in all that blah, blah, blah, the original poster has NOT ACTUALLY STATED WHAT SECTION OF LAW WAS CITED FOR A DENIAL!
Isn't it obvious it's for lack of moral character by providing false or misleading testimony as defined in INA 101(f)(6), 8 USC 1101(f)(6)?
Last edited by a moderator:
.. I can't see how they can find that failing to list your USC child is a material fact that would be grounds for deportation.
INA 101(f)(6) makes no requirement that the false testimony be material in order to qualify for deportation.
Isn't it obvious it's for lack of moral character by providing false or misleading testimony as defined in of INA 101(f)(6), 8 USC 1101(f)(6)?
Well, why speculate or embark on professorial research of immigration statutes when the OP can easily provide definite and certain details he has been asked to in order to receive adequate advise. This just shows a prevailing habit that he enjoys witholding vital information even if explicitly asked of him even though it is his "prerogative" to disclose it or not as he clearly expressed such "prerogative" on USCIS forms. I mean, what's the need of seeking help if you can't say what the hell it is you need help with especially when directly asked about it too? Nobody knows anyone's true identity here, so it is unclear why this Information-witholding behavior. This is obviously a prevailing bad habit that didn't start the day the OP started this thread.
Well, why speculate ..
Well the OP stated the denial letter mentioned he was denied for not disclosing his child on application. How is that speculation that he was denied for lack or moral character?
There only is one section of the law (INA 101(f)(6)) that deals with providing false information that would explain the naturalization denial.He never quoted the specific question asked of him; "section of law" quoted on the notice, not general descriptions.
There only is one section of the law (INA 101(f)(6)) that deals with providing false information that would explain the naturalization denial.
Well, it will be great and best to hear it from the horse's mouth as quoted on the document he received because God knows if he is even detailing anything accurately as it seems, for his own sake, we are all trying to pry information he should have provided in the first place from him just to be able to help him. In any case, as many of us have said, he needs to find a competent immigration attorney to pursue his situation. Let's hope he exhibits full disclosure with the attorney for his own good.
OP is evasive. NO DENIAL IS WRITTEN WITHOUT QUOTING THE LAW. It may be the actual statute [8 USC] which is the INA or it may be the regulations 8 CFR.
Whatever the underlying legal basis, there will be a write-up. In the written explanation, certain facts will be presented. This one little factoid that OP has stated is inconclusive.
Was this the lead that was cause for a further investigation? Was it found to be the tip of the iceberg? Perhaps OP has had a child with an EX-wife who might be a fellow B-2 overstay while married to his USC petitioner wife. This is a classic fraud scenario.
B-2 overstay married couple divorces and one marries a USC for a greencard and eventually divorces the USC and re-marries the real spouse. In such a case, mere "misrepresentation" is a minor aspect of the Marriage Fraud.
Without specifics which would be written in any denial, it is a waste of time to bother with the EVASIVE poster.
Whatever the underlying legal basis, there will be a write-up. In the written explanation, certain facts will be presented. This one little factoid that OP has stated is inconclusive.
Was this the lead that was cause for a further investigation? Was it found to be the tip of the iceberg? Perhaps OP has had a child with an EX-wife who might be a fellow B-2 overstay while married to his USC petitioner wife. This is a classic fraud scenario.
B-2 overstay married couple divorces and one marries a USC for a greencard and eventually divorces the USC and re-marries the real spouse. In such a case, mere "misrepresentation" is a minor aspect of the Marriage Fraud.
Without specifics which would be written in any denial, it is a waste of time to bother with the EVASIVE poster.
Yes, please, provide section of the law. I am somewhat thinking that the hiding of the child from applications might have been intentional to obtain some immigration benefit. The comment that the poster shouldn't have been granted the Green Card in the first place is also curious, based on what. If the poster would care to post the details of the letter (without the personal details) it would be helpful.
So what if he's being evasive? If he doesnt want to answer, then he doesnt. This is still a public forum at the end of the day and he might be scared people are watching him or what not. It's obvious from his postings he's nervous and confused.
If he doesnt give enough information for you to answer his question, then dont answer it. No one is forcing anyone to give helpful information. But going on and on, and almost trolling on OP because YOU FEEL he's being evasive doesnt make sense.
Worst case, stop typing in his thread and go help others who are willing to provide the information you need to help them.
OP isnt required to give information, he doesnt want to. And of course he's going to be forth coming with a lawyer! It's a lawyer for ball's sake, not a public forum, anyone can sign in with and read his posts. We dont know his particular situation, so no need to keep pushing him and repeating the same questions again and again. As the moderator stated, he's given enough information!
Peace.
If he doesnt give enough information for you to answer his question, then dont answer it. No one is forcing anyone to give helpful information. But going on and on, and almost trolling on OP because YOU FEEL he's being evasive doesnt make sense.
Worst case, stop typing in his thread and go help others who are willing to provide the information you need to help them.
OP isnt required to give information, he doesnt want to. And of course he's going to be forth coming with a lawyer! It's a lawyer for ball's sake, not a public forum, anyone can sign in with and read his posts. We dont know his particular situation, so no need to keep pushing him and repeating the same questions again and again. As the moderator stated, he's given enough information!
Peace.
Jackolantern
Registered Users (C)
INA 101(f)(6) makes no requirement that the false testimony be material in order to qualify for deportation.
Courts have ruled that deportation of an LPR for misrepresentation must involve a material fact (with limited exceptions such as where there was fraudulent intent involved in the misrepresentation of the immaterial fact).
So what if he's being evasive? If he doesnt want to answer, then he doesnt. This is still a public forum at the end of the day and he might be scared people are watching him or what not. It's obvious from his postings he's nervous and confused.
If he doesnt give enough information for you to answer his question, then dont answer it. No one is forcing anyone to give helpful information. But going on and on, and almost trolling on OP because YOU FEEL he's being evasive doesnt make sense.
Worst case, stop typing in his thread and go help others who are willing to provide the information you need to help them.
OP isnt required to give information, he doesnt want to. And of course he's going to be forth coming with a lawyer! It's a lawyer for ball's sake, not a public forum, anyone can sign in with and read his posts. We dont know his particular situation, so no need to keep pushing him and repeating the same questions again and again. As the moderator stated, he's given enough information!
Peace.
I completely agree with you, this guy is looking for some hope and advice, there is now reason to belittle him because he did not provide some info...
My advice, and I have been to immigration court, is to get the best immigration lawyer money can buy, because it would make all the difference.
Courts have ruled that deportation of an LPR for misrepresentation must involve a material fact (with limited exceptions such as where there was fraudulent intent involved in the misrepresentation of the immaterial fact).
There is a discussion towards the end of this decision about this topic starting on page 17 see "E. Material Misrepresentation".
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B7 - Form I-526 and I-829/Decisions_Issued_in_2011/Apr142011_01B7203.pdf
CalGreenCard
Registered Users (C)
I am married to a us citizen and filed after 5yrs of our marriage. Interview for citizenship was fine but was told that they will ge tback to me. I received a denial letter after 4months, after a week of this letter, i got notice to appear for removal proceeding today in the mail. The date is yet to be fixed. The denial said that I did not mention that I have a child. Yes, I do have a child and he was born in the US by my ex wife but when i was filing the form, i was thinking that you only need to include the names of children if you intend to file for them later. I did not include the childs name in any of the paper but i do pay child support and has been claiming her on tax.
I am so scared to death, the letter said that i was not supposed to get the green card. Please what are my chances of not getting deported?. I do not have any criminal record and my wife is with me all the way, she knows about the child as she comes everweekend to our house. Please someone talk to me!!!
In reading this thread, it seems to me that a big issue is why you didn't include the name of your child when you filed for your green card, removal of conditions, and naturalization. To me that is an even bigger issue than the specific reason for the N-400 denial.
All three forms--I-485, I-751, and N-400--are absolutely clear and unambiguous that you must list all of your children. It is simply not credible to me that you "forgot"--not once but three times--to mention a child for whom you are paying child support and who visits you once a week. There has to be a reason why this information was omitted. Initially I thought you were trying to protect the identity of an ex-wife not legally in the country--however you say that you did disclose the existence of your ex-wife so that cannot be the issue.
If I had to guess, my guess would be that--although you are currently up to date with your child support--when you initially filed I-485 there may have been a problem with the child support and you were trying to avoid drawing attention to that. Once you made the initial misrepresentation on the I-485 then you had to carry it over to the I-751 and the N-400 even though you resolved your child support by then.
Of course, I could be wrong--but your post really screams out that there is a definite reason why you omitted this information. It may not be something that you can share on this forum, but DO retain an attorney and DO tell them why you neglected to mention this info about your child.
Courts have ruled that deportation of an LPR for misrepresentation must involve a material fact (with limited exceptions such as where there was fraudulent intent involved in the misrepresentation of the immaterial fact).
That's a different part of the law not covered by INA 101(f)(6).In Kungys vs US, the supreme court ruled that false testimony does not need to be material under INA 101(f)(6) which is the discussion here.