Single daughter with a status change...

Help! US Citizen Petitioning unmarried daughter

My situation is a little different. I just got my US Citizenship and I have just petitioned my divorced 30-year old daughter to come to the US. I believe that her wait would only be 6 years or so under F1. But she's planning to get married, most any day now, and I want to know if that f1 will still apply, since she was unmarried at the time the I-130 was filed? Or will they bump her down to F3, as a married daughter of a citizen, and make her wait the additional 2 years?
 
It does not "ultimately" matter what her status is when you file I-130 for her... but her status when the priority date becomes current, so if she gets married the petition priority will be downgraded.
 
You can file her I-130 before or after she gets married. The key is, when she is interviewed she will be considered F1 if single, and F3 if married.

My situation is a little different. I just got my US Citizenship and I have just petitioned my divorced 30-year old daughter to come to the US. I believe that her wait would only be 6 years or so under F1. But she's planning to get married, most any day now, and I want to know if that f1 will still apply, since she was unmarried at the time the I-130 was filed? Or will they bump her down to F3, as a married daughter of a citizen, and make her wait the additional 2 years?
 
Help! US Citizen Petitioning unmarried daughter

My situation is a little different. I just got my US Citizenship and I have just petitioned my divorced 30-year old daughter to come to the US. I believe that her wait would only be 6 years or so under F1. But she's planning to get married, most any day now, and I want to know if that f1 will still apply, since she was unmarried at the time the I-130 was filed? Or will they bump her down to F3, as a married daughter of a citizen, and make her wait the additional 2 years?

OK. But since the preference category is what determines the interview date, meaning that the f1's get the interview in about 6 years, and the f3's get the interview in about 8 years, how and when would she get downgraded to an f3, since the application would say (truthfully at the time it was submitted) that she's single. I doubt that they would call her for the interview in 6 years and then say, Oh, you're now married, come back in two more years!
 
My situation is a little different. I just got my US Citizenship and I have just petitioned my divorced 30-year old daughter to come to the US. I believe that her wait would only be 6 years or so under F1. But she's planning to get married, most any day now, and I want to know if that f1 will still apply, since she was unmarried at the time the I-130 was filed? Or will they bump her down to F3, as a married daughter of a citizen, and make her wait the additional 2 years?

OK. But since the preference category is what determines the interview date, meaning that the f1's get the interview in about 6 years, and the f3's get the interview in about 8 years, how and when would she get downgraded to an f3, since the application would say (truthfully at the time it was submitted) that she's single. I doubt that they would call her for the interview in 6 years and then say, Oh, you're now married, come back in two more years!

That is probably what they would do... is not about her interview date, it is about her priority date... whether is current or not.

You have to file as F1 and if she does get married, well then let USCIS know.
 
My situation is a little different. I just got my US Citizenship and I have just petitioned my divorced 30-year old daughter to come to the US. I believe that her wait would only be 6 years or so under F1. But she's planning to get married, most any day now, and I want to know if that f1 will still apply, since she was unmarried at the time the I-130 was filed? Or will they bump her down to F3, as a married daughter of a citizen, and make her wait the additional 2 years?

OK. But since the preference category is what determines the interview date, meaning that the f1's get the interview in about 6 years, and the f3's get the interview in about 8 years, how and when would she get downgraded to an f3, since the application would say (truthfully at the time it was submitted) that she's single. I doubt that they would call her for the interview in 6 years and then say, Oh, you're now married, come back in two more years!

here's the thing if they schedule her for interview base on f1 category and on interview day she is already married her application/petition will be denied.
 
Don't let this happen to you. Do not make any mistakes, and do not lie.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071117...tion_appeal;_ylt=Ajll.BWr8HhRB4UxEvZA765H2ocA

Couple fight deportation after 20+ years
STATE COLLEGE, Pa. - Immigrants Pedro and Salvacion Servano have been model U.S. residents since arriving from the Philippines in the 1980s.
ADVERTISEMENT

Pedro Servano, 54, is a prominent family doctor in an underserved area of central Pennsylvania. His 51-year-old wife runs a grocery store and bakery.

But a change in their marital status during their visa application process more than two decades ago has come back to haunt them, and now they are facing possible deportation back to the Philippines.

The couple have been told to report to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office the day after Thanksgiving for the start of deportation proceedings, agency spokesman Michael Gilhooly said Friday.

Their attorney, Gregg Cotler, is devising a flurry of last-ditch legal and political appeals to allow them to remain in Selinsgrove, about 100 miles northwest of Philadelphia.

"We love this country and this is our American dream to be here," Salvacion Servano said in a telephone interview. "We've been here for 25 years. This is our home."

Their difficulties can be traced back to 1978 when, while both were single, their mothers applied for visas for them to come to the United States.

The couple married in the Philippines in 1980, and two years later, Salvacion Servano's visa was granted and she left the country. Pedro Servano followed in 1984 after getting his visa, and the couple moved to Philadelphia.

The Servanos applied for U.S. citizenship while living in San Diego in 1990, but an immigration official noticed during an interview that their visa application listed them as single. They were accused of lying and misrepresenting their marital status, and the deportation process began, Cotler said.

"I guess it's an honest mistake," Salvacion Servano said. "It's not premeditated."

The Servanos went about their lives as they filed appeals. They moved back to Philadelphia in 1992 before settling in Selinsgrove three years later. Pedro Servano works at Geisinger Medical Group in Selinsgrove, where he has about 2,000 patients.

Two of their four children graduated from Temple University, while one is in high school and another is in middle school.

Several years ago, the Servanos bought and renovated two properties in nearby Sunbury. Salvacion Servano recently opened a small grocery store there, selling Asian goods and baked items.

"They had an error on their visas when they first came here," said Terry Specht, Sunbury's city clerk, who frequents the store. "It's ridiculous to think they would lie about that."

But their appeals have been unsuccessful and appear to have run their course.

The Servanos turned to Cotler after receiving notice earlier this month that they had to report to the immigration enforcement office.

"It was a surprise to us," Pedro Servano said. "After that, it was as if a ton of bricks had fallen on our family."

Gilhooly declined to discuss the specifics of the case, citing ICE policy.

"They have had their due process through the U.S. immigration court system," he said. "They have exhausted their appeals."

Cotler hopes otherwise. His legal team is considering emergency appeals in court and directly to the U.S. attorney general's office.

The family has lobbied for help from politicians. Friends scheduled a prayer vigil in Sunbury for Saturday night.

Letters of support to the government have poured in from local dignitaries, Servano's patients and even someone from the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE.

"I fervently believe in the ICE mission. However, the Servanos did not sneak into this country illegally, they have broken no laws, and they have not been a burden to the economy. They pose no threat," DHS counterterrorism operative Bill Schweigart wrote in a letter obtained by The Daily Item of Sunbury. "I cannot fathom how deporting the Servanos fulfills any portion of the ICE mission. In fact, I would argue the action runs counter to it."

Cotler said the couple understands the government's position, but would simply like another chance to tell their story.

"You would not find two nicer people, two more unassuming people," Specht said. "It's a shame that these two are caught up in all this."
 
That is probably what they would do... is not about her interview date, it is about her priority date... whether is current or not.

You have to file as F1 and if she does get married, well then let USCIS know.

So, if an unmarried daughter had her US citizen parent apply for a visa for her, then the daughter is expected to stay single for at least 6 years, the time it takes for a F1 priority date to be called for an interview. Then if she falls in love and gets married any time after that, her visa application, which won't see the light of day for 6 years is considered a lie, and she would be turned down and accused of fraud, unless she finds and writes the proper authority, whoever that is, and they would have to find her original application, and notate right there that she wrote them and changed her status to a more severe 8-year wait F3 priority. You would think that, it would be more logical that her status a the time of her application would determine her priority date. Something doesn't sound right about all this. I thought that the Immigration folks aren't in the business of determining who can marry and who must not. That's pretty intrusive, for no good purpose. Of course it may or may not work quite like that, and it doesn't have to be fair, right?
 
Well, BolivianLady, I do think it's reasonable that the USCIS requires notification if one's situation changes. Yes, if someone continues to seek an immigrant benefit based on a situation that no longer applies, I have no problem with calling that fraud.

All immigrant petitions are judged by the circumstances that exist at the time of approval, not the time of application. Someone seeking employment based immigration needs to continue to work in that profession until their GC is approved, otherwise the country has no need for that person to become a PR. Someone who applied for marriage based GC but has a divorce prior to approval, even if the marriage was in good faith, is generally no longer eligible for the GC, because the intent is to not break up families by granting PR in this case, which is no longer necessary. So yes, a daughter who gets married while the application is pending, would be in a different preference category, consistent with what I said above, because they are less preferred than single children at the time they actually get their PR.

The problem really is that the preference categories are so backlogged, creating all kinds of artificial constraints on people and families for years. And, of course, who should be preferred over others is debatable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You would think that, it would be more logical that her status a the time of her application would determine her priority date.

The law only cares about her status the day she gets the immigrant visa.

I thought that the Immigration folks aren't in the business of determining who can marry and who must not.

The immigration folks couldn't care less who you marry, or if you marry. You are free to marry who you want, when you want, provided you accept the consequences marriage has on your immigration eligibility.

The US cannot force you not to marry, and you cannot force the US to admit you as an immigrant if your marriage makes you statutorily ineligible. Freedom has its price - it seems too many people want the freedom without the consequences.
 
Well, BolivianLady, I do think it's reasonable that the USCIS requires notification if one's situation changes. Yes, if someone continues to seek an immigrant benefit based on a situation that no longer applies, I have no problem with calling that fraud.

All immigrant petitions are judged by the circumstances that exist at the time of approval, not the time of application. Someone seeking employment based immigration needs to continue to work in that profession until their GC is approved, otherwise the country has no need for that person to become a PR. Someone who applied for marriage based GC but has a divorce prior to approval, even if the marriage was in good faith, is generally no longer eligible for the GC, because the intent is to not break up families by granting PR in this case, which is no longer necessary. So yes, a daughter who gets married while the application is pending, would be in a different preference category, consistent with what I said above, because they are less preferred than single children at the time they actually get their PR.

The problem really is that the preference categories are so backlogged, creating all kinds of artificial constraints on people and families for years. And, of course, who should be preferred over others is debatable.

Well, Austriacus, nobody on this end suggested breaking the law, refusing to update status, or as you imply, committing fraud. The questioning of policy or what the law is or even the fairness of a law is a respected tradition in all free countries, especially in this one, and this is what the forums are for.

Having said all that, I agree with you that it is the 6 to 8 year backlog which creates these problems. If there was no waiting or minimal wait times, the legal applicants' lives would not be so disrupted, and though there are those who always complain about any inconvenience, most of us would be happy just for the privilege of immigrating to the US.

Regarding the issue about whether the status at the time of application or at the time of interview should rule the outcome, I believe that you're correct that in this case it's the status at interview time that counts. And we will notify DHS when she marries. But you should know that it's not always that clear-cut; there are many Immigration and other legal processes in which the status at the application date trumps the status at the interview date, as in the I-751. Thank you, and the RealCanadian for your opinions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top