Abandonment of LPR Status

[BigJoe5]

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/12a0195p-06.pdf [New 6th Circuit Precedent]

This link is to the case of Lateef, et al. v. Holder (6th Circuit June 26, 2012) which starts out with:

"............................................ Petitioners Humaira Lateef, her husband and minor
children petition for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that
held that Lateef had abandoned her lawful permanent resident (LPR) status, which was
imputed to her daughter and served as the foundation to deny her husband and other
child entry into the United States. Lateef argues that while she spent the majority of her
time in her native country after she became a LPR, she never abandoned her status. For
the following reasons, we deny this petition for review."

The Opinion denying her Petition for Review (PFR) is followed by a Dissenting Opinion of nearly equal length.

 

[BigJoe5]

bump

 

[König]

Some people just do not seem to understand what permanent resident is. Either that or they do understand what it means but choose to trick the system for their own convenience. Spending 65% of the time outside of the USA without any compelling reason? I do not even see which point we can disagree on. As for the dissenting opinion, it seems to me that it was based in whole by comparing this case to Hana.

 

[Jackolantern]

It was that last trip of one year and 3 months (apparently without a reentry permit) that was the nail in the coffin. With a reentry permit it hand, or if she returned to the US before that trip was 1 year, she and her family probably would have been fine.

But on the other hand, it's ridiculous that LPR's can't immediately bring their spouse and minor children to the US, but nearly every other kind of long-term visa holder can. Even if they don't get a green card immediately, there should be some kind of visa allowing dependents to stay in the US while awaiting the green card, especially if the GC category of the first LPR would have allowed dependents if the relationship were established prior to LPR status.

 

[raevsky]

The circumstances she could prevent that made the judges make the decision against Lateef were:
1. A trip for 1 year and 3 months without reentry permit. A step towards complying with the law would be to have ordered one.
2. Not entering US right after obtaining visas for husband and children but attending weddings instead. She should have entered the US in between.
3. Misrepresenting facts at the border. Even though irrelevant to the court because they happened to be not material facts, that thing alone made the officer at the border not to allow her entry without IJ's order.

All those 3 things could have been easily prevented

if the GC category of the first LPR would have allowed dependents if the relationship were established prior to LPR status

I did not get it, please clarify. The only case where folloiwing-to-join is not allowed any time afterwards is DV lottery (following-to-join is limited to one fiscal year only)

 

[Jackolantern]

1. A trip for 1 year and 3 months without reentry permit. A step towards complying with the law would be to have ordered one.

Or returning to the US before completing a year abroad.

I did not get it, please clarify. The only case where folloiwing-to-join is not allowed any time afterwards is DV lottery (following-to-join is limited to one fiscal year only)

Follow-to-join isn't allowed if the marriage or child's birth happened after LPR status began. Also, if your GC was obtained as a derivative beneficiary, you can't add your own derivatives. And some categories such as unmarried over-21 son/daughter of USC don't allow spousal derivatives.

 

[raevsky]

Those are restrictions to make immigration manageable. I misunderstood your original statement.
It is quite obvious that unmarried person cannot have spousal dependents - that is the idea of separating immigration category that has spousal dependents from the category that does not have them. Waiting time differs significantly. I am actually quite surprized that dependent children of unmarried person are allowed. They could have split that category into two - with children dependents and without them.
Actually, an interesting thing, unmarried children under 21 petitioned by a US citizen parent have a choice - they could be considered as immediate relatives (and come alone) or as family priority category F1 (and bring dependent children). They could have done the same choice between F1 and F3 (you could commit to immigrate without a spouse under F1 even if you have a spouse versus immigrating as a family under F3)