Birth certificate has a wrong birth place

[masematn]

You seem confused. You have a family and US citizen kids, and in your years here you've been treated like an American. So you feel like you "belong". You are not an American. It won't matter how you "feel" and where you "belong". If USCIS doesn't give you permission to stay here, you'll have to leave.

Confused? Way no. But you make an interesting point. Here is what I think about living in US. I feel that I belong here regardless of how I've been treated. I do not care much how I am treated, it is much like weather - if you don't like it, you move somewhere else. In some sense I even do not live in US - I live in my 2000 sq. feet house which just happened to be located in this country. So US is more like a scenery, a very good looking and pleasing scenery which I observe. The feeling of belonging comes from a simple fact that I like this place. I would even call this place motherland because of this simple fact American? Of course I am not. And I will never be one. But the only thing that matters is exactly how I feel. If CIS decides that I have to leave, that does not mean that I will never live here.

 

[plus07]

You are not an American. It won't matter how you "feel" and where you "belong". If USCIS doesn't give you permission to stay here, you'll have to leave.

I meant you're not an American citizen yet.

 

[raevsky]

And AOS application without a copy of a birth certificate is likely to result in an RFE, not an approved AP.

I think AP will be granted especially in case of RFE. Because it is a necessary step for him to answer the RFE for AOS. The reason for his AP is getting the necessary evidence from Ukraine.

 

[raevsky]

Birth certificate is not a necessary evidence for I-131 form (application for advance parole).
And RFE for AOS will not be asked regarding BC, because there are a lot of ways a person could qualify from Uraine. Not necessarily through the place of birth.
Those thing are decided during the interview.

 

[plus07]

Birth certificate is not a necessary evidence for I-131 form (application for advance parole).

Right, but I-131 is not a freestanding form - it is based on a properly filed pending I-485. A properly filed form must include the initial evidence. A birth certificate (or acceptable secondary evidence) is required under initial evidence.

And RFE for AOS will not be asked regarding BC, because there are a lot of ways a person could qualify from Uraine. Not necessarily through the place of birth.

Right, but regardless of how you are going to qualify for DV, you need to submit your birth certificate (or acceptable secondary evidence) when you file I-485.

Note that this is different from CP. Read the instructions for more info.

 

[plus07]

I think AP will be granted especially in case of RFE. Because it is a necessary step for him to answer the RFE for AOS. The reason for his AP is getting the necessary evidence from Ukraine.

My personal guess is that AP will be granted if the RFE is about evidence beyond the initial evidence required with I-485, and delayed if some of the initial evidence is missing.

 

[plus07]

In fact, if your I-485 is missing some initial evidence, they can just reject or return it.

 

[raevsky]

Yes, he will have to submit his original Russian-issued BC, stating he was born in Russia, with his I-485, if he does not have a Ukrainian-issed BC at the time he submits I-485.

If he attaches a BC that says he was born in Russia and puts on the application that he was born in the Ukraine, he'll likely get an RFE.

They will not send him request for RFE, because his eligibility for Ukraine could be based on his parent's country of birth or because he could have been born in a part of Russia that now belongs to Ukraine (and at that time it belonged to Russia; BTW there exist some lands transferred from Russia to Ukraine under the Soviet Union, for instance, Crimea; a lot of people were born in Crimea). That is a responcibility of interviewing CIS officer to figure out what the situation is.
In case he was born in Crimea when it belonged to Russia, he had and has to write on the forms he was born in Ukraine (because it is Ukraine now), and he had to provide his Russian-issued BC stating he was born in Russia (because at the time of registration of his birth and issuing his BC it was Russia). The instructions for I-485 do not require any kind of explanation about this kind of situation. That is a common situation and should not generate RFE, because everything was done according to the instructions from the very beginning. RFE is issued when some instructions were not followed correctly.
The fact that his BC changes by the time of interview is not an additional problem, because the Ukrainian-issued BC will have the date of registration of birth anyway, and that date is in fiscal 2008 anyway. Regardless of any other circumstances, that fact will be clear to interviewing officer at the time of interview. And together with his hospital papers and affidavit from his mother, and with the story he told us, that should not be a problem.
I mean even if he submits Ukrainian-issued BC with his I-485 from the very beginning, the situation is exactly the same, because the BC still carries the same registration date. So, the officer will understand his birth in Ukraine was not registered until fiscal 2008.

So, your argument that changing BC during the process is worse than submitting Ukrainian-issued BC from the very beginning, does not work.

 

[plus07]

They will not send him request for RFE, because his eligibility for Ukraine could be based on his parent's country of birth or because he could have been born in a part of Russia that now belongs to Ukraine (and at that time it belonged to Russia; BTW there exist some lands transferred from Russia to Ukraine under the Soviet Union, for instance, Crimea; a lot of people were born in Crimea).

It's not about DV eligibility or any other kind of eligibility. If you say on I-485 that you were born in Ukraine and you submit a Russian BC saying you were born in Russia, you're likely to get an RFE, simply because your initial evidence does not match what you said on form I-485.

You can then submit additional evidence depending on your particular birth circumstances.

So, your argument that changing BC during the process is worse than submitting Ukrainian-issued BC from the very beginning, does not work.

I wasn't making this argument. I was only saying that:

• AOS app without BC -> RFE
• AOS app saying he was born in Ukraine, BC says he was born in Russia -> RFE
• AOS app saying he was born in Russia, BC says he was born in Russia -> etremely difficult to prove that he was born in the Ukraine later on + possible charge of lying to the USCIS on a form.

 

[raevsky]

It's not about DV eligibility or any other kind of eligibility. If you say on I-485 that you were born in Ukraine and you submit a Russian BC saying you were born in Russia, you're likely to get an RFE, simply because your initial evidence does not match what you said on form I-485.

Right. That is not DV specific. This is the same situation everywhere, for any kind of I-485 application. This is not a mismatch. Because the BC says to which country the place belonged at the time of your birth/registration of birth/BC issuance, and on I-485 form you say to which country the same place belongs right now (at the moment you put your signature under the form), or, in some specific cases, at certain time in the past. No reason for RFE. If the information is significant and fraudulent at the same time, the aplicant will be denied at the interview.

Reasons for RFE are listed in Adjudication Guide http://www.uscis.gov/propub/templat...tination|Chapter 11&s_type=all&hash=0-0-0-456 (p10.5)

In short, an adjudicator should strive to request the evidence needed for thorough, correct decision-making. An adjudicator should not “fish” for evidence.
If an RFE is needed, the adjudicator must: (1) determine what evidence is lacking and (2) request that evidence.

Here all the evidence is already there. The BC is present, and it is his original BC, issued at the moment of birth or soon after that. What specific evidence could CIS request? I mean the portion determine what evidence is lacking should have a specific outcome. What exactly outcome do you think it might suggest other than BC that is already present? Bring-me-you-only-know-what? That is exactly what is called fishing for evidence. In case the BC was issued long time after birth, the officer could request original BC, issued soon after birth. But this one is already the one issued at those times. Colorful map of the world published by the DOS in the year the BC was issued? Colorful map of the world published by the DOS in 2008? Both maps with the place of birth circled on both? It seems to me that type of information should be available to adjudicating officer. The officer should not rely on fake maps, bought by the applicants on the streets. Instead, he or she should request both maps from DOS in case of necessity.

The fact that BC shows different country of birth from what is written in I-485 is not a reason for RFE. Instead, it is a reason to deny the AOS at the interview in case the information provided is fraudulent.

 

[plus07]

Right. That is not DV specific. This is the same situation everywhere, for any kind of I-485 application. This is not a mismatch. Because the BC says to which country the place belonged at the time of your birth/registration of birth/BC issuance, and on I-485 form you say to which country the same place belongs right now (at the moment you put your signature under the form), or, in some specific cases, at certain time in the past. No reason for RFE. If the information is significant and fraudulent at the same time, the aplicant will be denied at the interview.

From what I understand, his BC says he was born in Kursk, Russia but in fact he was born in Kiev, Ukraine. (I'm making the city names up.)

So if you write on I-485 Kiev, Ukraine and your BC says Kursk, Russia (or Kursk, USSR) you'll likely get an RFE.

If you write on I-485 Kiev, Ukraine and your BC says Kiev, Ukraine (or Kiev, USSR) you're won't get an RFE (at least not for this reason alone). Changing borders are not relevant here.

 

[raevsky]

So, what will the specific evidence be that the officer is going to request after he or she determines that specific evidence is missing?

BTW, the town that was named Kursk and which was located in Russia, could be now called Kiev and be located in Ukraine.
Town Wroslaw in Poland used to be a part of Germany and was called Breslau.
Kunigsberg in Germany became Kaliningrad in Russia.
There are a lot of examples. The name frequently changes when the ownership changes.

 

[masematn]

From what I understand, his BC says he was born in Kursk, Russia but in fact he was born in Kiev, Ukraine. (I'm making the city names up.)

That's right, and I gladly accept Kursk - it is my ancestral town after all! The house used today as a city hall belonged to my family before 1917. And a few villages around Fatezh... and some peasants... and a sugar factory...

So if you write on I-485 Kiev, Ukraine and your BC says Kursk, Russia (or Kursk, USSR) you'll likely get an RFE. If you write on I-485 Kiev, Ukraine and your BC says Kiev, Ukraine (or Kiev, USSR) you're won't get an RFE (at least not for this reason alone).

I will write the truth: my I-485 will have Kiev, Ukraine, and my BC will have the same as a birth place. What I don't know today for sure, is whether the BC will be issued in Kursk or in Kiev. I need more time to decide. On another note - is getting an RFE is something you would generally try to avoid or it is OK to get one?

 

[plus07]

On another note - is getting an RFE is something you would generally try to avoid or it is OK to get one?

The discussion with raevsky was about RFE and Advance Parole. If there is something significant missing from the initial evidence, they may return the application, deny the application, or issue an RFE before processing the Advance Parole.

 

[plus07]

I will write the truth: my I-485 will have Kiev, Ukraine, and my BC will have the same as a birth place. What I don't know today for sure, is whether the BC will be issued in Kursk or in Kiev. I need more time to decide.

In this case it's hard to predict what will happen. Most likely they will ask more questions, either via an RFE or at the interview.

 

[raevsky]

As I said, RFE should be for a specific document, not for a proof of something in general. I cannot imagine what kind of document they could request if they suspect anything.
Most likely, you will get an interview without any problems. And most likely, your AOS will be denied right at the interview. I also envision right after that at the interview they will ask you to sign voluntary departure within a couple of weeks and forfeit the rights to appeal. That is how they like to do it. At the interview they will frighten you and you most likely will sign it.

 

[masematn]

I also envision right after that at the interview they will ask you to sign voluntary departure within a couple of weeks and forfeit the rights to appeal. That is how they like to do it. At the interview they will frighten you and you most likely will sign it.

A couple of weeks is nonsense. It will be at least 60 days, most likely more. The right to appeal will stay with me no matter what they may ask for. And how they like to do it really doesn't matter - let them do what they like, and i'll do what I like. And as for frightening, you know, at my age and with my background I successfully came to the point when it is almost impossible to frighten me. It is only the Almighty that I am afraid of.

 

[raevsky]

To be frightened and to be afraid are two different things. You might be afraid of Almighty, but you might be frightened by CIS (not of CIS). Just keep that in mind when they talk to you.

 

[masematn]

To be frightened and to be afraid are two different things. You might be afraid of Almighty, but you might be frightened by CIS (not of CIS). Just keep that in mind when they talk to you.

Thanks for a kind advice. I am not sure I understand how these two words are so different in meaning. If A tries to frighten B and B is frightened by A, then we can also say that B is afraid of A, isn't it so? CIS may try to frighten me, that is true, and we have a few interview stories on this forum about it. However, as I said, it is hard to frighten me, especially in such a peaceful setting as CIS office. Unless the officer takes me at a knife point

 

[raevsky]

To be afraid is a deeper feeling than to be frightened, but to be frightened is sharper. You might be frightened even if you are not actually afraid. Just because they say something to you at a specifica time under specific circumstances.