Confusing Denial Letter for I-94 Extension

A

aquawater

Registered Users (C)
Would appreciate if anyone could share their experience.

Just received a "denial" letter for I-94 extension.

The extension was for my parents who left the country 2 weeks after their I-94 expired but before they received the decision notice.

The notice states:
(1) out of status b/c they left after the I-94 expired.
(2) extension application is considered abandoned b/c they left the country already.
(3) last sentence says the extension has been denied.

My attorney says that they were always in status while they were in the US b/c they filed an extension. I checked the USCIS website and it says so too. He explained that the application was denied b/c they are no longer in the US so therefore the application was abandoned/denied.

Has anyone had experience whether they will encounter a problem with the consulate when they renew their visa and when the enter the US next time? (which would likely be in 2009).

Thanks!
 
read up on 222(g). they visas may be cancelled since they overstayed past the i-94 date and the extension was denied. (what was the big emergency since they left 2 weeks after expiration?).
 
thanks for the tip. i pasted the relevant parts of section 222(g) - it was all capitalized. it appears that interpretation of section 222(g) is up to the immigration officer.


-- 222(G) DOES/DOES APPLY TO ALIENS WHO FILE FOR A COS OR
EOS AND WHO REMAIN AFTER THE DATE ON THEIR I-94, IF THE
COS/EOS REQUEST IS SUBSEQUENTLY DENIED OR IS STILL PENDING
AT THE TIME OF THE ALIEN'S DEPARTURE. (BUT SEE BELOW,
CONCERNING THE BLANKET EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES
EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN ALIENS WHO DEPART WHILE A COS OR EOS
APPLICATION IS PENDING.)

Exemption...

-- ALIENS WITH PENDING EOS/COS APPLICATIONS: REF F
ANNOUNCED A BLANKET EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES EXEMPTION
FOR ALIENS WHO TIMELY FILE A NON-FRIVOLOUS APPLICATION FOR
CHANGE OR EXTENSION OF NIV STATUS BUT WHO DEPART THE U.S.
WHILE THE APPLICATION IS STILL PENDING. A NON-FRIVOLOUS
APPLICATION IS ONE WHICH IS NOT ON ITS FACE A GROUNDLESS
EXCUSE FOR THE APPLICANT TO REMAIN IN THE U.S. TO ENGAGE IN
ACTIVITIES INCOMPATIBLE WITH HIS/HER STATUS. IT IS NOT
NECESSARY FOR CONOFF TO DETERMINE THAT THE INS WOULD HAVE
APPROVED THE APPLICATION FOR THE APPLICATION TO BE
CONSIDERED NON-FRIVOLOUS. THIS EXEMPTION WOULD BE MERITED
ONLY IF THE ALIEN DID NOT WORK WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION EITHER
BEFORE THE APPLICATION WAS FILED OR WHILE IT WAS PENDING.
 
Ask your attorney to explain how he is sure that USCIS knew your folks had left? I too am curious to know what the emergency was that needed an extension filed? Implementation/enforcement of 222(g) is indeed at the mercy of the next admitting officer. I wish your folks good luck.


aquawater said:
He explained that the application was denied b/c they are no longer in the US so therefore the application was abandoned/denied.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for your replies and well wishes.

USCIS's letter stated the dates they received the application and the date my parents left the country. I'm assuming everything is computerized so everything can be tracked.

I'm hoping the immigration officer will have some heart and not consider my reason to be frivolous. My parents are elderly and it is a long flight. We had miscalculated a big celebration date by 2 weeks. They left the day after the celebration.

I reread the letter and it is truly confusing. They stated that they are out of status b/c they left the country and abandoned the application. And therefore they are declining.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top