I-485: Intent to Deny (Plz help)

SimFox3

Registered Users (C)
Hi Everyone,
Our whole family's I-485 has been filed under the LIFE Act (2001 version). When my dad's Labor Certificate got approved, attorneys filed our families I-485's since September 12, 2002 (dad being the primary applicant). Just today my mom received a Notice of Intent to Deny for my dad's I-485 employment based application. :eek: :eek: :confused:

I am SO shocked/scared/confused. The gist of the Acting Director's reason for denial for my father's I-485:

"The record of proceeding indicates that your last lawful admission to the US was on May xx, 1996, in WT (visa waiver) classification, valid for 90 days, or until August 26, 1996, and you departed from the United States on January 31, 1998.

In light of the above, it appears you were unlawfully present in the United States from April xx, 1997, until January xx, 1998, a period of more than 180 days, but less than one year. It further appears that you voluntarily dpearted from the United States and were subsequently paroled ino the United States on October xx, 2000. This departure thus appears to have rendered you inadmissable under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, and you are therefore also inligible to adjust status under section 245 of the Act. Your application for adjustment may therefore be denied. " Acting Director

Law: 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I):
"was unlawfully present in the United States for a period of more than 180 days but less than 1 year, volutantarily departed the United States [whether or not pursuant to section 244[e] prior to commencement of proceedings under section 235(b)(1) or section 240, and again seeks admission within 3 years of the date of such alien's departure or removal, ..."

Gist:
-Came on a WT (visa waiver) on May xx, 1996 (visa only valid until August 26, 1996)
-Dad departed from US on January xx, 1998
-Denial REASON: From April 1997 to January 1998 living unlawfully in the US for more than 180 days but less than a full year so he is ineligible.

:eek: ... However, there is something not adding up.. While it is true that from April 1997 to January 1998 is more than 180 days (but less than one year) and that this is grounds for inadmissability... what about the time he was living from August 1996 to January 1998 unlawfully in the US? Isn't that more than 1 year?

Any advise would be helpful.
Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:( ... it's worse than I thought.. If you live more than 1 year "unlawfully" than you are barred to come in the country for 10 years... Does the LIFE act somehow exempt us? Has anyone been in similar situation?
 
SimFox3 said:
:( ... it's worse than I thought.. If you live more than 1 year "unlawfully" than you are barred to come in the country for 10 years... Does the LIFE act somehow exempt us? Has anyone been in similar situation?

If your father's labor was filed before april 30, 2001, he might be elegible for AOS under 245 i...
 
Another thing. please explain how come he was paroled but not admitted.

In order to apply for 485 you have to be in valid non-immigrant status.
 
akatu said:
If your father's labor was filed before april 30, 2001, he might be elegible for AOS under 245 i...
The labor certificate was filed before April 30, 2001 and we are applying under 245(i) (Life Act).

I'm looking at 245i right now and the first line reads: "Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a) and (c) of this section, an alien physically present in the United States--" .... Does this mean that our officer's argument is no longer valid since we filed under 245(i)?
 
akatu said:
Another thing. please explain how come he was paroled but not admitted.

In order to apply for 485 you have to be in valid non-immigrant status.
He was admitted in a CP status on his last entry. Currently, our attorney's best argument is that he should have never been allowed in the country if 212(9)(a) is to be applicable.

However, if what you say is true about 245(i), then that is our strongest appeal. How come our attorney never even mentioned it yet? Perhaps, she doesn't know? Can anyone please recommend good/sharp attorneys that have dealt with cases like this before.

Akatu, I hope the 245i protects us from 245a... because that is the foundation of the officer's argument...
 
SimFox3 said:
He was admitted in a CP status on his last entry. Currently, our attorney's best argument is that he should have never been allowed in the country if 212(9)(a) is to be applicable.

If that is your attorney's best argument, then you are screwed.

Your farther was illegally present for over 180 days in the past, and therefore became subject to the 3-year bar. He was paroled into the US in error, but just because INS made an error at the Port of Entry doesn't waive the bar, since it cannot be waived or forgiven.

However, if what you say is true about 245(i), then that is our strongest appeal. How come our attorney never even mentioned it yet? Perhaps, she doesn't know?

Because your attorney is smart enough to know that 245i won't protect your father because he left the US after being subject to the re-entry bars. If he never left the US at all, 245i would protect him. Since he left the US, he is subject to the bars.

Akatu, I hope the 245i protects us from 245a... because that is the foundation of the officer's argument...

Only if he stayed in the US the entire time. That's why beneficiaries of 245i cases who are subject to the re-entry bars are strongly warned never to the leave the US under any circumstances until their I-485s are approved.
 
TheRealCanadian said:
If that is your attorney's best argument, then you are screwed.

Your farther was illegally present for over 180 days in the past, and therefore became subject to the 3-year bar. He was paroled into the US in error, but just because INS made an error at the Port of Entry doesn't waive the bar, since it cannot be waived or forgiven.



Because your attorney is smart enough to know that 245i won't protect your father because he left the US after being subject to the re-entry bars. If he never left the US at all, 245i would protect him. Since he left the US, he is subject to the bars.


Only if he stayed in the US the entire time. That's why beneficiaries of 245i cases who are subject to the re-entry bars are strongly warned never to the leave the US under any circumstances until their I-485s are approved.

Even if your father entered US elegally and it happened before 12/21/2000, he would be a subject for 245 i

"In general, section 245(i) of the Act allows an otherwise admissible alien who has an immediately available immigrant visa to apply for adjustment of status upon payment of a $1,000 surcharge, even though the alien entered the United States without inspection in violation of section 245(a) or is barred by section 245(c) of the Act. To be grandfathered under section 245(i) of the Act, an alien must be the beneficiary of a qualifying immigrant visa petition or application for labor certification that was filed on or before April 30, 2001 and meets applicable statutory and regulatory requirements."

"Clarification of Certain Eligibility Requirements Pertaining to an Application to Adjust Status
under Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
HQOPRD 70/23.1

(1) The alien was the beneficiary of a qualifying immigrant petition or application for labor certification filed on or before April 30, 2001.


(2) The qualifying immigrant visa petition or the qualifying application for labor certification was “properly filed” and “approvable when filed.”

(3) The principal alien was physically present in the United States on December 21, 2000, if the alien’s qualifying immigrant visa petition or application for labor certification was filed between January 15, 1998 and April 30, 2001."

You really need good attorney. That a..hole IO does not know what he is talking about, but he already made up his stupid mine , so you really need agood one with a reputable name.
Interesting thing is that your father never was admitted into US, instead he was paroled. So by account of that stupid officer 3 years have lapsed already since the time of his depature and is again admissable. (but not 10 years however...). The trick is : common sense is never applicable in immigration law: you have to read into every letter of law.
Anyway you good under 245 i

Tell you location and people will name the best attorney in the area otherwise call Mr khanna and he will prepare response to NOID
 
Last edited by a moderator:
akatu said:
Tell you location and people will name the best attorney in the area otherwise call Mr khanna and he will prepare response to NOID

Thank You! Even though nothing is for certain you have definitely brightned our day. :D

Currently we are in Sacramento, Ca, but it would be great if we can find a reputable attorney in Northern California (San Francisco, San Jose, etc...). However, if there is an attorney who has worked on a case like this and won then it doesn't matter where in the US the attorney is. (Our current attorney is in Minneapolis, MN).

Please reply to this thread, PM me, or email me at SimFox3 "#2#" gmail dot com (replace the #2# with @ && dot with .) .

Also, in a few minutes I'll be posting the full response of the IO (with identification information censored of course).
 
Sorry for reviving this thread..... but...........

Got a call from our attorney, who says that Greencards have been approved for the WHOLE FAMILY .. WOOOOOOOOOOTT..

Attorney is SHOCKED that the immigration judge decided to reverse his decision, but we couldn't be more happier.

These are the grounds on which the attorney appealed:


2. 212 (a)(9)(B)(iv) Tolling for Good Cause

3. Did Immigration waive the ULP because they let them back into the
USA? ( They should not have been allowed to return as an immigrant or
as a Non immigrant)

5. They were Paroled --- parolee not have ULP

6. ULP has had multiple interpretation throughout 1997 until Dec 1998
--- the law should not apply until after these multiple memos and
interpretations of the law are finished --- NO NOTICE.
8. Visa Waiver country
9. 212(d)(4) waiver


IF ANYONE has a similar case, I highly recommend calling Karam & Associates. Our attorney's name is Elizabeth, and her awesome assistance Diana Gavrilova.

I can't believe it... 7 years of frustration AND now against all odds, we have an approval :D

Wish everyone else the best.
 
Congratulations Sim Fox
Sorry for reviving this thread..... but...........

Got a call from our attorney, who says that Greencards have been approved for the WHOLE FAMILY .. WOOOOOOOOOOTT..

Attorney is SHOCKED that the immigration judge decided to reverse his decision, but we couldn't be more happier.

These are the grounds on which the attorney appealed:


2. 212 (a)(9)(B)(iv) Tolling for Good Cause

3. Did Immigration waive the ULP because they let them back into the
USA? ( They should not have been allowed to return as an immigrant or
as a Non immigrant)

5. They were Paroled --- parolee not have ULP

6. ULP has had multiple interpretation throughout 1997 until Dec 1998
--- the law should not apply until after these multiple memos and
interpretations of the law are finished --- NO NOTICE.
8. Visa Waiver country
9. 212(d)(4) waiver


IF ANYONE has a similar case, I highly recommend calling Karam & Associates. Our attorney's name is Elizabeth, and her awesome assistance Diana Gavrilova.

I can't believe it... 7 years of frustration AND now against all odds, we have an approval :D

Wish everyone else the best.
 
Top