INFOPASS APP. AS8 not OK to visit COP

[wantmygcnow]

I must agree on this one. After I have been granted asylum I applied for the derivative asylum for my child, who was 6 at that time. My asylum is not of a political category, so it was not automatically assumed that my child is persecuted as I was. But I HAD to submit PROOF that my child is in danger remaining in my COP. Only after the evidence was reviewed the derivative asylum was approved. It is a different thing, though that all the papers have gotten stuck in National Visa Center for 4 years now... Even though I would not want my child to have the same limitations as I did/do as asylee...

Then Faysal was right....It depends on type of ASylum.

 

[MGTgrl]

I must agree on this one. After I have been granted asylum I applied for the derivative asylum for my child, who was 6 at that time. My asylum is not of a political category, so it was not automatically assumed that my child is persecuted as I was. But I HAD to submit PROOF that my child is in danger remaining in my COP. Only after the evidence was reviewed the derivative asylum was approved. It is a different thing, though that all the papers have gotten stuck in National Visa Center for 4 years now... Even though I would not want my child to have the same limitations as I did/do as asylee...

In which part of the process were you asked to prove that your son was in danger remaining in COP? Was it when you applied for I-730?

 

[doctorn]

In which part of the process were you asked to prove that your son was in danger remaining in COP? Was it when you applied for I-730?

Yes, I had to submit that evidence with the I-730 along with the extensive cover letter stating in my own words the reasons why I am applying for the derivative asylum for my child.

 

[Alex_e38]

I disagree

I always fail to see the difference between derivative and principal. The fact that the derivative does not have to prove persecution does not mean that the derivative didn’t suffer from persecution. Indeed, the principal normally argue that his family (children, wife, etc) are persecuted at the initial interview. The derivative does not have to prove persecution because the principal had proved it. When the derivative shows up for an interview his name and claim of persecution by the principal is on file. That is the logic for giving derivative asylees asylum. For derivative to go back to country of persecution negates the principal’s claim that the whole family was persecuted. Therefore, asylum whether derivative or principal is the same. The derivative is even weaker because if the principal’s status is revoked the derivative unravels automatically.

I find it funny that you and some others fail to see the difference between derivative and principal.

My wife is from a different country than mine, she was never persecuted anywhere and that was clearly stated in 'my' application for asylum and in the interview.
Now, you and some others keep trying to convince everybody that derivative asylees cannot renew their NP, travel to 'my' COP or her native country ... bla, bla, bla. Frankly, I'm tired of seeing your empty arguments over and over again, but I keep wondering what is your motive.

I also know one person from my country whose wife and kid were back home when he was granted asylum. He had to be in asylum status for 6 months before he could have started the process to bring them here as derivatives. How can USCIS require them to wait in COP for 6 months if they are persecuted? Well, they were not persecuted, and that is what he stated but they still got derivative asylum status and came here.

Only main applicant is required to prove persecution. Now, if you stated in your application that your spouse and kids are persecuted as well, of course that in that case you have to prove it also. I guess some people are afraid that they will not get their asylum granted if their whole family is not persecuted as well and then go an exagarate their situation and make up stuff.

That is why I have beef with you and your empty arguments, you instill fear in people and make those people with legitimate asylum applications make up stuff and get themself in trouble.

Unnecessary.

Enough already.

 

[MGTgrl]

Yes, I had to submit that evidence with the I-730 along with the extensive cover letter stating in my own words the reasons why I am applying for the derivative asylum for my child.

Doctorn, I don't know the specifics of your case, so forgive me if I am wrong, but form 730 DOES NOT require you to send any evidence as to why you are applying for a derivative asylum for your family. Did you send it yourself because you felt it will "increase" your chances of getting the 730 approved? What 730 does is basically prove your relationship to the family member. It does not require you to "prove" that other members are persecuted.

 

[doctorn]

Doctorn, I don't know the specifics of your case, so forgive me if I am wrong, but form 730 DOES NOT require you to send any evidence as to why you are applying for a derivative asylum for your family. Did you send it yourself because you felt it will "increase" your chances of getting the 730 approved? What 730 does is basically prove your relationship to the family member. It does not require you to "prove" that other members are persecuted.

I was directed to do so by the asylum office that processed my asylum. Sorry, I can not reveal any more specifics.

 

[doctorn]

Doctorn, I don't know the specifics of your case, so forgive me if I am wrong, but form 730 DOES NOT require you to send any evidence as to why you are applying for a derivative asylum for your family. Did you send it yourself because you felt it will "increase" your chances of getting the 730 approved? What 730 does is basically prove your relationship to the family member. It does not require you to "prove" that other members are persecuted.

Also from your response it seems that what I had to do during the derivative asylum application is totally out of the ordinary... Is that so?

 

[thankful]

Thankful can correct me if I am wrong but according to U.S asylum laws, you get derivative status ONLY if the principal had the relationship on his application and you prove that.

They do not ask you to prove that you are also persecuted as the principal...Thats why it was ok to go back to COP for derivatives..??

You are correct--when a principal is granted asylum in the United States his eligible derivatives are eligible for asylum without regard to the derivatives' own fears of persecution. This assumes of course that a derivative passes muster in terms of a criminal background check etc. To take an example, even if the derivative is a citizen of a "good" country like England (where there is a very low possibility of persecution) and the principal is a Chinese citizen, the derivative can still get asylum protection.

So yes the granting of derivative status is independent of persecution.

That said, however, Fayal has a point. It is not uncommon for a family seeking asylum to claim that persecution has befallen the whole family (maybe one member suffered more but all were the target of the persecuting government). In this sense who is the principal (usually the male household member) is just a clerical matter. In this type of situations trips by a derivataive grantee could cast doubt on the entire asylum story.

So it depends on circumstances.

 

[thankful]

Doctorn, I don't know the specifics of your case, so forgive me if I am wrong, but form 730 DOES NOT require you to send any evidence as to why you are applying for a derivative asylum for your family. Did you send it yourself because you felt it will "increase" your chances of getting the 730 approved? What 730 does is basically prove your relationship to the family member. It does not require you to "prove" that other members are persecuted.

You are correct.

 

[thankful]

I was directed to do so by the asylum office that processed my asylum. Sorry, I can not reveal any more specifics.

An asylum office dealing with an I-730? Are you sure? The I-730s have not been the responsibility of the Asylum Division. They are the responsibility of the Examination Division via the Nebraska Service Center and the District Offices. As a matter of fact, as we speak the Asylum Division is thinking about taking over the adjudication of I-730s. As of right now it is something on the drawing board only.

 

[fasaavedra]

Once again, CONCLUSIONS....

here we go..... and all comments are welcome. but , would a AS8 be questioned at POE about his/her trip to COP???

 

[MGTgrl]

here we go..... and all comments are welcome. but , would a AS8 be questioned at POE about his/her trip to COP???

I would say NO, but hey, in this case make your own conclusion. Like you saw on this thread, there are different opinions. If I were you and if I wasn't still sure I'd make another infopass and see if I get another answer from IO. Again this is only my opinion, but I say I wouldn't worry about going back to COP as AS8.

 

[MGTgrl]

Also from your response it seems that what I had to do during the derivative asylum application is totally out of the ordinary... Is that so?

It's seems like it. And like Thankful said the asylum office has nothing to do with I-730s, so I really don't know why you were asked to do so. Again I don't know, maybe your case was out of the "ordinary" to begin with.

 

[MGTgrl]

here we go..... and all comments are welcome. but , would a AS8 be questioned at POE about his/her trip to COP???

fasaavedra,

I was reading your old post and I saw that you came back from COP recently and were never asked about it at POE. This to me answers your question. Althought it doesn't mean you will "never" be asked about on your next trip, at least you have first hand experience regarding AS8 and visit to COP. So I think you should defintely be able to make your own conclusions!

 

[fasaavedra]

MGTgrl, thanks for all of your comments. and yeap, i just came from COP on january 7, 2007, nothing to scared about it, my concerns are now because of the fact sheet is available to all IO to be read, and the things is that fact sheet says nothing new but creates fear to LPR obtained through asylum. Well, i will definetively keep visiting my family, I have never lie and I would not , if I ever get questioned about my visits to COP i will say the true, anyways Im a green card holder now, and it will be very hard to be taken away from me.
Now, what do you think about AS6 visits to COP, is that a total different thing right? is not the right moment for them to do so??

 

[MGTgrl]

Now, what do you think about AS6 visits to COP, is that a total different thing right? is not the right moment for them to do so??

fasaavedra, that issue has been debating and debated since the beginning of this forum. My opinion is that it's not a black and white answer. Each case is different. In some cases the situation in COP has changed and it would be ridiculous to say that you can't go to COP if things have changed.

Even if situation has not changed in COP, I think as long as an AS6 goes to his/her COP a lot, it might/will raise red flags. I think few trips here and there with good proof (such sick relatives and so on) might be OK. The AS6 might still be questioned at POE or citizenship interviews, but as long as the trips are justified, I think it's OK. This is only my opinion!

By the way, unless people are too tired about this topic, you will soon find yourself in the middle of heated arguments!

 

[wantmygcnow]

here we go..... and all comments are welcome. but , would a AS8 be questioned at POE about his/her trip to COP???

USCIS usually profiles LPRs from several countries. Ofcourse all of the middle eastern & some asian countries are included. Any travels to these countries by LPR are scrutnized more by the officer at the Port rather than say an ex-asylee from Bosnia or Russia.

It doesn't mean that people from less profiled countries get a free pass but usually they go through without any problems. As this fact sheet came from repeated inquiries by Colombian embassy, I am sure Columbians who were ex-asylees are also questioned now more than ever.

So what is the correct answer if an ex-asylee can go back to his COP? Well if you are from 'profiled' countries, they(airline personnel, foreign immigration officers, USICS immigraiton officers, visa people etc) are already "anal" with you. So if you like to be scrutinized more then go for it.

if your visit is valid, then you have nothing to worry about. What is a valid visit? Well a valid visit is something you would do to take off work, etc and fly on a plane somewhere..be it vacation, seeing a sick relative etc. If you are living in your COP & just visiting U.S to maintain your LPR status, then you might be get in trouble.

One thing every facet of government hate is when people try to take advantage of them. I work for USPS and we have a separate division(postal inspection service) handling mail frauds like someone opening others mail or fraudlent money orders, employees being on sick leave for no apparent reasons etc etc.
We have fact sheets posted all over. How to behave with an employee or how many days is valid to be off if you are injured during work...They are fact sheets, its mean is to educate you that you can't take advantage of U.S Government.

If you are normal, tax paying ex-asylee LPR who goes to work and comes home and pays his taxes and maybe wants to visit his COP once a year..you are perfectly OK.

You need to remember, you were granted asylum by no IDIOTS here. Officers, Judges judged you and said YES or NO....Obviously your story was valid or else you wouldn't get asylum benefit..as its the hardest to get in U.S or abroad.

Ofcourse in every society we have people who think they are smarter than the authorities..this fact sheet is meant for them. IF a 10 year old can TELL that you are taking advantage OF someone than be scared of visitng your COP.

 

[faysal]

I find it funny that you and some others fail to see the difference between derivative and principal.

My wife is from a different country than mine, she was never persecuted anywhere and that was clearly stated in 'my' application for asylum and in the interview.
Now, you and some others keep trying to convince everybody that derivative asylees cannot renew their NP, travel to 'my' COP or her native country ... bla, bla, bla. Frankly, I'm tired of seeing your empty arguments over and over again, but I keep wondering what is your motive.

I also know one person from my country whose wife and kid were back home when he was granted asylum. He had to be in asylum status for 6 months before he could have started the process to bring them here as derivatives. How can USCIS require them to wait in COP for 6 months if they are persecuted? Well, they were not persecuted, and that is what he stated but they still got derivative asylum status and came here.

Only main applicant is required to prove persecution. Now, if you stated in your application that your spouse and kids are persecuted as well, of course that in that case you have to prove it also. I guess some people are afraid that they will not get their asylum granted if their whole family is not persecuted as well and then go an exagarate their situation and make up stuff.

That is why I have beef with you and your empty arguments, you instill fear in people and make those people with legitimate asylum applications make up stuff and get themself in trouble.

Unnecessary.

Enough already.

Calm down Alex; Even experienced immigration officers/lawyers get confused with immigration matters. We all have different experiences and we are coming from different geographical locations; and the immigration laws are designed in way that accomodate all kinds of people.

As far as making up things goes, we are here to help one another. What you see as a sheer lie might be a sound advice for someone; therefore, the more we debate issues the more the advice seekers get more information. There is nothing personal here, and thanks for sharing your experience. Your case for example is part of the big picture of derivative asylum and mine is the same...they are not the whole part...once we piece together all our experiences that is when we will have the whole pie; therefore, nice to meeting and well come to the debate...

 

[Alex_e38]

Wow

I'm impressed with your politnes, and your adherence to democratic values and debate.

Only,
I see two problems with your text:

1. You have to show it in your other texts, not just here. So far you kept trying to impose your opinions on others and, INDIRECTLY though, acused those who had differing opinions of fraud in their asylum applications.

2. You have to learn to read what other people say as they say it, and try to interpret it as they meant it, not as you find convenient at the moment.

Nice meeting you as well!

 

[faysal]

I'm impressed with your politnes, and your adherence to democratic values and debate.

Only,
I see two problems with your text:

1. You have to show it in your other texts, not just here. So far you kept trying to impose your opinions on others and, INDIRECTLY though, acused those who had differing opinions of fraud in their asylum applications.

2. You have to learn to read what other people say as they say it, and try to interpret it as they meant it, not as you find convenient at the moment.

Nice meeting you as well!

"I'm impressed with your politnes, and your adherence to democratic values and debate." Thanks for the complement.

"1. You have to show it in your other texts, not just here." I always try to be consistent.

"2. You have to learn to read what other people say as they say it, and try to interpret it as they meant it, not as you find convenient at the moment"
This is not possible. It is unrealistic expectation. I read what Others say, but I can't assure that i will get exactly what they mean it. Good luck