Is my green card valid once the citizenship application is approved ?

harvydonald said:
Back to the original question.
You do not become US Citizen when your application is approved. You become a US Citizen when you take the oath.
Click to expand...
Good point. Someguy's interview is in September, which means the oath will probably be in October, unless they have same-day oaths where he is interviewing and he is not doing a name change. So it is quite likely that his parents will have their visa interview before his oath.
 
Sponsor in OP's case is technically correct term. Its neither a third world thing nor is it misconception :). Filing a Affidavit of Support or I-864 for someone's visa application makes the filer the sponsor of the visa.

Either you self sponsor (like Triple's relatives ) based on requirements for citizens of each country or you get sponsored by somebody. The sponsor (by filing I-864) is entering into legal contract with US Govt by not letting the sponsored visa holder become a public charge. This is why you file one I-864 per person and you have keep track of individuals you have sponsored in past.
 
NJOY_SCUBA said:
Sponsor in OP's case is technically correct term. Its neither a third world thing nor is it misconception :). Filing a Affidavit of Support or I-864 for someone's visa application makes the filer the sponsor of the visa.
Click to expand...

Actually, to be specific, there is no legal "sponsor" of a visa. There is a "petitioner", the person or entity who seeks the visa. B visas are self-petitioned, others (such as K, H, L and others) are petitioned by an external party and cannot be self-petitioned.

I think this is where the confusion comes from, and it's also worth noting that while likelihood of a public charge is a grounds of inadmissibility, an affidavit of support isn't the only way to get around it. I didn't need one for my GC (although my wife did). Additionally, the requirements to execute an affidavit of support are MUCH looser than those to petition for a visa.
 
NJOY_SCUBA said:
Sponsor in OP's case is technically correct term. Its neither a third world thing nor is it misconception :). Filing a Affidavit of Support or I-864 for someone's visa application makes the filer the sponsor of the visa.

Either you self sponsor (like Triple's relatives ) based on requirements for citizens of each country or you get sponsored by somebody. The sponsor (by filing I-864) is entering into legal contract with US Govt by not letting the sponsored visa holder become a public charge. This is why you file one I-864 per person and you have keep track of individuals you have sponsored in past.
Click to expand...

The OP is filing a B2 visitor visa for his parents. There is no requirement to file a I-864 with a B2 Visa application.
 
TheRealCanadian said:
Actually, to be specific, there is no legal "sponsor" of a visa. There is a "petitioner", the person or entity who seeks the visa. B visas are self-petitioned, others (such as K, H, L and others) are petitioned by an external party and cannot be self-petitioned.

I think this is where the confusion comes from, and it's also worth noting that while likelihood of a public charge is a grounds of inadmissibility, an affidavit of support isn't the only way to get around it. I didn't need one for my GC (although my wife did). Additionally, the requirements to execute an affidavit of support are MUCH looser than those to petition for a visa.
Click to expand...



while I don't disagree with your post, I don't see relevance of some of your points to the discussion.

The point of discussion was use of term "sponsor" in a self petitioned visitor visa application. My response , is that sponsor is ALSO generally used to describe a person who has filed I-134 or (I-834) or affidavit of support on behalf of another person who is seeking a visa to US. This is true even for self petitioned visitor visa application.

Hence the OP or anybody who has filed affidavit of support for somebody, towards their visitor visa petition can rightfully claim, in USCIS talk, to be the sponsor.
 
I guess we can agree to disagree. The US gets 100s of thousands of visitors a year who come over to see Disneyland, Mount Rushmore, etc. Most of them do not have relatives in the US. Most of these visitors are not rich. Heck, people vacation on credit cards even those who really should not be vacationing :)
I believe an I-134 provides a soothing affect at some consulates and one success story prompts all to follow in the hope of similar success :)


Bobsmyth said:
An I-134 is required if the petitioner cannot show sufficient funds for the trip. This is typical when a child is living in US and parents want to visit but don't have any income.
Click to expand...
 
I have to side with Triple Citizen. Never had to do I-134 for my parents or in-laws. They were never denied a visa, even though an avarage salary in my native country is one of the lowest in Europe.
 
Required is perhaps the wrong term. Recommended is better suited.
A I-134 is recommended when a petitioner is visiting a child in US and does not have financial ability to pay for trip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top