Relinquishing Green Card to get another visa?

[hipka]

I don't think so. Intent is all about your future plans/actions. Now, a person can lie or not truthful about his future plan, that's a different story. But it still about future plans. And that's the very reason there are consulate interviews - getting a hint of applicants actual intent.

That may be the dictionary definition if intent but as far as USCIS is concerned intent is demonstrated only by actions and NEVER by thought. ex. you may never intend to work for your employer while applying for GC, but what you really do after getting the GC is what counts. If you do work for the employer after getting GC means you demonstrated intent to work and what you were thinking while applting does not count.
In the case about the cannadian guy and US lady you mentioned, the only reason he gave was visiting his girlfriend, but thats not the case here. In this case the primary motive of coming to the US is to study. Living with the partner happens to be a long term objective which does not need to be mentioned at the consulate.

 

[pralay]

That may be the dictionary definition if intent but as far as USCIS is concerned intent is demonstrated only by actions and NEVER by thought.

As far I know there is no different definiton of intent for USCIS. It's exactly what dictionary says. All the USCIS process demonstrate the same.

ex. you may never intend to work for your employer while applying for GC, but what you really do after getting the GC is what counts. If you do work for the employer after getting GC means you demonstrated intent to work and what you were thinking while applting does not count.

I don't see any logic here. According to your point I don't need to have intent "while applying"? In that case, if I don't work for GC sponsorer, then what's wrong with that? No intent no working, right? I don't see any issue for not working for GC sponsorer here. But the problem is that the real USCIS process is not like that. When you apply for I-485 or CP that means in "good faith" you have showed your intent to work for immigrant visa petitioner (I-140 petitioner). So there is no "thinking" involved here. You showed your intent by applying. You applied, you are granted GC, you better show that your really had intent while applying I-485. Obviously AC21 provides relief after 6 months - where after 6 month you can change your intent.

Similar way, when you apply for F1 visa in consulate, you have showed your intent to comply with of F1 visa law - and that is coming to USA with non-immigrant intent.

In the case about the cannadian guy and US lady you mentioned, the only reason he gave was visiting his girlfriend, but thats not the case here.

You are making a guesswork here. Law is very clear about it. POE officer can deny entry to a visitor if the person shows any intent other than visiting (tourism, visiting friends/people). But when someone has girlfriend, he is a potential immigrant. He would not get his entry even if he said "I would like to visit Disneyland and Seaworld, and by the way I would like to visit my girlfriend too."

In this case the primary motive of coming to the US is to study. Living with the partner happens to be a long term objective which does not need to be mentioned at the consulate.

Again, I could not get your "long term intents" and "short term intents". Intent is intent. It can change, but there is nothing like short or long terms. I cannot say that my short term intent is "being student for 2 years" and then long term intent is "living in USA". If I say so, it automatically implies that my intent is to live in USA (two years of intent of being student is a non-issue here).

 

[hipka]

What I am trying to tell is that intent is determined (by USCIS )not by whats in your mind but by your actions. I know I am right!

 

[hipka]

As far I know there is no different definiton of intent for USCIS. It's exactly what dictionary says. All the USCIS process demonstrate the same.

All USCIS processes only look at your actions, at no stage do they use a lie detector, mind reading etc. to determine intent

I don't see any logic here. According to your point I don't need to have intent "while applying"? In that case, if I don't work for GC sponsorer, then what's wrong with that? No intent no working, right? I don't see any issue for not working for GC sponsorer here. But the problem is that the real USCIS process is not like that. When you apply for I-485 or CP that means in "good faith" you have showed your intent to work for immigrant visa petitioner (I-140 petitioner). So there is no "thinking" involved here. You showed your intent by applying. You applied, you are granted GC, you better show that your really had intent while applying I-485. Obviously AC21 provides relief after 6 months - where after 6 month you can change your intent.

What I meant was 'you can think in your mind' whatever you like but its what you do that counts. Lets say while applying for 485, I think in my mind that I will never work for this employer. Nobody can deny you 485 just for getting this thought. Basically you have just validated what I said

Similar way, when you apply for F1 visa in consulate, you have showed your intent to comply with of F1 visa law - and that is coming to USA with non-immigrant intent.

Yes the immediate intent is non-immigrant but this can change after coming here. Thats the only reason they grant you H-1 visa though you came on F-1.

You are making a guesswork here. Law is very clear about it. POE officer can deny entry to a visitor if the person shows any intent other than visiting (tourism, visiting friends/people). But when someone has girlfriend, he is a potential immigrant. He would not get his entry even if he said "I would like to visit Disneyland and Seaworld, and by the way I would like to visit my girlfriend too."

I think you are going too far here. In that case you can't visit even girlfriend/boyfriend in USA leave alone fiance/husband. Concluding immigrant based on having friends in the US is ridiculos. If any POE officer denies entry based on this he does not know the law. (Now I am wondering how steffi graf was able to meet andre agassi, didn't they suspect she had immigrant intent?)

Again, I could not get your "long term intents" and "short term intents". Intent is intent. It can change, but there is nothing like short or long terms. I cannot say that my short term intent is "being student for 2 years" and then long term intent is "living in USA". If I say so, it automatically implies that my intent is to live in USA (two years of intent of being student is a non-issue here).

No they are clearly separate and the only intent your actions need to prove is your short term intent, ask any attorney about this. What you plan to do lets say 10Yrs after GC. is not relevant when I apply for GC.

 

[pralay]

All USCIS processes only look at your actions,

I am not aware of any such "process". Exit-interview for visitors? Or An interview after one year of getting GC (to show intent)?

at no stage do they use a lie detector, mind reading etc. to determine intent

It's not a question of mind reading or lie detector. The very purpose for consulate interview is for that - to check applicant's intent.

What I meant was 'you can think in your mind' whatever you like but its what you do that counts. Lets say while applying for 485, I think in my mind that I will never work for this employer. Nobody can deny you 485 just for getting this thought. Basically you have just validated what I said

Again I am saying it's not a question of "thought" or "thinking". Therefore I am not validating your point. The assumption is that when you sign your I-485 form and submit to USCIS you already made your decision and showed (not thinking) your intent. It's really a non-issue what's in your head or what you are "thinking". It's your action (applying I-485) that matters.

Yes the immediate intent is non-immigrant but this can change after coming here. Thats the only reason they grant you H-1 visa though you came on F-1.

That's because it's OK to change intent later based on current circumstance.
For example, after graduating (in F1 visa), you got a job. You decided to take offer and changed to H1. This job or opportunity was unforseen when you applied for your F1 visa, entered USA and started going to college.
Secondly, converting to H1 does not prove immigrant intent. It's non-immigrant temporary worker visa.

I think you are going too far here. In that case you can't visit even girlfriend/boyfriend in USA leave alone fiance/husband. Concluding immigrant based on having friends in the US is ridiculos. If any POE officer denies entry based on this he does not know the law. (Now I am wondering how steffi graf was able to meet andre agassi, didn't they suspect she had immigrant intent?)

I think he (the border officer) knew the law pretty well. Law is pretty clear. POE offcer can deny entry in this circumstaces. Regarding Graf and Agassi I don't know how many times Agassi told at POE that he wanted to meet Graf (and that's the trick) and that's the purpose of visit. Needless to say that sportsmen/sportswomen with extraordinary ability and other celebrities enjoy immigration privileges what ordinary people cannot enjoy. That's why they get GC or citizenship within a month.

No they are clearly separate and the only intent your actions need to prove is your short term intent, ask any attorney about this. What you plan to do lets say 10Yrs after GC. is not relevant when I apply for GC.

The sole purpose of granting GC is granting residency status of USA. If you plan to leave USA after 10 years and tell that to adjucator (or consulate interviewer in CP), it's unlikely your will be granted GC. Aplying I-485 you already showed (again, not "thinking") intent to live USA parmanently.

 

[pralay]

Consulate officers don't discriminate between male/female applicants.

An example of "gender discrimination"? Even though it's not for F1, but similar.

http://www.murthy.com/rumor.html

Rumor : An unmarried woman cannot obtain a tourist visa.
Posted May 06, 2003

Clarification : It is much more difficult for an unmarried woman to obtain a B-2 tourist visa -- especially from a third-world country. To overcome this hurdle, the woman must submit evidence of strong ties to the home country beyond the ordinary evidence generally required that exhibit strong family and financial ties. Consulates tend to believe that a woman with no husband and/or children is not likely to return to the home country even if she has expressly stated her intention to do so.

 

[hipka]

I am not aware of any such "process". Exit-interview for visitors? Or An interview after one year of getting GC (to show intent)?



It's not a question of mind reading or lie detector. The very purpose for consulate interview is for that - to check applicant's intent.

You have a point here, they seem to be giving some importance to how you answer questions and body language to judge intent. But this is only in the consulate/POE or interviews and not while applying for 485, change of status. So different criteria are used to determine intent when you apply at consulate and when you apply for AOS. Point taken!

I think he (the border officer) knew the law pretty well. Law is pretty clear. POE offcer can deny entry in this circumstaces. Regarding Graf and Agassi I don't know how many times Agassi told at POE that he wanted to meet Graf (and that's the trick) and that's the purpose of visit. Needless to say that sportsmen/sportswomen with extraordinary ability and other celebrities enjoy immigration privileges what ordinary people cannot enjoy. That's why they get GC or citizenship within a month.


The sole purpose of granting GC is granting residency status of USA. If you plan to leave USA after 10 years and tell that to adjucator (or consulate interviewer in CP), it's unlikely your will be granted GC. Aplying I-485 you already showed (again, not "thinking") intent to live USA parmanently.

Correct, I will be careful in future interviews and not reveal longterm plans to consulate, pretty useful advice. Also huge difference between visa interview for germans and indians. Indians are presumed to be immigrants and have to prove otherwise, germans are presumed non immigrants and have to goof up not to get admitted. Sad but true.

 

[pralay]

Also huge difference between visa interview for germans and indians. Indians are presumed to be immigrants and have to prove otherwise, germans are presumed non immigrants and have to goof up not to get admitted. Sad but true.

That's why students from western europe don't have trouble to get F1 visa even if they have too many ties in USA but not have enough tie in their own homeland.