Reviewing case law: Robwoj vs. JoeF

[botwanajim]

I have just read a posting by ROBWOJ that goes against the sage-guru of this board whom I highly respect, JOEF.

The posting said something along the lines that there is NO caselaw whereby a person with re-entry permit has been denied re-entry [even though I agree with JoeF, that the "potential" always exists for being denied].

I want to get confirmations of this: is it really true that there is no caselaw whereby a person with "re-entry" permit got denied re-entry as a LPR ?

If that is true then the status of a "re-entry" permit is very very very strong - much stronger than JoeF or others make out [they insinuate that it is not as strong, and I agree theoretically, but practically it is indeed very strong].

2ndly: many people with "re-entry" permit keep coming back to USA every 6 months to keep in track for citizenship. However, that aside, if person came back genuinely after 2 years of abscence, then am I correct in stating that "practically" he is allowed re-entry ? ["Theoretically", he can be challenged and denied unless he shows proof that he has sufficient ties with USA].

In summary: a re-entry permit is the "Holy Grail" for a LPR that wants to spend significant time abroad yet keep his LPR status alive. Am I right?

 

[IloveAmerica2]

Hi Y'ALL. Guess who's back?!

Ok - you know me as the "systems" guy! How to 'beat the system'. I have read the recent postings and here is my comment:

I think the RE-ENTRY permit is almost THE HOLY GRAIL, somewhat contrary to JoeF. Let me be specific:

You need a/RE-ENTRY PERMIT; b/MUST FILE US TAXES as a 'resident' on the form; c/ have other ties to the USA. Driving licence or State I.D. card, and What other ties?
i/ Bank accountS - easy to do
ii/ Credit cards - again easy to do - just use it and pay it back often and "strategically" !
iii/ Any other bills like cell phone - easy to use and do

So Y'ALL the above are VERY EASY TO DO. Needs a "BIT" of effort on your part. Carry this evidence on your way back to the USA. Make sure that the bills are sent to a U.S. address - then make that person FORWARD THE ENTIRE COLLECTION TO YOU FED-EX!

Now ONE important thing has been left out: what about a place to reside?

This is a crucial bit of evidence, that in my opinion is the hardest to manipulate! Think about it. Without this, ALL the above can be carried out from MAILBOX ETC. !! They take care of everything ! But now let's brainstorm how to handle the "residence" part [i.e. house].

CASELAW shows that a Japanese family with LPR got kicked out of USA even though they owned a house, they didn't reside in that house [they rented it out], and resided with relatives in the USA for a few weeks, every 6 months. This showed the judge that the LPR family did NOT maintain residence.

So- you have to be "creative" to maintain house in USA. Perhaps this is a way, make sure you RENT a ROOM from a friend or family [if they are renting themselves, then sub-let from them]. Make sure YOU PAY for that room - and have contracts to prove it! Then PAY for it, via your bank account. The recepient can give you the money back [ ]. BUT it DOES mean that the person helping you out in this scheme, is liable to pay "taxes" on THEIR private income - so check up on that - because YOU want to pay that!

The worst case realistic scenario is that THEY get hauled to court to support you during your deportation proceeding. They must SWEAR ON OATH they they had contract with you etc. The good news is using above strategy, they WON'T be lieing - because you would have a written contract etc.

Any other ideas on "how to have a room in the USA" ?

NEW THOUGHT AND NOTE: The fact that you have a RE-ENTRY permit, and have already noticed DHS/INS/CBIS/'them' that you intend to be out of the USA - I suspect, that EVEN IF YOU DON'T MAINTAIN A "RESIDENTIAL HOME/ROOM" in the USA - but have all the above evidence - you have SUFFICIENTLY PROVEN THAT YOU ARE IN FACT A "RESIDENT" !

I can not imagine a judge deporting a person that has the following:
a/RE-ENTRY permit; b/Bills, bills, bills paid in the USA; c/Bank Account; d/MOST IMPORTANTLY: PAID FED TAXES in the USA and cited "resident" even though they are earning abroad.

Any thoughts Joe or others ? IF I am right - then the above is all that is required !!!!!

[Note again: although I disagree with the strength of JoeF's argument, I want to point out that 'theoretically according to the letter of the law' JoeF is correct. There is NO CRYSTAL CLEAR FORMULA! Re-entry permit is NOT equal to guaranteed re-entry (although it should be, it isn't!). But practically, we live in a good free nation. Even the boys at CBOE, though tough, areN'T wackos !]

 

[IloveAmerica2]

1000s of Green Card revocations yearly?

JoeF states there are 1000s of Green Card Revocations yearly.

Let us examine this.

Question 1 - WHY are there 1000s of GC revocations? The same type of reasons or different reasons?

If it is the 'same type' then we can create a system to avoid this.

Question 2 - From my reading too, I notice that NO person with a re-entry permit has had their GC revocked in case law !!!!!!!!!! WOW ! Am I right?

This means that IT IS THE Holy GRAIL. It means that no immigration officer is prepared to take the chance of revocking card and going eye-to-eye with revockee in front of a judge. IT MEANS THAT QUIETLY - IMMIGRATION OFFICERS allow the bearer of a "re-entry" permit to pass through [assumption is that they must at least pay/file FED TAXES !!!]

SMILE, DANCE, SING "BEAT THE SYSTEM!"

 

[baikal3]

First, what's with all the large caps letters and the exclamation marks?
There is no need to shout, unless you are a troll.


Now, regarding the contentions that "there is no case law" of someone with a reentry permit being denied reentry and being deemed by USCIS as having abandoned their LPR status.

I don't know for a fact if there is such a case-law or not but I rather suspect that such case-law actually exists, and if someone is really interested, you need to ask an immigration lawer for this information.

The immigration law has been changing rather quickly and mostly unfavorably to immigrants for the last 10 years. I don't know the statistics on how many GC holders are actually denied entry and deemed to have abandoned their LPR status, but it is probably a fairly large number. Presumably only a relatively small percentage of these people actually formally appeal these decisions and go full distance with such an appeal.

There the procedure is long and complicated, involving many steps and parties (USCIS district office, Immigration judge, Board of Immigration appeals, federal appeals court etc) and it takes years before the case gets to the federal appeals court stage, after which you can find the records of the case in Lexis-Nexis. That is why the information one finds now in Lexis-Nexis deals, at best, with the cases from the 80s and 90s. We don't have direct info about how the immigration judges, USCIS district offices etc are ruling on the current cases, but given the general considerable tightening of the immigration laws and regulations, it is reasonable to assume that their rulings are less favorable than before.

If one take the time to look-up some old cases, you will see that even in the days of more liberal immigration laws and enforcement practices having a reentry permit was certainly not considered a "holy grail".


For example, there is a case "Moin vs Ashcroft", 335 F.3d 415; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 12624; 193 A.L.R. Fed. 803, considered by the U.S. 5-th Circuit Court of Appeals in June 2003.


In that case a Pakistani woman was deemed to have abondoned her LPR status based on the totality of circumstances, even though during her pen-ultimate trip to the U.S. she did have a valid reentry permit (these events happened in early to mid-nineties). The 5-th circuit court affirmed this decision. Among other things the court wrote in their opinion:


"Moin argues that her trips to Pakistan were "temporary visits abroad" for two reasons. First, she notes that no trip exceeded two years, and she obtained a reentry permit valid for two years. However, "temporary visits" are not defined in terms of elapsed time alone. See Ahmed, 286 F.3d at 613; [**7] Huang, 19 I. & N. Dec. at 753. Also, a reentry permit, in and of itself, does not prevent a finding that an alien has abandoned her permanent residency status. "A reentry permit does not guarantee [an alien's] return if he or she is found inadmissible on seeking reentry." 3 Gordon and Mailman, Immigration Law and Procedure, § 35.02[1]."




The main point, however, is that, in my view, one should always act based
primarily on the plain meaning of the current laws and regulations and to take into account the current enforcement immigration climate. The "case-law" is not easily available to us, and by the time that it is, it often becomes obsolete.

 

[robwoj]

Hey -

1) Can you elaborate on the Pakistani family. Did they have a valid reentry permit, ties to the US and still were deemed to have abondoned the green card?

2) You say courts take years to decide on abaondonment cases. Is that true? So the person is in limbo for many years?

It seems there are 2 camps here:

JOEF camp: You can get a reentry permit, keep ties to the US, file taxes in the US (be admissable otherwise - no crime records) - AND STILL BE DENIED ENTRY and possibly courts would uphold the decision. The premise is that there are no guarantees because the law leaves a lot up to discretion of immigration officials. Since the immigration climate is going from bad to worse then it is not safe to go out of the US for 1-2 years even if the trip is temporary.

Possibly my camp: If you get a reentry permit, keep ties to the US, file taxes in the US and remain admissable otherwise e.g. no crime records - you will be allowed into the US. This is based on logical thinking that INS still allows temporary trips for immigrants (maybe they will tighten this as well in the future - but law still allows that).

I am not sure whether JoeF camp is correct. Certainly if you believe in this then you should never go on a 1-2 year assignment abroad.

 

[brb2]

non resident for tax purposes if less than 180 days in US

You need a/RE-ENTRY PERMIT; b/MUST FILE US TAXES as a 'resident' on the form...

When one files US taxes, if one has stayed outside the US for over 180 days one is automatically unable to file as a "resident". If that is in fact true, then technically one can not maintain their green card if one was to go overseas for a 2 year period on re-entry permit.

Any comments from immigration/tax gurus?
thanks.

 

[TheRealCanadian]

When one files US taxes, if one has stayed outside the US for over 180 days one is automatically unable to file as a "resident".

This is a gross oversimplification. There are several categories of individuals who must file as a resident even if they never set foot within the US in a given year, and another group that is eligible, but not required to.

 

[wurzbach]

case law, reentry permit and ties with US

Provide two cases involving reentry permits and the ties with US.

my understanding with reentry permit is:

1) reentry permit is a prima facia proof that your departure is in temporary nature, showing a valid reentry permit at POE ensures that little troubles will catch you and you almost do not need to present evidence of your ties with US during the period of departure although it is true that reentry permit is not a safe harbor and cannot guarantee your reentry or vest you the right to enter US.

2) reentry permit only has the evidentiary effect for your current entry purpose. Nothing more can be expected from the permit. if you has used reentry permit (once or twice), you must be very careful if you want to leave US and stay outside for a relatively lengthy time without reentry permit in the future. Once you get caught, the time you spend outside and the ties with US during the peiod of valid reentry permit will be used to contrue your "intent" of abandoning PRS.

cases:

(a) "OVERVIEW: The alien was admitted for permanent residence in the United States, and thereafter returned for a brief visit to the Philippines. Upon her return, she was readmitted while in possession of a valid reentry permit. The board then issued an order of exclusion and deportation, and the alien sought a writ of habeas corpus at the trial court, which was denied. The court vacated and remanded the trial court's decision concluding that the board did not establish facts supporting deportability by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence. The court found that the alien first entered the United States under a plan made with her husband to establish permanent residence, and she brought all of her belongings approximately one-half of the cash from her marital estate. The court found that she opened a bank account, applied for a social security card, petitioned for a visa on behalf of her adopted daughter, and arranged to leave her possessions in the United States while she was away, and obtained a reentry permit. The court concluded that the act of the attorney general in approving her reentry permit was an official act presumed to be lawful until the contrary was made to appear." (Pascual v. Carroll, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 23354)

(b) "The immigrants, who were husband and wife, were citizens of India who became lawful permanent residents of the United States in 1977 and 1981, respectively. They had two children who were United States citizens. In 1984, the immigrants left the United States so that the husband could take a two-year teaching job in Bahrain. Prior to departing, the immigrants secured a reentry permit from the INS. They disposed of all personal property, gave up their apartment, and left no relatives in the United States. They returned to the United States for a few weeks in between his teaching contracts and secured new reentry permits. Petitioners last returned to the United States in 1989, seeking to be admitted into the United States as "special immigrants," as defined in 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(27)(A). The court upheld the decision of the BIA that the immigrants had abandonment their lawful permanent residence. The court found substantial evidence in support of the finding that the immigrants' time abroad did not amount to a temporary visit abroad, and that the immigrants did not maintain sufficient ties to the United States to support a reasonable inference of the necessary intent." (Aleem v. Moyer, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14501)

 

[robwoj]

The guys here:

(b) "The immigrants, who were husband and wife, were citizens of India who became lawful permanent residents of the United States in 1977 and 1981, respectively. They had two children who were United States citizens. In 1984, the immigrants left the United States so that the husband could take a two-year teaching job in Bahrain. Prior to departing, the immigrants secured a reentry permit from the INS. They disposed of all personal property, gave up their apartment, and left no relatives in the United States. They returned to the United States for a few weeks in between his teaching contracts and secured new reentry permits. Petitioners last returned to the United States in 1989, seeking to be admitted into the United States as "special immigrants," as defined in 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(27)(A). The court upheld the decision of the BIA that the immigrants had abandonment their lawful permanent residence. The court found substantial evidence in support of the finding that the immigrants' time abroad did not amount to a temporary visit abroad, and that the immigrants did not maintain sufficient ties to the United States to support a reasonable inference of the necessary intent." (Aleem v. Moyer, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14501)


On the last trip when they got denied - did they have a valid reentry permit?

 

[wurzbach]

The guys here:
On the last trip when they got denied - did they have a valid reentry permit?

From court opinion, it seems that he only applied reentry permits twice (each for two years); he did not show reentry permit for his last entry after spending one year outside. same thing happened to the poor lady in the first case, she used reentry permit for the first time; after that she spent one year outside without reentry permit and got caught. But because she had much stronger ties with US during her departure, she won her case. By the way, the poor indian guy in the second case did file tax return each year, but the court said that was not enough.

Actually, the case decided by the 5th circuit court recently (Moin v. Ashcroft, 335 F.3d 415) does not conflict with the two cases I provided. In that case,the Pakistan lady had three entries: 1) the first entry was OK after one year staying outside without permit but having good "excuses" (marriage, pregnancy etc.); 2) the second entry was OK with a valid reentry permit after two years of staying outside; 3) the third entry was NOT OK after staying outside over one year without valid permit and the whole period of staying outside since the time of getting PR were used to contrue the "intent" of abandoning LPR.

 

[wurzbach]

"The court upheld the decision of the BIA that the immigrants had abandonment their lawful permanent residence" If you try to misquote, at least don't produce such glaring errors...

you think I did not notice the error? It is a error from Lexis and I do not want to correct it.......

 

[brb2]

JoeF
Thanks very much for the clarification.

It is not true for Permanent Residents.
There are two classifications as tax resident:
1. being in the US for at least 183 days/year. This is the "Substantial Presence Test."
2. being a PR at any time during the year. This is the "Greencard Test."
This is, btw, listed in IRS Publication 519, Tax Guide for Aliens.

So, PRs are US tax residents, regardless of how long they are abroad, and have to file US taxes as resident.
This also has implications if a person wants to own a company. Classification as S-Corporation requires all non-US citizen shareholders to pass the Greencard Test. Lots of people, even CPAs, get that wrong...

 

[alassea]

I want to get confirmations of this: is it really true that there is no caselaw whereby a person with "re-entry" permit got denied re-entry as a LPR?

I've read an article from murthy.com regarding the same case Baikal3 mentioned: the one about Moin vs. Ashcroft.

The article reads and to quote:
"It generally has been BCIS / Legacy INS practice and policy that a green card holder who has obtained a reentry permit from BCIS was allowed to remain abroad for a long period of time, without being deemed to have abandoned GC status. The reentry permit, generally, had been sufficient to reenter the U.S. after lengthy absences abroad. However, in a recent case in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Zeba Moin, et al. v. John Ashcroft, U.S. Attorney General, the court held that a permanent resident must be able to show continued ties to the United States, even with a valid reentry permit.

The Fifth Circuit found that merely having a reentry permit does not guarantee that a green card holder will be found legally admissible to return to the United States if s/he is unable to show other ties to the U.S. The court stated that: “to qualify as a returning resident alien, an alien must have acquired lawful permanent resident status in accordance with our laws, must have retained that status from the time that [she] acquired it, and must be returning to an unrelinquished lawful permanent residence after a temporary visit abroad.” The court further stated, “a reentry permit, in and of itself, does not prevent a finding that an alien has abandoned her permanent residency status.” Essentially, the court held that, without any other ties to the U.S., a lengthy visit abroad is not “temporary” in nature and will result in the person's losing GC status, even if s/he had obtained a reentry permit. In the case cited, Zeba Moin and her son, Moiz Ullah, had appealed a ruling of the Board of Immigration Appeals that held that Ms. Moin had abandoned her lawful permanent resident status and was, therefore, subject to exclusion and removal or deportation.

In order to maintain permanent resident status, a person needs to maintain strong ties to the U.S. Examples of such ties are: filing annual tax returns as a permanent resident; maintaining property in the U.S., having family members in the U.S., involvement with community organizations, having an address in the U.S., even if the address may be that of a friend or relative; maintaining a valid driver’s license; maintaining bank account/s; holding credit card and other accounts; and keeping some personal belongings in the U.S."

In summary: a re-entry permit is the "Holy Grail" for a LPR that wants to spend significant time abroad yet keep his LPR status alive. Am I right?

No, a re-entry permit is not the holy grail considering that there can still be a lot of factors at play. Nothing is for certain. Even if you have a re-entry permit, CBP officers will always consider the factors for your admissibility such as meeting other requirements of immigration law, strong and ongoing ties to the U.S., reasons for any prior absences (if there are any), and duration of those earlier absences from the U.S. Also, by asking relevant questions, officers nowadays (and also as their way for tightening security) really look into whether the stay abroad is really temporary or if the person with the re-entry permit is just using it to get by immigration and fool the system. Ofcourse, if you lie to them about your purpose and length of stay, they have means of finding out either sooner or later and you can really get into trouble for your actions.

 

[wurzbach]

Nothing is for certain. Even if you have a re-entry permit, CBP officers will always consider the factors for your admissibility such as meeting other requirements of immigration law, .......

Do not try to scare people here just after reading an article, please......things are not so bad as you think......if you have applied the reentry permit in good faith and you have some ties with US during your less than 2 years of departure, you are safe to enter US with the valid permit.

Bad thing happens when people try to use reentry permit to exclude the time they spend outside while holding the permit from consideration of their lack of residence. Under this situation, reentry permit does not help them becasue the permit is only for their current entry purposes, it cannot demonstrate more than that.

obviously you did not read the 5th circuit case by yourself. The lady got no trouble to enter US when she held her reentry permit at the second time. she was blocked at the third time after she was outside for more than one year without reentry permit. Had she continuously stayed in US after she entered US with reentry permit at the second time, there should be no any problem with her LPR so long as she was not spotted by the USCIS.

Attention should be paid is: do not try to leave this country for more than two years totally; do not try to leave and enter this country for multiple times.

 

[wurzbach]

That article is more insightful than all your so-called research which has been shown to be false and misleading.

seems that our biggest authority here, JoeF, also did not read the case. not surprise that what he can do is only to exaggerate some lawyers' speculation.

You should be the last person to criticize anybody here.

Thank you, I am so honored!

 

[alassea]

Do not try to scare people here just after reading an article, please......things are not so bad as you think......if you have applied the reentry permit in good faith and you have some ties with US during your less than 2 years of departure, you are safe to enter US with the valid permit.

I'm sorry if you feel that way about my opinion, but scaring people is really not my intention here. Ofcourse you have nothing to worry about if your reason for a re-entry permit is valid, your stay abroad is really for a "temporary" purpose (meaning in a short period of time, have clear duration and date of termination), and that you have maintained all legal requirements as a permanent resident. At least we can agree on that respect. I remain in saying that nothing is for certain though. IO at POE consider many factors in admitting non-citizens (including PRs). I've already mentioned some of that factors before and I don't want to be redundant. Having just the re-entry permit as guarantee for admissibility is not enough (also considering the present situation: the aftermath of 9/11 and security being tightened), it is merely an evidence for your intent to return, if your actions prove otherwise (e.g. IO has evidence that your visit abroad is really not temporary, that you no longer have ongoing ties to the U.S., that you have relinquished your permanent address in the U.S., that you have roundtrip ticket ending back to your country and only planning to stay for some months in the U.S. in order to prove you're keeping your LPR status, and so on... ), then it lies in the hands of the immigration officials whether to consider you inadmissable or not, based on those given examples they may reach the conclusion that you have abandoned your PR status. I hope you are getting my point as I am trying my best not to be misunderstood here. Also, to clear, I didn't just based what I've said before in my previous post from that article I've quoted. I for one have experienced these difficult processes (having to obtain both re-entry permit and SB1 in order to return to the U.S.), and I do not want others to commit the same mistakes that I did when it could have been prevented, that is why I am sharing these ideas and opinions of mine. I hope other readers won't misinterpret it the way you did, that I am scaring the people here.

obviously you did not read the 5th circuit case by yourself. The lady got no trouble to enter US when she held her reentry permit at the second time. she was blocked at the third time after she was outside for more than one year without reentry permit. Had she continuously stayed in US after she entered US with reentry permit at the second time, there should be no any problem with her LPR so long as she was not spotted by the USCIS.

Then I should just provide the readers with this link, let them decide for themselves what they make it, and be on my way: Moin v. Ashcroft

Happy reading!!

 

[Participant]

I for one have experienced these difficult processes (having to obtain both re-entry permit and SB1 in order to return to the U.S.),

Can you please explain why you sought SB-1 visa when you have an valid
REP.
Does your REP expire before? or You lost GC or ...doesn't have REP next time
and ovestayed ?
what grounds you evidenced for CO to get your SB1?
The details will be helpful for some other guys posted some related Qs earlier on the subject.

 

[pralay]

What qualifications do you have to claim to know more than the best immigration lawyers in this country???
Short answer: none. You have not even the ability to properly quote stuff, you mislead, you don't know the basic legal phraseology...
So, I take a well-known lawyer's advice over your crazy BS any day.

And of course he misled in past and gave people false assurance without knowing the laws. Good example is here:
http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?p=1281485#post1281485

 

[alassea]

Can you please explain why you sought SB-1 visa when you have an valid
REP.
Does your REP expire before? or You lost GC or ...doesn't have REP next time
and ovestayed ?

I have the re-entry permit before (and the purpose, by the way, for my stay abroad is to study), however, I wasn’t able to return to the U.S. on time (within the 2-year validity of the re-entry) because I have been marked with incomplete grades by my professors in college. I didn’t get to graduate on the date I was supposed to and must therefore complete all the needed requirements first to earn my degree. I can’t apply for another re-entry permit since I am outside the U.S. already (applicants for re-entry must be physically present in the U.S. at the time of their application), and also, I still have to deal with those incomplete grades. The only thing left for me to do (and it is also the only option I could think of at that time) was to apply for SB-1 visa to a U.S. Consulate.

what grounds you evidenced for CO to get your SB1?

This is the complicated part, as one must have strong evidence to convince the CO that the extended stay abroad was caused by unforeseen conditions beyond the person’s control. In my case, I did not expect that I would not graduate on time because of those incomplete grades. I have always maintained good scholastic records, and in fact, have never received any failing or incomplete grades before. Anyway, before you can apply for a returning resident visa, you must first file an application to determine returning resident status in person to the U.S. Consulate, with that application you’ll have to submit all the initial evidence required to prove that a.) You had the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence at the time of departure from U.S., b.) You departed from the U.S. with the intention of returning and you have not abandoned this intention, and c.) You are returning to the U.S. from a temporary visit abroad and, if the stay abroad was protracted, this was caused by reasons beyond your control and for which you are not responsible. As for my case, the initial evidence I submitted were my passport (must have the stamps for dates of travel outside the U.S.), green card, re-entry permit, my previous airline tickets/boarding pass, my proof of ongoing ties to the U.S. (papers for the house and car I own, letters/cards/phone bills evidencing ties from my family and friends in the U.S., bank and credit card account statements, copy of tax returns, SS card, and driver’s license), and last but not least, proof that my stay was for reasons beyond my control (for that I submitted my college transcript, letters from my professors and college dean, original receipts of my tuition fees, and my college registration card). After that, they will mail you the decision, whether you qualify or not as a returning resident. If you don’t qualify, you’ll receive your passport back but they will no longer return your green card in the mail anymore (so consider SB-1 as your option very, very carefully first before applying as this is really a very difficult process and rarely do COs approve of such applications). Note that it is not the end of the world, however, if your application for SB-1 has been denied. If you still wish to go back and migrate to the U.S. after that, a new immigrant visa petition should be filed by your sponsor on your behalf. If you do qualify however for the SB-1 visa, aside from that they’ll return your passport and green card in the mail, they will also enclose along with the package the appointment for your visa interview and instructions on how to proceed with the whole SB-1 visa application. Note that the instructions for applying for SB-1 visa is basically the same process as applying for an immigrant visa. The only difference is that you don’t have to wait anymore for the petition of the person sponsoring you in the U.S. However, you will need to submit again all the documents you submitted when you applied for your immigrant visa (e.g. passport, birth certificate, marriage certificate, evidence of financial support, visa photos, and others), and you will need to undergo medical examination again prior to the date of your visa interview. If after the interview, your returning resident visa is approved, you’ll receive your returning resident visa in the mail. You must now arrange plans for your return to the U.S. and fly as soon as you can, as SB-1 visa has very short date of validity (60 days if I my memory serves me right). Hope that helps.

Note that these are all just based from my personal experience, and is not intended as legal advice. It is best that you still seek the counsel of an immigration attorney if you encountered such similar problems as mine.

 

[Participant]

INote that these are all just based from my personal experience, and is not intended as legal advice. It is best that you still seek the counsel of an immigration attorney if you encountered such similar problems as mine.

Nice and a detailed account of your issue.Appreciate your time and this will help/guide some others in REP/SB-1 problems.