Urgent help needed. GC for my mom

N

naturalize_06

Registered Users (C)
Hi experts

I need your advise. I am a naturalized citizen. I am new to this site. I would like to file GC for my mom and take her to US as my dad expired a week back. The Visitor visa lines in Chennai are booked till march '07. I was wondering if I can file GC via CP to Chennai. Do you have any idea how long it takes (Someone said 6months or so to complete the whole process).

Or is it better to take the visitor visa and go to USA and then file for GC.

One more question. I want to stay in India for couple of months until she gets gc/visa to go to USA. Can I file for GC for my mom while i stay in india.

Please advise.

thanks
 
My condolences. I am actually in the same boat. My preliminary investigation is that there are three ways to get her here:
a) get her visitor visa (don't be afraid of the visitor visa deadlines. People
cancel very often so you will easily get last minute cancellation appointments
within 15-30 days. Just keep checking the appointment dates often). Then
bring her over to US.. file I-130 for her and AOS. This is the fastest way
to get her GC - around 3 months after she arrives in US.
b) File for I-130 in US (with consular processing). This I believe will take
around 13-15 months - slowest of all possibilities.
c) You stay in India for 3 months, show reasonable proof that you are
resident in India to the US consulate and do a DCF in Delhi. This will take
a few months after that initial 3 month wait period.

Let me know if you know of any other faster way.
All the best.



naturalize_06 said:
Hi experts

I need your advise. I am a naturalized citizen. I am new to this site. I would like to file GC for my mom and take her to US as my dad expired a week back. The Visitor visa lines in Chennai are booked till march '07. I was wondering if I can file GC via CP to Chennai. Do you have any idea how long it takes (Someone said 6months or so to complete the whole process).

Or is it better to take the visitor visa and go to USA and then file for GC.

One more question. I want to stay in India for couple of months until she gets gc/visa to go to USA. Can I file for GC for my mom while i stay in india.

Please advise.

thanks
Click to expand...
 
rsh431 said:
My condolences. I am actually in the same boat. My preliminary investigation is that there are three ways to get her here:
a) get her visitor visa (don't be afraid of the visitor visa deadlines. People
cancel very often so you will easily get last minute cancellation appointments
within 15-30 days. Just keep checking the appointment dates often). Then
bring her over to US.. file I-130 for her and AOS. This is the fastest way
to get her GC - around 3 months after she arrives in US.
b) File for I-130 in US (with consular processing). This I believe will take
around 13-15 months - slowest of all possibilities.
c) You stay in India for 3 months, show reasonable proof that you are
resident in India to the US consulate and do a DCF in Delhi. This will take
a few months after that initial 3 month wait period.

Let me know if you know of any other faster way.
All the best.
Click to expand...

Maybe I have good news. My friend is going through the same procedures to bring her mom here and filed an I130 that will have to go through consuar processing and was told by her lawyer that it will take about 6-7 months.
 
At this point, DCF at Delhi seems to be the fastest option to get a GC for your Mom - I think you have to stay 60 days in India before you file (DCF) - Direct Consular Filing. From the point you file (after the initial wait of 60 days), it should take less than 2 months before she's called for an interview at the Chennai consulate.

On the other hand, if you get a visitor visa appt for her soon enough while you are waiting (the 60 days for DCF), then bring her to the US first. While she's here, you can then apply for I-130, I-485 package. This way she's already in the US. The timeline for interview after filing I-485 depends on the DO. It's not necessarily approval, 3 months after filing like some one said here. I filed for my Mom in January and her interview is only in Aug - that is 7+ months for a straight forward case. So, how fast she gets her GC once I-485 is filed here, depends on the DO. It could range any where from 4 - 8 months on an average.

CP (Consular Processing) is the slowest - you should only pursue this option if you cannot stay long enough to file DCF in India, or if your Mom's visitor visa is rejected.
 
On the other hand, if you get a visitor visa appt for her soon enough while you are waiting (the 60 days for DCF), then bring her to the US first. While she's here, you can then apply for I-130, I-485 package. This way she's already in the US. The timeline for interview after filing I-485 depends on the DO. It's not necessarily approval, 3 months after filing like some one said here. I filed for my Mom in January and her interview is only in Aug - that is 7+ months for a straight forward case. So, how fast she gets her GC once I-485 is filed here, depends on the DO. It could range any where from 4 - 8 months on an average.QUOTE]

This advice, though earnest, is in fact ILLEGAL. A person is not to enter the US on nonimmigrant intent when they have immigrant intent. While I have dealt with several people that have come on VWP or B visas etc., met someone and then married --- that is a different scenario. When they came to the US they had NO SPECIFIC INTENT to adjust status.

Do many people do what you suggest above? Yes. But is it illegal? Yes. Can it be discovered and have the person removed/benefit denied? Perhaps, often not. USCIS seldom pursues this course of action, simply b/c they are far too busy with more important offenses and other matters --- and very often these cases would be appealed on various technicalities and drag on forever.

While the OP and others will do as they feel best according to their circumstances, I think it would be dangerous for this forum to advise in issues of EVADING IMMIGRATION LAWS. That is another "ten foot pole".
 
When one gets such advice from a popular Immigration attorney, one tends to think it is not "illegal" immigration..
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1459

I was only relaying info that I have seen sevaral times posted by Ron Gotcher on his website. As posted by many on this forum, one is "recommended/suggested" a wait time of 30 -90 days before they file for PR, when they initially entered with a non-immigrant visa. At this point, it is immaterial whether it is visitor's visa or any other non-immigrant visa. Of course, if you think something is risky and still go ahead and do it, you already are up for consequences.
 
jenimmi said:
When one gets such advice from a popular Immigration attorney, one tends to think it is not "illegal" immigration..
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1459

I was only relaying info that I have seen sevaral times posted by Ron Gotcher on his website. As posted by many on this forum, one is "recommended/suggested" a wait time of 30 -90 days before they file for PR, when they initially entered with a non-immigrant visa. At this point, it is immaterial whether it is visitor's visa or any other non-immigrant visa. Of course, if you think something is risky and still go ahead and do it, you already are up for consequences.
Click to expand...

This does NOT surprise me. While I do not wish to comment on Mr Gotcher's comments or any of his advice --- I will say that that advice is not uncommon among attorneys, especially in private consultations.

That does not mean that the advice is necessarily truly LEGAL or LEGITIMATE ---while some attorneys may proceed to counsel clients as they wish in private(subject to requirements and possible sanctions by their bar association), I do not believe that it is appropriate to give advice to people on a public forum on how to evade immigration law.

I have not done any research on what Mr Gotcher said, nor am I interested. None of my comments above apply to him --- I am merely discussing the legal issue of advising people to enter with immigrant intent on a nonimmigrant status.
 
pianoplayer said:
I have not done any research on what Mr Gotcher said, nor am I interested. None of my comments above apply to him --- I am merely discussing the legal issue of advising people to enter with immigrant intent on a nonimmigrant status.
Click to expand...

I don't see "any legal issue in advising people....." here. This is just a Public forum and the OP or any one else posting questions/expecting response here is supposed to do their own research, besides the tips/help they came looking for.
That said, there are tons of people doing/ who did the exact same thing and have already gotten the GC for their parents. As far as I know, not one either in this forum or others I've known personally, were even asked the issue of applying/ entering with a non-immigrant visa.

I can post that it is ok to do it and you may say that it is illegal to do so. But the fact remains, that this is how 99% of parents adjusting status came in (non-immigrant visa). If this was truly illegal, tens of thousands of these applications would have been denied at interview or a more stringent rule put in place years ago. Which didn't happen and therefore I conclude, in technicality this may be a law/rule - but in reality, this is mostly the way parents adjust their status in the US.

P.S: And with this I'm done here.
 
Thank you for the responses. The DCF option seems to be the fastest. In case I take a time off from work for 6 months, stay in India and file through the DCF. I believe at some point, I need to give an affidavit of support (for gc) for my mom. Would it matter that I can present only my tax return papers and no current paystubs (as i am in timeoff) and my employment verification letter may show i am in time off.

Thank you.
 
if you can take time off for 6 months I would recommend go for the DCF option.There is No guarentee that your Mom would get the B-2 visa at the first attempt....and if it get's complicated and rejected with 'immigrant intent'..then your subsequent applications would be seen as 'misrepresention' of intentions.
Every law has a loophole...(else the lawyers would be out of business.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jenimmi said:
I don't see "any legal issue in advising people....." here. This is just a Public forum and the OP or any one else posting questions/expecting response here is supposed to do their own research, besides the tips/help they came looking for.
That said, there are tons of people doing/ who did the exact same thing and have already gotten the GC for their parents. As far as I know, not one either in this forum or others I've known personally, were even asked the issue of applying/ entering with a non-immigrant visa.

I can post that it is ok to do it and you may say that it is illegal to do so. But the fact remains, that this is how 99% of parents adjusting status came in (non-immigrant visa). If this was truly illegal, tens of thousands of these applications would have been denied at interview or a more stringent rule put in place years ago. Which didn't happen and therefore I conclude, in technicality this may be a law/rule - but in reality, this is mostly the way parents adjust their status in the US.

P.S: And with this I'm done here.
Click to expand...


Your position is fascinating --- particularly given that you have such great knowledge about cases involving this.

In fact, there have been MANY people who have gotten in trouble for this and then go running for legal representation - it often comes down to how the DAO views it. Many more people than you think.

Are there loopholes to this? Yes, and be sure to know, attorneys use them. But what is discussed in private between an attorney and a client, pertaining to the particular facts of the client's case is NOT APPROPRIATE for a forum such as this.

What you are advising people to do, could end them up in a very difficult situation, where they have to spend lots of money on a lawyer to look for "loop holes". While I am happy for the industry, that is not advantageous to most people.

The irony is -- you may consider yourself DONE HERE, but then many that read your post may go out and do this, and run into all kinds of problems/expenses because of it. But who cares about whether you ADVOCATE FOLLOWING THE LAW -- you are done here.
 
I don't want to be taking one side or the other, but I have always
wondered about the "intent" part of the immigration law.

Theoretically speaking F-1 is issued to only those student swho do not
have any intention to stay in US (and I also know of cases where it has
been rejected the first time due to that reason). But in majority of the
cases, those students end up getting H-1 later and work in US after
graduation. Is that misrepresentation of "intent" while getting F-1?

So.. either the intent part of the law ought to be modified, or the
USCIS/consulate is statistically hugely way off in their intent gauging
techniques. Either way, denying visa on the "intent" basis does not
seem to be fair to those who have been denied the visa.

My 2cents. :)

pianoplayer said:
Your position is fascinating --- particularly given that you have such great knowledge about cases involving this.

In fact, there have been MANY people who have gotten in trouble for this and then go running for legal representation - it often comes down to how the DAO views it. Many more people than you think.

Are there loopholes to this? Yes, and be sure to know, attorneys use them. But what is discussed in private between an attorney and a client, pertaining to the particular facts of the client's case is NOT APPROPRIATE for a forum such as this.

What you are advising people to do, could end them up in a very difficult situation, where they have to spend lots of money on a lawyer to look for "loop holes". While I am happy for the industry, that is not advantageous to most people.

The irony is -- you may consider yourself DONE HERE, but then many that read your post may go out and do this, and run into all kinds of problems/expenses because of it. But who cares about whether you ADVOCATE FOLLOWING THE LAW -- you are done here.
Click to expand...
 
I don't see anything Illegal about jenimmi's advice. Jenimmi presented pro and con for each option. It's all up to OP to make up his/her mind based on the info or seek lawyer's advice.

It's just like the speeding limit, everyone driving 70mph at 65 mph zone, so what. If it is common practice, then go with the flow.

I wish there are more people like Jenimmi who can make contributions to the forum rather than sitting there criticizing and discouraging people who want to help others.
 
rsh431 said:
Theoretically speaking F-1 is issued to only those student swho do not have any intention to stay in US (and I also know of cases where it has
been rejected the first time due to that reason). But in majority of the
cases, those students end up getting H-1 later and work in US after
graduation. Is that misrepresentation of "intent" while getting F-1?
Click to expand...

How is switching non-immigrant statuses a change in intent?
 
Ok. Did a little research. I believe this particular case says it all.

Board of Immigration Appeals in an important precedent decision, Matter of Cavazos, 17 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 1980), ruled that in the absence of any serious negative factors, this holding stands for the proposition that "preconceived intent" is a legally insufficient reason to deny adjustment of status to an immediate relative of a US citizen.

BIA decisions are, by law, binding upon all CIS officers. I think that's why Mr. Gotcher advise to go ahead submit application immediatly.

So the conclusion is it is perfectly leagal to have an intent to file I-485 immediately when you enter with vistor visa, as long as
a. you are immediate relative of a US citizen
b. there is nothing terriblely wrong with your I-485 case.

Therefore, jenimmi's advices are everything but Illegal.
 
horiba said:
Therefore, jenimmi's advices are everything but Illegal.
Click to expand...

I would be exceptionally leery of relying on a BIA case over a quarter-century old, especially with the large number of changes made to immigration law since then.

If a parent arrives in the US on a B visa and almost immediately immediately files the I-485, I don't think it would be unreasonable for USCIS to pull up what information was provided as part of the visa application or inquire what the alien stated at the POE. If they claimed that they were only staying for a short period, then USCIS could invoke Seihoon v. Levy and claim that their intent was all along to file the I-485, and claim "fraud in order to secure an immigration benefit" (the B visa along with the ability to adjust).

Until we see a recent case we won't know for sure, but I wouldn't be so comfortable with this course of action. Also, if it turns out to be immigration fraud, then if HR 4437 ever gets passed you would be committing a felony by advising on this course of action.
 
TheRealCanadian said:
How is switching non-immigrant statuses a change in intent?
Click to expand...

Exactly right, RealCanadian. And moreover, there is nothing wrong with changing intent later on, hence the whole idea of AOS. However, the issue is the intent at the point of entry initially.
 
horiba said:
Ok. Did a little research. I believe this particular case says it all.

Board of Immigration Appeals in an important precedent decision, Matter of Cavazos, 17 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 1980), ruled that in the absence of any serious negative factors, this holding stands for the proposition that "preconceived intent" is a legally insufficient reason to deny adjustment of status to an immediate relative of a US citizen.

BIA decisions are, by law, binding upon all CIS officers. I think that's why Mr. Gotcher advise to go ahead submit application immediatly.

So the conclusion is it is perfectly leagal to have an intent to file I-485 immediately when you enter with vistor visa, as long as
a. you are immediate relative of a US citizen
b. there is nothing terriblely wrong with your I-485 case.

Therefore, jenimmi's advices are everything but Illegal.
Click to expand...

I applaud you on your homework -- however, have you heard of what is called "Shepardizing a case"??

Since the case you mentioned, there have been many others --- unfortunately when doing legal research, you have to do it comprehensively to determine what the prevailing legal theory is -- a "melting pot" so to speak of legal opinions. Are you also aware that there are different holdings in different jurisdictions within the US? Where you live in the US, CAN sometimes affect how your case is treated...I am not kidding.

Recently, one of the interesting distinctions that have been drawn has been that of having preconceived intent vs. the " preconceived possibility of change of intent" -- the latter not being found illegal. Regardless, the scenario debated here still falls clearly under "preconceived intent".

While I do not have time to lay the issue out in detail, I can assure you that your understanding of the issue, relying only on Cavazos, is erroneous. But if you doubt this, see for yourself. There is NO SUBSTITUTE FOR GOOD RESEARCH.
 
One more word. My intention was never to sit and criticize others' opinions. However, it is important that correct information be relayed -- other people's futures are at stake here. I have no bone to pick personally with Jenimmi -- his contributions here are valuable. But sometimes it is better to be silent, than to give opinions that are not correct. And it is best to correct erroneous information(even if it appears critical), simply because it is in the best interest of everyone using the newsgroup.

Best wishes
PP
 
pianoplayer said:
One more word. My intention was never to sit and criticize others' opinions. However, it is important that correct information be relayed -- other people's futures are at stake here. I have no bone to pick personally with Jenimmi -- his contributions here are valuable. But sometimes it is better to be silent, than to give opinions that are not correct. And it is best to correct erroneous information(even if it appears critical), simply because it is in the best interest of everyone using the newsgroup.

Best wishes
PP
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. The very first reason we come to this forum is because we are not experts in these matters. We share our research, personal experiences with others so that we can learn from each other, not to make same mistakes as other may already made. Yes, I admit I may not conduct my research as comprehensively as you did, but that should not keep me quiet. Jenimmi gave all the options OP have, one of the options may be in the gray area, even you yourself said depend on the jurisdiction, it could affect the determination. Then no way it should be treated as ILLEGAL advice (with all the capital letters). It's all up to OP to determine what's best for him/her, or consult those options with his/her lawyer if he/she chose to get one. If I was OP, I will definitely want to explore all the possibilities. Even if there is some info may not be 100% accurate, but if you don’t speak out, how would you find out? Of course, you can always go to the lawyers, but that will lose the point why we are here in this forum to DIY, right?

Anyway, I have to say you did much better research, I am learning something new everyday from this forum. Today, thanks to Jenimmi who didn’t keep quiet, otherwise, how do we know what we don’t know?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top