Source: http://www.mikebakerlaw.com/2007_09_01_archive.html
Timestamp: 2019-02-16 00:16:56
Document Index: 393233367

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 4', 'art 4', '§248', 'art 7', 'art 8', 'art 4']

Michael Baker -Immigration and Naturalization Law, DUI and Criminal Lawyer, Chicago: September 2007
Chicago Immigration Judge Reports — Asylum grants and denials, fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2005
Chicago Immigration Judge Reports — Asylum Grants and Denials
The data and analyses is from The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a data gathering, data research and data distribution organization associated with Syracuse University. Comprehensive, independent and nonpartisan information about U.S. federal immigration enforcement.
"Judge O. John Brahos was appointed as an Immigration Judge in October 1982. He received an undergraduate degree in 1956 from De Paul University, College of Commerce, and a Juris Doctorate from De Paul University, College of Law, in 1959. Prior to joining the Executive Office for Immigration Review, he served as general attorney, trial attorney, supervisory general attorney, and attorney examiner from 1971 to 1982 for the former Immigration and Naturalization Service in Chicago. Judge Brahos also served as an alternate member on the Board of Immigration Appeals in 1991, 1993, and 1994. He is a member of the Illinois Bar.
Judge Brahos decisions are available for the period covering fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2005. During this period, Judge Brahos is recorded as deciding 649 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted 172, gave 2 conditional grants, and denied 475. Converted to percentage terms, Brahos denied 73.2 percent and granted (including conditional grants) 26.8 percent.
For Judge Brahos , the largest group of asylum seekers appearing before him came from Guatemala . Individuals from this nation made up 9.6 % of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Brahos were: China (8.8 %), Yugoslavia (7%), El Salvador (5.8%), Bulgaria (4.9%).
In the nation as a whole during this same period, major nationalities of asylum seekers, in descending order of frequency, were China (22.3%), Haiti (9.3%), Colombia (9.1%), Albania (4.0%), India (3.9%), Guatemala (3.4%), Indonesia (3.0%), El Salvador (2.4%), Armenia (2.1%), Mexico (1.9%), and Russia (1.9%)."
"Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan was appointed Immigration Judge in December 2000. He received his B.A. from Evangel College in 1975 and his J.D. from Franklin Pierce Law Center in 1978. Judge Der-Yeghiayan was selected in 1978 as a trial attorney for the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in Chicago under the Attorney General's Honor Program. In 1981, he was promoted to the position of district counsel for the Chicago District of the INS where he served until his appointment as an Immigration Judge in December 2000. He received the INS "District Counsel of the Year" award in 1998 and the Frank J. McGarr award for "Outstanding Government Attorney of the Year" in 1986 from the Chicago Chapter of the Federal Bar Association. He is a member of the Illinois Bar and the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 2000, Der-Yeghiayan was appointed, under the Clinton administration, an immigration judge in the Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review. On April 6, 2001, Der-Yeghiayan was sworn in as an Immigration Judge. President George W. Bush nominated him on March 5, 2003 for the district court seat vacated by Marvin E. Aspen, and the Senate unanimously confirmed him on July 14, 2003.
Detailed data on Judge Der-Yeghiayan decisions are available for the period covering fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2003. During this period, Judge Der-Yeghiayan is recorded as deciding 258 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted 80, gave 1 conditional grants, and denied 177. Converted to percentage terms, Der-Yeghiayan denied 68.6 percent and granted (including conditional grants) 31.4 percent." ____________________________________________________________
"Judge Jennie L.Giambastiani was appointed as an Immigration Judge in May 2002. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1983 from Loyola University of Chicago, and a Juris Doctorate from Loyola University School of Law in 1986. Prior to becoming an Immigration Judge, from April 1987 until May 2002, Judge Giambastiani served as district counsel, deputy district counsel, assistant district counsel, and supervisory legalization officer for the former Immigration and Naturalization Service in Chicago. Judge Giambastiani is a member of the Illinois Bar.
Detailed data on Judge Giambastiani decisions are available for the period covering fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2005. During this period, Judge Giambastiani is recorded as deciding 274 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted 101, gave 12 conditional grants, and denied 161. Converted to percentage terms, Giambastiani denied 58.8 percent and granted (including conditional grants) 41.2 percent.
For Judge Giambastiani , the largest group of asylum seekers appearing before her came from China . Individuals from this nation made up 16 % of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Giambastiani were: Guatemala (10.2 %), Albania (8.7%), Iraq (4%), Ukraine (4%)."
"Judge James R. Fujimoto was appointed as an Immigration Judge in June 1990. He received an undergraduate degree in 1976 from the University of Chicago, and a Juris Doctorate from DePaul University in 1979. Judge Fujimoto was a partner in the law firm of Alexander, Fennerty & Fujimoto in Chicago from 1981 to 1990. From 1978 to 1981, he served as a law clerk and then associate attorney for Masuda, Funai, Eifert & Mitchell, also in Chicago. Judge Fujimoto is a member of the Illinois Bar.
Detailed data on Judge Fujimoto decisions are available for the period covering fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2005. During this period, Judge Fujimoto is recorded as deciding 736 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted 222, gave 9 conditional grants, and denied 505. Converted to percentage terms, Fujimoto denied 68.6 percent and granted (including conditional grants) 31.4 percent."
"Judge Carlos Cuevas was appointed as an Immigration Judge in February 1994. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree from DePaul University in 1979, and a Juris Doctorate from DePaul University, College of Law, in 1982. From 1989 to 1994, Judge Cuevas served as an administrative law judge with the Illinois Human Rights Commission in Chicago. From 1986 to 1989, he was in private practice in Chicago. Judge Cuevas served as an attorney with the Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago from 1982 to 1986. He is a member of the Illinois Bar. Detailed data on
Judge Cuevas decisions are available for the period covering fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2005. During this period, Judge Cuevas is recorded as deciding 703 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted 314, gave 20 conditional grants, and denied 369. Converted to percentage terms, Cuevas denied 52.5 percent and granted (including conditional grants) 47.5 percent.
For Judge Cuevas , the largest group of asylum seekers appearing before him came from Guatemala . Individuals from this nation made up 12.2 % of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Cuevas were: China (7 %), Yugoslavia (5.6%), Albania (5.5%), El Salvador (4.6%)." __________________________________________________________
"Judge Craig M. Zerbe was appointed as an Immigration Judge in August 1985. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree. from La Salle College in 1970, and a Juris Doctorate from Temple University Law School in 1975. From 1980 to 1985, Judge Zerbe served as general attorney in the Litigation Division at the former Immigration and Naturalization Service in Chicago. From 1970 to 1972, he served in the U.S. Army. Judge Zerbe is a member of the Pennsylvania Bar.
Detailed data on Judge Zerbe decisions are available for the period covering fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2005. During this period, Judge Zerbe is recorded as deciding 773 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted 318, gave 9 conditional grants, and denied 446. Converted to percentage terms, Zerbe denied 57.7 percent and granted (including conditional grants) 42.3 percent.
For Judge Zerbe , the largest group of asylum seekers appearing before him came from China . Individuals from this nation made up 9 % of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Zerbe were: Guatemala (8.8 %), Albania (7.5%), Bulgaria (4.9%), Pakistan (4.8%)." ___________________________________________________________
"Judge Robert D. Vinikoor was appointed as an Immigration Judge in January 1984. He received a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Delaware in 1971, and a Juris Doctorate from the University of Baltimore in 1976. From 1982 to 1984, he was a special assistant U.S. attorney at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Chicago. He also served as trial attorney in Chicago, and general attorney in Miami, Florida, with the former Immigration and Naturalization Service from 1976 to 1982. Judge Vinikoor also serves as an adjunct professor at Loyola University School of Law. Judge Vinikoor is a member of the Maryland, New Jersey, Florida, and Illinois Bars.
Detailed data on Judge Vinikoor decisions are available for the period covering fiscal year 2000 through the early months of 2005. During this period, Judge Vinikoor is recorded as deciding 1015 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted 239, gave 19 conditional grants, and denied 757. Converted to percentage terms, Vinikoor denied 74.6 percent and granted (including conditional grants) 25.4 percent.
For Judge Vinikoor, the largest group of asylum seekers appearing before him came from China . Individuals from this nation made up 11 % of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Vinikoor were: Guatemala (9.7 %), Albania (5%), Somalia (4.1%), El Salvador (3.6%)."
Labels: Asylum, Chicago Immigration Court, Deportation, Immigration Judge, Removal hearing
posted by Mike Baker at 10:33 AM 0 Comments Links to this post
Adjudicator's Field Manual, USCIS, Redacted Public Version- Updated Through June 18, 2007
Transmittal Memoranda
Immigrants and Other Permanent or Semi-Permanent Classifications.
Immigrants in General.
Numerical Limitations and the Visa Bulletin
Petition Validity
Enforceable Affidavits of Support
Family-based Petitions and Applications.
General Information About Relative Visa Petitions
Factors Common to the Adjudication of All Relative Petitions
Petition for a Spouse
Petition for a Child, Son, or Daughter
Petition for an Orphan
Petition for a Hague Convention Adoption [Reseved]
Petition for an Amerasian
Petition for a Sibling
Petition for Spouse, Child, or Parent of Certain Deceased U.S. Armed Forces Members
Employment-Based Petitions, Entrepreneurs and Special Immigrants.
Prior Law and Historical Background
Employment-based Petitions (Forms I-140)
Special Immigrant Cases
Employment Creation Entrepreneur Cases
Adjustment of Status to Lawful Permanent Resident.
Prior Law and Historical Background.
General Adjustment of Status Issues
Presumption of Lawful Admission and Creation of Record under 8 CFR 101
Adjustment of Status under Section 245 of the Act
Refugee and Asylee Adjustment under Section 209 of the Act
Registration of Lawful Permanent Residence under Section 249 of the Act
Section 289 Cases
Section 7 of the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 Cases
Adjustment of Status under Section 13 of the Act of September 11, 1957 (8 U.S.C. 1255b)
Cuban Adjustment Act Cases
Adjustment of Status under NACARA (sec. 202 of Pub L 105-100)
Adjustment of Status under HRIFA (sec. 902 of Pub L 105-277)
Adjustment of Status for Certain Syrian Nationals Granted Asylum
Legalization under Section 245a of the Act
Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) and Replacement Agricultural Worker (RAW) Programs
Legalization Provisions of the LIFE Act.
LIFE Act Family Unity Provisions
Petitions for Removal of Conditions on Conditional Residence.
Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 (Form I-751)
Entrepreneurs (Form I-829)
Rescission of Adjustment to Lawful Permanent Resident Status.
Adjudication Issues.
Adjudication Procedures.
III. Nonimmigrants and Other Temporary Status Aliens
Nonimmigrants in General.
Change of Nonimmigrant Status Under Section 248 INA
Replacement of Arrival-Departure Records
Status as a Foreign Government Official or Employee of an International Organization
Extensions of Stay for Certain A and G Nonimmigrants
Unauthorized Employment and Other Incidents Involving A or G Nonimmigrants
Affidavits of Support for Nonimmigrants
Geographically Restricted Nonimmigrants
Termination of Approval (Revocation of Approval of Petition)
Adjustment of Status to Nonimmigrant
Nonimmigrant Health Care Workers
Petitions for Temporary Workers (H Classifications).
General Requirements for H Petitions
H1-B Classification and Documentary Requirements
Agricultural Workers (H-2A)
Temporary Service or Labor Workers (H-2B)
Strikes and Lockouts Involving H Petition Beneficiaries
Petitions for Intracompany Transferees (L Classification).
Individual L Petition Process
Blanket Petition Process
Individual Eligibility under Blanket Petitions
Petitions for Artists, Entertainers, Athletes and Others of Extraordinary Ability or Achievement (O & P Classifications).
Consultation Requirements and Procedures
Aliens with Extraordinary Ability in the Sciences, Arts, Education, Business, or Athletics, and Accompanying Aliens (O-1 and O-2)
Internationally Recognized Athletes and Entertainers (P-1)
Reciprocal Exchange Artists and Entertainers (P-2)
Culturally Unique Artists and Entertainers (P-3)
Other Employment Authorized Nonimmigrants (E, I & R Classifications).
Information Media Representatives
Religious Occupation-Based Nonimmigrants
E-3 Specialty Occupation Workers
Students and Exchange Visitors (F, J, M & Q); School Approvals.[Reserved. Undergoing major revision]
Nonimmigrants Intending to Adjust Status (K and V Classifications).
Reserved (undergoing revision as 05-10-2006)
Provisions for the V Nonimmigrant Classification
Temporary Protected Status and Deferred Enforced Departure.
IV. Waivers and Related Matters
Waiver of Excludability for Immigrants.
Waiver of Medical Grounds of Inadmissibility.
Waivers of Inadmissibility for Refugees and Asylees.
Consent to Reapply After Deportation or Removal.
Waiver of Section 212(e) Foreign Residence Requirement.
Waiver Based on Exceptional Hardship to USC or LPR Spouse or Child.
Waiver Based on a Claim of Persecution
Waiver Based on a “No Objection” Letter
Waiver Based on a Request by a U.S. Government Agency, Not Involving a Foreign Medical Graduate
Waiver Based on Employment with a Designated Health Facility or Health Care Organization, or Federal Agency Involved in Medical Research or Training under Section 214(l) of the Act.
V. Travel and Identity Documents
Adjudication and Production Processes and Issues.
Form I-551 Renewal Policy and Procedure.
Naming Conventions; Use of Full Legal Name on All USCIS Issued Documents.
Reentry Permits.
Filing and Receipting Procedures.
Filing and Receipting Procedures
Advance Parole Documents and Boarding Letters.
Employment Authorization Documents.[Reserved. Undergoing major revision]
Other USCIS and DHS Documents.
Replacement of Nonimmigrant Arrival/Departure Record.
USC ID Cards.
Kickapoo Cards.
North American Indians Born in Canada.
Processes/Procedures for Conducting Naturalization Interviews.
The Eligibility Requirements for Naturalization.
Examination of Form N-400.
General Information and Introduction to Form N-400
Part-by-Part Discussion of Form N-400 Data
The Oath of Naturalization.
Ceremony-Related Issues
Non-Adversarial Interview Techniques
SRMT Search Request Form
USCIS Forms - FD-258 Requirements
The New Affidavit Of Support
List of States Recognizing Common Law Marriages and Their Requirements
Orphan Case Related Cables to Consulates
U.S. Public Law 108-136 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004), Sec. 1701. Requirements for Naturalization through Service in the Armed Forces of the United States
U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and U.S. Coast Guard Points-of-Contact for Public Law 108-136 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004)
Nicaraguan Nationality Requirements
Haitian Nationality Requirements
Text of Commissioner's Memorandum on Eligibility for Permanent Residence under the Cuban Adjustment Act Despite Having Arrived at a Place Other than a Designated Port of Entry
Basic Sworn Statement for Section 13 Cases
Matter of Buschini
Frequently Asked Questions About Form I-829
Sample NTA for Terminated Immigrant Investor
Points of Contact for EB-5 Cases
Model Notices to Appear (NTAs)
List of Occupational Categories for H, J and L Nonimmigrants
Request for Evidence Checklist for H-1B Petitions
Special Filing Situations Under the H Classifications
Interpretation of Specialized Knowledge
List of Organizations which Provide Consultations for O and P Petitions
Visa Class Change for Aktion Sühnezeichen Friedensdienste (ASF) or Action Reconciliation Service for Peace
Guidance Regarding Waivers for HIV+ Refugees
CDC Form For Applicants with HIV Infection
Headquarters Program Responsibility For Nonimmigrant Waivers of Inadmissibility
Instructions from CDC to Civil Surgeons on Widespread Unavailability of Certain Vaccines
Guide to Requirement of Consent to Reapply for Admission to the U.S. After Deportation or Removal
Addendum to Section 212(e) Waiver Approvals
Form I-551, Permanent Resident Card, Renewal Policy and Procedure - Final Phase; Process for I-90s
Letter from Department of Defense on Employment of NATO Member Dependents
Issuance of Employment Authorization Cards to Asylees and Refugees As Part of the Border Security Act
Nationality Chart # 1 - Children Born Outside U.S. in Wedlock
Nationality Chart # 2 - Children Born Outside U.S. out of Wedlock
Nationality Chart # 3 - Derivative Citizenship of Children
Nationality Chart # 4 - Section 322: Natural or Adoptive Child of a U.S. Citizen
Prior Laws Affecting Citizenship Claims
Implementation Instructions for Title I of the Child Citizenship Act of 2000
Addition of Citizen Grandparents and Citizen Legal Guardians as Eligible Applicants Pursuant to INA 322
Processing Worksheet for N-600 Cases
NQP4 Procedures
N-400 Processing Worksheets Clarifications
Naturalization File Transfer Procedures
File Transfer Procedures Federal Record Center POC Listing
Form FD-258 Fingerprint Card - Instructions for N-400 Form FD-258 Processing
Sample Sworn Statement Regarding Fingerprint Waivers Due to Age or 2nd Rejection by FBI
Sample Sworn Statement Regarding Missing Alien Registration Card
Sample Sworn Statement Regarding Cases Involving T Files
Complete File Review Implementation
Disability Naturalization Applications
Effect of Failure to Register for Selective Service on Eligibility for Naturalization
Processing N-400s with Updated or Expired FD-258 Control Numbers
Guidance on the Acceptance and Handling of FD-258 Fingerprint Cards
Faciliated Military Service Member Naturalization
Scheduling Military N-400 Cases
Military G-325B Processing
Policy Regarding Section 334 of the INA
Text of USCIS Booklet M-289
U. S. Government Structure
U. S. Government Structure Level I
Corrections to A Guide to Naturalization and the Effect of Failure to Register for Selective Service on Naturalization Eligibility
Relating to False Claims to US Citizenship
Legal Consequences of Voting by an Alien Prior to Naturalization
Voter Registration and Standardized Date Citizenship Testing
Institution of Deportation Proceedings: Legalization or SAW Applicants; Naturalization of Persons Who Filed Fraudulent Legalization or SAW Applications
Continuity of Residence for Naturalization Purposes
Recent General Counsel Opinions Affecting Eligibility for Naturalization
Implementation Instructions for the Amended Version of the Hmong Veterans’ Naturalization Act of 2000
IRS Publication 54, Chapter 54
1991 Version of Form N-400
Update of the Implementation Instructions for Title I of the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, Public Law 106-395 (CCA)
Guidance on Making the Naturalization Process Accessible to Applicants with Disabilities
Use of Adjudication Officer's Full Name and Signature on Official Immigration Documents
NQP Compliance for Cases Requiring Special Handling
Form N-470: Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes (Under Section 316(b) or 317 of the Act)
Instructions Regarding the Expanded Meaning of Section 319(a)
Instructions Regarding the Use of Naturalization Quality Procedures (NQP) Attachment #4
The Attorney General's Model Plan
Universal Distribution of President’s Letter
Guidelines for Voter Registration at Naturalization Ceremonies
Adjudicator Actions
Labels: USCIS Adjudicator's Field Manual
posted by Mike Baker at 11:25 AM 0 Comments Links to this post
Maintaining Status.
(a) General . Section 101(a)(15) of the INA specifies various classes of persons admissible to the U.S. as nonimmigrants. Requirements for admission in each category are discussed 8 CFR 214 and in Chapter 15.4 of the Inspector’s Field Manual . This chapter will discuss general requirements for maintaining status, changing status, and obtaining extensions of stay. Requirements for maintaining and changing status which apply only to specific nonimmigrant classes are discussed in Chapters 31 through 37 and Chapter 15 of the Inspector’s Field Manual . Matters relating to parole of aliens are contained in Chapter 16 of the Inspector’s Field Manual , and matters relating to Temporary Protected Status are contained in Chapter 38 of this manual.
(b) Activities Consistent with Status . A nonimmigrant may engage only in activities consistent with his or her status. In general, the filing of an application for a different status or even the approval of a petition (for example an I-129 petition to accord H, L, O or P status), does not constitute authorization to engage in the activities permitted in the new status. (However, under certain conditions, an alien who is already in H-1B status may commence working for a new employer upon the filing of a new petition by that new employer.) With regards to a change of status applicant, it is only the formal approval of the change of status application by USCIS that constitutes authorization to engage in activities consistent with that new statu s. An alien who, prior to approval of a change of status, engages in activities not consistent with his or her present status is at risk fo being found to be in violation of status in the event the application is denied, although approval is often retroactive to the date of the original application [See Matter of Teberan , 15 I&N Dec. 689 (BIA 1976), and Matter of Dacanay , 16 I&N Dec. 238 (BIA 1977)]. However, in accordance with 8 CFR 248.1(c) , an alien may be granted a change of status to that of F-1 or M-1 student even though he or she may have begun attending the school even before the application was submitted.
(c) Voluntary Departure vs. Nonimmigrant Status . Voluntary departure is not a nonimmigrant status. It is, however, regarded as an authorized period of time for purposes of section 212(a)(9). Accordingly, time spent in voluntary departure does not add to an alien’s unlawful presence. For example, a B-2 nonimmigrant files for an extension after his stay expires. The extension is denied and the alien is granted 15 days of voluntary departure. In calculating unlawful presence, count as unlawful the days between the expiration of the B-2 status and the issua nce date of the Form I-210 granting voluntary departure, as well as any time after the voluntary departure expired, but do not count the 15 day voluntary departure period itself. Voluntary departure is discussed in 8 CFR 240.25 .
(d) Unlawful Presence under Section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Act .
(1) Counting of Unlawful Presence for Nonimmigrants . An alien who remains in the United States beyond the authorized period of stay is unlawfully present and becomes subject to the 3- or 10-year bar to admission under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I) and (II) of the Act. Under current Service policy, unlawful presence is counted in the following manner for nonimmigrants:
(A) Nonimmigrants Admitted until a Specific Date . Nonimmigrants admitted until a specific date begin accruing unlawful presence on the date the authorized period of admission expires, as noted on Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Card.
(B) Nonimmigrants Admitted Duration of Status (D/S) . Nonimmigrants admitted to the United States for D/S begin accruing unlawful presence on the date USCIS finds a status violation while adjudicating a request for another immigration benefit, or on the date an immigration judge finds a status violation in the course of proceedings. If, however, the immigration judge concurrently issues voluntary departure and the alien complies with the order by making a timely departure, no unlawful presence accrues. See sections (d)(2) and (d)(5) of this chapter regardin g voluntary departure as a period of stay authorized by the Attorney General.
(2) Authorized Period of Stay . USCIS has also designated the following as authorized periods of stay:
• Voluntary departure;
• Refugee status;
• Asylee status;
• Grants of withholding or deferral of removal under the United Nations Convention Against Torture;
• Legalization and special agricultural worker applications for lawful temporary residence which are pending through an administrative appeal;
• Grants of withholding or suspension of deportation, or cancellation of removal;
• Applications for temporary and permanent residence by Cuban-Haitian entrants under section 202(b) of Pub. L. 99-603 through administrative appeal;
• Grants of Temporary Protected Status and Deferred Enforced Departure;
• Applications for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act (including section 245(i)), and registry applications under section 249 of the Act, if properly filed with INS or USCIS. The period of stay authorized by the Attorney General continues if the application is denied and renewed in proceedings, through review by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The alien must, however, be eligible to renew the denied application in proceedings and have a legal basis for renewing that application; and
• Certain pending applications for extension of stay or change of status. See sections (d)(3) and (d)(4) of this chapter.
(3) Requirements for Authorized Period of Stay with Respect to Pending Change of Status and Extension Applications .
(A) The application for change of status or for extension of stay was filed timely. To be considered timely, the application must have been filed before the previously authorized stay expired, as provided under 8 CFR 214.1(c)(4) and 8 CFR 248.1(b) .
(C) The change of status or extension application has been pending with INS or USCIS for more than 120 days after the date the I-94 expired.
(4) Effect of Decision on Unlawful Presence and Tolling .
(A) Approved Applications . If USCIS approves an E/S or C/S application, the alien will be granted a new authorized period of stay, retroactive to the date the previously authorized stay expired, as applicable to the nonimmigrant classification under which the alien was admitted (or to which the alien had previously be changed) pursuant to 8 CFR 214.2. No unlawful presence accrues. This applies to aliens admitted until a specific date and aliens admitted D/S.
(B) Denied applications .
(i) Denial of Timely Filed Applications and Frivolous Applications; Unauthorized Employment . If the C/S or E/S application is denied because it was untimely or frivolous, or because the alien engaged in unauthorized employment, any and all time after the Form I-94 expiration date will be considered unlawful presence, provided the alien was admitted until a specific date. If, however, the alien was admitted D/S, unlawful presence begins accruing on the date of the Service’s decision.
(ii) Denial of Late Applications . If the application was filed late and was denied, unlawful presence begins accruing on the date the I-94 expired, regardless of the reason for denial. For aliens admitted D/S, unlawful presence begins accruing on the date of denial.
(5) Voluntary Departure as an Authorized Period of Stay . USCIS has designated voluntary departure as an authorized period of stay. However, any unlawful presence that accrued before the date the voluntary departure was actually granted is not eliminated. And, if the alien does not make a timely departure, the counting of unlawful presence resumes on the day after the required departure date and continues on until the alien finally departs. Moreover, the alien becomes subject to civil penalties and is ineligible for any further voluntary departure or other forms of re lief, such as adjustment of status, registry, and cancellation of removal.
(6) Effect of Departure .
(A) Applicants for Nonimmigrant Visas . Date certain nonimmigrants who file an application for change of status or extension of stay who depart the United States while the application is pending and subsequently apply for another nonimmigrant visa must establish, to the satisfaction of the consular officer, that the application was timely filed and that it was not frivolous. The requirement that the application was timely may be established through the submission of evidence of the date the previously authorized stay expired, together with a co py of a dated filing receipt, a canceled check payable to INS or USCIS for the E/S or C/S application, or other credible evidence of a timely filing. To be considered non-frivolous, the application must have an arguable basis in law and fact and must not have been filed for an improper purpose. In determining whether an E/S or C/S application was non-frivolous, DOS has instructed consular posts that it is not necessary to make a determination that INS or USCIS would have ultimately ruled in favor of the alien. If the consular officer finds that the alien qualifies for a visa in the same category as the visa classification that was sought in the abandoned E/S or C/S application, the consular officer may presume that the E/S or C/S application was not frivolous. The question then turns to whether the alien engaged in unauthorized employment before the E/S or C/S application was filed or while it was pending. Consular officers will determine this through the routin e course of questioning. Consular officers may also review and consider evidence of an alternate means of support during the time in which the alien was not authorized to work. If the consular officer determines that the application was timely filed, non-frivolous, and that the alien did not engage in unauthorized employment, the alien is not subject to the 3- or 10-year bars to admission under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i) of the Act. See Inspector’s Field Manual Chapter 15.15 for a discussion of the effect of the alien’s departure on section 222(g). D/S nonimmigrants who depart the United States while an application for change of status or extension of stay is pending generally do not trigger the 3- and 10-year bars under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i) of the Act, unless a formal finding of a status violation has been made, and the alien has not been granted any other authorized period of stay, such as voluntary departure.
(B) Applicants for Admission at a Port of Entry (POE) . When a date certain nonimmigrant files an application for change of status or extension of stay and departs the United States while the application is pending, officers at POEs should use the same procedures followed by consular officers to determine whether the application was timely and non-frivolous, and whether the alien engaged in unauthorized employment. If the extension application was timely and non-frivolous and the alien did not engage in unauthorized employment, the alien is not subject to the 3- or 10-year bar to admission. [See Inspector’s Field Manual, Chapter 15.15 for the applicability to section 222(g) ].
Extension of Stay for Nonimmigrants.
(a) General . Except as stated below, a nonimmigrant admitted for a specified period of time may request an extension of his or her admission period in order to continue to engage in those activities permitted under the visa category in which he or she was admitted. General requirements (such as those relating to passport validity, waivers of inadmissibility, and posting of a bond) for an extension of stay are discussed in 8 CFR 214.1(a) . An application for an extension of stay is filed on Form I-129 , Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, or Form I-539 , Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, as specified in 8 CFR 214.1(c) , depending upon the nonimmigrant classification of the applicant. Form I-539 is used primarily for B-1/B-2, A-3/G-5, and M-1/M-2 extensions, as well as for student reinstatements and extensions of some dependents not included on the I-129 extension for a principal alien. Form I-129 is used to extend nonimmigrants working for a specific employer.
(b) Limitations . Aliens in classes C, D, K, WT, WB, and TWOV are ineligible for an extension of stay.
(1) Initial receipting . The applicant must file Form I-539 with the service center having jurisdiction over his or her residence, except student (F or M) reinstatement requests, which are filed at local offices. Editions of Form I-539 prior to the most current edition should not be accepted for purposes of extension of stay. A single application may be filed by a family group, provided all family members hold the same status or derivative status.
(2) Preliminary Review . Preliminary review, in addition to general items discussed in Chapter 10.2, includes the following:
Note 1: If I-94 copies are submitted even though originals were required, or vice versa, and the application will be adjudicated in CLAIMS, continue processing unless there is some apparent need to examine an original form. The CLAIMS-generated approval notice, Form I-797A includes a replacement I-94, which is to be attached to the original. Upon approval, return any original I-94 which was improperly submitted.
Note 2: If an extension applicant claims to have lost his or her I-94 , a separate Form I-102 , Application for Replacement/Initial Arrival/Departure Record should be filed. Although a CLAIMS-generated I-94 is issued in the course of adjudicating the extension application, the instructions indicate that it is to be attached to the original I-94 (or the replacement original). Verify arrival from TECS or, if no record can be found, obtain a copy of the applicant’s passport page containing the admission stamp. Please consult TECS manual for current instructions.
(H) Dependents . When an application for an extension of a dependent is not filed concurrently with the principal alien, evidence of the principal’s status must accompany the application. This information may be verifiable in CLAIMS. There is no dependent status for Q-1 or TN nonimmigrants; however such dependents may separately qualify for nonimmigrant status, usually B-2.
( Note: The Q-3 nonimmigrant category pertains only to dependents of Q-2 nonimmigrants.)
(3) Adjudication . Nonimmigrant extensions are generally simple to adjudicate. Because the benefit sought is short-lived, these applications should be processed as quickly as possible, to ensure the request is acted upon while it is still relevant. Timely adjudication is also important because an applicant is not considered to be maintaining status simply because an extension application is pending [See Matter of Teberan , 15 I&N Dec. 689 (BIA 1976)]. The following actions, in addition to the general steps described in Chapter 10.3 , are ordinarily required during the I-539 adjudication process:
(A) Determine If the Application Was Timely Filed . Although an application for extension of stay is ordinarily required to be submitted before the expiration of the applicant’s previously authorized period of stay, the adjudicator has discretion to grant an extension based on an untimely application. In deciding such a case, determine the reasons for late filing and whether the reasons were beyond the applicant’s control, the degree of lateness, whether there is any indication that the applicant may have violated status in some other way, whether the appl icant is otherwise a bona fide nonimmigrant, and whether the applicant has been apprehended and placed in proceedings by the Service.
Note 1: Issues surrounding the alien’s original entitlement to nonimmigrant status were explored by INS or CBP and Department of State officials at the time of initial admission and visa issuance (or, in the case of visa exempt aliens, by INS or CBP alone). Absent gross error, changed circumstances or new information, these should not be revisited in extension proceedings. However, if the adjudicator has strong reason to believe that the alien was not entitled to a nonimmigrant status in the first place, he or she may seek clarification from the applicant through correspondence or by requiring an interview at the appropriate local office. If it is established that the applicant was not entitled to the status initially, the application should be denied and (if appropriate) the information provided to the visa issuing post or port-of-entry through normal intelligence and liaison procedures. Additionally, the information may form the basis of an additional charge (under section 237(a)(1)) on the Notice to Appear initia ting removal proceedings. In extreme cases, where employee misconduct is suspected, the Office of Professional Responsibility should be advised.
Note 2: Inadmissibility Issues . At times, you may encounter an applicant for change of status and/or extension of stay who is inadmissible to the U.S., but who never obtained a waiver of such inadmissibility. Likewise, you may encounter an alien who had previously received a limited duration waiver of inadmissibility which has expired, or will expire before the end of the extension he/she is seeking. In either case, you may not grant such alien a change of status or an extension of stay unless and until he or she has applied for and bee n granted a waiver of his or her inadmissibility which covers the entire period of his or her proposed stay in the U.S. [See AFM Chapter 42 regarding adjudication of nonimmigrant waivers of inadmissibility] In addition to the general factors discussed in Chapter 42, in the case of an alien who was inadmissible at the time of his or her original admission as a nonimmigrant but was not in possession of waiver, you must also determine the reason(s) a waiver was not obtained at that time or when the alien applied for a nonimmigrant visa. If the alien willfully concealed his or her inadmissibility from the consular officer or the inspect ing officer, the alien may be inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(C) of the Act in addition to the original grounds of inadmissibility. If the waiver was not obtained due to an honest misunderstanding on the part of the alien, or an error on the part of the consular or immigration officer, then only the merits of waiving the original ground of inadmissibility need be taken under consideration. If appropriate, the waiver request may be granted nunc pro tunc to cover the original admission as well as the proposed extension.
(B) Verify Passport Validity . An applicant need not submit a valid passport with his or her application since Part 4 of the application contains passport validity information. The applicant must hold a valid passport at the time of application and is required to maintain validity during the entire period of his or her stay in the United States. [See 8 CFR 214.1.] This does not preclude the adjudicating officer from requiring submission of evidence of the validity of the passport, if the officer has reason to believe that the alien has falsely claimed that it is valid.
(C) Decide If a Favorable Exercise of Discretion Is Warranted . Applications for extensions of stay are matters solely within the administrative discretion of the director. Before approving an application for an extension, the adjudicator must be satisfied that the applicant will continue to engage only in activities specifically consistent with his or her nonimmigrant status. [See Matter of Sourbis , 11 I&N Dec. 335 (BIA 1965); Matter of Sparmann , 11 I&N Dec. 285 (Acting District Director, 1965); Matter of Rogalski , 14 I&N Dec. 507 (District Director, 1973); Matter of Healy and Goodchild , 17 I&N Dec. 22 (BIA, 1979)]. In determining whether a favorable exercise of discretion is warranted consider, among other things:
• the applicant’s age and condition (and how that relates to the specific reasons given for the requested extension). For example, a healthy, working or school age B-2 extension applicant staying in the home of a family with small children for a prolonged period could give rise to the suspicion that the applicant is actually providing child care or attending school.
• whether the applicant is likely to attempt to stay indefinitely. USCIS may terminate a nonimmigrant’s authorized period of stay when it becomes aware the alien intends to remain indefinitely in the U.S. [See Matter of Safadi, 11 I&N Dec 446 (BIA 1965) ].
(D) Determine Whether Alien Is a Visas Mantis Case . If so, follow the Visas Mantis reporting procedures discussed in Chapter 30.2(e) .
Note: The usual time allowed for an extension for a B-1 visitor is the length of time requested, or no more than six (6) months at one time, whichever is less. However, B-1 members of a religious denomination doing temporary missionary work may be granted extensions up to one year in length.
(4) Interview . Requiring a personal appearance by an applicant or requesting a formal investigation for an extension should rarely be required. Likewise, requests for additional evidence should be relatively unusual. The application itself, supporting documentation required by the instructions on the form and existing INS or USCIS records will enable you to adjudicate virtually any extension of stay request.
(5) Revocation of Extensions . USCIS has the authority to reopen and deny an extension which was granted without knowledge of the true facts material to the case [See Matter of T - -, 9 I&N Dec. 239 (BIA 1961).] Such actions require a "Motion to Reopen" written in letter format, followed by the actual decision written in formal order. Note: Even in those few cases where on fee is collected on a motion to reopen (I.e., when USCIS is the moving party), it is still counted as an application or petition (as appropriate) received and completed.
(6) Bonds . A maintenance of status and departure bond, although seldom used, may be required as a condition for approval of an extension or change of status request. [See Inspector’s Field Manual , Chapter 45, for procedures on posting bonds.]
(7) File Review . In adjudicating an Form I-539 , a relating "A" file shall be obtained and reviewed prior to adjudication if a bond has been posted on the alien's behalf or if the alien has been granted a section 212(d)(3) waiver. In any other case, a relating "A" file can be obtained and reviewed if there is reason to believe it may contain relevant information needed to decide the case. In a section 212(d)(3) waiver case, if the applicant's Form I-94 is noted "ARL" the file should not be requested, but the Arlington, VA. District Office should be con sulted before an extension of stay is granted. In all cases in which an "A" file exists, the adjudicated application and all relating material shall be placed in the file. The file number shall be noted on the application and the Form I-94.
(A) Approval . Determine the appropriate amount of time for the extension. [See 8 CFR 214.1 for general requirements and 8 CFR 214.2 for the specific requirements relating to each nonimmigrant classification.] Endorse the action block on the application and indicate the actions taken in the "INS (or as updated forms are issued, USCIS) use only" section of the form. Upon approval, update CLAIMS, ordering approval notices. The Form I-530 forwarding the record of approval is automated at the service centers and the data is sent to TECS. Returning the receipt file to Records. The CLAIMS approval notice, Form I-797A , contains a tear-off section which serves as a replacement Form I-94 , indicating the extension date. If the application is not processed in CLAIMS, the original I-94 must be manually noted on the reverse with the approval date, office three-letter code, and officer stamp number. In addition, both CLAIMS and non-CLAIMS approvals require the preparation and forwarding of Form I-530 or the automated equivalent for each alien included on the application and (unless the I-94 is hand-delivered to the alien) completion of an approval notice on Form I-542.
(B) Denial . Endorse the action block on the application and indicate the actions taken. Set a voluntary departure period, if the alien is no longer maintaining status. For denials processed in CLAIMS, select proper standard denial paragraphs from CLAIMS, adding special text if necessary. In non-CLAIMS cases, prepare Form I-541 to advise the applicant of the reasons for denial; and prepare Forms I-530 for the applicant and each dependent and forward to NIIS. Delivery of the decision may be accomplished by routine ser vice, as described in 8 CFR 103.5a.
(C) Routing of Miscellaneous Documents . In the case of a J-1 application for an extension of stay, always return the pink colored, USCIS annotated, IAP-66 with the I-94 to the applicant or attorney. The yellow copy of the IAP-66 is sent to the Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and the white copy stays in the file with the application. In the case of the F-1 student the school copy of Form I-20AB is sent to the data facility in London, Kentucky and the student copy (Form I-20ID) is returned to the student or attorne y, in accordance with Appendix 15-8 of the Inspector’s Field Manual .
(9) Appeal . There is no appeal from an adverse decision on Form I-539 . Decisions may be certified to the Administrative Appeals Unit in accordance with 8 CFR 103.4. An alien may seek review of an improper decision by filing a motion pursuant to 8 CFR 103.5.
(1) Initial Receipting . General receipting procedures are discussed in Chapter 10 of this manual. The applicant’s employer must file Form I-129 with the service center having jurisdiction over his or her (the alien’s) place of employment. A single application may be filed by the employer on behalf of a family group, provided all family members hold the same status or derivative status. Family members may not be included in a petition for multiple principal beneficiaries. Although technically a readmission, NAFTA extensions for TN and L-1 nonimmigrants may also be adjudicated at ports-of-entry when the applicant seeks reentry. [See Inspector’s Field Manual , Chapter 15.5.] Editions of Form I-129 prior to the most current edition may not be accepted for purposes of extension of stay for nonimmigrants.
(2) Preliminary Review . In addition to the steps discussed in Chapter 10 of this field manual :
• a copy of the employer’s labor condition application and Form I-129W for H-1B applicants.
• a valid labor certification for H-2B applicants.
• a valid labor certification for H-2A applicants, unless it is a request for an extension not to exceed two weeks (or less, if the original certification was for less than two weeks) for employment included in a prior certification.
Note 1: Form I-94 . If an original I-94 is attached, rather than a copy, it should be returned when action is completed on the application, since CLAIMS generates a new I-94, to be attached to the original, upon approval of the extension. Questions regarding original admission or previous status can usually be resolved by searching CLAIMS or NIIS data bases. NIIS records should contain arrival information, in the event an I-94 is not submitted.
Note 2: Jurisdiction . Normally cases submitted in the wrong jurisdiction must be transferred to the appropriate office; however, in certain situations local management may choose to assume jurisdiction in a case. Consult with supervisory personnel before processing an application which does not appear to be submitted in the proper jurisdiction. Remember that jurisdiction is determined by the petitioner’s address in cases involving temporary employment:
• for the same employer at more than one location;
• for more than one agricultural employer, where an association is petitioning for H-2A workers; or
• for one, or more than one, non-agricultural employer, where an established agent is serving as the petitioner.
Note 3: Dependents . Dependents may be included on an I-129 extension request if the I-129 includes only one principal alien. In the event a multiple beneficiary I-129 is submitted which includes dependents for one or more principals, request that the dependents submit separate extension applications on Form I-539 . A separate I-539 is required for each family group of dependents.
(3) Adjudication . Nonimmigrant extensions on Form I-129 are ordinarily fairly simple to adjudicate, unless there is a change in previously authorized employment. Because the benefit sought is short-lived, these applications should be processed as quickly as possible, to insure the request is acted upon while it is still relevant.
Note: The alien beneficiary of a Form I-129 being filed by his or her employer for an extension has previously been found eligible for nonimmigrant status, either by INS, USCIS or CBP at the time of admission or through an initial petition, or by the Department of State during the visa issuance process. Absent apparent gross error, a change in the circumstances surrounding the alien’s stay, or discovery of new information not previously available, the adjudicator should not engage in an in-depth review of issues relating to the initial status. In the event of adverse action on a reopened I-129 petition (or denial of a petition extension request), the petitioner has the same appeal right s available in the original petition proceedings (see chapter 10.17 of this Field Manual for additional discussion of motions to reopen and motions to reconsider).
(C) Determine if the Form I-129 was timely filed . Although timely filing is ordinarily required, the adjudicator has discretion to grant an extension based on an untimely application. In deciding such a case, determine the reasons for late filing and whether the reasons were beyond the alien’s control, the degree of lateness, whether there is any indication that the applicant may have violated status in some other way, whether the applicant is otherwise a bona fide nonimmigrant and whether the applicant has been apprehended and placed in proceedings by the Service.
(D) Verify passport validity . An alien need not submit a valid passport with his or her application, since Part 4 of the application contains a check-block requiring the applicant to indicate he or she has a valid travel document. The alien must hold a valid passport at the time of filing and must agree to maintain its validity during the entire period of his or her stay.
(4) Interview . Requiring a personal appearance by an alien for an extension should rarely be required and requests for additional evidence should likewise be relatively unusual. The Form I-129 itself, supporting documentation required by the instructions on the form and existing USCIS records will enable you to adjudicate most extension of stay requests. In the event either action is required, follow local procedures for forwarding the application for interview or establishing a call-up for the returned case. The application itself, supporting documentation required by the instructions on the form and existing USCIS records will enable you to adjudicate virtually any extension of stay request. When an interview is conducted, a sworn statement (or a memorandum containing the results or notes summarizing the interview) should be included in the record. If the interview was conducted at the request of a service center or another field office, that office should be notified of the findings.
(5) Temporary vs. Permanent Intent: Effect on Nonimmigrant Status . Although nonimmigrants, by definition, are in temporary status and should be able to demonstrate their intention to return to their home country, H-1 and L nonimmigrants need not maintain a residence in a foreign country and are considered to be maintaining status even after taking overt actions to remain permanently in the United States. Other classes of nonimmigrants may be required to provide evidence of their intent to depart from the United States when their authorization to remain expires.
(6) File Review . In adjudicating an extension on Form I-129 , a relating "A" file shall be obtained and reviewed prior to adjudication if a bond has been posted on the alien's behalf or if the alien has been granted a section 212(d)(3) waiver. In any other case, a relating "A" file can be obtained and reviewed if there is reason to believe it may contain relevant information needed to decide the case. In a section 212(d)(3) waiver case, if the alien's Form I-94 is noted "ARL" the file should not be requested, but the Arlington, VA. District Office should be consulte d before an extension of stay is granted. In all cases in which an "A" file exists, the adjudicated Form I-129 and all relating material shall be placed in the file. The file number shall be noted on the application and the Form I-94.
(7) Closing Actions . In addition to the general procedures described in Chapter 10, the following closing actions are required:
(A) Approval . Determine the appropriate amount of time for the extension. [See 8 CFR 214.1 for general requirements and 8 CFR 214.2 for the specific requirements relating to each nonimmigrant classification.] Endorse the action block on the Form I-129 and indicate the actions taken in the “INS use only” section of the form. Upon approval in CLAIMS, update the system, ordering approval notices and forwarding the record of approval to NIIS. The CLAIMS approval notice, Form I-797A , contains a tear-off section which serves as a replacement Form I-94, indicating the extension date. If the case is not processed in CLAIMS, the original I-94 must be manually noted on the reverse with the approval date, office three-letter code, and officer stamp number. In addition, both CLAIMS and non-CLAIMS approvals require the preparation and forwarding to NIIS of Form I-530 for each alien included on the application and completion of an approval notice on Form I-171C.
Note: Approval of a timely-filed I-129 extension is always considered nunc pro tunc , effectively forgiving the status violation for overstaying or continuing employment (with the same employer) which may have occurred between the expiration of the original admission period and the approval date of the extension. [See Matter of Dacanay 16 I&N Dec. 238 (BIA 1977).]
(B) Denial . Endorse the action block on the Form I-129 and indicate the actions taken, including setting a voluntary departure period, if the alien is no longer maintaining status. For denials processed in CLAIMS, select proper standard denial paragraphs from CLAIMS, adding special text if necessary. In non-CLAIMS cases, prepare Form I-541 to advise the applicant of the reasons for denial, set a period of voluntary departure; and in both CLAIMS and non-CLAIMS denials, prepare Forms I-530 for each alien included on the application and forward to NIIS. Delivery of the decision should be by routine service, as described in 8 CFR 103.5a.
(8) Appeal . There is no appeal from an adverse decision on Form I-129 filed for purposes of seeking an extension of stay, except in H, L, O, P and Q cases where the denial is based on petition-related issues. If the adjudicator reopens an original petition and denies a case on petition-related grounds, the matter may be appealed to the Administrative Appeals Unit.
Change of Nonimmigrant Status Under Section 248.
(a) General . Section 248 of the Act provides a nonimmigrant, lawfully admitted to the U.S., who is continuing to maintain the status in which he or she was admitted or previously changed, the opportunity to change from one classification under section 101(a)(15) of the Act to another, with certain restrictions. Its purpose is to allow such nonimmigrant, in meritorious situations, to avoid the delay and expense of departing from the U.S. and returning, in order to engage in activities other than those permitted in his or her original or current nonimmigrant visa category. The applicant must meet all eligibility criteria for the new category. An application for a change of status is filed on Form I-129 , Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker or Form I-539 , Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, as specified in 8 CFR 248.3, depending upon the nonimmigrant classification being sought. The I-539 is used for changes to A, B, F, G, I, J, M, N, S and NATO and for dependents of other classes when the principal has already been accorded another status. The I-129 is used for nonimmigrants seeking E, H, L, O, P, Q, R and TN status concurrently with approval of a petition to accord such status. Special requirements for each status are discussed in Chapters 31-35. No request or application is required to change status from B-1 to B-2. Other within-class changes, such as F-2 to F-1 or H-4 to H-1, require a formal application and fee even though they are not, strictly speaking, changes of status under section 248 of the Act.
(1) Changes from a Specified Class (Chapter 30.3(b)(1), Revised 07-13-2005) . An alien in classes C, D, K, S, WT, WB, or TWOV is ineligible for a change of nonimmigrant status. An alien admitted as an exchange visitor (J) who is subject to the two-year foreign residence requirement of section 212(e) of the Act and who has not received a waiver of that requirement, can change only to A or G status. See Matter of Kim , 13 I&N Dec. 316 (R.C. 1968). Any J nonimmigrant who was admitted (or acquired such status) to pursue graduate medical education or training is ineligible to change status, even if he or she obtains a waiver of section 212(e) . An alien who has been admitted as an Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program visitor (Q-2 alien) is subject to the two-year foreign residence requirement of section 212(t) of the Act. Such an alien cannot apply for another nonimmigrant status, an immigrant visa, or permanent residence until the residency requirement has been met or a waiver has been granted. However, 212(t) only applies to those Q-2 aliens who initially entered the United States on or after December 10, 2004.
(2) Changes to a Specified Class . Although an application and fee are required, changing from J-1 to J-2 is not regarded as a change of status, therefore, it is not prohibited. An M-1 nonimmigrant cannot change to F-1 status or to H status if the M-1 training helped him or her qualify for H status. No nonimmigrant can be granted M-1 status in order to gain training necessary to qualify for H status. [See also 8 CFR 248.2 and §248 of the INA.]
(c) Form I-539 .
(1) Initial Receipting . The applicant must file Form I-539 with the service center having jurisdiction over his or her place of residence. A single application may be filed by a family group. The basic procedures for receiving such applications are discussed in Chapter 10.
Note: On April 12, 2002, the INS amended 8 CFR 248.1(c) to add a provision prohibiting most B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrants from changing status to that of F or M full-time student if that B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant has already begun taking classes at the school. USCIS must deny the requested change if there is evidence that the alien has begun course work prior to the adjudication (approval) of the I-539 application. The rule applies to any B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant who: • Last entered the United States as a B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant on or after April 12, 2002; or • Although admitted to the United States as a B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant prior to April 12, 2002, filed an application for an extension of his or her nonimmigrant status on or after April 12, 2002; or • Although admitted in any nonimmigrant category either before, on, or after April 12, 2002, filed an application for a change of nonimmigrant status to that of B-1 or B-2 on or after April 12, 2002; or • Although granted a change of status to that of B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant prior to April 12, 2002, filed an application for an extension of his or her B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant status on or after April 12, 2002. An applicant who does not meet ANY of these four provisions is “grandfathered in” under the old (pre-April 12, 2002) regulations and is NOT subject to the bar.
(2) Preliminary Screening . In addition to the steps described in Chapter 10 , preliminary review includes the following:
(A) Determine Jurisdiction . Jurisdiction is generally based on the alien’s location in the United States. Consult with supervisory personnel before accepting an application which does not appear to be submitted in the proper jurisdiction.
Note: Normally cases submitted in the wrong jurisdiction must be transferred to the appropriate office; however, in certain situations local management may choose to assume jurisdiction in a case. Consult with supervisory personnel before processing an application which does not appear to be submitted in the proper jurisdiction.
· Changes into or within an A, G, or NATO Classification . Requests for change of status into or within an A, G, or NATO nonimmigrant classification are adjudicated exclusively by USCIS personnel from the Washington District Office, who meet weekly with personnel in the Department of State (DOS) Visa Office in Washington, DC, or by New York District Office personnel who work closely with the U.S. Mission to the United Nations (USUN) in New York. This was a long-standing arrangement between DOS and the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, which continues with USCIS. These two USCIS offices have assigned adjudicators to this function. Change of status requests into or within any of these classifications should not be adjudicated at any other district office or at a service center.
When an alien in the United States requests a change of nonimmigrant status into or within an A, G, or NATO classification, that request must first be considered by the DOS Office of Protocol, USUN for aliens assigned to the United Nations or to a foreign mission to the United Nations, or by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization/Headquarters, Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (NATO/HQ SACT) for aliens assigned to a NATO command. A change within a classification would include instances in which aliens receive promotions or otherwise change their responsibilities and may require a change within the existing classification, for example, from A-2 to A-1.
How to Handle Requests for Change of Status into or within an A, G, or NATO Classification Filed at Other District Offices or Service Centers . Should another district office or service center receive a request for a change of status into or within an A, G, or NATO classification, the request should be returned to the alien, using the following recommended language:
· Extension of Stay for A-3, G-5, or NATO-7 Classifications . Requests for an extension of stay for an A-3, G-5, or NATO-7 nonimmigrant are adjudicated exclusively by the Washington District Office or New York District Office, following a thorough review of the circumstances of such requests by DOS, USUN, or NATO officials. These officials are able to verify that the sponsoring employer continues to hold the qualifying position and to review updated employment contracts to ensure that the terms of employment are consistent with current requirements. Such requests f or an extension should not be adjudicated at other district offices or service centers.
How to Handle Extension of Stay Requests for A-3, G-5, or NATO-7 Nonimmigrants Filed at Other District Offices or Service Centers . Should another district office or service center receive any such request, the request should be returned to the alien, using the following recommended language:
“Your application was filed incorrectly. Please contact your employer’s embassy, international organization, or NATO command for proper filing procedures.”
· Change from an A, G, or NATO Classification . When A, G, or NATO aliens wish to change to another nonimmigrant classification, such requests are adjudicated at service centers, provided there is an endorsement by a DOS Visa Office or a USUN official at Part 7 on Form I-566 (Interagency Record of Request), accompanying Form I-539 (Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status) or Form I-129 (Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker). Please note that the DOS Visa Office, not NATO/HQ SACT, endorses this form on behalf of NATO nonimmigrants.
· After the adjudication of a change of status from these classifications : USCIS officers must complete Part 8 of the revised Form I-566 by documenting action taken and returning a copy of that form to the appropriate office:
For the Department of State, Office of Protocol, use the following address:
Note 1: Form instructions on Form I-539 indicate that aliens seeking B, F, J or M status are required to submit their original Form I-94. Others should submit only a copy of their I-94. If I-94 copies are submitted even though originals were required, or vice versa, and the application will be adjudicated in CLAIMS, continue processing unless there is some apparent need to examine an original form. The CLAIMS-generated approval notice, Form I-797A , includes a replacement I-94, which is to be attached to the original I-94. Return to the applicant any original I-94 which was improperly submitted.
Note 2: If a change of status applicant claims to have lost his or her I-94, a separate Form I-102, Application for Replacement/Initial Arrival/Departure Record should be filed since the I-94 issued in the course of adjudicating the application indicates that it is to be attached to the original I-94. Verify arrival from NIIS or, if no record can be found, obtain a copy of the applicant’s passport page containing the admission stamp.
Note 3: Inadmissibility Issues . At times, you may encountered an applicant for change of status and/or extension of stay who is inadmissible to the U.S., but who never obtained a waiver of such inadmissibility. Likewise, you may encounter an alien who had previously received a limited duration waiver of inadmissibility which has expired, or will expire before the end of the extension he/she is seeking. In either case, you may not grant such alien a change of status or an extension of stay unless and until he or she has applied for and b een granted a waiver of his or her inadmissibility which covers the entire period of his or her proposed stay in the U.S. [See AFM Chapter 42 regarding adjudication of nonimmigrant waivers of inadmissibility] In addition to the general factors discussed in Chapter 42, in the case of an alien who was inadmissible at the time of his or her original admission as a nonimmigrant but was not in possession of waiver, you must also determine the reason(s) a waiver was not obtained at that time or when the alien app lied for a nonimmigrant visa. If the alien willfully concealed his or her inadmissibility from the consular officer or the inspecting officer, the alien may be inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(C) of the Act in addition to the original grounds of inadmissibility. If the waiver was not obtained due to an honest misunderstanding on the part of the alien, or an error on the part of the consular or immigration officer, then only the merits of waiving the original ground of inadmissibility need be taken under consideration. If appropriate, the waiver request may be granted nunc pro tunc to cover the original admission as well as the proposed extension.
• Aliens seeking F-1 or M-1 status must submit the appropriate Form I-20 and evidence of financial ability to maintain the new status. Aliens seeking J-1 status must submit Form IAP-66.
• Aliens seeking A-3 or G-5 status must submit an executed Form I-566, a letter from their employer detailing their job duties and evidence of the employer’s status (usually an I-94).
• Dependents of various temporary workers must submit evidence of the principal alien’s status (or evidence of a pending request for such status).
Note: Information relating to a principal alien’s status, if missing or questionable, may be verified in CLAIMS or NIIS. There is no dependent status for Q-1 or TN nonimmigrants; however, such dependents may separately qualify for nonimmigrant status, usually B-2.
(3) Adjudication . Applications for a change of status on Form I-539 are relatively simple to adjudicate. Because the benefit sought is generally short-lived or time-sensitive, these applications should be processed as quickly as possible, to insure the request is acted upon while it is still relevant. The following actions, in addition to the steps described in Chapter 10.3, are ordinarily required during the adjudicative process:
(A) Determine if the application was timely filed . Although ordinarily required, the adjudicator has discretion to grant a change of status based on an untimely application. In deciding such a case, determine the reasons for late filing and whether the reasons were beyond the applicant’s control, the degree of lateness, whether there is any indication that the applicant may have violated status in some other way, whether the applicant is otherwise a bona fide nonimmigrant and whether the applicant has been apprehended and placed in proceedings. If the alien is guilty of more than excusable tardiness (e.g., if he/she has worked without authorization or has committed a crime), the adjudicator has no discretion to excuse the tardiness.
(B) Verify passport validity. An applicant need not submit a valid passport with his or her application, but must complete Part 4 of the application which contains passport validity information. The applicant must hold a valid passport at the time of application and is required to maintain validity during the entire period of his or her stay in the U.S.
(D) Determine if a Favorable Exercise of Discretion Is Warranted . Change of status applications are discretionary in nature. In deciding whether a favorable exercise of discretion is warranted, consider such things as the alien’s financial ability to maintain the status sought, whether there was possible deception when the original visa or admission was sought, what the applicant’s ultimate intentions may be, veracity of documentation submitted, and the overall effects of a positive or negative decision. It is important to keep in mind that discretionary does not mean a rbitrary. Given similar fact patterns, discretionary decisions should yield similar results regardless of where such cases are adjudicated or by whom. There is a significant body of precedent decisions which discuss the appropriate exercise of discretion under a variety of situations. Familiarity and conformity with these precedents are critical to achieving consistent and fair results in such cases.
Note 1: Ability to Maintain Status . Maintenance of status is discussed generally in Chapter 30.1. In order to change status, an applicant must be a bona fide nonimmigrant, maintaining his or her current status [ Matter of Haddad , 10 I&N Dec 785 (R.C. 1964)]. Matter of Lee , 11 I&N Dec. 601 (R.C. 1966) found that an H-1 nonimmigrant’s failure to continue the temporary employment for which he was admitted constituted a failure to maintain status.
With the exception of H-1 or L nonimmigrants who are covered by section 212(h) of the Act, because an alien who is seeking a change of status and/or an extension of stay bears the burden of establishing eligibility for the benefit sought, if he or she has filed an application for adjustment of status or an application for asylum (or even if he or she is the beneficiary of a permanent or temporary visa petition, unless the applicant can establish that he or she is the unwilling or unknowing beneficiary) he o r she cannot meet this burden and the application for change of status or extension of stay should be denied. Contrast this issue with the discussion in Chapter 23 on whether an alien automatically violates his or her nonimmigrant status by merely applying for adjustment of status or asylum. However, under certain very limited circumstances, extension or change of status may be granted to an alien who (1) had previously been denied adjustment or asylum or whose previously approved visa petition has been wit hdrawn or revoked, (2) who met the criteria discussed in Chapter 23 for being considered as having maintained his or her status throughout the pendency of the asylum/adjustment application, and (3) is able to satisfy the officer adjudicating the application for change or extension that he or she has completely abandoned his or her intend to remain in the United States beyond the period which can be authorized under the change or extension being sought.
In addition, the applicant must demonstrate he or she is able to maintain him or herself in the status sought, particularly financially. This issue needs particular examination when the applicant seeks a prolonged stay in any status where employment is not a routine part of the status, for example student status. The discussion of status and the effects of section 212(a)(9) of the Act are discussed in paragraph 30.1 of this chapter.
Note 2: Preconceived Intent . The adjudicator will encounter applications where it appears, either from the statements made on the application or from the sequence of events (from initial visa application and issuance, admission, obtaining supporting documents for a new status, until the date of filing) that the applicant concealed his or her true purpose for entering the U.S., either on the visa application or to the inspector at the time of admission. Most frequently, this situation occurs in requests to change status from B-2 to F- 1. The issuance dates of Forms I-20, affidavits of support , etc. are often helpful in determining whether preconceived intent or actual fraud exists.
USCIS policy discourages such deliberate actions. In cases where the new status is one which requires substantial financial assets by the applicant or an overseas sponsor, the consular officer in the applicant’s home country is in a better position to assess the situation than a USCIS adjudicator. Similarly, where an applicant’s overseas employment or ties to his or her home country are at issue, again the consular officer on the scene can most easily assess eligibility.
Although the facts in such situations could be indicative of actual visa fraud, more often the appropriate course of action may be to deny the application as a matter of discretion. A denial would not be warranted simply because an applicant entered as a visitor, for example, and was later offered an opportunity to attend school, receive specialized training or accept employment. It is necessary to look closely at the facts of the particular case, examining such facts as dates on supporting documents. If ne cessary, seek additional information from the applicant concerning all facts leading to his or her request.
A series of precedent decisions and court cases upholds the Service’s decision to deny a change of status in such a situation. Matter of Hsu , 14 I&N Dec. 344 (R.C. 1973), denied a change of status to an applicant who obtained a visa under the pretext of a visit for business whereas the actual purpose was to seek acceptance at a school. In Matter of Le Floch , 13 I&N Dec. 251 (BIA 1969), the Board ruled that even the applicant’s claim that she was misinformed by a consular officer regarding the need for a student visa was insufficient to justify entry as a visitor. In Seihoon v. Levy , 408 F. Supp. 1208 (La. 1976), the court upheld the decision to deny an application to change status based on a finding that a rapid sequence of events leading to enrollment in a school is sufficient for a finding that the applicant had a preconceived intent to change nonimmigrant status and circumvent the normal visa issuance process.
Note 3: Applicant Is an Intending Immigrant . Matter of Gutierrez , 15 I&N Dec. 727 (R.C. 1976), denied a change of status to an alien who was determined to be an intending immigrant. However, it should be noted that not all nonimmigrants are required to maintain a foreign residence and that in some categories even overt evidence of intent to remain permanently in the United States is not a ground for denial of a change of status request. However, in the most commonly filed requests, those seeking F, J or M classification, before approving a case the adjudicator should be satisfied that the alien is not an intending immigrant.
Note 4: Visas Mantis Cases . In adjudicating an application for change of status on behalf of an alien who was admitted under the Visas Mantis program, follow the same procedures as are set out for extension of stay applicants in Chapter 30.2(e) .
Note 5: Inadmissibility Issues . At times, you may encountered an applicant for change of status and/or extension of stay who is inadmissible to the U.S., but who never obtained a waiver of such inadmissibility. Likewise, you may encounter an alien who had previously received a limited duration waiver of inadmissibility which has expired, or will expire before the end of the extension he/she is seeking. In either case, you may not grant such alien a change of status or an extension of stay unless and until he or she has applied for and b een granted a waiver of his or her inadmissibility which covers the entire period of his or her proposed stay in the U.S. [See AFM Chapter 42 regarding adjudication of nonimmigrant waivers of inadmissibility] In addition to the general factors discussed in Chapter 42, in the case of an alien who was inadmissible at the time of his or her original admission as a nonimmigrant but was not in possession of waiver, you must also determine the reason(s) a waiver was not obtained at that time or when the alien app lied for a nonimmigrant visa. If the alien willfully concealed his or her inadmissibility from the consular officer or the inspecting officer, the alien may be inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(C) of the Act in addition to the original grounds of inadmissibility. If the waiver was not obtained due to an honest misunderstanding on the part of the alien, or an error on the part of the consular or immigration officer, then only the merits of waiving the original ground of inadmissibility need be taken under consideration. If appropriate, the waiver request may be granted nunc pro tunc to cover the original admission as well as the proposed extension.
(4) Personal Interview . Requiring a personal appearance by an applicant for a change of status should rarely be required and requests for additional evidence should likewise be relatively unusual. In the event either action is required, follow local procedures for forwarding the application for interview or establishing a call-up for the returned case. (If the case is being referred for an interview, prepare a memorandum explaining the reasons for the referral.) The application itself, supporting documentation required by the in structions on the form, and existing records will enable you to adjudicate virtually any extension of stay request. When an interview is conducted, a memorandum containing the results or notes summarizing the interview should be included in the record. If the interview was conducted at the request of a service center or another field office, that office should be notified of the findings.
(5) Indirect Attainment of a Prohibited Change of Status . Chapter 30.3(b) describes limitations on certain nonimmigrant status changes. An applicant may not evade these restrictions by virtue of having attained an intermediate status. Matter of Kim , 13 I&N Dec. 316 (R.C. 1968), denied a change of status from A-2 to F-1 because the applicant was originally admitted as a J-1. Such a change would be an indirect change from exchange visitor to student, a prohibited action.
(6) Changes of Nonimmigrant Classification Formerly Permitted Without Application or Fee . Prior to January 11, 1994, 8 CFR 248.3(c) specifically allowed certain changes without fee or application. Those changes included:
(A) A change to classification under section 101(a)(15)(A) or (G) of the Act;
(B) A change to classification under sections 101(a)(15)(A) or (G) of the Act for an immediate family member, as defined in 22 CFR 41.1, of a principal alien whose status has been changed to such a classification;
The reason for discontinuing these provisions related to the need to eliminate circumstances whereby persons could change status without paying a fee (in effect transferring the USCIS' cost of doing business onto someone else), not with proscribing any of these actions. The types of changes for status listed above remain equally available to persons in such classifications today, provided that the person(s) involved file the application, pay the requisite fee, and are otherwise eligible. After Jan. 11, 1994, only those aliens described in (A) remain exempt fee.
Note: It has been determined that 8 CFR 248.3(b) applies to the B-2 spouse or children of B-1 nonimmigrants. Therefore, if a B-1 nonimmigrant applies for and is granted an extension of temporary stay, the status of the spouse and children will be changed without fee or application. Upon this change of status, Forms I-94 must be endorsed "B-1 spouse" or "B-1 child".
(7) Change of Status within the J Classification . 8 CFR 248.2 prohibits a change from the J nonimmigrant classification for any individual who became a J in order to receive graduate medical training or who is subject to the 2-year residency requirement. However, this prohibition does not prevent someone (who is otherwise eligible) from seeking a change within the J category from J-1 to J-2, or vice versa. However, three important items should be noted regarding this type of change:
(8) Bonds . A maintenance of status and departure bond, although seldom used, may be required as a condition for approval of an extension or change of status request. See Inspector’s Field Manual , Chapter 45, for procedures on posting bonds.
(9) Affidavits of Support . See Chapter 30.8 of this manual.
(10) File Review . When adjudicating an application for change of status, obtain and review any relating "A" file prior to adjudication if a bond has been posted on the alien's behalf or if the alien has been granted a section 212(d)(3) waiver. In any other case, a relating "A" file may be obtained and reviewed if there is reason to believe it may contain relevant information needed to decide the case. In a section 212(d)(3) waiver case, if the applicant's Form I-94 is noted "WAS" the file should not be requested, but the Washington, D.C. District Office should be consulted before an extension of stay is granted. In all cases in which an "A" file exists, the adjudicated application and all relating material shall be placed in the file. The file number shall be noted on the application and the Form I-94.
(11) Case Closing Actions .
(A) Approval . Complete the following steps when approving an application for change of status:
• Determine the appropriate amount of time for the extension of stay in the new visa classification. [See 8 CFR 214.1 for general requirements and 8 CFR 214.2 for the specific requirements relating to each nonimmigrant classification.]
• Endorse the action block on the application and indicate the actions taken in the section of the form designated "for Government Use Only".
• For CLAIMS-processed cases, upon approval, update CLAIMS and order approval notices. The system will forward the record of approval to NIIS. The CLAIMS approval notice, Form I-797A , contains a tear-off section which serves as a replacement Form I-94 indicating the new status and extension date.
• If the application is not processed in CLAIMS, the original I-94 must be manually noted on the reverse with the action taken (e.g. “c/s to F-1"), approval date, office three-letter code, and officer stamp number. Also, endorse the I-94 manually or using a rubber stamp, with the notation: “You must obtain a new visa to reenter this country in your present status.” In addition, both CLAIMS and non-CLAIMS approvals require the preparation and forwarding to NIIS of Form I-530 for each alien included on the app lication and completion of an approval notice on Form I-542.
(B) Denial . If denying the application for change of nonimmigrant status, complete the following steps:
• Using Form I-210, set a period of voluntary departure if the applicant is no longer maintaining status and he or she has agreed to accept voluntary departure.
• For denials processed in CLAIMS, select the proper standard denial paragraphs from CLAIMS, adding special text if necessary.
• In non-CLAIMS cases, prepare Form I-541 to advise the applicant of the reasons for denial.
• In both CLAIMS and non-CLAIMS cases, prepare Form(s) I-530 and forward to NIIS -- Service Centers do not prepare I-530s on denials of I-129s ir I-539s.
(C) Routing of Miscellaneous Documents . Returning the pink colored, USCIS annotated, IAP-66 with the I-94 is no longer the process. IAP-66 has been replaced by SEVIS generated DS-2019s. This is no longer a multiple copy form. Annotated original DS-2019 is returned to the applicant or attorney after approval of the COS. A photo copy of the annotated DS-2019 should go into the file. In the cas of the F-1 form I-20, the original endorsed I-20 is returned to the student or attorney, a photocopy of the annotated I-20 goes into the case file and nothing is sent to London, KY. SEVIS has eliminated STSC which is where the data from the copies of the I-20s were entered previous to SEVIS.
The yellow copy of the IAP-66 is sent to the Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and the white copy stays in the file with the application. In the case of the F-1 student the school copy (Form I-20AB) is sent to the data facility in London, Kentucky and the student copy (Form I-20ID) is returned to the student or attorney, in accordance with Appendix 15-8 of the Inspector’s Field Manual .
(12) Appeal . There is no appeal from an adverse decision on Form I-539 filed for purposes of seeking a change of status.
Labels: Change of Nonimmigrant Status, Extension of Stay for Nonimmigrants, Maintaining Status, Nonimmigrants
posted by Mike Baker at 2:07 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
I-751 Petition for Removal of Conditions on Conditional Residence, Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986
Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986: I-751 Petition to Remove the Conditions of Residence on Permanent Resident Status.
References: Section 216 of the Act
(a) General . The Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 (“IMFA”) were enacted in response to a growing concern about aliens seeking permanent residence in the U.S. on the basis of marriage to a citizen or resident when either the alien acting alone, or the alien and his or her reputed spouse acting in concert, married for the sole purpose of obtaining permanent residence. Congress was particularly moved by the testimony of numerous citizens whose alien spouses had left them shortly after obtaining residence, as well as the testimony of Service representatives concerned with “marriage for hire” schemes. Congress also acknowledged the inherent difficulties faced by the Service in determining whether the marriage is fraudulent and whether the alien intended to leave the marital union once lawful permanent residence was granted.
In response to these concerns, Congress passed IMFA, which added section 216 to the Immigration and Nationality Act. Section 216 created a conditional residence requirement for aliens who acquire permanent residence based on recent marriages. The condition being that persons subject to the provisions of IMFA were required to petition the Service two years after obtaining residence for removal of the conditional basis of the residence. Failure to do so, or denial of the removal petition, would result in the alien losing residence status and being removed from the U.S. as a deportabl e alien. Section 216 also includes a waiver provision because it recognizes that under certain circumstances (e.g., if the marriage had dissolved through no fault of the alien), the alien’s loss of residence and deportation from the U.S. would be inappropriate.
The conditional residence provisions of section 216 apply to:
• Any alien who, based upon a marriage to either a citizen of the U.S. or a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., obtains permanent residence within two years of such marriage (i.e., as a spousal Immediate Relative or second preference classification); and
• Any child of such alien who also obtains permanent residence through his or her parent’s marriage within 2 years of the marriage.
Note: Confusion can arise regarding to whom a reference is being made (especially in spousal second preference conditional residence situations due to both parties, husband and wife, being aliens). In order to clarify which party is being referred to, the alien who is subject to the IMFA conditions is known as a “conditional permanent resident,” while the citizen or LPR who had filed the I-130 petition on behalf of such alien is known as the “petitioning spouse.”
The section 216 provisions do not apply to:
• An alien who obtains permanent residence through a marriage which is more than two years old at the time of admission or adjustment;
• An alien who obtains permanent residence on a basis other than marriage (e.g., a woman who adjusts through an employment-based petition, even if she is married to a citizen at the time);
• An alien who (regardless of the age of the marriage at the time) obtains permanent residence as an accompanying or following to join dependent of an alien who obtains residence under:
– a special immigrant classification;
– a refugee or asylee classification;
– a preference classification other than second preference;
– any other provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act, or any other law, which allows dependents to accompany or follow to join a principal alien.
(b) Notification Requirements . The Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 require that a conditional permanent resident be notified of his or her obligations under the law at specified points:
• At the time an alien acquires conditional permanent residence through admission to the U.S. with an immigrant visa or adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act, the Service shall notify the alien of the conditional basis of the alien's status. The Service will notify the alien of the requirements for removal of the conditions within the ninety days immediately preceding the second anniversary of the date the alien was granted status, and will inform the alien that failure to apply for removal of the conditions will result in automatic termination of the alien's lawful status in the U.S. This notification is done (either verbally or in writing) by the inspector or adjudicator who admits or adjusts the alien to conditional resident status .
• Approximately 90 days before the second anniversary of the date on which the alien obtained conditional permanent residence, the Service must (attempt to) notify the alien a second time of the requirement that the alien and petitioning spouse must file a petition to remove the conditional basis of the alien's lawful permanent residence. The notification will be mailed to the alien's last known address. However, failure on the part of the Service to provide notification (which can occur, for example, if the alien fails to notify the Service of a change of address) does not relieve the alien and the petitioning spouse of the requirement to file a joint petition within 90 days preceding the second anniversary date of the alien's conditional status. This notification is done on an automated basis by the Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments System . (This system is known in some offices as IMFAS (“im-FASS”) and in others as MFAS (“MAY-fiss”).)
(c) Filing for Removal of Conditions . There are two vehicles through which the conditional basis of residence may be removed:
(1) Joint Petition . Within the 90-day period immediately preceding the second anniversary date on which the alien obtained permanent residence, the alien and the petitioning spouse must file a Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence (Form I-751) with the Service Center having jurisdiction over the alien's place of residence. Normally, a conditional resident child is included in the joint petition filed by his or her parent and step-parent. The joint petition must be filed within this 90-day window regardless of the amount of physical presence which the alien has accumulated in the U.S. The one exception to this rule is that if either the alien or the petitioning spouse (or both) is outside the U.S. on U.S. government orders, the filing window does not commence until the person(s) on orders returns to the U.S.
(2) Waiver . The conditional permanent resident, acting alone, may apply (also on Form I-751) for a waiver of the requirement to file the joint petition. See 8 CFR 216.5 .The waiver may be filed at any time (i.e., before, during or after the 90-day filing window). The waiver may be sought if the joint petition cannot be filed due to:
• The termination of the marriage through annulment, divorce, or the death of the petitioning spouse;
• The refusal of the petitioning spouse to join in the filing of the petition;
• A conditional resident child being unable to be included in the joint petition of his or her parent (e.g., if the parent died before seeking removal of conditions);
• The conditional resident being unable or unwilling to file the joint petition because the petitioning spouse is an abusive spouse or parent; or
• Any other reason which is provided for in the Act.
Note : The alien may cite multiple reasons for filing the waiver application. In fact, other than the battered spouse/child waiver, all reasons MUST be applied for at once. (The battered spouse/child waiver may be sought either in combination with other reasons listed on the same Form I-751, or on a separately-filed Form I-751.)
(d) Ineligibility for Adjustment of Status . Under section 245(d) of the Act, an alien who is a permanent resident on a conditional basis under section 216 of the Act is not eligible for adjustment of status under section 245(a) of the Act. The implementing regulation is 8 CFR 245.1(c)(5) . In Matter of Stockwell , 20 I & N Dec. 309 (BIA 1991), the Board of Immigration Appeals adopted a narrow interpretation of 8 CFR 245.1(c)(5) . Under this narrow interpretation, the prohibition against adjustment of status no longer applies if USCIS has terminated the alien's conditional LPR status. In 1996, the Attorney General proposed an amendment to the regulation, so that a conditional permanent resident would remain ineligible for adjustment of status even after termination of conditional LPR status. 61 Fed . Reg . 43,028 (1996). Until the Department of Homeland Security publishes a final rule, and the final rule enters into force, however, USCIS officers are bound to follow Matter of Stockwell . If an officer has a case in which an alien whose conditional LPR status has been terminated is seeking adjustment of status under section 245, the officer should consult with district or service center counsel concerning whether the 1996 proposed rule has been made a final rule.
(e) Documentation .
(1) Joint Petition . A Form I-751 being filed as a joint petition shall be accompanied by evidence that the marriage was not entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws of the U.S. Such evidence may include:
• Documentation showing joint ownership of property;
• Lease showing joint tenancy of a common residence;
• Documentation showing commingling of financial resources;
• Birth certificates of children born to the marriage;
• Affidavits of third parties having knowledge of the bona fides of the marital relationship (Note: the affiant must be available to appear at the joint petitioners’ interview if required); or
• Other documentation establishing that the marriage was not entered into in order to evade the immigration laws of the U.S.
(2) Waiver . A Form I-751 being filed as a waiver application shall be accompanied by:
• Evidence to establish the facts of the case on which the alien is seeking the waiver; and
• Evidence that the marriage was not entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws of the U.S., as described in paragraph (1), if the marriage was not entered into for such purposes. However, be aware that the extreme hardship waiver provision does not require that the applicant establish that the marriage was entered into in good faith.
(f) Termination of Status for Failure to File . Failure to properly file Form I-751 within the 90-day period immediately preceding the second anniversary of the date on which the alien obtained lawful permanent residence on a conditional basis shall result in the automatic termination of the alien's permanent residence status and the initiation of proceedings to remove the alien from the U.S. Form I-751 may be filed after the expiration of the 90-day period only if the alien establishes to the satisfaction of the director, in writing, that there was go od cause for the failure to file within the required time period.
(g) Adjudication of the Joint Petition .
(1) Determination of Credibility of Evidence . [Section (g)(1) updated 06-20-2006] The director of the regional service center shall review the Form I-751 filed to determine whether to waive the interview required by the Act.
(a) Waive Interview and Accept . If satisfied that the marriage was not for the purpose of evading the immigration laws, the director may waive the interview and approve the petition.
(b) Waive Interview and Deny . If after examining the evidence submitted with an I-751 petition, the Service Center Director finds that the case presents substantial and undisputed evidence that the marriage was to circumvent the immigration laws, the Service Center Director shall deny the case.
(c) Interview Necessary . In cases where an interview is deemed useful for the adjudication of I-751 petitions, the Service Center Director shall forward the petition, along with the assigned fraud level, to the district director having jurisdiction over the place of the alien's residence.
(2) Assigning Fraud Levels . [Section (g)(2) updated 06-20-2006] If an interview is deemed necessary, the case is sent to the Service Center's Adjudications Unit and given to an adjudicator to assign a fraud level. The fraud levels of A, B, and C are assigned to the I-751 based on the documentation submitted with the application. If the adjudicator is fully satisfied that the case is approvable, then a fraud level of C is assigned. If the adjudicator is less than fully satisfied, but still feels that (based on the information available at the time) the case can be approved, then a fraud level of B is assigned. If the adjudicator has serious concerns about the approvability of the case and/or wants the applicant and the spouse to be interviewed, then the case would be assign ed a fraud level of A.
· Reasons for Assigning Fraud Level C. If you assign a fraud level C, it means that there are no technical problems (signatures, missing information, lack of evidence, etc.) and you think the case is approvable (no interview necessary). All required supporting documents are attached and there is no indication of fraud that can be identified in the documents or through the biographic data of the parties involved.
· Reasons for Assigning Fraud Level B. Fraud level B cases are those cases which have no technical problems that need correction and have the minimum number of proper supporting documents, but there is something, or an absence of something (which you may or may not be able to articulate) that creates suspicion about the bona fides of the marriage, the veracity of the evidence, etc. The reasons for suspicion are so varied that a concise list cannot be made. An example would be where the I-751 is supported by t he minimum required number of documents, however the documents are all of recent origin. Remember, though, that a level B case will be approved if the computer randomly does not assign the case to an interview slot, so do not assign a fraud level B if the application and /or supporting documents are insufficient to approve the case.
· Reasons for Assigning Fraud Level A. Fraud level A should be assigned when the adjudicator strongly suspects fraud. Reasons fraud level A might be assigned include:
- the petitioner fails to sign the form;
- there is insufficient evidence;
- a large age difference exists between the spouses;
- the married couple is not living together;
- a prior I-751 was denied;
- the petition was filed untimely without a good reason for being late; or
- any other reasons as the service center director may determine.
Note: The service center adjudicator must indicate when fraud is suspected, rather than a technical omission, to alert the Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) Immigration Officer at the District Office.
(3) Entering Cases in the Computer . Once the fraud level is determined, the adjudicator enters the case in the MFAS data base. The district office assigns a percentage to each fraud level. All fraud level A cases are interviewed. The responsible officer (usually the ADDE) in the district offices may choose to interview between 30% to 100% of all fraud level B cases; and between 10% and 50% of all fraud level C cases. After the case is entered in MFAS, the adjudicator enters the fraud level and the computer determines if the case will be sent for interview depending on the percentage of cases the district office wants to interview.
Note: As of May 25, 2001, users of the Marriage Fraud Amendment System (MFAS) can set up their interview schedules up to six months in advance. Additionally, MFAS will now allow users to delete dates from the Interview Calendar, even if there are cases scheduled for that date. Those cases will automatically return to the "Ready for Interview Scheduling" status.
(4) Types of Cases . The following is a breakdown of the Marriage Fraud cases after adjudication by the service center adjudicator, as indicated in the MFAS support system:
(A) Case Granted . These are cases for which MFAS has determined that an interview is not needed after the adjudicator entered the fraud level. The case is stamped with the adjudicator's approval stamp and routed to an application clerk who sends out the approval notice.
(B) Scheduled for Interview . If the computer determines that an interview is required, the MFAS automatically slots the petitioner into an available time slot for the district where the petitioner lives. If all available interview slots are filled for the district office, then a "no schedule" phrase is issued. As soon as an interview time is available, they will be slotted into it. Special care should be taken to verify the address and zip code because the interview site is chosen based on the zip code entered from the I-751 .
(C) Overseas Holds . These are cases where the petitioner and/or spouse live outside the U.S. The case is held pending until the return of the petitioner and/or spouse for a U.S. address to be entered into the computer. Once a U.S. address is known the case can be entered into the computer to see if an interview is required.
Form I-751s filed by Conditional Permanent Residents ( CPRs) who are currently overseas pursuant to military or government orders and who have valid APO/FPO addresses are not automatically placed on an “ overseas hold .” Instead, the director will review the Form I-751 and supporting documentation filed by the CPR and his or her spouse to determine whether or not to waive the interview requirement.
(D) Terminations . These cases are denied for failure to file. They are put in a 60 day call-up category to give the petitioner and spouse a last chance to file the Form I-751 . If they have not filed after the 60 day call-up time frame has expired, the case is routed to the district office for a Notice to Appear to be issued.
(E) Improperly Classified . These are cases where the petitioner (conditional permanent resident) was incorrectly classified when he/she entered the U.S. (generally because the inspecting or adjudicating officer failed to notice that the alien had been married for at least two years at the time the alien was admitted to the U.S. as a permanent resident or adjusted his/her status to that of a permanent resident). When the adjudicator of the Form I-751 determines that the alien was improperly classified as a conditional resident, the adjudicator should issue the individual a letter telling the alien that he/she was incorrectly classified and advising him/her to go to a district office to file an I-90 for issuance of an I-551 at no cost. The Form I-751 is also processed for a fee refund on Form G-266, and the Form I-751 is counted as a “statistical denial.”
(F) Battered Spouse . The battered spouse's address is verified and then the case is sent to an adjudicator. The address is verified so that notices are not sent to the wrong person. After updating in the computer the case is sent to a District office for interview.
(G) OASIS Flag . [(b)(2) or (b)(7)(E)]
(5) Inability of Child to Be Included in Joint Petition . As a matter of administrative convenience, the regulations allow a conditional resident child who is unable to be included in his/her parents’ joint petition to file an separate Form I-751. (This could also be thought of as a hardship issue since otherwise the child would be separated from his or her parent, but the child filing such petition need not document extreme hardship.) Circumstances under which this situation might arise include:
• A child whose conditional resident parent has died;
• A child who entered the U.S. more than 90 days after his conditional resident parent and therefore does not have sufficient residence in the U.S. to qualify for removal of conditions on the joint petition (but verify that the parent and step-parent’s joint petition has been granted before approving the child’s petition); and
• Any other circumstances whereby in the determination of the director, the child is prevented from being included in the joint petition of his or her parent and step-parent through no fault of the child or his or her parents.
In adjudicating the separate petition of a child, you must be satisfied that the conditional residence status was not obtained through fraud and that the petition’s approval would not further a fraud scheme. For example, you would not approve a separate petition filed by a child which would enable an otherwise ineligible parent (who obtained conditional status through a questionable marriage) to make a stronger case for an extreme hardship waiver.
h) Waiver of Joint Filing .
These are cases where the petitioner and the spouse do not file a joint petition. They are usually filed because the petitioner and spouse are divorced, or the petitioner (child of the conditional spouse) could not enter or follow to join the conditional spouse. The documentation to be submitted, and the factors to be determined in the adjudication process, depend on the type of waiver being sought. Section 216(c)(4) of the Act allows an alien to file a waiver application under one (or more) of three circumstances: extreme hardship (section 216(c)(4)(A) ), good faith and not at fault (section