Archive for May, 2010

General Tips on Assembling Applications for Mailing

Mark both the envelope and the cover letter as to the nature of the submission. Example: ORIGINAL SUBMISSION – BRIEF FOR AN APPEAL – RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION – etc.
Use the appropriate mailing address and mark both the envelope and the cover letter as to the form type. Example: I-129; I-130; I-690; I-698, etc.
Provide both the receipt notice number and the A-Number as an identifier, if they are available.
If the packet is being resubmitted in response to a REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE (RFE), please place the notice requesting the additional evidence/information on the top of the packet. Also, please use the special mailing envelope provided.
If evidence is being submitted in support of a previously filed appeal or motion, a cover letter stating “BRIEF FOR APPEAL”, etc., should be placed on top of the packet.
In preparing your packet, please take note of the following:
Do not use binders or folders that cannot be easily disassembled.
Use ACCO fasteners to hold together thick or bulky applications or petitions. Two-hole punching the top of the material for easy placement in the file is appreciated.
The use of tabs assist in locating items listed as attachments. The tabs should be placed on the bottom and not the side for ease in filing.
Avoid using heavy-duty staples; instead use ACCO fasteners or heavy clips.
Avoid submitting originals unless specifically required. Avoid submitting oversized documentation when possible.
If you are sending more than one case in an envelope, clearly separate the cases by rubber band or clip fasteners.
A form G-28 is not acceptable unless signed by the authorized representative and the petitioner (re: petitions) or the applicant (re: applications). Facsimile signature stamps are acceptable for the signature of the representatives. However, applicants/petitioners must live sign the initial Form G-28 submitted with the application/petition. Any subsequent Form G-28 relating to the same case may be a photocopy of the original, which should be already attached to the relating case.
Send copies of any prior approval notices with any new requests for extensions of stay, change of status or amended petitions.
Keep copies of all submissions. Don’t assume the officer will have access to a prior file or record. Submit as complete a packet as possible so the case can be adjudicated from what you submit. Submit a complete packet of information for each petition or application. If officers have to review prior files or records, the adjudication of the case can be delayed substantially.
Be sure to complete all pertinent items on the petition or application. Ensure all entries on the forms are legible. Note the appropriate consulate, embassy, or a request to adjust status on the petition. Do note enter “N/A” when “None” is appropriate.
If you believe your situation to be unique, explain it fully in an attachment to the packet, not as a cover letter.
Please submit certified translations for all foreign language documents. The translator must certify that s/he is competent to translate and that the translation is accurate.

The certification format should include the certifier’s name, signature, address, and date of certification. A suggested format is:

Certification by Translator

I [typed name], certify that I am fluent (conversant) in the English and ________ languages, and that the above/attached document is an accurate translation of the document attached entitled ______________________________.

Signature_________________________________
Date Typed Name
Address
USCIS no longer routinely requires submission of original documents or “certified copies.” Instead, ordinary legible photocopies of such documents (including naturalization certificates and alien registration cards) will be acceptable for initial filing and approval of petitions and applications.

At the discretion of the officer, original documents may still be required in individual cases. Please be advised that USCIS no longer returns original documents submitted with the exception of Certificates of Naturalization, Forms I-551, Permanent Resident Card, Forms I-94, Arrival/Departure Document, valid passports, or those specifically requested by the officer. Such documents will be returned when they are no longer needed.
Reminder: The best way to locate records is through the receipt number and/or the A-Number. Always provide this information whenever possible. If you don’t know the A-Number, provide a COMPLETE name and date of birth. ALSO: Provide ANY AND ALL names used by the individual, including aliases, maiden names, names used when originally admitted to the United States, etc. Providing this information is extremely helpful and speeds up processing time.
DUPLICATE FILINGS (without fee): Cases will be accepted as a duplicate filing only when USCIS has specifically requested that a duplicate be filed. In such a case be sure to submit the receipt number of original filing or any copies of notices received from USCIS on the first filing when submitting a duplicate petition or application.
The address block on the forms is the data field captured for all of our mailings. Consistent with the limitations on the number of characters per line (a maximum of 32) and the total numbers of lines (4) in that field, whatever is in the block will become the mailing address used by the system. The data in these fields is entered exactly as indicated on the forms. Please include internal routing symbols in the address block, especially for large organizations. It is better to abbreviate the name of the organization and have space for the routing codes than to fully spell out the name and have notices sit in the organization’s mailroom.
Recognized authorities: Many I-129 petitions filed with evidence of the beneficiary’s education or accomplishments include documentation submitted by various authorities. For example, petitions for artists and entertainers may incude evidence the beneficiary has received an award or other recognition of achievement. Petitions for individuals employed in a specialty occupation may include evidence the beneficiary belongs to a professional organization. When an individual’s awards or membership is used to support a petition, evidence establishing the reputation of that organization must also be submitted. Examples of the type of evidence needed includes the following: the size and standing of the organization or the organization’s requirements for membership and any other documentation which would establish the reputation of that organization.

When an opinion from a recognized authority is submitted, the opinion should state: the writer’s qualifications as an expert; the writer’s experience giving such opinions, citing specific instances where past opinions have been accepted as authoritiative and by whom; how the conclusions were reached; and the basis for the conclusions, including copies or citations of any research material used.
Any application or petition for an individual currently in F-1 status needs to include evidence the student has been maintaining status and has been authorized employment if applicable. Such evidence usually can be satisfied by submitting the latest Form I-20AB/I-20ID and a copy of the employment authorization card.

  • Share/Bookmark

For Immediate Release Throwing Good Money After Bad

Immigration Enforcement without Immigration Reform Doesn’t Work

May 26, 2010

Washington, D.C. – This week, the Senate is considering amendments to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill that would add thousands of additional personnel along the border (including the National Guard), as well as provide millions of dollars for detention beds, technology, and resources. Yesterday, bowing to pressure, President Obama announced that he would send 1,200 National Guard troops to the border and request $500 million for additional resources. Some senators are upping the ante, proposing up to $2 billion for this effort. All of this attention on resources for the border, however, continues to ignore the fact that border enforcement alone has never been enough. Throwing money at this problem as the sole means of solving it is not only fiscally irresponsible, but history teaches us it is ineffective.

For more than two decades, the U.S. government has tried without success to stamp out unauthorized immigration through enforcement efforts at the border and in the interior of the country without fundamentally reforming the broken immigration system that spurs unauthorized immigration in the first place. Ironically, while billions upon billions of dollars have been poured into enforcement, the number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically.

The annual budget of the U.S. Border Patrol stood at $3.0 billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 – a nine-fold increase since FY 1992. The number of Border Patrol agents stationed along the southwest border with Mexico grew to 16,974 in FY 2009 – a nearly five-fold increase since FY 1992.

Yet, the unauthorized-immigrant population of the United States has tripled in size, from roughly 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008.
The enforcement-only approach to our immigration problems is clearly not yielding the results needed. It is time for Congress and the President to propose comprehensive solutions to the complex problem of our broken immigration system.

For more detailed data on the costs of enforcement:

Throwing Good Money After Bad (IPC Fact Check, May 26, 2010)

###

For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at 202-507-7524 or wsefsaf@immcouncil.org

  • Share/Bookmark

How is a typical interview at the Immigration Office is conducted?

This is a short guide about a USCIS regular interviews. It does not include any sort of “special” situations. Many of our clients are fearful on this day especially because it is at the discretion of one person. I have compiled few things that happens at this interview to help.
1. The interview process (using the sample of a marriage family petition)

In most marriage cases done under adjustment of status, the USCIS will conduct an interview of the couple at the local office. You will be notified of this interview with an I-797 notice. The interview notice will usually tell you about the documents you should bring at this interview. The interview is conducted in a regular office (not a court) with an immigration officer. If you are represented by an attorney (counsel), the attorney will be allowed inside the office by your side.
What will happen during the interview
I am using the example of CA (Bay Area) local offices. Each office might have a different procedures:

1. You will be sworn in;

2. Officer will go over the documents and see if there are any corrections. Usually corrections will be marked in red and you will have an opportunity to review the corrections or notes before you sign that you have reviewed. Note that your attorney if present will also be premitted to view the corrections.

3. Then often you will be asked question how you met your spouse and regular questions about your marriage.

4. The officer usually also asks for proofs of marital relationship e.g. bank accounts, lease agreements, insurance, utility bills, pictures, etc. 5. If the officer is satisfied, and all the checks are done, they might give you an approval at this point. However, in most cases, they will put under review by a supervisor and give you an answer within few days after the interview.
What happens if the officer is not satisfied?
If the officer is not satisfied, the officer might ask to separate both of you and start questioning you independently to know the validity of the marriage. This happens usually when they suspect marriage fraud. Note that you can ask to stop the interview at any time. The officer can also call your spouse and you for another interview. Since this legal was limited to a “typical” case, we will not cover marriage fraud interview in this legal guide.

Additional Resources
You can read more about marriage petitions on our websites http://peerallylaw.com

Disclaimer The information contained in this guide is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. No recipients of content from this article, clients or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the article without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an attorney licensed in the recipient’s state

  • Share/Bookmark

Anti-Immigrant Group Recommends Economic Self-Destruction for Arizona

For Immediate Release
May 18, 2010
Washington D.C. - In data released “exclusively to FoxNews.com,” the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) – architects of the new Arizona law SB1070 – claim that unauthorized immigrants in Arizona are costing the state’s taxpayers $2.7 billion per year for education, medical care, and incarceration. The release of this “fiscal analysis” takes advantage of the absence of any legitimate economic analysis by the state on what SB1070 will cost. However, judging from FAIR’s track record when it comes to these kinds of state estimates, it is likely that their numbers are virtually meaningless. In its most recent state studies on unauthorized immigration in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, for instance, FAIR has dramatically exaggerated the fiscal “costs” imposed by unauthorized immigrants by including schooling and medical care for their native-born, U.S.-citizen children in its estimate, and conveniently forgetting to account for the economic role that unauthorized workers play as consumers who help support local economies.

FAIR’s latest data fails to account for the property, sales, and income taxes paid by unauthorized immigrants. Nor does the data account for the consumer purchasing power of unauthorized immigrants – what they spend on goods, services, and housing – which actually creates jobs and generates additional tax revenue. They seem to forget that deporting workers also means deporting consumers and taxpayers.

However, in all fairness, they do acknowledge that the costs of implementing SB1070 will add to the economic strain on the state. In the absence of any state-generated fiscal data on the cost of the law’s implementation, some Arizonans have pointed to a fact sheet produced by Yuma County Sheriff Ralph E. Ogden in response to similar legislation proposed in 2006. The Yuma county snapshot of enforcement costs is a sobering reminder of the overwhelming financial costs – up to $100 million for just one Arizona county – that will ensue if the state attempts to enforce its new law.  Ultimately, this law will cost Arizona hundreds of millions of dollars to implement. Yet those costs are only part of the story and don’t even account for lost revenue from losing a part of the workforce, not to mention a growing boycott and expensive lawsuits from which the state will have to defend itself.
For further information see:
###
For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at wsefsaf@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7524.
Join Our Mailing List
Follow us on:

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC’s mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.


A division of the American Immigration Council.

Visit our website at www.immigrationpolicy.org.

  • Share/Bookmark

Battered Spouses VAWA Petitions

Battered Spouse

  • Share/Bookmark

Follow us on Facebook

  • Share/Bookmark