Immigration Atty. Michael Gurfinkel
Petitions by Citizens:
The priority date for the First Preference Category, F-1 (unmarried sons and daughters of US citizens, over 21 years of age) moved forward by 14 days from October 8, 1993 to October 22, 1993.
The Third Preference Category, F-3 (married sons and daughters of United States citizens) priority date moved forward by 7 days from October 15, 1991 to October 22, 1991.
Dear Atty. Gurfinkel:
I am a green card holder, and I filed a petition for my unmarried son. It was approved in the F-2B category (single adult child of green card holder). Last year, his live-in girlfriend got pregnant, and they now have a baby.
The priority date on my son’s petition is now current, and he is to be processed for his immigrant visa. What will happen to his girlfriend and the baby? Can my son’s girlfriend and child get immigrant visas and accompany my son to the US?
Very truly yours,
ZF
Recently, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a child must also suffer the consequences of her parent’s immigration fraud or inadmissibility. Although the "child" in that case was already an adult and a US citizen at the time of the court’s ruling, the US government still sought to have her US passport revoked and the child removed/deported, because she did not have a valid immigrant visa.
In that case, the child’s father entered the United States in the 80’s as a visitor. He later became a permanent resident through marriage to a US citizen. The problem was that he claimed that his first wife had died, such that, as a widower, he was able to legally marry the American.
The US State Department recently announced the opening of the registration period for the Diversity Visa Lottery. This lottery is for a special class of immigrants, known as "diversity immigrants," where a maximum of 55,000 diversity visas are made available to persons from countries with low rates of immigration to the US.
"Low rates of immigration to the US," means that the diversity lottery is available to people from countries that have sent no more than 50,000 immigrants to the US over the past 5 years. Obviously, Filipinos are NOT ELIGIBLE for the diversity visa lottery. This is because, as everyone knows, more than 50,000 Filipinos have immigrated to the US in the previous 5 years. In fact, the Philippines has one of the highest rates of immigration to the US of any country. The backlogs, waiting times, or priority dates, are so long because so many Filipinos are under petition and are hoping to immigrate to the US.
In two recent decisions, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) held that when an alien was not given an adequate definition of a drug crime, including all essential elements, any admission or confession by that alien of the crime could not be used against him for immigration purposes. This is great news for people who were refused their visas due to admitting drug use during their medical exam at St. Luke’s, Manila. If they did not receive an adequate definition of the crime, or warning about the consequences of admitting drug use (which is a lifetime ban), there may still be hope!
By way of background, in 2002, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Pazcoguin vs. Radcliffe, held that an alien could be banned for life for admitting, to the doctors at St. Luke’s, that the alien had "used" drugs in the past. The ban applied even if the alien was never charged or convicted of any drug crime, and even if his drug test turned out to be "negative." The lifetime ban results from the alien’s mere admission to the doctor or psychiatrist, of the use of marijuana or some other prohibited drugs in the past, even if the use occurred many years ago. Thus, people petitioned by US citizen spouses, other relatives, employers, etc., and had waited years for their petition to be current, found themselves banned for life, when the doctors asked if they ever tried marijuana or other drugs at any time in their life, and they said "yes."PETITIONS by citizens
The priority date for the First Preference Category, F-1 (Unmarried sons and daughters of US citizens, over 21 years of age) Moved Forward By 16 Days From September 22, 1993 To October 8, 1993.
The Third Preference Category, F-3 (married sons and daughters of United States Citizens) priority date moved forward by 23 days from September 22, 1991 to October 15, 1991.
Dear Attorney Gurfinkel:
Afew years ago, my wife and I went to an "attorney" for help in processing our immigration papers. Although the attorney said that he could help us, we’re not quite sure how this was to be accomplished. Although we signed some forms, I’m also not quite sure what it was we were signing.Recently, I tried to contact that person, but the number was disconnected. We tried going to his office, but he is no longer located there. When I asked around, I was told he had gone out of business and back to the Philippines, after his office was raided by DHS and his files were seized, etc. Bottom line is that I can no longer locate him. What would you advise?
Very truly yours,
E.B.
"I truly believe that one of the hardest parts of a consul’s job is refusing a visa to a person who desperately needs to go to the US for some dire emergency, such as a sickly relative or for a funeral. However, Congress has enacted Section 214(b), and consuls are required by law, to follow the law."
In a previous, article, Idiscussed visa refusals under Section 214(b). Here is more information about visa refusals under Section 214(b).
Many people applying for visitor, student, or certain other non-immigrant visas are saddened when their visa application is refused. At their interview, they are handed a sheet of paper, advising them that their visa was refused under Section 214(b).
Some of these visa applicants have a very urgent need to go to the US, such as a sickly or dying relative, attend a funeral, etc., and cannot understand why the consul would refuse a visa under such heart-wrenching circumstances. They become even more frustrated when an acquaintance is issued a visitor’s visa in order to go to Disneyland, or because that acquaintance told the consul that they want to go shopping on Rodeo Drive. How is it possible that one person can be issued a visitor visa to go shopping, but another person is refused the visitor’s visa in order to attend a close relative’s funeral? In this article, I will discuss various aspects of a Section 214(b) refusal.
| New hope for people whose relative has diedAtty. Michael GurfinkelOn October 29, 2009, President Obama signed into law the Department of Homeland Security... + Full Story |
| Other Articles |
| Pacman shows RP ‘small but mighty’ Manny's time has come.The Filipino ring icon, generally regarded as the world’s pound-for-pound champion, graces the cover of Time Magazine Asia edition—where he is featured in a five-page... + Full Story |
| Other Articles |
