 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsAustralia and NZCanadaUSAUSA Marriage Base ImmigrationKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Immigration Forum / USA Marriage Base / June 2005USCIS nightmare continues......
OK, more irritating news from USCIS. I brought my wife over here on a K1 in November and we married in January. Her I-94 expired in February but we did not think it mattered. We sent in her an I-485 and a few weeks later, separately, her I-765 (Employment). They called us in for biometrics (for both the 485 and the 765) last week which we did. Today in the mail a letter came from them denying the I-765 saying because the I-94 was no longer valid - no appeal possible. Huh? Why would this matter. And more importantly, what do we do now? So after following all deadlines and submitting paperwork properly, she can not work and also can not drive or get a state (California) ID as the DMV requires a Employment Authorization (see http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.visa.us.marriage-based/browse_frm/thread /d5315e2ed23368bb/e4ff9ccf5bdf6106#e4ff9ccf5bdf6106 which explains why this is the case). So now we are really stuck. I often travel for work and she is really stuck here. Please tell me there is a way out of this nightmare. Thanks! Hi, One must always follow the rules as you often get faced with what we call " a strict interpretation thereof " . That being said this is most infortunate and I can advise with a great degree of certitude when I say you should imediately consult with a legal professional as matters can always be resolved. BCIS are not without understanding despite what you read here and all you need is to get your paperwork in order. I have a good feeling in your case. Best of luck Julia > OK, more irritating news from USCIS. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Thanks! > OK, more irritating news from USCIS. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Thanks! You should have filed the I-485 and the I-765 together. Did you fill in the correct information that the I-765 was being filed based on an appplication to adjust status and did you send it to the Chicogo address? Good luck! :)Marnee > You should have filed the I-485 and the I-765 together. Did you fill > in the correct information that the I-765 was being filed based on an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Good luck! > :)Marnee It's not necessary to file them together, as long as you show in the EAD application package that you have an I-485 pending. Did you include a copy of the I-485 along with your EAD package? If not, they might not have been able to see your I-485 pending yet, as it had only been a few weeks and probably not in the system yet. I'm not sure what the I-94 has to do with it either, except that most people file the AOS package within the first 90 days, before the I-94 expires. They probably looked at the expired I-94, saw that you don't have an I-485 pending yet (according to their records) and issued a denial. Here's a suggestion that come to mind: Re-submit the EAD application, this time including a photocopy of the I-485 NOA, showing you've done your biometrics. I can't think of anything else to do. Best Wishes, Rene > OK, more irritating news from USCIS. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Thanks! My first question to you is which category did you mark on the I-765? If you checked the one for the temporary 90 day EAD then yes, they are correct. Let us know what code you marked.  SignatureI'm not an attorney. This disclaimer is valid in NYS! Thanks for the replies, but I did everything as I should have. I sent in with my 765 a photocopy of the cleared check from the I-485 (as I had not received a NOA for the 485 until last week though the check had cleared almost 3 months ago). There is no choice on the 765 for a temp work one, only "Permission to accept employment", replacement, or renewal. So is my only recourse to submit a new application along with $175 and hope someone sane reviews it? I just spoke with someone at USCIS and they explained it - it is my fault, as Rete indicated. I put down a6 as the code, which is for people coming over on a K1. But the k1 had expired and the 485 was in process so I should have put down c9, Adjustment Applicant. Ugh. Bye $175 and 3 months. Thanks all, as usual. > I just spoke with someone at USCIS and they explained it - it is my > fault, as Rete indicated. I put down a6 as the code, which is for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Thanks all, as usual. Ouch, sorry to hear that - it always hurts to lose money and time. But now you know the right category...good luck on the next one. :) Rene > I just spoke with someone at USCIS and they explained it - it is my > fault, as Rete indicated. I put down a6 as the code, which is for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Thanks all, as usual. I'm sorry to be right in this case, Sevros. I hope you get quick response to your new application. SignatureI'm not an attorney. This disclaimer is valid in NYS! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.