回複：請問xiaobaitu及各位:MTR不成自動轉成appeal麽

Your lawyer is right. At least it is right two years ago in NSC since I did it in this way then.

After I filed I290B to NSC 4 months later, I got lette from NSC in which they said they transferred my case to D.C. That means MTR did not pass and the case have to go appeal process. 8 more months later my case got approved after appeal.

My friend did exact same thing with me but his case was approved during MTR in NSC. it took 3 months and he got his GC already.

This is what happened in 2 years ago. I think it is still same process so I say your lawyer is right.

I don't think it is nice to say your lawyer does not know anything, he or she should know more things in law field than you, should'nt he or she?

I hope this will help you.

所有跟帖： 

• 回複：回複：請問xiaobaitu及各位:MTR不成自動轉成appeal麽 -majia113- ♀ (170 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 07:12:52

• sorry,上文誤將appeal錯打成appear -xiaobaitu- ♀ (0 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 07:16:25

• 回複：回複：回複：請問xiaobaitu及各位:MTR不成自動轉成appeal麽 -YIUYIU- ♂ (68 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 07:27:00

• 如果遞交的是290B， 自動就是appear,不存在MTR不成再轉appear的情況 -xiaobaitu- ♀ (401 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 07:15:04

• 回複：如果遞交的是290B， 自動就是appear,不存在MTR不成再轉appear -majia113- ♀ (205 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 07:29:43

• 回複:這個解釋MTR和appeal區別的說法對麽? -majia113- ♀ (1778 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 07:44:00

• 回複:又找到另一個關於I290B的說法,跟我律師說法一樣,正確麽? -majia113- ♀ (291 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 07:50:41

• 回複：回複:又找到另一個關於I290B的說法,跟我律師說法一樣,正確麽? -YIUYIU- ♂ (53 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 08:06:12

• 回複：多謝! -majia113- ♀ (17 bytes) () 04/25/2007 postreply 08:16:23