回複:主要問題是說AOS超過180天485被拒就3年不得入境的問題。

來源: sdfsdfsdff 2008-07-31 09:49:04 [] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 本文已被閱讀: 次 (985 bytes)
回答: 回複:important CIS memo s. 245(k)sdfsdfsdff2008-07-31 08:17:14
Why do you drag the 1996 law 3-year or 10-year bar into this? It has nothing to do with this memo. To trigger the bars above, the first subclause is "unlawful PRESENCE", which has nothing to do with what we discuss here, don't confuse it.

The issue here is ineligibility to invoke 245k. You need to have (let's limit to only subclause A here) no more than 180 days of "unlawful STATUS" since last admission (thus excluding AP entry) or other parole (not AP, but other paroles, there are several type of immigration paroles) So AOS only with no valid non-immigrant status is not a legal "STATUS" but only a legal "PRESENCE", so you will not be able to file EB I-485 again unless you re-enter with a non-immigrant visa to reset the clock.

I said this is not a new interpretation because this language of "STATUS" in 245k (A) and it's difference with legal stay/presence has been discussed between USCIS and AILA a couple of years ago already.



所有跟帖: 

也許你的解釋是對的,問題是USCIS以及國務院是不是按你說的做。 -yeeha- 給 yeeha 發送悄悄話 (59 bytes) () 07/31/2008 postreply 10:26:43

請您先登陸,再發跟帖!

發現Adblock插件

如要繼續瀏覽
請支持本站 請務必在本站關閉/移除任何Adblock

關閉Adblock後 請點擊

請參考如何關閉Adblock/Adblock plus

安裝Adblock plus用戶請點擊瀏覽器圖標
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安裝Adblock用戶請點擊圖標
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”