I completely forgot to mention a conversation I had with another K-3er
at the Vancouver consulate last week.

This person was denied entry to
the US after he attempted to cross having filed his I-130 & I-129F. He
was fingerprinted and it seems that he was not given the option to
voluntarily withdraw.

He did get his K-3 visa regardless and was not
questioned about it. Of far greater interest to the interviewer was a
drunk-in-public conviction dating back about 10 years, for which he had
to produce court records...anyway, I digress.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by CalgaryAMC I completely forgot
to mention a conversation I had with another K-3er at the Vancouver
consulate last week. This person was denied entry to the US after
he attempted to cross having filed his I-130 & I-129F. He was
fingerprinted and it seems that he was not given the option to
voluntarily withdraw. He did get his K-3 visa regardless and was
not questioned about it. Of far greater interest to the interviewer
was a drunk-in-public conviction dating back about 10 years, for which
he had to produce court records...anyway, I digress.

Hi:


If he got the K-3 visa without a waiver, then he WAS allowed to
"voluntarily" withdraw.


--
Certified Specialist
Immigration & Nat. Law
Cal. Bar Board of Legal Specialization


Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Folinskyinla Hi: If he got
the K-3 visa without a waiver, then he WAS allowed to "voluntarily"
withdraw.

Interesting. He told me he was fingerprinted and
I assumed this meant he was on record as having a denied entry. For
that matter, he may have had a waiver and not mentioned it to me.


Point I wanted to communicate: he was denied entry because he had
filed an I-130/I-129F.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by CalgaryAMC Interesting. He told
me he was fingerprinted and I assumed this meant he was on record as
having a denied entry. For that matter, he may have had a waiver and
not mentioned it to me. Point I wanted to communicate: he was
denied entry because he had filed an I-130/I-129F.

Hi:

When
there is a formal action, you get fingerprinted -- this includes a
formal withdrawal of the application for entry.

I often get
consulations about people who applied for entry, paperwork was done,
fingerprints taken and they then return home. In order to give proper
advice and figure out the course of action, I need to see the actual
paperwork to determine whether or not it was a "voluntary" withdrawal.


For some reason, I'm thinking of Gary Gilmore who was sentenced to
death by Utah. Gilmore voluntarily elected not to be hung and Utah
honored that wish. He was shot.


--
Certified Specialist
Immigration & Nat. Law
Cal. Bar Board of Legal Specialization


Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Can they just deny you entry for applying for I-130/I-129F? There isn't
anything illegal about entering the US while these are being process.
There must have been something more to the situation. Perhaps lack of
ties to the home country?


Originally posted by CalgaryAMC
I completely forgot to mention a conversation I had with another
K-3er at the Vancouver consulate last week. This person was denied
entry to the US after he attempted to cross having filed his I-130 & I-
129F. He was fingerprinted and it seems that he was not given the option
to voluntarily withdraw.
He did get his K-3 visa regardless and was
not questioned about it. Of far greater interest to the interviewer was
a drunk-in-public conviction dating back about 10 years, for which he
had to produce court records...anyway, I digress.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Lauren Can they just deny you
entry for applying for I-130/I-129F? There isn't anything illegal about
entering the US while these are being process. There must have been
something more to the situation. Perhaps lack of ties to the home
country?

Hi:

Yes, they can deny entry because an I-130/129F
is pending. This has been true for a long time.

Take a look at
101(a)(15)(B) of the Immigration & Nationality Act for the defintion of
non-immigrant visitor -- the applicant must have a home abroad which
they do not intend to abandon.

"Intent" is a subjective thing. And
what is the extent of that intent? A very strict defintion would make
it impossible for the beneficiary of a pending I-130 to immigrate.


--
Certified Specialist
Immigration & Nat. Law
Cal. Bar Board of Legal Specialization


Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Ok, so I have both I-130/I-129F pending and am planning a 3 week visit
to the US in May. I'm concerned b/c I don't have significant ties to my
home country but am definitely planning on returning. Why else would I
pay for and apply to do it the proper way??
I am unemployed and living
with my parents until I get my K3. Does anyone have any suggestions for
other proof?? I'm worried I will be denied entry.



Originally posted by Folinskyinla Hi: Yes, they
can deny entry because an I-130/129F is pending. This has been true for
a long time. Take a look at 101(a)(15)(B) of the Immigration &
Nationality Act for the defintion of non-immigrant visitor -- the
applicant must have a home abroad which they do not intend to abandon.

"Intent" is a subjective thing. And what is the extent of that intent?
A very strict defintion would make it impossible for the beneficiary of
a pending I-130 to immigrate.


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Lauren Ok, so I have both I-130/I-
129F pending and am planning a 3 week visit to the US in May. I'm
concerned b/c I don't have significant ties to my home country but am
definitely planning on returning. Why else would I pay for and apply
to do it the proper way?? I am unemployed and living with my parents
until I get my K3. Does anyone have any suggestions for other proof??
I'm worried I will be denied entry.

Hi:

Your plan is
perfectly legal. However, the POE people have the right to turn you
away. However, in the course of ANY application for entry, there is
ALWAYS the risk that one might be turned away. It is the nature of
the system.


--
Certified Specialist
Immigration & Nat. Law
Cal. Bar Board of Legal Specialization


Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Originally posted by Folinskyinla Hi: Your plan is
perfectly legal. However, the POE people have the right to turn you
away. However, in the course of ANY application for entry, there is
ALWAYS the risk that one might be turned away. It is the nature of the
system.

I think that's too bad though... Why don't they just
have a uniform set of rules applicable on all POE's, as to what proof is
sufficient and such and give these people the benefit of the doubt?
Because if they have the intent to stay in the US indefinitely upon
visiting, why would they bother to file for the I-130 and/or I-129F
(which is expensive, time-consuming and energy-robbing).

Like the
situation is right now, there is no legal certainty at all or does the
notion of legal certainty not apply on aliens?

Just wondering...


--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com

It's a big red flag that makes proving your ties even more important.
Personally I think it's ludicrous - if you are going to the trouble of
filing the paperwork properly, why would you be more likely to immigrate
illegally. From what we've seen the USCIS inspectors are very variable in
this regard - some seem to want to deny entry automatically while others get
chatty about all the things the immigrant will need to do when they do move.
C'est la vie.

Andy.

--
I'm not really here, it's just your warped imagination
"Lauren" <member15236@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:1375971.1082431803@britishexpats.com... Can they just deny you entry for applying for I-130/I-129F? There isn't anything illegal about entering the US while these are being process. There must have been something more to the situation. Perhaps lack of ties to the home country? Originally posted by CalgaryAMC I completely forgot to mention a conversation I had with another K-3er at the Vancouver consulate last week. This person was denied entry to the US after he attempted to cross having filed his I-130 & I- 129F. He was fingerprinted and it seems that he was not given the option to voluntarily withdraw. He did get his K-3 visa regardless and was not questioned about it. Of far greater interest to the interviewer was a drunk-in-public conviction dating back about 10 years, for which he had to produce court records...anyway, I digress. -- Posted via http://britishexpats.com