Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Treatment of denied LIFE Act application

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Treatment of denied LIFE Act application

    §245a.6 Treatment of denied application under part 245a, Subpart B.
    If the district director finds that an eligible alien as defined at §245a.10 has not established eligibility under section 1104 of the LIFE Act (part 245a, Subpart B), the district director shall consider whether the eligible alien has established eligibility for adjustment to temporary resident status under section 245A of the Act, as in effect before enactment of section 1104 of the LIFE Act (part 245a, Subpart A). In such an adjudication using this Subpart A, the district director will deem the "date of filing the application" to be the date the eligible alien establishes that he or she was "front-desked" or that, though he or she took concrete steps to apply, the front-desking policy was a substantial cause of his or her failure to apply. If the eligible alien has established eligibility for adjustment to temporary resident status, the LIFE Legalization application shall be deemed converted to an application for temporary residence under this Subpart A.

    Anybody went through this???????????

  • #2
    §245a.6 Treatment of denied application under part 245a, Subpart B.
    If the district director finds that an eligible alien as defined at §245a.10 has not established eligibility under section 1104 of the LIFE Act (part 245a, Subpart B), the district director shall consider whether the eligible alien has established eligibility for adjustment to temporary resident status under section 245A of the Act, as in effect before enactment of section 1104 of the LIFE Act (part 245a, Subpart A). In such an adjudication using this Subpart A, the district director will deem the "date of filing the application" to be the date the eligible alien establishes that he or she was "front-desked" or that, though he or she took concrete steps to apply, the front-desking policy was a substantial cause of his or her failure to apply. If the eligible alien has established eligibility for adjustment to temporary resident status, the LIFE Legalization application shall be deemed converted to an application for temporary residence under this Subpart A.

    Anybody went through this???????????

    Comment


    • #3
      I have not heard of anyone going through this. I woild like to tie in another question here and get experts opinion.
      If LIFE application as been deined because of misreprisentation/fraud in the material present to prove presence in 1981-1982 and applicant found inadmissible under INA(a)(6)(C)(i). Is the applicant deportable? The applicant's I687 Under CSS setemment is also pending. Does the inadmissibility hold for just LIFE application or once inadmissible, applicant is unable to adjust by CSS setemlent or any other means.

      Comment


      • #4
        PA,
        why do you think Immigration Attorneys charge fees?
        I posted earlier all links to Shusterman's website, dealing with LULAC/LIFE applications, did you find it useful?

        Zumot,
        Can you give more details?
        What is your question?
        Whether anybody went through this?
        Do you have other, particular questions that you seek answers to?

        E.

        Comment


        • #5
          i was also denied life legalization for misrepresentation
          can you tell me were was your application processed my
          was n.y

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi rajubhai
            Can you please tell me what the USCIS said about your Life Legalization misrepresentations? So we can advise you and find a way to respond to USCIS accusation!!!
            Rajubhai can you please tell me what happened with your Life Act interview and what kind of documents you gave the USCIS about your presence from 1982-88.

            Comment


            • #7
              hi zumot
              e-mail me sayani9@yahoo.com.

              Comment


              • #8
                Epic your findins are very useful but I am still missing the answer to one part. If inadmissible in one case, does that mean inadmissible to any other future filings to adjust. See if you can ding that one out. Also, please see the following arctle and see what you can make out of it.
                http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
                and read
                03/31/2005: Attorney General Rules "Expungement" Does Not Remove Conviction and Deportability for Immigration Purposes.

                Comment


                • #9
                  PA:

                  There are few grounds of inadmissibility that are most serious and no waiver is possible for those. Others are relatively easier to overcome.

                  For example, both convicted murderer and simple 'overstay' are 'inadmissible' and 'deportable', per different subparts of Section 212, 237 and 238( in case of convicted murderer).
                  However, 'overstay' can adjust under 245(i) or 245A or some other valid grounds of adjustability.
                  While murderer can't.

                  As you can see, the spectrum under which Alien might fall is quite wide.

                  If I am not mistaken, you earlier stated that you or your friend fall under 212(a)(6)(C)(i).
                  Again, it is important to know what kind of misrepresentation you are talking about.
                  I assume many people who were eligible to adjust under 245A would also be inadmissible under various subparts of section 212 by virtue of either overstaying , or staying and working in US illegally. Some may have also used false documents to enter US in the first place[that would be one example of application of (a)(6)(C)(i)].
                  Again, if such conflict of statutes arised, Section245A would logically overrule certain subparts of 212.
                  Or certain waiver would allow to overcome the requirements of certain parts of Section 212.
                  But there are some very strict subparts of Section 212 that are virtually impossible to overcome. Still other subparts are possible to overcome, but only in case if you prove extreme hardship to USC, which you said would not apply to you/your friend.
                  There are also statutory limitations on 'misrepresentations', which is 5 years , if I am not wrong.
                  And you never gave , or at least I do not recall/didn't read parts where you would give a detailed account as to what particular finding was made, how were you or your frind fall under 212 (a)(6)(C)(i)?
                  Was misrrepresentation made during application for adjustment under LIFE/LULAC?
                  If so, was the finding wrong/factually unsupported?
                  If so, can you prove it?
                  You should give much more details about your case before we can give you more precise answers.
                  But I would personally suggest in your particular case to check everything with Immigration Attorney, rather than expecting us, regular folks, to give you the most accurate answer on this website.


                  As far as AG's expungement ruling goes:
                  from what I know some laws in California are very tough and some sentenses are harsher than in other parts of the country.
                  Expungement rule you refer to applies to the case of FIREARM CONVICTION in CA, which is a serious crime in itself, regardless of what State you reside in.
                  And AG ruled that "An alien whose firearms conviction was expunged pursuant to section 1203.4 of the
                  California Penal Code has been "convicted" for immigration purposes. Matter of
                  Marroquin, 23 I&N Dec. 705 (A.G. 2005)".
                  It really doesn't matter what I think of it, and there is nothing I can say to you except that AG has made a ruling that will have effect on people who were convicted of certain crimes in past but had their records 'expunged'.


                  E.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    By all means do not answer questions by this poster. This person is psychologically unstable and will use this information against you in futere postings. I would advise you to ask some of the better qualified, well natured helpers on this board. Good luck!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      KEROSENE!!!
                      KEROSENE!!!




                      PA, feel free to ask if you have any questions.

                      E.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        You are all beating behind the bushes. Its clear that the alien claiming his eligiblity under 245. he should have concrete proof that he was Front Desked. Means he was tried to file his case after the initial date expired but his application was either rejected or returned to him because he filed late OR after the Expiration date. Service is looking for the proof of Stamp Or any other kind of proof of receiving application.
                        Once this aplication is does not established the eligiblity for AOS then Service will look for ASO under 245A Sub A.( this is second way to see if alien can be adjusted) If Alien qualify for This part then he will be adjusted to temp residence and Date of filing his application will be his priority date for adjustment.

                        TO PA,
                        Once the application is denied for Mis rep, YES alien will be deportable and inadmissable and He will be denied any case pending including CSS, Marriage petition. Political asylum. Deportation proceeding can be started if he got caught but due to No Criminal history he will have low priority .
                        Its a discussion, not a legal advise..

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Fraud or Misrepresentation

                          Under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i), an alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or entry into the United States or other benefit provided under the INA is excludable. The determination of materiality is a fact which would make an alien excludable or shut off a line of inquiry which may have resulted in exclusion.

                          A more restrictive immigrant waiver is authorized under the new INA §212(i)(1) in the case of an immigrant who is the spouse, son or daughter or a United States citizen or of an immigrant lawfully admitted for permanent residence if it is established to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that the refusal of admission would result in extreme hardship to the citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent of of such an alien. According to the new INA §212(i)(2), no court shall have jurisdiction to review a decision or action of the Attorney General regarding a waiver under INA §212(i)(1).

                          Under the new INA §212(a)(6)(C)(ii), any alien who falsely represents, or has falsely represented, himself or herself to be a citizen of the United States for any purpose or benefit under the INA or any other Federal or State law is excludable. [This provision is applicable to representations made on or after September 30, 1996.] The immigrant waiver described above does not apply to this ground.

                          There is only one exception to INA §212(a)(6)(C)(ii), which was implemented by the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 ("CCA"). In the case of an alien making such a representation, if:


                          Each natural parent of the alien (or, in the case of an adopted alien, each adoptive parent of the alien) is or was a citizen (whether by birth or naturalization);

                          The alien permanently resided in the United States prior to attaining the age of 16; and

                          The alien reasonably believed at the time of making such representation that he or she was a citizen;

                          the alien shall not be considered to be inadmissible under any provision of this subsection based on such representation.

                          Stowaways
                          An alien who is a stowaway is excludable under INA §212(a)(6)(D).


                          Document Fraud

                          Aliens who are subject to a final order for violation of section 274C (which relates to document fraud) are excludable under INA §212(a)(6)(F)(i) [formerly INA §212(a)(6)(F)]. The new INA §212(D)(12) provides for a waiver of INA §212(a)(6)(F)(i) for humanitarian purposes or to assure family unity in the case of lawful permanent residents, who temporarily proceeded abroad voluntarily and are otherwise admissible to the United States as returning residents, and applicants for admission or adjustment of status, if no previous civil money penalty was imposed against the alien under section 274C and the offense was committed solely to assist, aid or support the alien's spouse or child. No court shall have jurisdiction to review a decision of the Attorney General to grant or deny a waiver under this ground.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            LIFE Act applications are seriously backlogged (as are many other applications). I think over 100,000 applications were filed during the 2-year application period ending in June 2003. Many class members were interviewed two years ago and have heard nothing. We have been able to get some backlogged cases processed and approved, but this takes pushing and writing letters and telephoning the CIS. Best done by a lawyer. Many LIFE Act applications have been approved, many denied, and most are still pending.

                            Comment



                            Working...
                            X