Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LIFE Legalization denial rate.

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

  • LIFE Legalization denial rate.

    I talked to too many lawyer about life legalization denial rate, I was surprised it around 98%. Most of them told me the BCIS is still hostile toward CSS/LULAC applicant and if they approved some it just because congress force then through LIFE act.
    All Life applicant who left the country and came back with visa denied, even through to be qualified for Life you must either LULAC/CSS and these cases all of them came back with visa.

  • #2
    In January 2003, the BCIS reported that only 50,000 persons had applied to adjust their status under the LIFE Act, and that of these applications, 50 percent had been filed by persons who, according to the BCIS, never applied for a CSS or LULAC work permit and are accordingly ineligible for LIFE Act benefits

    Comment


    • #3
      Did anybody get approved through the new CSS/LULAC settlement?

      Does anybody know what the approval rate of the new settlement is? I am wondering if the CHRCL knows! Any good news !

      Comment


      • #4
        First of all reprting of 2 LULAC approvals under Life Act that I persoanlly know. Several denials also. Now I have a big question for all the experts.
        One of my friends received intent to deny for LIFE application. The reson being fraud and misrepresentation of ducuments, hence is Inadmisible under INA 212(a)(6)(c)(i). The question is what happens to his I687 filed. Now that LIfe application will be dnied, can he still get work authorization renewed under CSS setekment since his I687 is pending or is he permanently inadmisible. I dared to call Peter Schey and luckily got hold of him. He said LIfe and CSS (I687) are 2 seperate applications. He had to run so could not answer my actual question. Anyone wana take a shot on this one.
        Thanks

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi PA;
          You said One of my friends received intent to deny for LIFE application The reason being fraud and misrepresentation of documents, hence is Inadmissible under INA 212(a)(6)(c)(i).

          My question is did the USCIS give any detail about your friend misrepresentation
          and fraud document, this is a big accusation from their part, did they investigate his case and paper? They can't accuse somebody of that if they don't have evidence or explanation!!! Did you personally look at your friend paper in question? any finding?
          Did the USCIS tell your friend how he can defend his case and paper or sending more proof?
          Peter Schey is a useless person to talk to, if you talk to him it just like you talked to very rude immigration officer even worst.

          Comment


          • #6
            No one will be approved!!!

            ALL GRINTS MUST BURN!!!

            NOT ONLY FRAUDSTERS BUT A-L-L D-A-M-N-E-D G-R-I-N-T-S MUST BURN!!!!!!!!


            BURN ,GRINTS ,BURN!!!

            Comment


            • #7
              hi,
              does accusation for fraud and misrepresentation mean that a person gets deported.

              Comment


              • #8
                GET OUT OF MY BOARD, YOU FRAUDSTER RAJUBHARATI MAKHARATI!!!

                YES, ALL THAT TAKES TO BURN GRINT IS ACCUSATION!!!

                BURN, GRINTS, BURN!!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hey Epic....

                  If you don't want to share then get the hell out of the board.

                  To all Life Legalization applicants. The INS or now BCIS not serious about approving Life Legalization applications. Many of life applicants had their interview and gave the INS evidence of their presence from 1982-1988 and waiting for decission and no action have been taken in their cases from the INS.

                  I suggest to all Life Legalization applicants they should petition the Center for Human Rights and constitution to file a class action against the INS for not approving the eligible Life Legalization applicants. If we delay more then the Life applicants will be waiting another 16 or more years for decision in their cases.

                  To all applicants, please send your thought and request to file a class action against the INS to The Center for Human Rights and Constitution Law at their E-mail address:
                  mail@centerforhumanrights.org and amnestycoordinator@centerforhumanrights.org
                  or to their fax number 213/-386-9484 or you can write to them at
                  Amnesty Coordinator, Center for Human Rights
                  256 S. Occidental Blvd.
                  Los Angeles, California 90057

                  Let us all fight for our rights, family and dignity.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    BURN, GRINTS, BURN!!!

                    You get out of MY board, Dinesh!!!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      To Antton,
                      Yes they gave explanation of the investigation. My question remains the same, since he has I687 filed and it is considered a seperate application. Does the inadmisibilty hold in any applications he files in future or it holds just for LIFE Act application. Also, what happens if the appeal is denied, can he be deported. Are their any waivers available in this case either INA 212(d)(3) or INA 212(h).
                      Thanks

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Get off MY board, PA!!!

                        BURN, GRINTS, BURN!!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Here is what INA says:

                          INA 212(a)(6)(c)(iii). Waiver authorised.
                          For provision authorising waiver of clause (i) [ INA 212(a)(6)(c)(i) ] , see subsection (i).

                          Subsection (i), Adm. of imm. excl. for fraud or wlfl misrep. of mat. fact

                          (1) Attorney General may, in the discretion of the Attorney General, waive the application of clause (i) of subsection (a)(6)(C) in the case of an immigrant who is the spouse , son, or daughter of a US citizen or of an alien lawfully admitted for perm. res. if it is established to the satisfaction of the AG that the refusal of admission to the US of such immigrant alien would result in extreme hardship to the citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent of such alien.
                          (2) No court shall have jurisdiction to review a decision or action of the AG regarding a waiver under paragraph (1).

                          Hope this answers your question, but would suggest that you check with professional Immigration Attorney for updated regulations in Federal Register, and ammendments made to Immigration Law recently.

                          E.

                          ______________________

                          Addl. info:

                          AMNESTY
                          Law Offices of Carl Shusterman
                          624 So. Grand Avenue, Suite 1608, Los Angeles, (213) 623-4592
                          http://www.shusterman.com/toc-amnesty.html


                          Late Amnesty:
                          http://www.shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex...g/lateamnesty/


                          FEDERAL COURTS APPROVE SETTLEMENTS IN CSS AND LULAC (Newman) LEGALIZATION CASES:
                          http://www.shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex...ss_3_23_04.pdf

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi PA
                            Thank you for your respond. The most important thing in your friend's case is to over come the reason for fraud and misrepresentation. To answer your question fully I need to know what is the USCIS serive finding and explanation concerning their accusation of fraud and misrepresentation.
                            Because all CSS/LULAC has to fill out forum I-690 and pay $30.00 because all of them did not tell the U.S embassy in their country when they apply to visa about their illegal presence in the U.S and they lie about their intention when they apply to U.S visa. All of this is mention in the center of the human right and constitution law and USCIS website. After all this said before we gave your friend advice and start the discussion thread. Can you please tell us what are the USCIS finding and explanation of the fraud and misrepresentation of your friend's case?????
                            And what is your friend's thinking of it?? Waiting for your answer PA?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Thanks to Epiclaughter , good research. The only problem is he has none of the following.
                              "in the case of an immigrant who is the spouse , son, or daughter of a US citizen or of an alien lawfully admitted for perm. res. if it is established to the satisfaction of the AG that the refusal of admission to the US of such immigrant alien would result in extreme hardship to the citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent of such alien." The only grounds could be of humanitarian and his long stay in the US and good moral character, no criminal record.

                              To Antton :
                              1- He had provided envelopes of letter received in early 80's from back home. USCIS concluded they are not authentic because they have US postmark on them also and that USCIS has checked with post office and confirmed post office does not postmark mail coming in from overseas.
                              2- He provided a few rent receipts that he recived from the landlord in 1981 and 1982. USCIS claims they could not have been authentic since they are in sequential order and it seems the landlord was not issuing receipts to anyone else.
                              3- He had provided a bank statemant which USCIS thinks is not authentic since the typed lettering was not available till 1984 I.e Laser printing.
                              On all these 3 babses they have concluded he is inadmissible under INA212(a)(6)(c)(i). and advised with 30 days to present any other information that may be considered in deciding the case.

                              I was just looking at the instructions of LIFE Legalization and it states " If you are inadmissible under any section of INA for which waiver is available, you will be required to file I690."

                              Comment



                              Working...
                              X