Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

cspa to antman23

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

  • cspa to antman23

    I am also confuse about interpretation no. 17. specially the word "who". Is he refering to both beneficiary and his or her child. Under the old law, once the child aged out, the NVC dilete the child's name from the list. Under cspa, it is not dileted. Under both laws. the parents file the visa application, never the child.As a derivative child he or she is a travelling companion. The parents and the child are issued visa at the same time.

    Under cspa, if you aged out, you fall under the appropriate conversation category process. That is, if you qualified under Section 8 EFFECTIVE DATE, IF NOT, you are out because cspa is not retroactive. I this a BETRAYAL.

    In your case, your parents petition was approved before cspa, and no visa application is to be filed yet, I cannot see any reason why you cannot benifit under the cspa.

    Your parents petition has complied with the two elements of cspa:

    1. there is an approved peition prior to cspa,
    2. there is no final visa determination yet becuase there is none to determine.

    The cspa does not require an approved petition to file a visa application before its effectivity, it only speaks of final determination filed before its effectivity.

    I hope you get my point.

  • #2
    I am also confuse about interpretation no. 17. specially the word "who". Is he refering to both beneficiary and his or her child. Under the old law, once the child aged out, the NVC dilete the child's name from the list. Under cspa, it is not dileted. Under both laws. the parents file the visa application, never the child.As a derivative child he or she is a travelling companion. The parents and the child are issued visa at the same time.

    Under cspa, if you aged out, you fall under the appropriate conversation category process. That is, if you qualified under Section 8 EFFECTIVE DATE, IF NOT, you are out because cspa is not retroactive. I this a BETRAYAL.

    In your case, your parents petition was approved before cspa, and no visa application is to be filed yet, I cannot see any reason why you cannot benifit under the cspa.

    Your parents petition has complied with the two elements of cspa:

    1. there is an approved peition prior to cspa,
    2. there is no final visa determination yet becuase there is none to determine.

    The cspa does not require an approved petition to file a visa application before its effectivity, it only speaks of final determination filed before its effectivity.

    I hope you get my point.

    Comment


    • #3
      dear boni,

      to clarify, my parents have already filed for visa application because they already submitted the 130 form, affidavit of support by the sponsor, have paid the 260$ fee and all they are waiting is the medical and interview schedule that will be provided by the US local embassy here.

      so, do u think i am still qualified. they have applied for visa already, although no final determination yet as they are still to be given the medical and interview schedule.

      im still waiting for my lawyers reply there in USA by the name of ATTY. GURFINKEL.

      but do u think i can still catch up and obtain the visa the same time they obtain it. or if not, will i be given the retention of the priority date under f2b.

      again, i have two petitions as derivative, one f4( 1982) and one f3 (1988) but its the f3 thats being processed now.

      will i be able to avail of the CSPA given such scenario.

      thanks boni,

      hope for the best
      antman23

      Comment


      • #4
        dear boni,

        i got your point but what can you say about the confusing statement in interpretation#17 saying that...

        Under this interpretation, beneficiaries ( and derivative beneficiaries ) of petitions approved prior to August 6, 2002 who never applied for a visa prior to August 6 BECAUSE THEY HAVE AGED-OUT will receive no benefit from Section 3 and cannot apply afterward in order to receive a benefit.

        pls read it.

        its very confusing. thats why i thought i cannot anymore avail of the cspa because although there has been no final determination yet as to my parents visa, the fact is i never did apply for a visa prior to August 6 which is but true because HOW WILL I BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR VISA when our priority dates became current when in fact i have aged-out already even before it became current, that is why i was excluded from the NVC list and i did not submit the 130 form because they excluded me already.

        what do u think? that interpretation is confusing.

        will i still be entitled of CSPA after reading that?

        thanks,
        antman23

        Comment


        • #5
          As I have said children under f4 petition do not apply for visa, you are listed only as travelling companion of your parent in the Biodata form.It is always the parent who do the filling.

          Your case definitely fall under the PRIORITY OF RETENTION DATE provision of the law because you have age out before the passage of cspa and your case under the exception under Sec. 8.

          Generally, petitions filed prior to cspa is not covered,because the cspa is not retroactive. But in all general rule, there is always an e4xcdption execption. The exception under Sec. 8, is if the visa application is still under process during, on and after the cspa effectivity.

          In your case dthe visa application ;has no final determination yet so you are covered but under the Retention process, in other words you do not fall under 2a but 2b, for ;that matter you have to advise sthe NVC that you are still covered.

          Comment


          • #6
            As I have said children under f4 petition do not apply for visa, you are listed only as travelling companion of your parent in the Biodata form.It is always the parent who do the filling.

            Your case definitely fall under the PRIORITY OF RETENTION DATE provision of the law because you have age out before the passage of cspa and your case falls under the exception of Sec. 8.

            Generally, petitions filed prior to cspa is not covered,because the cspa is not retroactive. But in all general rule, there is always an excdption exeception. The exception under Sec. 8, is if the visa application is still under process during, on and after the cspa effectivity.

            In your case the visa application has no final determination yet so you are covered but under the Retention process, in other words you do not fall under 2a but 2b, for that matter you have to advise the NVC that you are still covered.

            Comment


            • #7
              to clarify my point, here is an example which was posted before, if you have read it.

              I filed for my sister on 1980. her visa application begin on 4-17-002 when she recieved paper works from the local consulate, because of delays, she finally recieved her visa on 8-5-02. On that date her son was 21 years old and 7 months.Under the old law her sons is out, under the cspa he is not covered iether becuase he is not included under the Sec. 8 excetion- that is, the visa application was determined prior to the cspa.

              UInder the above situation, the only recourse for my sister is to file a petition under f2b category, for unmarried sons and daughters of GC holders, any time after she landed in the US.

              Comment


              • #8
                So, does this mean if parents has not yet received a visa, or parent's application for adjustment of status has not been approved(has not been interveiwed), the sons and daughters will qualify under CSPA?

                Tim

                Comment


                • #9
                  thanks boni, i got your point, i knew i am really
                  entitled to CSPA but the thing that still confuses me is interpretation # 17 which speaks of those who have not filed visa ( main and derivative beneficiaries ) prior to august 6 because they aged-out can no longer avail of the CSPA. have u read it?

                  that section is still currently being discussed. im still waiting for atty. gurfinkel's reply on my case. what do u think should i do for the mean time?

                  will i report my case already to NVC and our local US embassy here?

                  by the way boni, the one currently being processed right now in my case is the F3. my F4 is not yet current.

                  i told u i have f3 and f4 petitions. but f4 will be useless anymore since its the f3 thats current right now.

                  by the way, my grandmother filed her petition f3 to my mother in Guam, USA. do u think i will have to contact INS in Guam?

                  but my family will go straight to mainland USA hopefully,and i hope i will be able to obtain the visa the same time they get it.

                  they're medical and interview will be soon so i was quite anxious of acting fast since final adjudication will be soon.

                  i hope to catch up.

                  what do u think boni and others?

                  local embassy here boni doesn't know the details of the CSPA, i dunno why. they just said they have to wait for guidelines.

                  hope for the best,
                  antman23

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I have to clarify one thing. you cannot file a visa application unless your visa number is reachable. by that time the local consulate will send your paper work.If the paper work was sent to you before the cspa, you are not required to accomplished it and send it back before the cspa become effective. The more you are qualified if it was sent back after the cspa under Sec.8. perhaps you misunderstood your so-called interpretation no.17. may be that interpretation is wrong. the truth of the matter is that the cspa is a farse, it is a betrayal of hope by giving us some leeway prentending that the child is qualified under the age determination process and the reduce by process. At the end, they will betray us under Sec.8. the EEFECTIVE DATE which is misleading. I call it the IMPLEMENTATION DATE.

                    Comment

                    Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

                    Home Page

                    Immigration Daily

                    Archives

                    Processing times

                    Immigration forms

                    Discussion board

                    Resources

                    Blogs

                    Twitter feed

                    Immigrant Nation

                    Attorney2Attorney

                    CLE Workshops

                    Immigration books

                    Advertise on ILW

                    EB-5

                    移民日报

                    About ILW.COM

                    Connect to us

                    Questions/Comments

                    SUBSCRIBE

                    Immigration Daily



                    Working...
                    X