future stepdaughter immigration status once here

[jj]

Good work Ronnie,  you are to be congratulated on your hard work to get to this point and a good "common sense" decision by the Judge.  The law is ambiguous to say the least,  and the arguments you and the judge brought forth should make it easier for the rest of us to understand and apply.  I will be sending this to our immigration attorney whom I have enlisted to see us thru the AOS period. They had their biometrics on Dec 27, and the total time frame is averaging 6 months in our district.  My step-daughter will be 21 in middle of  July. We have flagged paperwork to expediate, (at least try to).      Your efforts are appreciated, and glad your step-son is one step closer to adjusting his status, and citizenship.

[William3rd]

Keep an eye on this one. It seems to have short coat tails and has not had the time to file an appeal run yet.  Why is it that jurists are thoughtful and fine writers when they are fer ya and idiots who dont understand the case when they are agin ya, like in IMBRA?

[Ronnie]

Happy New Year William!

I sense you don't agree with the Court.  Would you have made a different argument than the ones used by the US Attorney? 

[William3rd]

No- I do not disagree with the decision as it sits.

I dont think that the TA did much work on the case; they will have to work a little harder on the appeal, if they do appeal. Fortunately, the case is in the 9th circuit. . . . .

There has always been the K anomaly which allows for "children" up to age 21 to AOS. The rest of the law is marriage before age 18 or no eligibility to the step-child. Perhaps Congress can address this small area in the next term.

The decision has short coat tails and not much in the way of precedence. Best way to face it is just to get the AOS done before age 21 becomes an issue. If you can't, you play the cards that you are dealt. . . .

[Ronnie]

William, 
What argument did the attorney miss?  She did the best she could.  A different attorney defended the Still in Jiang..nothing subtantive there either.  Jiang was lost because Jiang's attorney closed doors he should have left open.  That case, which is under appeal, was heard by a newly assigned magistrate who likely did not want to disagree with the Gov't.

[Ronnie]

JJ,

You can avoid all this hassle since your wife's daugher doesn't reach 21 for a while.  I was on a conference call last March with several other families whose K-2 had been wrongfully denied on age out grounds and one fellow said his wife's daughter was turning 21 in May and they had no interview date.

When I suggested he try for an expedited interview, he got an infopass, went in and asked for an expedited interview and at first was told, as I was, that as  long as the app was in, there would be no age out issue.  He said he was in touch with others who had been denied even though the app was in b/4 21.

Later they came back to him and granted an interview the very next week and the green cards arrived two weeks later.

My advice would be to get and infopass and insist on an expedited interview.  I don't think the flagging always works...didn't in our case.

[William3rd]

The way its always been is that interview has to be COMPLETED before the 21st birthday. You have until summer. . . when did they finish your biometrics?

 Depending on the final outcome of this particular case, it may change or may change in the 9th circuit or in a particular district office.

[jj]

Ronnie- what month and year did your friend's daughter file AOS ?

WilliamIII- if are asking me, my their biometrics was Dec 27, last week.  We  now have 6 1/2 months.  Unfortunately, I still can not check their status on line as they are not in the computer system yet, seems they are behind entering AOS receipt numbers.  We got NOA back after filing on Nov 5th , 07. 

[William3rd]

My prediction would be an interview notice arriving in March. However, you cant bank on it.

Stay on their case via your counsel.

[Ronnie]

Ronnie- what month and year did your friend's daughter file AOS ?

He fiiled in Dec 2006.  Normal waiting time for an interview was 12 months in his district office.

In my wife's case..we filed in Sep 05; interview was April 06, her name check was not completed and case approved until Dec 2006.  Under the interpretation of some DOs (i.e., SFO) the case must be adjudicated before 21st birthday.  Interviews often occur before the name check is done as in our case therefore final adjudication does not always happen at interview.