Age-out - but not official!!!
Sep 6th 2005, 12:20 pm
#76
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 863
Re: Age-out - but not official!!!
Originally Posted by lovenlife
Ok last post,
I agree, but trying to find one, just one lawyer out here has been impossible. I have basically stated exactly what you have said and no one seems to under stand this. No one, in one ear out the other they talk of the CSPA that does|does not cover your son, when did I file the I-130 for him, there is a 2 year limit (k-3 and 4’s) etc. I does my head in. I can’t even get my original lawyer to look at it, he’s of the mind that since a child is defined under sec 101(b) he’s an age out as well. I feel like beating my head against a brick wall. The author of “K-visas: The Hybrid Visas� in the AILA 2005-06 Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook has spoiled your contention for us as well, Ms Provatas statements falls in line with the Williams memo in regard to the handling of K-2’s and age out, so every lawyer that reads it seems to take this a authority. So how can we get our hand on the prize? I feel like I’m playing power ball. <shakes head, walks off disgusted>
I agree, but trying to find one, just one lawyer out here has been impossible. I have basically stated exactly what you have said and no one seems to under stand this. No one, in one ear out the other they talk of the CSPA that does|does not cover your son, when did I file the I-130 for him, there is a 2 year limit (k-3 and 4’s) etc. I does my head in. I can’t even get my original lawyer to look at it, he’s of the mind that since a child is defined under sec 101(b) he’s an age out as well. I feel like beating my head against a brick wall. The author of “K-visas: The Hybrid Visas� in the AILA 2005-06 Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook has spoiled your contention for us as well, Ms Provatas statements falls in line with the Williams memo in regard to the handling of K-2’s and age out, so every lawyer that reads it seems to take this a authority. So how can we get our hand on the prize? I feel like I’m playing power ball. <shakes head, walks off disgusted>
Perhaps it all has to do with the approach, and wanting to get in all the details may be becoming too long-winded, and offer too many options for the discourse to get off on a tangent.
How about feeding this statement to your lawyer? It seems fairly succinct and right to the point to me. "The "age-out" applies to the I-129F visa petition, issuance of the K-2 visa, and entry as a K-2 non-immigrant. That is ALL the Immigration & Nationality Act requires (del: in regards to) .... Period. Once there is entry on the K-2, the ONLY substantive qualification is that (del:your wife married you) <the K-1 married the USC petitioner> within the statutory 90 days. (del:His age)<Age of K-2> has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the ADJUSTMENT."
Sep 6th 2005, 1:30 pm
#77
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: Age-out - but not official!!!
Originally Posted by lovenlife
Ok last post,
I agree, but trying to find one, just one lawyer out here has been impossible. I have basically stated exactly what you have said and no one seems to under stand this. No one, in one ear out the other they talk of the CSPA that does|does not cover your son, when did I file the I-130 for him, there is a 2 year limit (k-3 and 4’s) etc. I does my head in. I can’t even get my original lawyer to look at it, he’s of the mind that since a child is defined under sec 101(b) he’s an age out as well. I feel like beating my head against a brick wall. The author of “K-visas: The Hybrid Visas� in the AILA 2005-06 Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook has spoiled your contention for us as well, Ms Provatas statements falls in line with the Williams memo in regard to the handling of K-2’s and age out, so every lawyer that reads it seems to take this a authority. So how can we get our hand on the prize? I feel like I’m playing power ball. <shakes head, walks off disgusted>
I agree, but trying to find one, just one lawyer out here has been impossible. I have basically stated exactly what you have said and no one seems to under stand this. No one, in one ear out the other they talk of the CSPA that does|does not cover your son, when did I file the I-130 for him, there is a 2 year limit (k-3 and 4’s) etc. I does my head in. I can’t even get my original lawyer to look at it, he’s of the mind that since a child is defined under sec 101(b) he’s an age out as well. I feel like beating my head against a brick wall. The author of “K-visas: The Hybrid Visas� in the AILA 2005-06 Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook has spoiled your contention for us as well, Ms Provatas statements falls in line with the Williams memo in regard to the handling of K-2’s and age out, so every lawyer that reads it seems to take this a authority. So how can we get our hand on the prize? I feel like I’m playing power ball. <shakes head, walks off disgusted>
Please note that the tone of your posting appears hostile to yours truly when it seems that everybody but your OWN lawyer is in agreement.
Folinskyinla states that CSPA is not applicable to K-2 adjustments.
This is in total agreement with the 2-14-2003 Williams Memo. On page 1, Williams notes that CSPA applies to adjustments based upon section 204. K-1/2 adjustments are not based upon section 204 -- they are based upon section 214(d).
On page 2 of the Memo, Williams states that "Non-immigrant visa (e.g. K or V) ... will not beneift fro0m the provisions of CSPA." There is a footnote which states "Under the literal language of the statute, the CSPA applies only to immigrant visa categories specified and the law does not contain a provision allowing for its application to V visa/status, K, or other nonimmigrant cases."
The memo goes on to Immediate Relatives stating "an alien who is a K2 cannot utilize the CSPA when seeking to adjust."
I was talking to a colleaque today on another issue and I brought up the K-2 age out issue. Nancy AGREED with me that CSPA does not apply and cannot be used. Nancy also added "Its not needed for the adjustment."
How do you get the prize -- I suggest you LISTEN to what you have now been told -- the Williams Memo is correct and I fail to see why your own lawyer thinks it isn't. Furthermore, I would wave the Willimas Memo in the face of the CIS examiner who told you that your wife's son "aged out."
Good luck.
