EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Dec 15th 2003, 5:53 pm
#1
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN, USA
Posts: 204
EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Hi,
I've discovered via much surfing, research and consultation with a lawyer that an EAD (arguably, or perhaps not even arguably) is not necessary for K-3/K-4 visa holders.
They appear very certain about this - once you have applied for AOS, then you are legal to work. It appears that you can apply for an EAD if only for your employers' benefit, but it just is not necessary; the immigrant themselves cannot be penalised for accepting employment if they have filed for AOS.
That would certainly explain why the NBC have put K-3 applicants for EADs on the backburner....
The only thing that bothers me, is why this hasn't been mentioned before on this forum....?
- Mark
I've discovered via much surfing, research and consultation with a lawyer that an EAD (arguably, or perhaps not even arguably) is not necessary for K-3/K-4 visa holders.
They appear very certain about this - once you have applied for AOS, then you are legal to work. It appears that you can apply for an EAD if only for your employers' benefit, but it just is not necessary; the immigrant themselves cannot be penalised for accepting employment if they have filed for AOS.
That would certainly explain why the NBC have put K-3 applicants for EADs on the backburner....
The only thing that bothers me, is why this hasn't been mentioned before on this forum....?
- Mark
Dec 15th 2003, 10:30 pm
#2
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Hi,
I've discovered via much surfing, research and consultation with a lawyer that an EAD (arguably, or perhaps not even arguably) is not necessary for K-3/K-4 visa holders.
They appear very certain about this - once you have applied for AOS, then you are legal to work. It appears that you can apply for an EAD if only for your employers' benefit, but it just is not necessary; the immigrant themselves cannot be penalised for accepting employment if they have filed for AOS.
That would certainly explain why the NBC have put K-3 applicants for EADs on the backburner....
The only thing that bothers me, is why this hasn't been mentioned before on this forum....?
- Mark
Hi,
I've discovered via much surfing, research and consultation with a lawyer that an EAD (arguably, or perhaps not even arguably) is not necessary for K-3/K-4 visa holders.
They appear very certain about this - once you have applied for AOS, then you are legal to work. It appears that you can apply for an EAD if only for your employers' benefit, but it just is not necessary; the immigrant themselves cannot be penalised for accepting employment if they have filed for AOS.
That would certainly explain why the NBC have put K-3 applicants for EADs on the backburner....
The only thing that bothers me, is why this hasn't been mentioned before on this forum....?
- Mark
This HAS been mentioned from time to time -- by yours truly. In fact, it is an FAQ.
There are two components to the employmer sanctions law: employment of "unauthorized aliens" and the paperwork provisions.
All K's are authorized to work "incident to status." However, the defintion has a provision "as evidenced by an employment authorization document"
As such, an K working can't be penalized. Nor can the employer be sanctioned for hiring an unauthorized alien.
However, there is also a separate paperwork provision imposed on the employer. Without seeing the proper documentation, they CAN be sanctioned for this. However, the penalty is nominal and these days is rarely imposed. However, one time, Disneyland in Anaheim was reportedly hit with $400,000 in paperwork sanctions even thhough they had no unauthorized aliens. [This was reported as a news item but had never been acknowledged by Disney -- I, in no way vouch for the veracity of this report].
To complicate matters, asylees & refugees are also authorized incident to status as evidenced by an EAD. But they also can get an unrestricted social security card. The former INS has noted that, as a practical matter, asylees/refugees legally are required to have an EAD in order to work but that neither the employer nor the alien can be penalized for use of the picture ID and the unrestricted social security card to fill out the I-9.
Further complication -- the "authorized alien" language in 8 CFR 274a.12(a) was updated in 2001 to add subsection (a)(8) to cover K-3/4's. Howver, the concomitant provisions in 8 CFR 274a.13(a) regarding the EAD application process was NOT updated to conform.
Bottom line: K's are "authorized alien" who can work without penalty. An employer will not be sanctioned the large fine for employing an "unauthorized alien." However, they CAN be nicked for not complying with the paperwork.
BTW, how does this explain what NBC is doing with I-765's -- in the employment based arena, the Service Centers are backlogged on 765's -- and then we go to local district for interim EAD issuance on day 91 -- which bugs the Districts no end and makes them mad at service center.
Last edited by Folinskyinla; Dec 15th 2003 at 10:34 pm.
Dec 15th 2003, 11:45 pm
#3
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,049
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Vespa,
The anecdotal evidence is that K3s have a hard time getting a SS card without an EAD ......
Regards, JEff
The anecdotal evidence is that K3s have a hard time getting a SS card without an EAD ......
Regards, JEff
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Hi,
I've discovered via much surfing, research and consultation with a lawyer that an EAD (arguably, or perhaps not even arguably) is not necessary for K-3/K-4 visa holders.
They appear very certain about this - once you have applied for AOS, then you are legal to work. It appears that you can apply for an EAD if only for your employers' benefit, but it just is not necessary; the immigrant themselves cannot be penalised for accepting employment if they have filed for AOS.
That would certainly explain why the NBC have put K-3 applicants for EADs on the backburner....
The only thing that bothers me, is why this hasn't been mentioned before on this forum....?
- Mark
Hi,
I've discovered via much surfing, research and consultation with a lawyer that an EAD (arguably, or perhaps not even arguably) is not necessary for K-3/K-4 visa holders.
They appear very certain about this - once you have applied for AOS, then you are legal to work. It appears that you can apply for an EAD if only for your employers' benefit, but it just is not necessary; the immigrant themselves cannot be penalised for accepting employment if they have filed for AOS.
That would certainly explain why the NBC have put K-3 applicants for EADs on the backburner....
The only thing that bothers me, is why this hasn't been mentioned before on this forum....?
- Mark
Dec 16th 2003, 3:35 am
#4
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN, USA
Posts: 204
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
Hi:
This HAS been mentioned from time to time -- by yours truly. In fact, it is an FAQ.
There are two components to the employmer sanctions law: employment of "unauthorized aliens" and the paperwork provisions.
All K's are authorized to work "incident to status." However, the defintion has a provision "as evidenced by an employment authorization document"
As such, an K working can't be penalized. Nor can the employer be sanctioned for hiring an unauthorized alien.
However, there is also a separate paperwork provision imposed on the employer. Without seeing the proper documentation, they CAN be sanctioned for this. However, the penalty is nominal and these days is rarely imposed. However, one time, Disneyland in Anaheim was reportedly hit with $400,000 in paperwork sanctions even thhough they had no unauthorized aliens. [This was reported as a news item but had never been acknowledged by Disney -- I, in no way vouch for the veracity of this report].
To complicate matters, asylees & refugees are also authorized incident to status as evidenced by an EAD. But they also can get an unrestricted social security card. The former INS has noted that, as a practical matter, asylees/refugees legally are required to have an EAD in order to work but that neither the employer nor the alien can be penalized for use of the picture ID and the unrestricted social security card to fill out the I-9.
Further complication -- the "authorized alien" language in 8 CFR 274a.12(a) was updated in 2001 to add subsection (a)(8) to cover K-3/4's. Howver, the concomitant provisions in 8 CFR 274a.13(a) regarding the EAD application process was NOT updated to conform.
Bottom line: K's are "authorized alien" who can work without penalty. An employer will not be sanctioned the large fine for employing an "unauthorized alien." However, they CAN be nicked for not complying with the paperwork.
BTW, how does this explain what NBC is doing with I-765's -- in the employment based arena, the Service Centers are backlogged on 765's -- and then we go to local district for interim EAD issuance on day 91 -- which bugs the Districts no end and makes them mad at service center.
Hi:
This HAS been mentioned from time to time -- by yours truly. In fact, it is an FAQ.
There are two components to the employmer sanctions law: employment of "unauthorized aliens" and the paperwork provisions.
All K's are authorized to work "incident to status." However, the defintion has a provision "as evidenced by an employment authorization document"
As such, an K working can't be penalized. Nor can the employer be sanctioned for hiring an unauthorized alien.
However, there is also a separate paperwork provision imposed on the employer. Without seeing the proper documentation, they CAN be sanctioned for this. However, the penalty is nominal and these days is rarely imposed. However, one time, Disneyland in Anaheim was reportedly hit with $400,000 in paperwork sanctions even thhough they had no unauthorized aliens. [This was reported as a news item but had never been acknowledged by Disney -- I, in no way vouch for the veracity of this report].
To complicate matters, asylees & refugees are also authorized incident to status as evidenced by an EAD. But they also can get an unrestricted social security card. The former INS has noted that, as a practical matter, asylees/refugees legally are required to have an EAD in order to work but that neither the employer nor the alien can be penalized for use of the picture ID and the unrestricted social security card to fill out the I-9.
Further complication -- the "authorized alien" language in 8 CFR 274a.12(a) was updated in 2001 to add subsection (a)(8) to cover K-3/4's. Howver, the concomitant provisions in 8 CFR 274a.13(a) regarding the EAD application process was NOT updated to conform.
Bottom line: K's are "authorized alien" who can work without penalty. An employer will not be sanctioned the large fine for employing an "unauthorized alien." However, they CAN be nicked for not complying with the paperwork.
BTW, how does this explain what NBC is doing with I-765's -- in the employment based arena, the Service Centers are backlogged on 765's -- and then we go to local district for interim EAD issuance on day 91 -- which bugs the Districts no end and makes them mad at service center.
Thankyou for the information. My theory was that the SC's are making K-based applications for EADs less of a priority due to the fact that they're not entirely necessary, but that doesn't hold water judging from the above, quite clearly. I just can't understand though, why the NBC is backlogged with I-765 applications to last April.
Would you know (and can you point me to any legal documentation to this effect) whether K's are entitled to a SSN?
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Dec 16th 2003, 3:50 am
#5
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2003
Location: Santa Fe, NM from Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 502
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by jeffreyhy
Vespa,
The anecdotal evidence is that K3s have a hard time getting a SS card without an EAD ......
Regards, JEff
Vespa,
The anecdotal evidence is that K3s have a hard time getting a SS card without an EAD ......
Regards, JEff
Dec 16th 2003, 4:41 am
#6
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,049
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Buendia,
I would think that most employers would want to see an EAD before they would hire a foreigner who is not a Permanent Resident. The law says that they are supposed to. But I can't speak to what any employer in particular will do.
If your husband wants to work, he should get an EAD.
Regards, JEff
I would think that most employers would want to see an EAD before they would hire a foreigner who is not a Permanent Resident. The law says that they are supposed to. But I can't speak to what any employer in particular will do.
If your husband wants to work, he should get an EAD.
Regards, JEff
Originally posted by Buendia
I've been reading the FAQ also and that's how I read it. My husband was in the US several years ago on an HB1 and has a social security number... so I was wondering if we have to apply for an EAD? I'm so confused!
I've been reading the FAQ also and that's how I read it. My husband was in the US several years ago on an HB1 and has a social security number... so I was wondering if we have to apply for an EAD? I'm so confused!
Dec 16th 2003, 4:47 am
#7
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,049
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Mark,
Search for posts by Michael D Young. Or search the SSA web site directly. You'll find some of the references you're looking for.
EAD is an acronym, EAD = 'employment authorization document' by definition. Acceptable EADs are the employment-authorized stamp that is put on the I-94 or passport at some POEs and the employment-authorized ID card that is issued by the local Sistrict and Sub offices.
Regards, JEff
Search for posts by Michael D Young. Or search the SSA web site directly. You'll find some of the references you're looking for.
EAD is an acronym, EAD = 'employment authorization document' by definition. Acceptable EADs are the employment-authorized stamp that is put on the I-94 or passport at some POEs and the employment-authorized ID card that is issued by the local Sistrict and Sub offices.
Regards, JEff
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Folinskyinla;
Thankyou for the information. My theory was that the SC's are making K-based applications for EADs less of a priority due to the fact that they're not entirely necessary, but that doesn't hold water judging from the above, quite clearly. I just can't understand though, why the NBC is backlogged with I-765 applications to last April.
Would you know (and can you point me to any legal documentation to this effect) whether K's are entitled to a SSN?
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Folinskyinla;
Thankyou for the information. My theory was that the SC's are making K-based applications for EADs less of a priority due to the fact that they're not entirely necessary, but that doesn't hold water judging from the above, quite clearly. I just can't understand though, why the NBC is backlogged with I-765 applications to last April.
Would you know (and can you point me to any legal documentation to this effect) whether K's are entitled to a SSN?
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Dec 16th 2003, 4:48 am
#8
Concierge
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 46,486
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
It is the EAD or the green card with, of course, the social security card.
Actually I found over the last few month that EAD's were being issued rather rapidly for the majority of people. Where did you see they were "backed up" from April, 2003. Those who have filed for AOS and have had their EAD applications sent to NBC all seem to have gotten their EADs in under 3 months from filing.
A biometric sheet is nothing more than an appt for printing and/or the receipt for printing. Biometrics are used for other things then just EADs. A receipt might be good enough for a worker to continue working if they are attempting to renew an expired EAD and the I-94 for the K-3 does not include the needed legend of "INS work authorized". Also as JEff stated having an EAD doesn't do you squat if you don't have a social security card/number.
Rete
Actually I found over the last few month that EAD's were being issued rather rapidly for the majority of people. Where did you see they were "backed up" from April, 2003. Those who have filed for AOS and have had their EAD applications sent to NBC all seem to have gotten their EADs in under 3 months from filing.
A biometric sheet is nothing more than an appt for printing and/or the receipt for printing. Biometrics are used for other things then just EADs. A receipt might be good enough for a worker to continue working if they are attempting to renew an expired EAD and the I-94 for the K-3 does not include the needed legend of "INS work authorized". Also as JEff stated having an EAD doesn't do you squat if you don't have a social security card/number.
Rete
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Folinskyinla;
Thankyou for the information. My theory was that the SC's are making K-based applications for EADs less of a priority due to the fact that they're not entirely necessary, but that doesn't hold water judging from the above, quite clearly. I just can't understand though, why the NBC is backlogged with I-765 applications to last April.
Would you know (and can you point me to any legal documentation to this effect) whether K's are entitled to a SSN?
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Folinskyinla;
Thankyou for the information. My theory was that the SC's are making K-based applications for EADs less of a priority due to the fact that they're not entirely necessary, but that doesn't hold water judging from the above, quite clearly. I just can't understand though, why the NBC is backlogged with I-765 applications to last April.
Would you know (and can you point me to any legal documentation to this effect) whether K's are entitled to a SSN?
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Dec 16th 2003, 5:32 am
#9
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN, USA
Posts: 204
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by Rete
It is the EAD or the green card with, of course, the social security card.
Actually I found over the last few month that EAD's were being issued rather rapidly for the majority of people. Where did you see they were "backed up" from April, 2003. Those who have filed for AOS and have had their EAD applications sent to NBC all seem to have gotten their EADs in under 3 months from filing.
It is the EAD or the green card with, of course, the social security card.
Actually I found over the last few month that EAD's were being issued rather rapidly for the majority of people. Where did you see they were "backed up" from April, 2003. Those who have filed for AOS and have had their EAD applications sent to NBC all seem to have gotten their EADs in under 3 months from filing.
But Adiastar was authorized today with a receipt date of 10/10/03, whereas mine is 09/30/03... so I'm entirely befuddled now.
A biometric sheet is nothing more than an appt for printing and/or the receipt for printing. Biometrics are used for other things then just EADs. A receipt might be good enough for a worker to continue working if they are attempting to renew an expired EAD and the I-94 for the K-3 does not include the needed legend of "INS work authorized". Also as JEff stated having an EAD doesn't do you squat if you don't have a social security card/number.
Rete
Rete
I applied for my SSN shortly after arriving here, so presumably when my EAD is approved, they will send it - or will I have to apply again/give them a nudge, I wonder.
- Mark
Is just it me, or does the fact that someone is worse off than me make me feel bad?
Dec 16th 2003, 6:43 am
#10
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Folinskyinla;
Thankyou for the information. My theory was that the SC's are making K-based applications for EADs less of a priority due to the fact that they're not entirely necessary, but that doesn't hold water judging from the above, quite clearly. I just can't understand though, why the NBC is backlogged with I-765 applications to last April.
Would you know (and can you point me to any legal documentation to this effect) whether K's are entitled to a SSN?
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Folinskyinla;
Thankyou for the information. My theory was that the SC's are making K-based applications for EADs less of a priority due to the fact that they're not entirely necessary, but that doesn't hold water judging from the above, quite clearly. I just can't understand though, why the NBC is backlogged with I-765 applications to last April.
Would you know (and can you point me to any legal documentation to this effect) whether K's are entitled to a SSN?
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
I think you are making a very basic error in assuming that that "K-3/4" are the ONLY I-765's that NBC takes. I think the secret lies in the I-485 -- LIFE line. Those applications had a drop-dead filing deadline last June and lots of them had I-765 tied to them. Since the I-485 has to be intitally processed before issuance of an EAD, I find it interesting that the EAD appication processing time is just a little behind the 485/Life processing.
This is speculation on my part -- but informed speculation.
Dec 16th 2003, 6:46 am
#11
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Folinskyinla;
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Folinskyinla;
Also, is the EAD the only form of legal documentation that the employer can accept as an 'employment authorization document'? Would the biometrics sheet, receipt and the K-3 I94 be adequate substitute?
Thanks once more,
- Mark
Dec 16th 2003, 7:25 am
#12
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN, USA
Posts: 204
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
You are a person of little imagination. <g> and
I think you are making a very basic error in assuming that that "K-3/4" are the ONLY I-765's that NBC takes. I think the secret lies in the I-485 -- LIFE line. Those applications had a drop-dead filing deadline last June and lots of them had I-765 tied to them. Since the I-485 has to be intitally processed before issuance of an EAD, I find it interesting that the EAD appication processing time is just a little behind the 485/Life processing.
This is speculation on my part -- but informed speculation.
You are a person of little imagination. <g> and
I think you are making a very basic error in assuming that that "K-3/4" are the ONLY I-765's that NBC takes. I think the secret lies in the I-485 -- LIFE line. Those applications had a drop-dead filing deadline last June and lots of them had I-765 tied to them. Since the I-485 has to be intitally processed before issuance of an EAD, I find it interesting that the EAD appication processing time is just a little behind the 485/Life processing.
This is speculation on my part -- but informed speculation.
- Mark
Dec 16th 2003, 10:24 am
#13
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Not 100% sure I can follow what you're saying - by 'drop-dead' filing deadline, do you mean that these apps HAD to be processed by June, come what may, and therefore their I-765 apps were left lagging behind - so much so that they're just being processed now? I wondered whether the date on there happened to be the date of the oldest case they had on their books. I'm guessing that in a nutshell, that's what you mean?
- Mark
Not 100% sure I can follow what you're saying - by 'drop-dead' filing deadline, do you mean that these apps HAD to be processed by June, come what may, and therefore their I-765 apps were left lagging behind - so much so that they're just being processed now? I wondered whether the date on there happened to be the date of the oldest case they had on their books. I'm guessing that in a nutshell, that's what you mean?
- Mark
There is a tendency of people to think that that THEIR type of application is the only thing being handled. Which is not true. All I was saying is that the K related I-765 are not the only I-765's handled by NBC.
Dec 16th 2003, 10:45 am
#14
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN, USA
Posts: 204
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
No, the "drop-dead" deadline for LIFE adjustments was in June and many of the people waited until the last mintute to get them in. Think of the picture of a snake sawllowing an animal whole if it helps. There was probably a big BULGE in filings of I-765 in a short period of time.
There is a tendency of people to think that that THEIR type of application is the only thing being handled. Which is not true. All I was saying is that the K related I-765 are not the only I-765's handled by NBC.
No, the "drop-dead" deadline for LIFE adjustments was in June and many of the people waited until the last mintute to get them in. Think of the picture of a snake sawllowing an animal whole if it helps. There was probably a big BULGE in filings of I-765 in a short period of time.
There is a tendency of people to think that that THEIR type of application is the only thing being handled. Which is not true. All I was saying is that the K related I-765 are not the only I-765's handled by NBC.
My wife's roommate plans to marry an Angolan refugee who is currently seeking asylum in the UK, although they plan to live in the USA. Although my situation hasn't trundled forward completely smoothly and I'm about to crack up, I have a feeling that situation is somewhat more complex than mine. So I make sure that I understand everything, hence my propensity to post a lot!
To be honest, I didn't think that my type of I-765 was the only one being processed, but was feeling very woe-is-me and self-indulgent in believing that my specific application is the only one not being processed at all...
- Mark
Dec 16th 2003, 10:53 am
#15
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: EAD = white elephant for K3/K4 holders?
Originally posted by speedyvespa
Thankyou for that Folinskyinla, I guess any information I can garner about this whole thing is useful, as I try to help others from time to time - and obtaining advice from someone in the legal profession is as 'from the horses mouth' as one can get. Certainly more reliable than anything the BCIS hinderline can offer me, anyway! The machinations of the BCIS is becoming something of a macabre fascination to me.
My wife's roommate plans to marry an Angolan refugee who is currently seeking asylum in the UK, although they plan to live in the USA. Although my situation hasn't trundled forward completely smoothly and I'm about to crack up, I have a feeling that situation is somewhat more complex than mine. So I make sure that I understand everything, hence my propensity to post a lot!
To be honest, I didn't think that my type of I-765 was the only one being processed, but was feeling very woe-is-me and self-indulgent in believing that my specific application is the only one not being processed at all...
- Mark
Thankyou for that Folinskyinla, I guess any information I can garner about this whole thing is useful, as I try to help others from time to time - and obtaining advice from someone in the legal profession is as 'from the horses mouth' as one can get. Certainly more reliable than anything the BCIS hinderline can offer me, anyway! The machinations of the BCIS is becoming something of a macabre fascination to me.
My wife's roommate plans to marry an Angolan refugee who is currently seeking asylum in the UK, although they plan to live in the USA. Although my situation hasn't trundled forward completely smoothly and I'm about to crack up, I have a feeling that situation is somewhat more complex than mine. So I make sure that I understand everything, hence my propensity to post a lot!
To be honest, I didn't think that my type of I-765 was the only one being processed, but was feeling very woe-is-me and self-indulgent in believing that my specific application is the only one not being processed at all...
- Mark
I'm sure that the most important I-765 that USCIS is handling is yours. To establish that, all one has to do is ask you!
.
