SanBernardino

Sounds like a good question, but could you ask/answer it in another thread? I would really appreciate it if this thread stayed on the topic of status after Advanced Parole. I know it's a pain to start another thread, but this is just so confusing already, that I'd really appreciate if we'd stay on one topic here.

SanBernardino

This is an important illustration of the problem -- lack of guarantees despite the norms. But just to prevent any confusion, I started this thread to discuss the changes in status AFTER RETURNING on AP, so I hope we won't get too much into discussing the possibility of being denied re-entry. I think that would only confuse the issue in this thread, which is that your status changes upon travelling on AP. I'd really appreciate it if any follow-up specifically on the question of denial of re-entry were done in another thread.

Of course, Folinskyinla's main point was about the inherent risk of all aspects of travelling on AP and the importance of doing a risk-benefit analysis. That advice is much appreciated and highly considered. My problem is I don't understand what the risk are because I have no idea what the actual differences are between "parolee status" (post-parole status) and I am not prepared to read all of immigration law to figure it out.

Matthew Udall

You said, “Just as they both have warned about trying to enter the US with a K-1 or I-130 pending�. I actually don’t recall posting anything (or many postings) with that particular spin about entering while an I-129f or 130 is pending, but I sure do recall posting over and over again the basic principle that everyone entering with a non-immigrant option need to be able to demonstrate nonimmigrant intent. As your posting links warnings about entry with pending K-1’s or I-130’s, your recapping of what you seem to recall is far from clear or accurate for that matter.

I happen to agree with that last sentence. Your last sentence was not what I had a problem with, and instead it was the other statement that was far from clear, and which said that I’ve warned about trying to enter with an I-129f or 130 pending.

My focus has always been on immigrant vs. non-immigrant intent when this subject comes up, and I don’t think you will find any (or many) postings over the years where I specifically “warned about trying to enter the U.S. with a K-1 or I-130 pending�. My warning about being able to satisfy the officer at the POE that one has the correct intent to match the nonimmigrant option holds true regardless of whether or not a K-1 petition or I-130 has been filed.

Nope, wrong again. I was not the one who had that debate with Jason. I remember this too as I recall that was the particular bit of misinformation (from Jason) that prompted me to ask another AILA friend of mine to jump into that discussion, and it was Jason (not I) that took the incorrect position that one cannot enter the U.S. when an I-129f has been filed.

And in that particular discussion, I seem to recall that AILA friend of mine saying the same sort of thing, that there is no law that explicitly says one cannot enter when there is a pending I-129f or I-130 (which goes against the statement you made that I felt was expressed in a confusing manner that would seem to suggest I had the opposite view).

No big deal and its not the end of the world, but I do ask once again that you stop recapping what you seem to recall me saying. Please don’t take it upon yourself to interpret my old postings and offer your recapped version attributing it to me. Again, I might not catch it, and you don’t have my permission to speak for me. As a former NG friend, I respectfully ask you to honor this request. Thanks again.

SanBernardino

Great,maybe I can find some more specifics by reading the archives then! Could you suggest what terms to search for? I will start with the word "parolee" since that seems very specific to this question about status after AP.

SanBernardino

For the reference of others reading this thread, here are some threads I turned up on the subject of parolee status:

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hreadid=113497

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...threadid=10604

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...threadid=45568

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...threadid=83588

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hreadid=104306

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hreadid=118218

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hreadid=145245

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hreadid=171464

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hreadid=162896

For people on H1B visas:

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hreadid=176795

These threads don't add any details about parolee status, but do confirm it exists:

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hlight=parolee

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...hlight=parolee

These threads are all links to Britishexpats because that is the forum I use to read these newsgroups. These threads are actually all newsgroup threads.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

To give you an idea of the complexity of this -- I have a potential client who was ordered deported in 1992. In 1995 he marries a US citizen and not knowing that you have to file a "Motion To Reopen" with the immigration court, he files an I-130/485/765/131 with the local district. Not being as paranoid as they are now -- district does no record check and gives him a new A number and gives him advance parole.

In Jan 1996, he departs foreign with the advance parole, unaware of the fact this causes a "self-deportation." Its as if INS had expelled him from the country and he is prohibited from coming back. Also, the departure wipes out any legal possiblity of reopening his deportation hearing.

He returns on the advance parole. He travels repeatedly on the advance parole. In 1997, this comes up in his adjustment interview and the matter is continued.

He continues to get advance parole and travels repeatedly.

In June 2003, he is arrested by ICE on the original deport order. They are puzzled by the two "A" numbers but they expell him.

Query: given the parole status, has he been "outside" the United States for the requisite 5 years after his 1996 self-deport and we can now get him a K-3?

Reasonable legal minds might differ on this one.

SanBernardino

I can see why! But in this case, the lesson about not using advanced parole seems to apply only to people who were ordered deported and therefore were not eligible in the first place.

I suppose there are other cases and am still reading through the threads I posted above to figure out what they might be.