Mikey D

Every day I think of something new to say.........

I'm staying in Atlanta with my American girlfriend, and I came over on the WVP. I'm going back to London at the end of December.

I hopefully plan to come back sometime next year, and stay permantly on a K-1 fiance visa. I know you're not allowed to work on the WVP, but I was wondering about unpaid work experience? Has anyone ever done this? I graduated in broadcasting studies a couple of years back, and this is the field I would like to work in when I am legible to work.

Your views please

Ingo Pakleppa - See Web Site For Email

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 19:19:08 +0000, Mikey D wrote:


    > Every day I think of something new to say.........
    >
    > I'm staying in Atlanta with my American girlfriend, and I came over on
    > the WVP. I'm going back to London at the end of December.
    >
    > I hopefully plan to come back sometime next year, and stay permantly on
    > a K-1 fiance visa.

You mean, with a spousal Green Card. A K-1 is only good for 90 days; you
need to get married and apply for the spousal GC during that time.

    > I know you're not allowed to work on the WVP, but I was wondering about
    > unpaid work experience? Has anyone ever done this?

You generally can't do that, either. Work is work, whether it's paid or
not. If it is strictly a training program where you wouldn't perform any
actual productive work, then you might be able to do it with an M-1 visa
(schooling still isn't permitted as a tourist).

    > I graduated in broadcasting studies a couple of years back, and this is
    > the field I would like to work in when I am legible to work.

--
Remember, I am strictly a layperson without any legal training. I encourage
everybody to seek competent legal counsel rather than relying on usenet
newsgroups.

Please support H.R. 539, H.R. 832 and S. 1510. More information at
http://www.kkeane.com/lobbyspousal-faq.shtml

Please visit my new FAQ at http://www.kkeane.com (always under construction)

My email address in usenet posts is now invalid for spam protection. See
my Web site for information on how to contact me.

Now with new photos! Please feel free to enjoy some of my photographs at my
new Web site http://www.ingopakleppa.com ! Comments are welcome.

fleming77

I was in the same situation as you mate. I ended up getting a B1/B2 tourist visa which allows you to stay in the country for 6 months with a possible extension to 1 year. However you arent allowed to work on this visa..................strickly speaking. I ended up doing odd jobs around the town i was in for cash and did some labouring.
So that is an option for you if you are willing to work for cash and take a little risk.

I would only use the K visa if you were fully intent in getting married. If not it may cause more issues down the line when you apply for other visas.

Another plus with the B visa is that you can change from this status to the H1-b sponsorship visa easily. That is if you manage to find a company willing to sponsor you.

Good luck
d

Ingo Pakleppa - See Web Site For Email

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:47:36 +0000, fleming77 wrote:


    > I was in the same situation as you mate. I ended up getting a B1/B2
    > tourist visa which allows you to stay in the country for 6 months with a
    > possible extension to 1 year. However you arent allowed to work on this
    > visa..................strickly speaking. I ended up doing odd jobs
    > around the town i was in for cash and did some labouring.
    >
    > So that is an option for you if you are willing to work for cash and
    > take a little risk.

Just remember not to run for Governor of California. It seems that Arnold
is a bit of hot water with CIS for having done this and not disclosed it
on later immigration paperwork.

--
Remember, I am strictly a layperson without any legal training. I encourage
everybody to seek competent legal counsel rather than relying on usenet
newsgroups.

Please support H.R. 539, H.R. 832 and S. 1510. More information at
http://www.kkeane.com/lobbyspousal-faq.shtml

Please visit my new FAQ at http://www.kkeane.com (always under construction)

My email address in usenet posts is now invalid for spam protection. See
my Web site for information on how to contact me.

Now with new photos! Please feel free to enjoy some of my photographs at my
new Web site http://www.ingopakleppa.com ! Comments are welcome.

Thorsten

Ingo Pakleppa - see web site for email wrote:

    > Just remember not to run for Governor of California. It seems that Arnold
    > is a bit of hot water with CIS for having done this and not disclosed it
    > on later immigration paperwork.

I assume that since Mr. Schwarzenegger presumably entered the country
legally and subsequently married a USC, his only potential problem would
be if he committed immigration fraud. (Please correct me if this isn't
correct.)

Given what is known about his history, what might have constituted
immigration fraud? His failure (if this turned out to be the case) to
dislose (on his GC application) having drawn U.S. income while in B-1
status? Or could the mere fact that he perhaps violated the terms of his
B-1 status (again, if this turns out to be true) by working for money
constitute grounds for immigration fraud. (In other words and as a more
general question: When--if ever--does violating the terms of an
immigration status constitute fraud?)

If Mr. Schwarzenegger has in fact committed immigration fraud, who would
have standing to initiate legal action against him? Would (B)CIE have to
take action once it knows about an individual who committed
immigration fraud? Could any California voter perhaps challenge the
election result based in the (alleged) fact that the winner may be an
illegal immigrant?

I know this is all speculation, but I am curious... ;-)

Thorsten

--
Formerly reachable via thacct-.-at-.-yaaaahooooo-.-dot-.-com

Ingo Pakleppa - See Web Site For Email

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 20:55:36 +0000, Thorsten wrote:

    > Ingo Pakleppa - see web site for email wrote:
    >
    >> Just remember not to run for Governor of California. It seems that
    >> Arnold is a bit of hot water with CIS for having done this and not
    >> disclosed it on later immigration paperwork.
    >
    > I assume that since Mr. Schwarzenegger presumably entered the country
    > legally and subsequently married a USC, his only potential problem would
    > be if he committed immigration fraud. (Please correct me if this isn't
    > correct.)

Yes. Well, I wouldn't call it "only". The immigration fraud would have
consisted of not disclosing being here illegally when he adjusted status.
I don't know how he got his GC.

    > Given what is known about his history, what might have constituted
    > immigration fraud? His failure (if this turned out to be the case) to
    > dislose (on his GC application) having drawn U.S. income while in B-1
    > status? Or could the mere fact that he perhaps violated the terms of his
    > B-1 status (again, if this turns out to be true) by working for money
    > constitute grounds for immigration fraud. (In other words and as a more
    > general question: When--if ever--does violating the terms of an
    > immigration status constitute fraud?)

Violating the terms of his status is just that. It does not in and of
itself constitute fraud.

Immigration fraud would require an element of deception. Not disclosing
having worked illegally would be one example.

    > If Mr. Schwarzenegger has in fact committed immigration fraud, who would
    > have standing to initiate legal action against him? Would (B)CIE have to
    > take action once it knows about an individual who committed immigration
    > fraud?

Yes.

    > Could any California voter perhaps challenge the election result based
    > in the (alleged) fact that the winner may be an illegal immigrant?

No. Without a question, he currently is a US citizen, so he is qualified
for governorship on that basis. The immigration fraud probably wouldn't
directly disqualify him. But CIE could indeed start the denaturalization
process, and strip him of his US citizenship.

Of course, having started a business without a contractor's license may or
may not be a misdemeanor and disqualify him. That's a completely separate
legal question, though.

Realistically, denaturalization is not actually going to happen. The only
cases I am aware of where people actually did get stripped of their
citizenship are people who lied about a Nazi past. Now Schwarzenegger
apparently did have fairly close ties with a number of Nazis (Kurt
Waldheim seems to have been a friend of the family, probably through
Arnold's father, who was a party functionary). But of course there is not
much evidence whatsoever against Arnold Schwarzenegger (beyond the rather
ridiculous accusations about a statement he supposedly made).

And with his political connections, it seems extremely unlikely that there
will ever be a prosecution.

--
Remember, I am strictly a layperson without any legal training. I encourage
everybody to seek competent legal counsel rather than relying on usenet
newsgroups.

Please support H.R. 539, H.R. 832 and S. 1510. More information at
http://www.kkeane.com/lobbyspousal-faq.shtml

Please visit my new FAQ at http://www.kkeane.com (always under construction)

My email address in usenet posts is now invalid for spam protection. See
my Web site for information on how to contact me.

Now with new photos! Please feel free to enjoy some of my photographs at my
new Web site http://www.ingopakleppa.com ! Comments are welcome.