Notice of Hearing in Removal Proceedings

[Randy W]

We had planned on Jingyu going home on Aug 1, but we got this notice in the mail today for a hearing on July 26, so it doesn't look like he'll last that long.

 

My question is what kind of clean-up do we need to do on his case? Is there anything he should do before he leaves? What do we need to do after he leaves? This needs to show on his record as a voluntary departure, and not an order of removal.

 

 

The only thing I see is to file a EOIR-33 change of address with the court, and then his actual departure would show as the exit port.

[Robertw711]

We had planned on Jingyu going home on Aug 1, but we got this notice in the mail today for a hearing on July 26, so it doesn't look like he'll last that long.

 

My question is what kind of clean-up do we need to do on his case? Is there anything he should do before he leaves? What do we need to do after he leaves? This needs to show on his record as a voluntary departure, and not an order of removal.

 

 

The only thing I see is to file a EOIR-33 change of address with the court, and then his actual departure would show as the exit port.

 

Hi Randy,

 

First I want to thank you for the information about Glenys and she has talked with me these few days by emails. She is really nice and we got a lot information from her and also encouragement. However, I heard from her that once the AOS is denied, one still has six months of lawful presence in the US, and the illegal days is accrued after the six months, and we went to a lawyer today, and he seems to be not sure about that. If that's the case, won't your son be allowed to stay in the US till mid-October? Why did your son receive the notice of deportation hearing?

[Randy W]

The notice claims that he overstayed his K-2 visa as of Feb. 28. That, as of that date, he no longer has "permission" from the USCIS to stay in the country. This completely ignores the fact that the INA very explicitly and by ANYONE's interpretation allowed him to apply for AOS as a child (under 21), and that that would extend the "permission" up to the date of the interview (April 16) or denial.

 

The hearing on the 26th is actually a Master Calendar hearing, for which we simply show up, announce that we have a lawyer, and need an interpreter. A date would then be scheduled for an actual hearing.

 

As I understand it now, one possible outcome of that hearing might be to require the USCIS to adjudicate his case.

 

Right now, though, it's languishing due to the lack of a lawyer who is familiar with the K-2 situation

[Randy W]

If you need some reading material, here's the thread where the K-2 age-out situation came up.

[Robertw711]

Randy, I figure out that even USCIS accrued the days from the kids' K2 expire date, your son can live here legally until Augest, because his K2 I-94 expire in Feb, right, why they have the Romoval Proceedings now, and why you need to do something to clear that?

[Robertw711]

Do you know Mr Folinsky?

[Robertw711]

I mean USCIS accrue the days after 6 months after the kids' k2 expire. We heard from the attorneys that this situation is like the K2's age out, some think that it should be accrued after 6 months since the kids' K2 expire, some think it should be accrued after six months since the AOS denial, yet anyway, it is accrued after the 6 months, right?

[Randy W]

There are two timers here - one, the "unlawful presence" timer, the other the court calendar. The "unlawful presence" timer doesn't seem to enter the picture, since it would only bar him from the US for a period of 3 years, not nearly as long as it would take us to get an approved I-130. If we establish at the court hearing that he legally applied for AOS (the laws they quote say that he did) before his 21st birthday, then it shouldn't be a problem at all.

 

What the NTA (Notice to Appear) says is that as of Feb 28, he has been here without authorization, that the K-2 is only a temporary visa.

 

Basically, according to them, Feb 28 was his last legal day in the US.

 

My first thought was that we would have to get him out of the country before the hearing, that "removal" would be a big black mark on his record. In actuality, it's an opportunity to present your case, with one possible outcome a court-ordered AOS. At the opposite end, worst case is voluntary removal. All we need is a lawyer who can argue the case for a 21 yr old K-2. They seem to be a lot fewer and farther-between than I thought they would be.

 

Who is Mr Folinsky? I have talked with Curtis about lawyers, but am so far wanting a local (Houston) one - one I don't have to argue my case to, hopefully, but I'm not above doing that.

[Qsdby]

There are two timers here - one, the "unlawful presence" timer, the other the court calendar. The "unlawful presence" timer doesn't seem to enter the picture, since it would only bar him from the US for a period of 3 years, not nearly as long as it would take us to get an approved I-130. If we establish at the court hearing that he legally applied for AOS (the laws they quote say that he did) before his 21st birthday, then it shouldn't be a problem at all.

 

What the NTA (Notice to Appear) says is that as of Feb 28, he has been here without authorization, that the K-2 is only a temporary visa.

 

Basically, according to them, Feb 28 was his last legal day in the US.

 

My first thought was that we would have to get him out of the country before the hearing, that "removal" would be a big black mark on his record. In actuality, it's an opportunity to present your case, with one possible outcome a court-ordered AOS. At the opposite end, worst case is voluntary removal. All we need is a lawyer who can argue the case for a 21 yr old K-2. They seem to be a lot fewer and farther-between than I thought they would be.

 

Who is Mr Folinsky? I have talked with Curtis about lawyers, but am so far wanting a local (Houston) one - one I don't have to argue my case to, hopefully, but I'm not above doing that.

 

I am so sorry to hear that. Did you find a good attorney there?

[Randy W]

There are two timers here - one, the "unlawful presence" timer, the other the court calendar. The "unlawful presence" timer doesn't seem to enter the picture, since it would only bar him from the US for a period of 3 years, not nearly as long as it would take us to get an approved I-130. If we establish at the court hearing that he legally applied for AOS (the laws they quote say that he did) before his 21st birthday, then it shouldn't be a problem at all.

 

What the NTA (Notice to Appear) says is that as of Feb 28, he has been here without authorization, that the K-2 is only a temporary visa.

 

Basically, according to them, Feb 28 was his last legal day in the US.

 

My first thought was that we would have to get him out of the country before the hearing, that "removal" would be a big black mark on his record. In actuality, it's an opportunity to present your case, with one possible outcome a court-ordered AOS. At the opposite end, worst case is voluntary removal. All we need is a lawyer who can argue the case for a 21 yr old K-2. They seem to be a lot fewer and farther-between than I thought they would be.

 

Who is Mr Folinsky? I have talked with Curtis about lawyers, but am so far wanting a local (Houston) one - one I don't have to argue my case to, hopefully, but I'm not above doing that.

 

I am so sorry to hear that. Did you find a good attorney there?

 

 

Yes - Stuart Folinsky referred us to an attorney here in Houston who won a case where the USCIS rescinded an already approved AOS of an over 21 K2, so hopefully she'll do good for us. Thanks

[Qsdby]

Yes - Stuart Folinsky referred us to an attorney here in Houston who won a case where the USCIS rescinded an already approved AOS of an over 21 K2, so hopefully she'll do good for us. Thanks

 

I am glad that you have a good attorney now, I think that she'll do good for you. That case shed light on the 21 k2s and I think that the attorney must be confident on your wife's son's case. Good luck! We will pray for you!