To contact us Click HERE
Eligible Widow(er)s of Deceased U.S. Citizens must file I-360 Visa Petitions by October 28, 2011
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has stated that the deadline for eligible widow(er)s to file a Form I-360 visa petition is October 28, 2011.
If you are the widow(er) of a U.S. citizen who died before October 28, 2009 you may be eligible to immigrate to the United States if:
• You and your deceased spouse were married for less than 2 years when your spouse died and
• You file Form I-360 for Special immigrant classification as a widow/widower by October 28, 2011.
USCIS must receive your Form I-360 by October 28, 2011. Since you must file Form I-360 by mail or overnight courier, please be sure to ship it in time for USCIS to receive it no later than October 28, 2011.
30 Eylül 2012 Pazar
How To Get Proof of U.S. citizenship
To contact us Click HERE
U.S. citizenship carries a wealth of benefits and privileges, including the ability to travel without a visa to many countries, the right to vote in federal, state and local elections, and greater eligibility to qualify for federal benefits and jobs. In order to qualify for these benefits, one must be able to provide proof of citizenship.
Proof of citizenship can be documented in a variety of ways. Among the most common documents that establish US citizenship are:
If you are not a U.S. citizen by birth or did not acquire U.S. citizenship automatically after birth, you may still be eligible to become a citizen through the normal naturalization process. Qualifying individuals who are 18 years and oder may submit an “Application for Naturalization” (Form N-400) to become naturalized citizens. If you are already a naturalized U.S. citizen, then a copy of your naturalization certificate will prove your citizenship.
How do I prove U.S. Citizenship if I was born outside the U.S. to U.S. Citizen parents?
If you were born outside the United States, but one or both of your parents were U.S. citizens when you were born, you may still be a U.S. citizen. This is called citizenship through derivation. There are usually additional specific requirements, and sometimes citizenship can be through a combination of a parent and grandparent.
Whether or not someone born outside the U.S. to a U.S. citizen parent is a U.S. citizen depends on the law in effect when the person was born. These laws have changed over the years, but usually require a combination of at least one parent being a U.S. citizen when the child was born and having lived in the U.S. or its possessions for a period of time. Persons who acquired citizenship from parent(s) while under 18 years of age may apply for a certificate of citizenship on Form N-600.
If you were born abroad to U.S. citizen parents, you can apply for a U.S. passport in the same manner as someone born in the United States. However, you will have the added requirement of establishing your citizenship claim. Passport applications are made at passport offices in the United States, including local post offices, or at U.S. consulates abroad.
How do I prove U.S. Citizenship if my birth was registered abroad?
If your parents were U.S. citizens and registered your birth with a U.S. Consulate in the first five years of your life, then they were issued a certificate called a Consular Registration of Birth Abroad. This form will prove your citizenship. If they didn’t do this or they lost the form, you will need to apply for a passport or Certificate of Citizenship on Form N-565 instead.
How do I prove U.S. Citizenship if I am a Naturalized Citizen?
If you were born outside of the U.S. and filed an application for citizenship on Form N-400, then the citizenship certificate that you were issued when you appeared for the naturalization oath ceremony is your proof of citizenship.
If you have lost your Naturalization Certificate or Certificate of Citizenship, you should file Form N-565, Application for Replacement Naturalization Citizenship Document, with USCIS to replace the lost certificate. You may also contact the Department of State for information on how to obtain a passport.
Proof of citizenship can be documented in a variety of ways. Among the most common documents that establish US citizenship are:
- A U.S. Birth Certificate;
- A U.S. Passport;
- A Certificate of Citizenship; and
- A Naturalization Certificate.
If you are not a U.S. citizen by birth or did not acquire U.S. citizenship automatically after birth, you may still be eligible to become a citizen through the normal naturalization process. Qualifying individuals who are 18 years and oder may submit an “Application for Naturalization” (Form N-400) to become naturalized citizens. If you are already a naturalized U.S. citizen, then a copy of your naturalization certificate will prove your citizenship.
How do I prove U.S. Citizenship if I was born outside the U.S. to U.S. Citizen parents?
If you were born outside the United States, but one or both of your parents were U.S. citizens when you were born, you may still be a U.S. citizen. This is called citizenship through derivation. There are usually additional specific requirements, and sometimes citizenship can be through a combination of a parent and grandparent.
Whether or not someone born outside the U.S. to a U.S. citizen parent is a U.S. citizen depends on the law in effect when the person was born. These laws have changed over the years, but usually require a combination of at least one parent being a U.S. citizen when the child was born and having lived in the U.S. or its possessions for a period of time. Persons who acquired citizenship from parent(s) while under 18 years of age may apply for a certificate of citizenship on Form N-600.
If you were born abroad to U.S. citizen parents, you can apply for a U.S. passport in the same manner as someone born in the United States. However, you will have the added requirement of establishing your citizenship claim. Passport applications are made at passport offices in the United States, including local post offices, or at U.S. consulates abroad.
How do I prove U.S. Citizenship if my birth was registered abroad?
If your parents were U.S. citizens and registered your birth with a U.S. Consulate in the first five years of your life, then they were issued a certificate called a Consular Registration of Birth Abroad. This form will prove your citizenship. If they didn’t do this or they lost the form, you will need to apply for a passport or Certificate of Citizenship on Form N-565 instead.
How do I prove U.S. Citizenship if I am a Naturalized Citizen?
If you were born outside of the U.S. and filed an application for citizenship on Form N-400, then the citizenship certificate that you were issued when you appeared for the naturalization oath ceremony is your proof of citizenship.
If you have lost your Naturalization Certificate or Certificate of Citizenship, you should file Form N-565, Application for Replacement Naturalization Citizenship Document, with USCIS to replace the lost certificate. You may also contact the Department of State for information on how to obtain a passport.
Follow-to-join: What It Is and Who Qualifies
To contact us Click HERE
If you were married or had a child before you became a permanent resident and your spouse or child did not accompany you to the United States when you initially entered as a permanent resident, your spouse or child may be eligible to follow-to-join.
The follow-to-join benefit allows your spouse and children to obtain status as permanent residents even though they did not obtain this status when you did. This benefit is available to spouses and children of permanent residents who obtained permanent residency through a family-based preference petition, an employment-based petition, or the diversity visa lottery. If you obtained permanent residence based on an immediate relative petition, your spouse and children are not eligible to follow-to-join.
Spouses and children who are following-to-join are not required to file a separate Immigrant Petition. They will be granted permanent residency in the same preference category as their permanent resident relative. If you are a permanent resident, your spouse or child may qualify to follow-to-join:
To take advantage of the follow-to-join benefit, you will need to file Form I-824, Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition, with the USCIS Service Center that adjudicated your application for permanent residence. You will need to file this with proof of your status and your spouse’s or child’s eligibility to follow-to-join. Your application will be forwarded to the appropriate US consulate so that your spouse and child(ren) can apply for their immigrant visas. Your spouse and child(ren) will need to appear at the consulate for an interview at which time a consular officer will determine if they are admissible to the United States. If their applications are approved, they will be given immigrant visas, allowing them to enter the US and join you as permanent residents.
Follow-to-join: What It Is and Who Qualifies
On 12.23.09, In , By Immigration DirectFollow-to-join: What It Is and Who QualifiesIf you were married or had a child before you became a permanent resident and your spouse or child did not accompany you to the United States when you initially entered as a permanent resident, your spouse or child may be eligible to follow-to-join.
The follow-to-join benefit allows your spouse and children to obtain status as permanent residents even though they did not obtain this status when you did. This benefit is available to spouses and children of permanent residents who obtained permanent residency through a family-based preference petition, an employment-based petition, or the diversity visa lottery. If you obtained permanent residence based on an immediate relative petition, your spouse and children are not eligible to follow-to-join.
Spouses and children who are following-to-join are not required to file a separate Immigrant Petition. They will be granted permanent residency in the same preference category as their permanent resident relative. If you are a permanent resident, your spouse or child may qualify to follow-to-join:
- If the family relationship existed prior to the time you became a permanent resident;
- If your spouse or child was outside of the US when you entered the US as a permanent resident; and
- If your spouse or child enters the US at least four months after your entry as a permanent resident.
To take advantage of the follow-to-join benefit, you will need to file Form I-824, Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition, with the USCIS Service Center that adjudicated your application for permanent residence. You will need to file this with proof of your status and your spouse’s or child’s eligibility to follow-to-join. Your application will be forwarded to the appropriate US consulate so that your spouse and child(ren) can apply for their immigrant visas. Your spouse and child(ren) will need to appear at the consulate for an interview at which time a consular officer will determine if they are admissible to the United States. If their applications are approved, they will be given immigrant visas, allowing them to enter the US and join you as permanent residents.
Procedure and Documentation Required to Obtain a Fiancée Visa
To contact us Click HERE
It is in this Embassy or US Consulate that your fiancé(e) has to apply for a K-1 non-immigrant fiancée visa, which is valid up to 90 days. This US Embassy’s Consular section will guide the foreign fiancé(e) with details about what documents are needed and how to go about the application. Along with the documents, the fiancé/fiancée has to go through an interview where a digital, ink-free fingerprint scan will also be done for later identification of the person.
Both your fiancé(e) and you must be legally free to marry each other. So “legal proof” must be available to show that both of you are eligible to marry, and that if either or both of you were married earlier, that marriage was ended legally. Moreover, both of you must have met in the last two years before filling a petition. However, exemptions are possible, if meeting each other can create problems for both of you or is against your religious traditions and customs.
This petition can only be filed by US citizens. Green Card holders or permanent residents have to marry outside US, and then file Form I-130 to petition their spouse to immigrate to the US.
Procedure and Documentation Required to Obtain a Fiancée Visa
If you are a US citizen planning to get married in the US, and your fiancé/fiancée is a foreign national, you can find solution to your problem by applying for a fiancée visa or K-1 visa.Application Process of K-1 or Fiancée Visa
Before applying for a K-1 visa, the US citizen, on behalf of the foreign fiancé(e), has to file a Petition for Alien Fiancé or Form I-129F, at the nearest USCIS office in his/her locality or at the nearby US consulate, if the citizen is living abroad. After the approval from the USCIS, this petition goes to the National Visa Center for further processing, from where it is sent to US Embassy.It is in this Embassy or US Consulate that your fiancé(e) has to apply for a K-1 non-immigrant fiancée visa, which is valid up to 90 days. This US Embassy’s Consular section will guide the foreign fiancé(e) with details about what documents are needed and how to go about the application. Along with the documents, the fiancé/fiancée has to go through an interview where a digital, ink-free fingerprint scan will also be done for later identification of the person.
Things to be noted:
Within 90 days of entering the United States, your fiancé(e) must get married to you. In case the marriage doesn’t happen within the stipulated period, or your fiancé doesn’t marry you, your fiancée has to leave US, as extension of this fiancée visa is not a possible option. If this visa expires and the marriage did not take place, your fiancé will have to leave the US and will need a new visa to re-enter.Both your fiancé(e) and you must be legally free to marry each other. So “legal proof” must be available to show that both of you are eligible to marry, and that if either or both of you were married earlier, that marriage was ended legally. Moreover, both of you must have met in the last two years before filling a petition. However, exemptions are possible, if meeting each other can create problems for both of you or is against your religious traditions and customs.
This petition can only be filed by US citizens. Green Card holders or permanent residents have to marry outside US, and then file Form I-130 to petition their spouse to immigrate to the US.
The Documentation Required
Clear photocopies of the following necessary documents are to be attached with the fiancée visa application. Any document that is not in English has to be translated and the translations have to be attached along with a certificate from the translator certifying his/her qualification to translate. Any original document if required will be requested from you and will be returned at the time of the interview or later.- A passport for traveling to US with an expiry date later than 6 months or more
- Birth Certificate.
- Death or divorce record of any earlier spouse of you and your fiancé(e).
- Medical examination report.
- Police verification document from all the places lived, since the age of 16 years.
- USCIS Form I-134; Affidavit of Support may be submitted as a proof of financial capability.
- Proof of relationship with the fiancée/ fiancé.
- Two Nonimmigrant Visa Applications
- Two visa photos of the nonimmigrant
- One Nonimmigrant Fiancée Visa Application, Form DS-156K.
US Citizens Marrying Abroad
A US citizen marrying abroad has to file a petition Form I-130, for immigration of the alien spouse, after the marriage with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS, previously INS) in the United States. At times, this petition may be filed at the U.S. Embassies or Consulates outside US, but prior information must be collected, as not every consulate has this provision.Popular USCIS Forms
To contact us Click HERE
PopularUSCIS Forms
A variety of USCIS immigration forms are available for people seekingpermanent residence in the United States and for the people who wish to enterthe United States temporarily. Among hundreds of USCIS forms, there are fewforms that are very popular. Forms such as Form I-90, Application to ReplacePermanent Resident Card, Form N-400, Application for Naturalization and FormI-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status are certainforms that are commonly filed.
Form I-90 - Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card
USCIS Form I-90, is generally known as the Green Card renewal form.This form is more common and popular among the Green Card holders because allthe holders of this card must use Form I-90 to renew their expiring GreenCards. Immigrants who are granted lawful status in the United States are issuedGreen Cards to establish the legal status of the holder in America. These GreenCards or permanent resident cards are not valid for a lifetime and those cardsexpire every ten years. Hence the lawful permanent residents, to establishtheir status in America must always hold a valid Green Card and they must applyfor Green Card renewal before the card could expire. Though their lawfulpermanent resident status in America does not cease on the expiration of theirGreen Cards, the immigrants are required by the US immigration laws to hold avalid Green Card. Hence the permanent residents must apply for renewal beforesix months from the date of expiration of their Green Cards.
Form I-485 - Application to Register Permanent Residence or AdjustStatus
Non US citizens who are in America on some other non-immigrant statusmay use this USCIS form to change their status to permanent resident status.They may become lawful permanent residents through adjustment of status, ifthey are sponsored by their US citizen family members or if they are offeredjobs by US employers. Besides, some people become Green Card holders by holdingasylum or refugee status and they may file Form I-485 to adjust status topermanent resident status, one year after being granted asylum or refugeestatus. Applicants in the United States on some other status, may file Form I-485after an immigrant visa become available in their particular category.
Form N-400 - Application for Naturalization
A non US citizen may become a US citizen through naturalization forwhich Form N-400 must be filed with the USCIS. A non-American citizen above age18, who is a lawful permanent resident in the United States for five years andmore, may be eligible for US citizenship through naturalization, on meeting theeligibility requirements for naturalization. Though the United States grants certainrights to lawful permanent residents, certain citizenship rights such as theright to vote are granted only to US citizens. Hence by becoming a US citizen,a foreign national will be granted the rights as that of a native US citizen. Aforeign citizen who is married to a US citizen, may become a US citizen onholding a valid Green Card for 3 years and more.
PopularUSCIS Forms
A variety of USCIS immigration forms are available for people seekingpermanent residence in the United States and for the people who wish to enterthe United States temporarily. Among hundreds of USCIS forms, there are fewforms that are very popular. Forms such as Form I-90, Application to ReplacePermanent Resident Card, Form N-400, Application for Naturalization and FormI-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status are certainforms that are commonly filed.
Form I-90 - Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card
USCIS Form I-90, is generally known as the Green Card renewal form.This form is more common and popular among the Green Card holders because allthe holders of this card must use Form I-90 to renew their expiring GreenCards. Immigrants who are granted lawful status in the United States are issuedGreen Cards to establish the legal status of the holder in America. These GreenCards or permanent resident cards are not valid for a lifetime and those cardsexpire every ten years. Hence the lawful permanent residents, to establishtheir status in America must always hold a valid Green Card and they must applyfor Green Card renewal before the card could expire. Though their lawfulpermanent resident status in America does not cease on the expiration of theirGreen Cards, the immigrants are required by the US immigration laws to hold avalid Green Card. Hence the permanent residents must apply for renewal beforesix months from the date of expiration of their Green Cards.
Form I-485 - Application to Register Permanent Residence or AdjustStatus
Non US citizens who are in America on some other non-immigrant statusmay use this USCIS form to change their status to permanent resident status.They may become lawful permanent residents through adjustment of status, ifthey are sponsored by their US citizen family members or if they are offeredjobs by US employers. Besides, some people become Green Card holders by holdingasylum or refugee status and they may file Form I-485 to adjust status topermanent resident status, one year after being granted asylum or refugeestatus. Applicants in the United States on some other status, may file Form I-485after an immigrant visa become available in their particular category.
Form N-400 - Application for Naturalization
A non US citizen may become a US citizen through naturalization forwhich Form N-400 must be filed with the USCIS. A non-American citizen above age18, who is a lawful permanent resident in the United States for five years andmore, may be eligible for US citizenship through naturalization, on meeting theeligibility requirements for naturalization. Though the United States grants certainrights to lawful permanent residents, certain citizenship rights such as theright to vote are granted only to US citizens. Hence by becoming a US citizen,a foreign national will be granted the rights as that of a native US citizen. Aforeign citizen who is married to a US citizen, may become a US citizen onholding a valid Green Card for 3 years and more.
29 Eylül 2012 Cumartesi
August 2012 Visa Bulletin - Visa Retrogression for F1 Philippines
To contact us Click HERE
This coming August 2012, petitions under the Family Sponsored F1 Preference will experience significant visa retrogression for applicants whose country of chargeability is the Philippines. The August Visa Bulletin shows visa retrogression from July 15, 1997 to March 1, 1994.
FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES
EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCES
Source: August 2012 Visa Bulletin
If you have any questions or need assistance with your immigration matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES
EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCES
Source: August 2012 Visa Bulletin
If you have any questions or need assistance with your immigration matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
DHS Outlines Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Process
To contact us Click HERE
USCIS to begin accepting requests for consideration of deferred action on August 15, 2012
The Department of Homeland Security today provided additional information on the deferred action for childhood arrivals process during a national media call in preparation for the August 15 implementation date.
WASHINGTON—The Department of Homeland Security today, August 3, 2012 provided additional information on the deferred action for childhood arrivals process during a national media call in preparation for the August 15 implementation date.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is finalizing a process by which potentially eligible individuals may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals.
USCIS expects to make all forms, instructions, and additional information relevant to the deferred action for childhood arrivals process available on August 15, 2012. USCIS will then immediately begin accepting requests for consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals.
Information shared during today’s call includes the following highlights:
Requestors – those in removal proceedings, those with final orders, and those who have never been in removal proceedings – will be able to affirmatively request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals with USCIS.
Requestors will use a form developed for this specific purpose.
Requestors will mail their deferred action request together with an application for an employment authorization document and all applicable fees to the USCIS lockbox.
All requestors must provide biometrics and undergo background checks.
Fee waivers cannot be requested for the application for employment authorization and biometric collection. However, fee exemptions will be available in limited circumstances.
The four USCIS Service Centers will review requests.
Additional information regarding the Secretary’s June 15 announcement will be made available on www.uscis.gov on August 15, 2012. It is important to note that this process is not yet in effect and individuals who believe they meet the guidelines of this new process should not request consideration of deferred action before August 15, 2012. Requests submitted before August 15, 2012 will be rejected. Individuals who believe they are eligible should be aware of immigration scams. Unauthorized practitioners of immigration law may try to take advantage of you by charging a fee to submit forms to USCIS on your behalf.
Source: USCIS
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING DEFERRED ACTION,PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
USCIS to begin accepting requests for consideration of deferred action on August 15, 2012
The Department of Homeland Security today provided additional information on the deferred action for childhood arrivals process during a national media call in preparation for the August 15 implementation date.
WASHINGTON—The Department of Homeland Security today, August 3, 2012 provided additional information on the deferred action for childhood arrivals process during a national media call in preparation for the August 15 implementation date.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is finalizing a process by which potentially eligible individuals may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals.
USCIS expects to make all forms, instructions, and additional information relevant to the deferred action for childhood arrivals process available on August 15, 2012. USCIS will then immediately begin accepting requests for consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals.
Information shared during today’s call includes the following highlights:
Requestors – those in removal proceedings, those with final orders, and those who have never been in removal proceedings – will be able to affirmatively request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals with USCIS.
Requestors will use a form developed for this specific purpose.
Requestors will mail their deferred action request together with an application for an employment authorization document and all applicable fees to the USCIS lockbox.
All requestors must provide biometrics and undergo background checks.
Fee waivers cannot be requested for the application for employment authorization and biometric collection. However, fee exemptions will be available in limited circumstances.
The four USCIS Service Centers will review requests.
Additional information regarding the Secretary’s June 15 announcement will be made available on www.uscis.gov on August 15, 2012. It is important to note that this process is not yet in effect and individuals who believe they meet the guidelines of this new process should not request consideration of deferred action before August 15, 2012. Requests submitted before August 15, 2012 will be rejected. Individuals who believe they are eligible should be aware of immigration scams. Unauthorized practitioners of immigration law may try to take advantage of you by charging a fee to submit forms to USCIS on your behalf.
Source: USCIS
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING DEFERRED ACTION,PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Process
To contact us Click HERE
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT DEFERRED ACTIONFOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS (DACA)
Individuals who demonstrate that they meet the guidelines below may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals for a period of two years, subject to renewal, and may be eligible for employment authorization.
You may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals if you:
1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;
5. Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or your lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;
6. Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and
7. Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.
Individuals may begin to request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals on August 15, 2012. Please do not file before August 15. If you file early, your request will be rejected.
Filing Process
How do I request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals?
Beginning August 15, 2012, you will be required to submit your request for consideration of deferred action to USCIS through a form, along with a form requesting an employment authorization document. The total fees will be $465. USCIS is still developing the forms and will be submitting them to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Pending OMB clearance, the forms and instructions will be available on the USCIS website on August 15, 2012. Do not submit any request to USCIS before these forms are available. All requests received before August 15, 2012, will be rejected.
Will the information I share in my request for consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals be used for immigration enforcement purposes?
Information provided in this request is protected from disclosure to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for the purpose of immigration enforcement proceedings unless issues of misrepresentation and/or fraud are suspected. Individuals whose cases are deferred pursuant to the consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals process will not be referred to ICE.
If you have additional question regarding DACA, please join us onAugust 11, 2012 from 10:00 to 4:00 pm at 8340 Van Nuys Blvd., Suite M, Van Nuys, CA 91402(Island Pacific Panorama City Plaza).
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
Individuals who demonstrate that they meet the guidelines below may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals for a period of two years, subject to renewal, and may be eligible for employment authorization.
You may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals if you:
1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;
5. Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or your lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;
6. Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and
7. Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.
Individuals may begin to request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals on August 15, 2012. Please do not file before August 15. If you file early, your request will be rejected.
Filing Process
How do I request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals?
Beginning August 15, 2012, you will be required to submit your request for consideration of deferred action to USCIS through a form, along with a form requesting an employment authorization document. The total fees will be $465. USCIS is still developing the forms and will be submitting them to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Pending OMB clearance, the forms and instructions will be available on the USCIS website on August 15, 2012. Do not submit any request to USCIS before these forms are available. All requests received before August 15, 2012, will be rejected.
Will the information I share in my request for consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals be used for immigration enforcement purposes?
Information provided in this request is protected from disclosure to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for the purpose of immigration enforcement proceedings unless issues of misrepresentation and/or fraud are suspected. Individuals whose cases are deferred pursuant to the consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals process will not be referred to ICE.
If you have additional question regarding DACA, please join us onAugust 11, 2012 from 10:00 to 4:00 pm at 8340 Van Nuys Blvd., Suite M, Van Nuys, CA 91402(Island Pacific Panorama City Plaza).
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
September 2012 Visa Bulletin - Some Forward Movement for India and the Philippines
To contact us Click HERE
The Visa Bulletin for September 2012 has come out showing some significant movements in the family-sponsored preferences.
This coming September, those in the F1, F2A and F2B categories for all countries of chargeability will experience significant forward movement of priority dates being processed.
SEPTEMBER 2012
FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES
As for employment-based preferences, no movement for all chargeability will take place for the 2nd preference while little movement will take place for the 3rd preference.
EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCE
Source: September 2012 Visa Bulletin
If you have any questions or need assistance with your immigration matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466 Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120 Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
This coming September, those in the F1, F2A and F2B categories for all countries of chargeability will experience significant forward movement of priority dates being processed.
SEPTEMBER 2012
FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES
As for employment-based preferences, no movement for all chargeability will take place for the 2nd preference while little movement will take place for the 3rd preference.
EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCE
Source: September 2012 Visa Bulletin
If you have any questions or need assistance with your immigration matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.BAGON LAW FIRM6700 Fallbrook AvenueSuite 125HWest Hills, CA 91307Toll Free: (888) 992-2466 Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120 Fax: (888) 589-0804www.bagonlawfirm.com
The Latest News about the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Visa Program
To contact us Click HERE
Victorville Investor Agrees to Forfeit Processing Fee: According to recent reports, Yin-Yang Dong, an Asian investor in the Victorville, CA EB-5 Immigrant Investor program has agreed to forfeit $50,000 so that the $500,000 he loaned to the city through the now defunct EB-5 program can be recovered.
Las Vegas Conference Features EB-5 Program: A recent two-day conference about the EB-5 program held in Las Vegas, NV, was a resounding success with nearly 200 real estate developers, lawyers, regional center executives and sponsors attending. Those regional center executives attending the conference included George Ekins, CEO of American Dream Fund, which manages the Los Angeles Regional Center and the Las Vegas Regional Center, and Robert Hobbs, VP of R.H. Hobbs and Century American Regional Center, which is currently pending USCIS approval.
National Lobbying Group Hopes to Make the EB-5 Program Permanent: A new national association hopes to make the EB-5 investor program permanent. The program, which was not originally intended to last in perpetuity, may become a permanent fixture in immigration law, if the Association to Invest in USA has its way. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) may soon introduce a bill that would eliminate the EB-5 program’s sunset date (September 30, 2012), as well as make other revisions to the immigrant investor visa program.
The Association to Invest in USA is based in Chicago, IL and has 114 members, including the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce.
28 Eylül 2012 Cuma
Arriving in the US Port of entry
To contact us Click HERE
Arriving in the US Port of entry
The K1 Fiance Visa is a single use visa, that means that you can only use it once and so you had better make the most of it! Arriving in the US with all my possessions in two suitcases, my passport with visa paper in it, and my sealed envelope with whatever documents the US embassy had decided to put in inside there, I was keen for everything to run smoothly. After arriving in the US port of entry I followed the crowd as normal to the US customs desks. Unlike previous visits to the US, when I was a temporary visitor arriving on a visa waiver and it was clear what my status was, this time I was unsure as to which queue that I should stand in as I was neither a tourist, or an American passport holder. When I asked a kindly US Immigration Officer about it and explained that I was a US immigrant on a K1 Fiance Visa, she started a new queue and put me at the front(!)
I was nervous when a finally got to see a US Immigration Officer at the US customs desk - there was nothing amiss, I was just anxious that having gone through all the trouble of getting my K1 Fiance Visa from the USCIS, nothing should go wrong at the last minute. As it was busy (I arrived at Orlando, Florida) and the US Immigration officer has to process all of the documents inside the sealed envelope, which takes some time, he directed me through to the waiting area, where I sat around for maybe fifteen minutes before I was called back to the US customs desk. It took another ten or fifteen minutes to process the contents of my sealed envelope and take my fingerprints etc. The contents of the sealed envelope appeared to be mainly just the original application documents and evidence from the K1 Fiance Visa process, but I could be wrong.
Eventually it was over and the immigration officials wished me well. I still had to collect my baggage and go through more security, but I was through the US immigration part. From now on, I would be living in the USA.
The K1 Fiance Visa is a single use visa, that means that you can only use it once and so you had better make the most of it! Arriving in the US with all my possessions in two suitcases, my passport with visa paper in it, and my sealed envelope with whatever documents the US embassy had decided to put in inside there, I was keen for everything to run smoothly. After arriving in the US port of entry I followed the crowd as normal to the US customs desks. Unlike previous visits to the US, when I was a temporary visitor arriving on a visa waiver and it was clear what my status was, this time I was unsure as to which queue that I should stand in as I was neither a tourist, or an American passport holder. When I asked a kindly US Immigration Officer about it and explained that I was a US immigrant on a K1 Fiance Visa, she started a new queue and put me at the front(!)
I was nervous when a finally got to see a US Immigration Officer at the US customs desk - there was nothing amiss, I was just anxious that having gone through all the trouble of getting my K1 Fiance Visa from the USCIS, nothing should go wrong at the last minute. As it was busy (I arrived at Orlando, Florida) and the US Immigration officer has to process all of the documents inside the sealed envelope, which takes some time, he directed me through to the waiting area, where I sat around for maybe fifteen minutes before I was called back to the US customs desk. It took another ten or fifteen minutes to process the contents of my sealed envelope and take my fingerprints etc. The contents of the sealed envelope appeared to be mainly just the original application documents and evidence from the K1 Fiance Visa process, but I could be wrong.
Eventually it was over and the immigration officials wished me well. I still had to collect my baggage and go through more security, but I was through the US immigration part. From now on, I would be living in the USA.
Getting married in the US (Florida)
To contact us Click HERE
The first thing that I should point out about getting married in the US is that each state has its own laws and costs. Even within a state, there can also be minor differences between the different counties, so it is always best to check and double check the relevant info and regulations in advance. My specific personal experience was getting married in Florida, so bear in mind that although there are bound to be lots of similarities with other states, there will also some differences too. Given my very positive experience, I would certainly recommend getting married in Florida. My wife and I were married in north central Florida in the city of Gainesville, a college town which is home to the University of Florida.
Background to getting married in the US
Getting married to a US citizen and obtaining a marriage license was a requirement of my K1 Fiance Visa, but my wife and I never lost sight of the fact that were mainly getting married because we loved each other and wanted to live together as man and wife. The K1 Fiance Visa was purely a tool for achieving that. Given the logistical problems that would be involved with getting all our respective families together, my family from across the Atlantic in the UK and my wife’s family from the north east of the US, we opted to have just a small intimate ceremony, rather than a big wedding. Because neither of us are particularly religious, we also decided that we would go for a civil ceremony, rather than getting married in a church.
Arranging the ceremony, getting the license and getting married in Florida
I am a UK citizen, so I can only really make comparisons with getting married in England, where I am from. Compared to the UK, getting married in the US seems cheap when it comes to paying for a civil ceremony. Getting married is also much quicker, although there is a three day waiting period in Florida (unless you either do a short pre-marital course, or you live outside Florida, in which case the three day waiting period is waived). As my wife and I didn’t want to do the premarital course and we both live together in Florida, we were liable for the waiting period, and so decided to apply for our marriage license at the start of the week and arrange with the court for getting married in Florida on the Friday. The fee was $93.50, which at around £65 seemed relatively cheap to me. We had to go together to get the marriage license and I had to use my passport as I.D. The marriage license they gave us was valid for 30 days, but as I mentioned we arranged for our wedding to take place just four days later. It was all very straightforward, partly because neither of us had been married before, so we didn’t have to prove that we were divorced or widowed.
The marriage ceremony and afterwards
As I mentioned earlier, we kept the number of people at the marriage ceremony small, just inviting a couple of friends, plus my wife’s daughter. If you are getting married in the US, be aware that because of the gun culture there and the threat of terrorism, there is much stricter security at public buildings such as court houses – I was somewhat surprised when all of us were searched for weapons when entering the courthouse on our wedding day, albeit in a friendly way. All in all, however, I thoroughly enjoyed my wedding experience and would heartily recommend getting married in Florida.
Getting married meant that we had fulfilled the requirements of the K1 Fiance Visa by getting married in the US within 90 days. This meant that I was now able to put in an adjustment of status application for a US green card.
Background to getting married in the US
Getting married to a US citizen and obtaining a marriage license was a requirement of my K1 Fiance Visa, but my wife and I never lost sight of the fact that were mainly getting married because we loved each other and wanted to live together as man and wife. The K1 Fiance Visa was purely a tool for achieving that. Given the logistical problems that would be involved with getting all our respective families together, my family from across the Atlantic in the UK and my wife’s family from the north east of the US, we opted to have just a small intimate ceremony, rather than a big wedding. Because neither of us are particularly religious, we also decided that we would go for a civil ceremony, rather than getting married in a church.
Arranging the ceremony, getting the license and getting married in Florida
I am a UK citizen, so I can only really make comparisons with getting married in England, where I am from. Compared to the UK, getting married in the US seems cheap when it comes to paying for a civil ceremony. Getting married is also much quicker, although there is a three day waiting period in Florida (unless you either do a short pre-marital course, or you live outside Florida, in which case the three day waiting period is waived). As my wife and I didn’t want to do the premarital course and we both live together in Florida, we were liable for the waiting period, and so decided to apply for our marriage license at the start of the week and arrange with the court for getting married in Florida on the Friday. The fee was $93.50, which at around £65 seemed relatively cheap to me. We had to go together to get the marriage license and I had to use my passport as I.D. The marriage license they gave us was valid for 30 days, but as I mentioned we arranged for our wedding to take place just four days later. It was all very straightforward, partly because neither of us had been married before, so we didn’t have to prove that we were divorced or widowed.
The marriage ceremony and afterwards
As I mentioned earlier, we kept the number of people at the marriage ceremony small, just inviting a couple of friends, plus my wife’s daughter. If you are getting married in the US, be aware that because of the gun culture there and the threat of terrorism, there is much stricter security at public buildings such as court houses – I was somewhat surprised when all of us were searched for weapons when entering the courthouse on our wedding day, albeit in a friendly way. All in all, however, I thoroughly enjoyed my wedding experience and would heartily recommend getting married in Florida.
Getting married meant that we had fulfilled the requirements of the K1 Fiance Visa by getting married in the US within 90 days. This meant that I was now able to put in an adjustment of status application for a US green card.
Getting a Social Security Card as a US immigrant and non US citizen
To contact us Click HERE
In this post I thought I would talk about my experience of getting a social security card as a US immigrant and non US citizen, once I had arrived in the USA on my K1 Fiance Visa. After all my troubles with trying to open a non US citizen bank account, I will not pretend that I was not a little nervous about trying to jump another bureaucratic hurdle. But a US Social Security Card is essential in America for many things: the social security card itself can be used as proof of ID, plus you need the Social Security Number (SSN) that comes with it too.
The closest thing to a US Social Security Number in the UK, where I am from, is the National Insurance number. However, we only generally use that for work, tax, and claiming benefits in Britain. As I mentioned, you need a US Social Security Card and Social Security Number (SSN) for all sorts of things in America. In the UK, you often have to use your passport as I.D. and occasionally your driving license as I.D. In the USA, your Social Security Card and Driving License are requested constantly for I.D. purposes and there is no assumption that you have a passport (many Americans don’t have passports).
How do I get a social security card?
You need to find out where your local social security office is. If you are unsure, look it up on the internet. I went down to my local social security office with my wife shortly after getting married in Florida. There was no appointment system, we were told just to turn up and join the queue. I took along some I.D.: my passport with the I-94 in it and my marriage license. I also took along a social security form applying for a US social security card and SSN that I had filled out in advance. The Social Security Office had a lot of similarities with its British equivalent - if you have ever had to make a claim for unemployment or another welfare benefit, you probably won’t be phased by the experience, a waiting room full of bored and demoralized people kept waiting for a long period of time. The only major difference from Britain was that we were checked over for guns by the security guard on the way in.
Eventually we were seen by one of the ladies at a hatch. She dealt with my case efficiently and I was told that I would receive my card in about 2 weeks, which turned out to be an accurate. My social security card was a standard one, apart from it stating on the front that it was "Valid for Work with DHS Authorization Only". This was because I didn’t have a US green card or EAD. Once you get your work authorization documents, you can go back to the social security office and they will swap your social security card for one without the legend on it (you need a US green card or EAD). The SSN stays the same. Unlike most of the K1 Fiance visa stuff, the social security process was completely free at every stage.
The closest thing to a US Social Security Number in the UK, where I am from, is the National Insurance number. However, we only generally use that for work, tax, and claiming benefits in Britain. As I mentioned, you need a US Social Security Card and Social Security Number (SSN) for all sorts of things in America. In the UK, you often have to use your passport as I.D. and occasionally your driving license as I.D. In the USA, your Social Security Card and Driving License are requested constantly for I.D. purposes and there is no assumption that you have a passport (many Americans don’t have passports).
How do I get a social security card?
You need to find out where your local social security office is. If you are unsure, look it up on the internet. I went down to my local social security office with my wife shortly after getting married in Florida. There was no appointment system, we were told just to turn up and join the queue. I took along some I.D.: my passport with the I-94 in it and my marriage license. I also took along a social security form applying for a US social security card and SSN that I had filled out in advance. The Social Security Office had a lot of similarities with its British equivalent - if you have ever had to make a claim for unemployment or another welfare benefit, you probably won’t be phased by the experience, a waiting room full of bored and demoralized people kept waiting for a long period of time. The only major difference from Britain was that we were checked over for guns by the security guard on the way in.
Eventually we were seen by one of the ladies at a hatch. She dealt with my case efficiently and I was told that I would receive my card in about 2 weeks, which turned out to be an accurate. My social security card was a standard one, apart from it stating on the front that it was "Valid for Work with DHS Authorization Only". This was because I didn’t have a US green card or EAD. Once you get your work authorization documents, you can go back to the social security office and they will swap your social security card for one without the legend on it (you need a US green card or EAD). The SSN stays the same. Unlike most of the K1 Fiance visa stuff, the social security process was completely free at every stage.
USCIS I-693 form and Vaccination Supplement
To contact us Click HERE
After getting married in the USA (Florida), I now had to file an I-485 Green Card application for permanent residency. This is also called seeking an adjustment of status (AOS). If all went well with that, then I would be issued with a USCIS Green Card. Before I could do that, however, I needed to get certification to show that all my vaccinations and health checks etc. were in order. This was to be done with a USCIS I-693 form, I discovered, which I had to get filled out and then include when I sent in the I-485 Green Card application package.
As I had had a K1 Fiance Visa Medical Exam back in London only a few months prior and had brought my copy of the vaccinations sheet with me to the USA, that made things a little easier when sorting out the USCIS I-693 form. Essentially, because I had had my K1Fiance Visa Medical Exam within 12 months previous to putting in my I-485 Green Card application, I didn’t need to undergo another medical (phew!) and I only needed the USCIS i-693 supplemental form filling out, not the entire I-693 form.
The I-693 supplemental form relates only to the vaccination supplement part of the form and has to be filled out by a designated civil surgeon, which basically means a USCIS approved doctor. There is a list of practices on the USCIS website that I used to help me find a designated civil surgeon. Apparently, prices vary considerably, so you are supposed to shop around. In my small city, however, there were only two practices with a designated civil surgeon and one of them never answered my calls, so I didn’t have a great deal of choice. The price wasn’t bad, however. I forget what the fee was but it was somewhere in the region of $35. I had to keep telling them that I only needed the I-693 supplemental form doing, however, and did not require the entire medical (which would have cost considerably more and was completely unnecessary in my case).
Anyway, I booked an appointment and it was all very straightforward. As it had already been determined that I met the US vaccination requirements for the medical exam back in London, I just took along my passport as ID and my copy of the vaccine worksheet that I had been given to me after my London medical and they copied my details from the vaccine worksheet over onto the USCIS I-693 supplement. I didn’t need any extra vaccinations. The I-693 supplement was then stamped and signed by the designated civil surgeon and I was given a sealed envelope that I was told under no circumstances should I open.
Now that I had sorted out my USCIS i-693 supplemental form, I was ready to put together my I-485 Green Card application package.
As I had had a K1 Fiance Visa Medical Exam back in London only a few months prior and had brought my copy of the vaccinations sheet with me to the USA, that made things a little easier when sorting out the USCIS I-693 form. Essentially, because I had had my K1Fiance Visa Medical Exam within 12 months previous to putting in my I-485 Green Card application, I didn’t need to undergo another medical (phew!) and I only needed the USCIS i-693 supplemental form filling out, not the entire I-693 form.
The I-693 supplemental form relates only to the vaccination supplement part of the form and has to be filled out by a designated civil surgeon, which basically means a USCIS approved doctor. There is a list of practices on the USCIS website that I used to help me find a designated civil surgeon. Apparently, prices vary considerably, so you are supposed to shop around. In my small city, however, there were only two practices with a designated civil surgeon and one of them never answered my calls, so I didn’t have a great deal of choice. The price wasn’t bad, however. I forget what the fee was but it was somewhere in the region of $35. I had to keep telling them that I only needed the I-693 supplemental form doing, however, and did not require the entire medical (which would have cost considerably more and was completely unnecessary in my case).
Anyway, I booked an appointment and it was all very straightforward. As it had already been determined that I met the US vaccination requirements for the medical exam back in London, I just took along my passport as ID and my copy of the vaccine worksheet that I had been given to me after my London medical and they copied my details from the vaccine worksheet over onto the USCIS I-693 supplement. I didn’t need any extra vaccinations. The I-693 supplement was then stamped and signed by the designated civil surgeon and I was given a sealed envelope that I was told under no circumstances should I open.
Now that I had sorted out my USCIS i-693 supplemental form, I was ready to put together my I-485 Green Card application package.
I-485 Green Card Application and I-684 Affidavit of Support
To contact us Click HERE
Unfortunately, the bureaucracy didn’t stop for me once I had entered the US with my K1 Fiance Visa and got married. The K1 Fiance Visa can only be used once, so having entered the USA and got married, its use was essentially over, although I did, of course, keep all my documents in case they were needed for proof further down the line (the I-94 inside my passport, for instance, was essential later for proving that I had entered the country legally, as was the I-797 approval notice that was received by my wife at the end of the I-129 petition process). Anyway, I was now ready for the next stage after getting married in the US (Florida), making my I-485 Green Card application for permanent residency, known as an adjustment of status or AOS. If that was successful, then I would receive a USCIS Green Card and be classified as a resident alien by the USCIS. Along with the I-485 Green Card application, I also applied for Advance Parole (AP) and Employment Authorization (EAD), as there was no fee to pay if I filed them at the same time as my application for adjustment of status (AOS).
The I-485 Green Card application is a thick form with lots of questions, but I had got used to filling out those when undergoing the K1 Fiance Visa Process. What was a pain about applying for Adjustment of Status, in my wife and I’s experience, was putting together all the masses of evidence that was needed to go with the accompanying I-684 Affidavit of Support. As well as providing proof that we were are married, my wife also had to present proof that she was financially solvent and able to support me. This basically involves collecting together piles of tax returns that have to be sorted through and copied, as well as letters from my wife’s boss and months and months of bank statements, amongst other things. I also had to include the I-693 vaccination supplement, a copy of my I-94, the I-684 Affidavit of Support, along with copies of all the bank, employment, and tax documents. We also included evidence of our relationship, including: copy of marriage license, wedding cards and photos, letter from bank showing we had a joint bank account and a few other things, such as the I-797.
As I mentioned, as well as the green card application, I also put in applications for temporary travel documents and temporary employment permission, known as I-131 Advance Parole (AP) and the I-765 Employment Authorization (EAD), so that I have the option of traveling and working while we wait for the adjustment of status application to be processed, although in practice the AP and EAD can also take months to be processed. I thought it was worth putting them in, however, as there were no extra costs, given that they were filed with my I-485 and I-684.
The whole package of five application forms and status adjustment evidence was so big and heavy it cost us $14 for the postage! (That was on top of the $980 we had to pay for the processing of the application!) There is also a small fee at this point that you have to pay towards the biometrics that you will have to get later. We actually forgot to include this the first time round and were sent a letter saying that they wouldn’t start processing our forms until they had received it. They also send letters acknowledging receipt of the various forms.
The next stage after this is the biometrics appointment. They send a letter inviting you when they are ready. It took over four months for me just to get the I-131 Advance Parole (AP) and the I-765 Employment Authorization (EAD), never mind the Adjustment of Status, so try to keep patient!
The I-485 Green Card application is a thick form with lots of questions, but I had got used to filling out those when undergoing the K1 Fiance Visa Process. What was a pain about applying for Adjustment of Status, in my wife and I’s experience, was putting together all the masses of evidence that was needed to go with the accompanying I-684 Affidavit of Support. As well as providing proof that we were are married, my wife also had to present proof that she was financially solvent and able to support me. This basically involves collecting together piles of tax returns that have to be sorted through and copied, as well as letters from my wife’s boss and months and months of bank statements, amongst other things. I also had to include the I-693 vaccination supplement, a copy of my I-94, the I-684 Affidavit of Support, along with copies of all the bank, employment, and tax documents. We also included evidence of our relationship, including: copy of marriage license, wedding cards and photos, letter from bank showing we had a joint bank account and a few other things, such as the I-797.
As I mentioned, as well as the green card application, I also put in applications for temporary travel documents and temporary employment permission, known as I-131 Advance Parole (AP) and the I-765 Employment Authorization (EAD), so that I have the option of traveling and working while we wait for the adjustment of status application to be processed, although in practice the AP and EAD can also take months to be processed. I thought it was worth putting them in, however, as there were no extra costs, given that they were filed with my I-485 and I-684.
The whole package of five application forms and status adjustment evidence was so big and heavy it cost us $14 for the postage! (That was on top of the $980 we had to pay for the processing of the application!) There is also a small fee at this point that you have to pay towards the biometrics that you will have to get later. We actually forgot to include this the first time round and were sent a letter saying that they wouldn’t start processing our forms until they had received it. They also send letters acknowledging receipt of the various forms.
The next stage after this is the biometrics appointment. They send a letter inviting you when they are ready. It took over four months for me just to get the I-131 Advance Parole (AP) and the I-765 Employment Authorization (EAD), never mind the Adjustment of Status, so try to keep patient!
27 Eylül 2012 Perşembe
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals - What To Do?
To contact us Click HERE
Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Process
You may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals if you:
1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;
5. Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or your lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;
6. Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and
7. Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.
If you need legal assistance with your DACA application,
please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.
BAGON LAW FIRM
6700 Fallbrook Avenue
Suite 125H
West Hills, CA 91307
Toll Free: (888) 992-2466
Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120
Fax: (888) 589-0804
www.bagonlawfirm.com Areas of Services: Deferred Action for Children and Deferred Action for young adults in Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Oxnard, Camarillo, Thousand Oasks, Simi Valley, Cerritos, Glendale, Burbank, Eagle Rock, Ventura, Santa Barbara, Canyon Country, Montebello, Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, Norwalk, West Covina, Covina, Balwind Park, Irwindale, Pacoima, North Hollywood, Van Nuys, North Hills, West Hills, Woodland Hills, Reseda, Canoga Park. Deferred Action in California. Deferred Action Immigration Attorney in West Hills. Deferred Action in Oxnard call Bagon Law Firm. Deferred Action Bagon Law Firm. Deferred Action and you need an attorney contact Bagon Law Firm. We can help with your Deferred Action Application. Deferred action for high school students. Deferred Action for College Students. Employment Authorization for deferred action. Attorney and lawyer for deferred action is Bagon Law Firm.
Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Process
You may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals if you:
1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;
5. Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or your lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;
6. Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and
7. Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.
If you need legal assistance with your DACA application,
please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sharlene Mae Bagon, Esq.
BAGON LAW FIRM
6700 Fallbrook Avenue
Suite 125H
West Hills, CA 91307
Toll Free: (888) 992-2466
Main Tel.: (818) 539-0120
Fax: (888) 589-0804
www.bagonlawfirm.com Areas of Services: Deferred Action for Children and Deferred Action for young adults in Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Oxnard, Camarillo, Thousand Oasks, Simi Valley, Cerritos, Glendale, Burbank, Eagle Rock, Ventura, Santa Barbara, Canyon Country, Montebello, Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, Norwalk, West Covina, Covina, Balwind Park, Irwindale, Pacoima, North Hollywood, Van Nuys, North Hills, West Hills, Woodland Hills, Reseda, Canoga Park. Deferred Action in California. Deferred Action Immigration Attorney in West Hills. Deferred Action in Oxnard call Bagon Law Firm. Deferred Action Bagon Law Firm. Deferred Action and you need an attorney contact Bagon Law Firm. We can help with your Deferred Action Application. Deferred action for high school students. Deferred Action for College Students. Employment Authorization for deferred action. Attorney and lawyer for deferred action is Bagon Law Firm.
Ombudsman Recommendation Update: USCIS Processing of Waivers of Inadmissability
To contact us Click HERE
On June 10, 2010, the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman recommended enhancements to the administration of Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility. While specifically focused on the USCIS Ciudad Juarez Field Office, many of the recommendations applied to all overseas posts: (1) Centralize I-601 processing; (2) Allow applicants to concurrently file Form I-601 and Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative; (3) Prioritize the finalization of the overseas case management system, already under development, to ensure accurate statistical reporting on Forms I-601, to allow processing times to be posted, and to enable customers to track a Form I-601 application via the "My Case Status" feature on the USCIS website; (4) Publish clear instructions for customers seeking expedited waiver processing; (5) Increase coordination between Department of State (DOS) and USCIS officers who work with I-601 waivers; and (6) Allow USCIS employees to request digitized A-Files upon receipt of interview schedules. This Recommendation update provides the status of recommendations made by the Ombudsman at least twelve months after the recommendations were issued.
Read more: http://www.ilw.com/immigrationdaily/news/2011,1209-inadmissibility.shtm
On June 10, 2010, the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman recommended enhancements to the administration of Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility. While specifically focused on the USCIS Ciudad Juarez Field Office, many of the recommendations applied to all overseas posts: (1) Centralize I-601 processing; (2) Allow applicants to concurrently file Form I-601 and Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative; (3) Prioritize the finalization of the overseas case management system, already under development, to ensure accurate statistical reporting on Forms I-601, to allow processing times to be posted, and to enable customers to track a Form I-601 application via the "My Case Status" feature on the USCIS website; (4) Publish clear instructions for customers seeking expedited waiver processing; (5) Increase coordination between Department of State (DOS) and USCIS officers who work with I-601 waivers; and (6) Allow USCIS employees to request digitized A-Files upon receipt of interview schedules. This Recommendation update provides the status of recommendations made by the Ombudsman at least twelve months after the recommendations were issued.
Read more: http://www.ilw.com/immigrationdaily/news/2011,1209-inadmissibility.shtm
CISOMB Recommendation Update: USCIS Processing of Waivers of Inadmissability
To contact us Click HERE
"On June 10, 2010, the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman recommended enhancements to the administration of Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility. While specifically focused on the USCIS Ciudad Juarez Field Office, many of the recommendations applied to all overseas posts: (1) Centralize I-601 processing; (2) Allow applicants to concurrently file Form I-601 and Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative; (3) Prioritize the finalization of the overseas case management system, already under development, to ensure accurate statistical reporting on Forms I-601, to allow processing times to be posted, and to enable customers to track a Form I-601 application via the "My Case Status" feature on the USCIS website; (4) Publish clear instructions for customers seeking expedited waiver processing; (5) Increase coordination between Department of State (DOS) and USCIS officers who work with I-601 waivers; and (6) Allow USCIS employees to request digitized A-Files upon receipt of interview schedules. This Recommendation update provides the status of recommendations made by the Ombudsman at least twelve months after the recommendations were issued." -CISOMB, updated Dec. 8, 2011.
Article posted by Daniel M. Kowalski
http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/immigration-law/blogs/inside/archive/2011/12/09/cisomb-recommendation-update-uscis-processing-of-waivers-of-inadmissability.aspx
Article posted by Daniel M. Kowalski
http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/immigration-law/blogs/inside/archive/2011/12/09/cisomb-recommendation-update-uscis-processing-of-waivers-of-inadmissability.aspx
UPDATE on I-601 Waivers: Easier Route to Green Card to Be Proposed for Some
To contact us Click HERE
Obama administration officials announced on Friday that they will propose a fix to a notorious snag in immigration law that will spare hundreds of thousands of American citizens from prolonged separations from immigrant spouses and children.
The change that immigration officials are offering would benefit United States citizens who are married to or have children who are illegal immigrants. It would correct a bureaucratic Catch-22 that those Americans now confront when their spouses or children apply to become legal permanent residents.
Although the tweak that officials of Citizenship and Immigration Services are proposing appears small, immigration lawyers and advocates for immigrants say it will make a great difference for countless Americans. Thousands will no longer be separated from loved ones, they said, and the change could encourage Americans to come forward to apply to bring illegal immigrant family members into the legal system.
Read more in the NY Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/us/path-to-green-card-for-illegal-immigrant-family-members-of-americans.html?_r=1&smid=fb-share
The change that immigration officials are offering would benefit United States citizens who are married to or have children who are illegal immigrants. It would correct a bureaucratic Catch-22 that those Americans now confront when their spouses or children apply to become legal permanent residents.
Although the tweak that officials of Citizenship and Immigration Services are proposing appears small, immigration lawyers and advocates for immigrants say it will make a great difference for countless Americans. Thousands will no longer be separated from loved ones, they said, and the change could encourage Americans to come forward to apply to bring illegal immigrant family members into the legal system.
Read more in the NY Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/us/path-to-green-card-for-illegal-immigrant-family-members-of-americans.html?_r=1&smid=fb-share
AP source: Admin. plans change in immigration rule
To contact us Click HERE
WASHINGTON—The Obama administration plans a rule change to help reduce the time illegal immigrant spouses and children are separated from citizen relatives while they try to win legal status in the United States, a senior administration official said Thursday.
Currently, illegal immigrants must leave the country before they can ask the government to waive a three- to 10-year ban on legally coming back to the U.S. The length of the ban depends on how long they have lived in the U.S. without permission.
The official said the new rule would let children and spouses of citizens ask the government to decide on the waiver request before the illegal immigrant heads to his or her home country to apply for a visa. The illegal immigrants still must go home to finish the visa process to come back to the U.S., but getting the waiver ahead of time could reduce the time an illegal immigrant is out of the country.
Read more at http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_19685281?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com
Currently, illegal immigrants must leave the country before they can ask the government to waive a three- to 10-year ban on legally coming back to the U.S. The length of the ban depends on how long they have lived in the U.S. without permission.
The official said the new rule would let children and spouses of citizens ask the government to decide on the waiver request before the illegal immigrant heads to his or her home country to apply for a visa. The illegal immigrants still must go home to finish the visa process to come back to the U.S., but getting the waiver ahead of time could reduce the time an illegal immigrant is out of the country.
Read more at http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_19685281?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com
26 Eylül 2012 Çarşamba
Longshoreman Strike Averted on East and Gulf Coasts
To contact us Click HERE
East and Gulf Coast Port Strike AvertedWe’re pleased to confirm news released from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services today that the International Longshoreman's Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Aliance (USMX) have agreed to extend the collective bargaining agreement due to expire onSeptember 30th, 2012 for a ninety day period (90 days) through to December 29th, 2012.This significant move will avert an ILA strike at East coast and Gulf coast ports!This also confirms that congestion surcharges announced by carriers will not go into effect on October 1st, 2012.We will continue to bring you news on the talks as we receive it.Kind regards,TTC World News Total Transportation Concept, Inc.,8728 Aviation BlvdInglewood CA 90301 USAPhone: (800) 582-7110
Statement by FMCS Director George H. Cohen On Verizon-CWA-IBEW Tentative Agreement
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- "I am extremely pleased to announce that at the culmination of two months of intense but constructive, highly focused negotiations under the auspices of myself and my colleagues, the parties negotiated a successor collective bargaining agreement. This successful outcome is yet another example of the fact that the process of collective bargaining—a cornerstone of our industrial democracy system—provides the parties the best opportunity to accommodate their strongly held competing positions.
"After more than one year of direct negotiations, the parties entered mediation essentially at a standstill on a score of significant core issues. Ultimately, however, the parties committed to a problem-solving mindset which paved the way to their achieving a comprehensive agreement.
"It was an honor and privilege for myself, Deputy Director Scot Beckenbaugh and Director of Mediation Services John Pinto to have assisted the Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, two highly respected unions representing approximately 43,000 working men and women, and Verizon Communications Inc., one of the nation's leading corporations, in this noteworthy endeavor. In plain terms, this agreement will provide a stable working environment for all parties concerned over the course of the next three years.
"Out of respect for the ratification processes to be applied by each party, the Agency will not disclose any of the details of this agreement."
The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, created in 1947, is an independent U.S. government agency whose mission is to preserve and promote labor-management peace and cooperation. Headquartered in Washington, DC, with 10 district offices and 67 field offices, the agency provides mediation and conflict resolution services to industry, government agencies and communities.
SOURCE Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
RELATED LINKS
http://www.fmcs.gov
 |
| English: Seal of the US Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
East and Gulf Coast Port Strike AvertedWe’re pleased to confirm news released from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services today that the International Longshoreman's Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Aliance (USMX) have agreed to extend the collective bargaining agreement due to expire onSeptember 30th, 2012 for a ninety day period (90 days) through to December 29th, 2012.This significant move will avert an ILA strike at East coast and Gulf coast ports!This also confirms that congestion surcharges announced by carriers will not go into effect on October 1st, 2012.We will continue to bring you news on the talks as we receive it.Kind regards,TTC World News Total Transportation Concept, Inc.,8728 Aviation BlvdInglewood CA 90301 USAPhone: (800) 582-7110
Statement by FMCS Director George H. Cohen On Verizon-CWA-IBEW Tentative Agreement
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- "I am extremely pleased to announce that at the culmination of two months of intense but constructive, highly focused negotiations under the auspices of myself and my colleagues, the parties negotiated a successor collective bargaining agreement. This successful outcome is yet another example of the fact that the process of collective bargaining—a cornerstone of our industrial democracy system—provides the parties the best opportunity to accommodate their strongly held competing positions.
"After more than one year of direct negotiations, the parties entered mediation essentially at a standstill on a score of significant core issues. Ultimately, however, the parties committed to a problem-solving mindset which paved the way to their achieving a comprehensive agreement.
"It was an honor and privilege for myself, Deputy Director Scot Beckenbaugh and Director of Mediation Services John Pinto to have assisted the Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, two highly respected unions representing approximately 43,000 working men and women, and Verizon Communications Inc., one of the nation's leading corporations, in this noteworthy endeavor. In plain terms, this agreement will provide a stable working environment for all parties concerned over the course of the next three years.
"Out of respect for the ratification processes to be applied by each party, the Agency will not disclose any of the details of this agreement."
The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, created in 1947, is an independent U.S. government agency whose mission is to preserve and promote labor-management peace and cooperation. Headquartered in Washington, DC, with 10 district offices and 67 field offices, the agency provides mediation and conflict resolution services to industry, government agencies and communities.
SOURCE Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
RELATED LINKS
http://www.fmcs.gov
Related articles
US Port Strike Crisis Averted... For Now
Dockworkers agree to extend negotiations
Dockworkers extend contract talks, averting strike
ILA Negotiations to Resume
Who is actually taking that online course you are teaching?
To contact us Click HERE
Inside Higher Ed reports that websites are spring up that offer to take students' courses for them... for a fee, of course.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/09/21/sites-offering-take-courses-fee-pose-risk-online-ed
I looked into this issue a few years ago and here's what I found at that time:
Meet Jack JeffersonHe is a 19-year-old junior at QuadCity Technical College 6’2", 194 lbs., short brown hair, dark eyesGoalie for the QuadCity Quakers soccer team Sports Medicine major with a 3.6 gpa
Now, Jack is taking a class online...
...or is he?
Student identity verification moves to center stageby Jim CastagneraMore than 20 percent of American college students took at least one online course during the fall 2007 semester. And from 2002 to 2007 U.S. enrollment in online courses grew 19.7 percent, reports the Sloan Consortium. Online education’s growth rate of 19.7 percent has noticeably outpaced the 1.5-percent growth rate of the total college student population.
Now the issue of student ID verification is on higher education’s front burner. What lessons can the U.S. Department of Education, accreditors and college administrators learn for the benefit of all?Anonymity changes everything for cheaters
In his classic 1999 book Code and Other Cyberspace Laws, Professor Larry Lessig explained, “Real-space life… carries with it this mix of authenticating and authenticated credentials. Social life is a constant negotiation between these different credentials. In a small town, in a quieter time, documents as credentials were not terribly necessary. You were known by your face, and your face carried with it a reference… about your character. As life becomes more anonymous, social institutions must construct credentials to authenticate facts about you that in an earlier time, or in a smaller world, would have been authenticated by the knowledge of the community about who you are.”
Lessig’s book focused on the needs of the financial and retail industries, where the vendor and the customer have always shared a strong interest in authenticated identity. A correct identification of the buyer by the seller is now crucial to internet commerce. Online learning, says Michael Jortberg, an Acxiom executive, “poses the exact same problem… only different.”
Jortberg explains that higher education is unique in that a customer may be motivated to mislead the seller about his actual identity. Since our customers may be more interested in buying a credential rather than our principal product – knowledge – a significant percentage of them are likely to cheat.
How serious is the problem of cheating in testing and assessment of learning? A 2008 U.S. News & World Report study reported that 56 percent of graduate business students admitted to cheating at least once. Fifty-four percent of engineering students and 45 percent of law students made the same admission. Contrast those findings with a study authored in September of this year by three faculty at Friends University titled Point, Click, Cheat: Frequency and Type of Academic Dishonesty in the Virtual Classroom. “Results suggest that the amount of academic misconduct among online students may not be as prevalent as believed.”
If the latter findings are true, perhaps it’s because online educators are taking cheating very seriously. Don Kassner is president of Andrew Jackson University, founded in 1995 as a correspondence school and now 100 percent online. Kassner offers, “We used to proctor every exam.” He adds that such close monitoring produces high costs and student inconvenience. “Students complained that ‘I can do all the course work at my kitchen table, but then I have to go somewhere else to take the tests.’”
Proctoring is at best a stopgap measure
The drawbacks of proctoring are exacerbated when curricula are delivered globally. Larry Dugan, Director of Online Learning at Finger Lakes Community College offers, “We give tests all over the world. Let’s say I needed a proctor for an exam in Tokyo. I’d have to identify and hire that person. If I put the job on the faculty, they wouldn’t do it right. And it would be very expensive.”
Clearly, for online learning to grow and prosper, face-to-face proctoring had to yield to a more modern replacement. Axciom offers one very intriguing solution. When a student sits down at the keyboard to take a test, he is faced with a series of “challenge questions” in quick succession. If he answers correctly, he may proceed with the assessment exercise. The questions come from a database developed and maintained by Mike Jortberg’s unit, which gathers public information from the worldwide web. “Typically we pose three random challenges and give the student two minutes to answer.”
Does it ever happen that your system produces incorrect information, I ask him. “Yes, occasionally,” he allows. What about legal liability? Dr. Jeff Bailey, formerly with National American University, says, “We told students up front that challenge questions are a reasonable alternative to proctoring, and they could opt out. No one opted out and we had no complaints.” A click-to-accept agreement includes acquiescence to the “challenge question” component, and it’s a common safeguard used by Jortberg’s client schools.
None of the Acxiom clients I talked to reported any legal hassles with the “challenge question” approach, but some are not satisfied with exclusive reliance on this methodology. Don Kassner says, “We combined the Axciom product with webcam.” In fact, he tells me, Andrew Jackson combines three techniques to monitor midterms and final exams, which are the only assessment tools for most of the university’s courses.
First, the faculty member administering the exam is able to see and hear the student. A photo is on record for comparison purposes.
Second, the student must answer the challenge questions.
Third, the teacher is able to see what the student is seeing on the computer screen. The student can’t bounce to Google and look up an answer.
Andrew Jackson’s one-two-three punch may be the state-of-the-art in online higher education verification at this writing, but the next generation of identification technologies are already in use in the financial and retail sectors. Observes Dr. Tim McGee, a faculty-development specialist, “We’re still in a medieval structure. We’re not using 21st century technologies.” He cites a simple example. “At my local grocery store, employees punch in and out by palm identification.”
Big Brother is watching . . . and expects compliance
Even if the online education industry were not unveiling better student-verification methods, Uncle Sam would insist upon them. According to Mike Jortberg, “The issue of identity involves Title IV dollars. How do we know the taxpayers’ money is going to the people it’s supposed to?” The Higher Education Opportunity Act addresses this federal concern. By next summer, says the Department of Education, accreditors need to have figured out how their client institutions will address the issue.
But, complains Jortberg, in the negotiated rulemaking process, “the industry convinced ED that a user ID and password were sufficient.” He specifically points his finger at the Instructional Technology Council. ITC’s “Best Practice Strategies to Promote Academic Integrity in Online Education” seems to support his claim. The seventh of its seven guidelines on “Institutional Context and Commitment” is “Secure student logins and password to access online courses and related resources, discussions, assignments and assessments.” However, under the “Assessment and Evaluation” portion of the document, a nod is given to “Use [of] proctored test sites where appropriate.”
Whether or not the trade association exercised the influence that Jortberg ascribes to it, ED’s March 2009 “Proposed Regulatory Language” does state, “Accrediting agencies must require institutions that offer distance education or correspondence education to have processes in place to establish that the student who registers for a distance education or correspondence course or program is the same student who participates in and completes the program and receives the academic credit. … the expectation is that institutions have security mechanisms in place, such as identification numbers, or other pass code information, that are used each time student participates in class time or coursework online.”
Yet, in the same breath, the ED document adds that “… as new identification technologies are developed, and become more sophisticated and less expensive, the conferees anticipate that agencies and institutions will consider their use in the future.”
Iris recognition and voice recognition move onstage
Iris recognition may be a promising prospect for online student identification. One vendor, LG Electronics, touts, “Of all the biometric technologies used for human authentication today, it is generally conceded that iris recognition is the most accurate. Iris recognition has also shown itself to be exceedingly versatile and suited for large population applications.” European banks and the U.S. military in the Middle East are using iris recognition today. Iris-recognition.org lists eight iris-recognition vendors, while LG Electronics boasts dozens of clients, including the Harvard Medical School.
Voice recognition is another solution using currently available technology. A firm named csIDentity, a serious player in the commercial identity theft business, has licensed its voice recognition system to TeamEDU for distribution in the higher education marketplace.
When students enroll where csIDentity VoiceVerified is used, a voice print is made and stored. Later, the system randomly telephones students when they submit an electronic test or other assignment to the school’s learning management system. The student will be asked to repeat a random set of numbers displayed on his screen. The system compares the new voiceprint to the stored sample. “The entire verification takes less than 20 seconds. It is user-friendly and non-invasive,” says Steve Cooper, CEO of TeamEDU. The average price for a typical course with 25-30 authentications is about $20.00 per student per year. No extra equipment is needed beyond the student’s computer and a landline phone or cell telephone.
Cooper believes that cost matters. A former policeman and military security officer before launching a higher education service company, Cooper discovered a biometric pen that had been developed for military use. He piloted it at several colleges successfully, but despite its ease of use and accuracy, the $200 price point was prohibitive.
ED seems to expect technologies to evolve, and places the burden on institutions and accrediting organizations to find solutions, rather than rigidly prescribing the solution. Meanwhile, Jeff Bailey shrugs and says, “People who cheat will always cheat.” Consequently, the best method, he suggests is “multiple assessment points.” An online course should avoid a “big final that encourages cheating by its high stakes.”
More on this topic:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/09/21/sites-offering-take-courses-fee-pose-risk-online-ed
I looked into this issue a few years ago and here's what I found at that time:
Meet Jack JeffersonHe is a 19-year-old junior at QuadCity Technical College 6’2", 194 lbs., short brown hair, dark eyesGoalie for the QuadCity Quakers soccer team Sports Medicine major with a 3.6 gpa
Now, Jack is taking a class online...
...or is he?
Student identity verification moves to center stageby Jim CastagneraMore than 20 percent of American college students took at least one online course during the fall 2007 semester. And from 2002 to 2007 U.S. enrollment in online courses grew 19.7 percent, reports the Sloan Consortium. Online education’s growth rate of 19.7 percent has noticeably outpaced the 1.5-percent growth rate of the total college student population.
Now the issue of student ID verification is on higher education’s front burner. What lessons can the U.S. Department of Education, accreditors and college administrators learn for the benefit of all?Anonymity changes everything for cheaters
In his classic 1999 book Code and Other Cyberspace Laws, Professor Larry Lessig explained, “Real-space life… carries with it this mix of authenticating and authenticated credentials. Social life is a constant negotiation between these different credentials. In a small town, in a quieter time, documents as credentials were not terribly necessary. You were known by your face, and your face carried with it a reference… about your character. As life becomes more anonymous, social institutions must construct credentials to authenticate facts about you that in an earlier time, or in a smaller world, would have been authenticated by the knowledge of the community about who you are.”
Lessig’s book focused on the needs of the financial and retail industries, where the vendor and the customer have always shared a strong interest in authenticated identity. A correct identification of the buyer by the seller is now crucial to internet commerce. Online learning, says Michael Jortberg, an Acxiom executive, “poses the exact same problem… only different.”
Jortberg explains that higher education is unique in that a customer may be motivated to mislead the seller about his actual identity. Since our customers may be more interested in buying a credential rather than our principal product – knowledge – a significant percentage of them are likely to cheat.
How serious is the problem of cheating in testing and assessment of learning? A 2008 U.S. News & World Report study reported that 56 percent of graduate business students admitted to cheating at least once. Fifty-four percent of engineering students and 45 percent of law students made the same admission. Contrast those findings with a study authored in September of this year by three faculty at Friends University titled Point, Click, Cheat: Frequency and Type of Academic Dishonesty in the Virtual Classroom. “Results suggest that the amount of academic misconduct among online students may not be as prevalent as believed.”
If the latter findings are true, perhaps it’s because online educators are taking cheating very seriously. Don Kassner is president of Andrew Jackson University, founded in 1995 as a correspondence school and now 100 percent online. Kassner offers, “We used to proctor every exam.” He adds that such close monitoring produces high costs and student inconvenience. “Students complained that ‘I can do all the course work at my kitchen table, but then I have to go somewhere else to take the tests.’”
Proctoring is at best a stopgap measure
The drawbacks of proctoring are exacerbated when curricula are delivered globally. Larry Dugan, Director of Online Learning at Finger Lakes Community College offers, “We give tests all over the world. Let’s say I needed a proctor for an exam in Tokyo. I’d have to identify and hire that person. If I put the job on the faculty, they wouldn’t do it right. And it would be very expensive.”
Clearly, for online learning to grow and prosper, face-to-face proctoring had to yield to a more modern replacement. Axciom offers one very intriguing solution. When a student sits down at the keyboard to take a test, he is faced with a series of “challenge questions” in quick succession. If he answers correctly, he may proceed with the assessment exercise. The questions come from a database developed and maintained by Mike Jortberg’s unit, which gathers public information from the worldwide web. “Typically we pose three random challenges and give the student two minutes to answer.”
Does it ever happen that your system produces incorrect information, I ask him. “Yes, occasionally,” he allows. What about legal liability? Dr. Jeff Bailey, formerly with National American University, says, “We told students up front that challenge questions are a reasonable alternative to proctoring, and they could opt out. No one opted out and we had no complaints.” A click-to-accept agreement includes acquiescence to the “challenge question” component, and it’s a common safeguard used by Jortberg’s client schools.
None of the Acxiom clients I talked to reported any legal hassles with the “challenge question” approach, but some are not satisfied with exclusive reliance on this methodology. Don Kassner says, “We combined the Axciom product with webcam.” In fact, he tells me, Andrew Jackson combines three techniques to monitor midterms and final exams, which are the only assessment tools for most of the university’s courses.
First, the faculty member administering the exam is able to see and hear the student. A photo is on record for comparison purposes.
Second, the student must answer the challenge questions.
Third, the teacher is able to see what the student is seeing on the computer screen. The student can’t bounce to Google and look up an answer.
Andrew Jackson’s one-two-three punch may be the state-of-the-art in online higher education verification at this writing, but the next generation of identification technologies are already in use in the financial and retail sectors. Observes Dr. Tim McGee, a faculty-development specialist, “We’re still in a medieval structure. We’re not using 21st century technologies.” He cites a simple example. “At my local grocery store, employees punch in and out by palm identification.”
Big Brother is watching . . . and expects compliance
Even if the online education industry were not unveiling better student-verification methods, Uncle Sam would insist upon them. According to Mike Jortberg, “The issue of identity involves Title IV dollars. How do we know the taxpayers’ money is going to the people it’s supposed to?” The Higher Education Opportunity Act addresses this federal concern. By next summer, says the Department of Education, accreditors need to have figured out how their client institutions will address the issue.
But, complains Jortberg, in the negotiated rulemaking process, “the industry convinced ED that a user ID and password were sufficient.” He specifically points his finger at the Instructional Technology Council. ITC’s “Best Practice Strategies to Promote Academic Integrity in Online Education” seems to support his claim. The seventh of its seven guidelines on “Institutional Context and Commitment” is “Secure student logins and password to access online courses and related resources, discussions, assignments and assessments.” However, under the “Assessment and Evaluation” portion of the document, a nod is given to “Use [of] proctored test sites where appropriate.”
Whether or not the trade association exercised the influence that Jortberg ascribes to it, ED’s March 2009 “Proposed Regulatory Language” does state, “Accrediting agencies must require institutions that offer distance education or correspondence education to have processes in place to establish that the student who registers for a distance education or correspondence course or program is the same student who participates in and completes the program and receives the academic credit. … the expectation is that institutions have security mechanisms in place, such as identification numbers, or other pass code information, that are used each time student participates in class time or coursework online.”
Yet, in the same breath, the ED document adds that “… as new identification technologies are developed, and become more sophisticated and less expensive, the conferees anticipate that agencies and institutions will consider their use in the future.”
Iris recognition and voice recognition move onstage
Iris recognition may be a promising prospect for online student identification. One vendor, LG Electronics, touts, “Of all the biometric technologies used for human authentication today, it is generally conceded that iris recognition is the most accurate. Iris recognition has also shown itself to be exceedingly versatile and suited for large population applications.” European banks and the U.S. military in the Middle East are using iris recognition today. Iris-recognition.org lists eight iris-recognition vendors, while LG Electronics boasts dozens of clients, including the Harvard Medical School.
Voice recognition is another solution using currently available technology. A firm named csIDentity, a serious player in the commercial identity theft business, has licensed its voice recognition system to TeamEDU for distribution in the higher education marketplace.
When students enroll where csIDentity VoiceVerified is used, a voice print is made and stored. Later, the system randomly telephones students when they submit an electronic test or other assignment to the school’s learning management system. The student will be asked to repeat a random set of numbers displayed on his screen. The system compares the new voiceprint to the stored sample. “The entire verification takes less than 20 seconds. It is user-friendly and non-invasive,” says Steve Cooper, CEO of TeamEDU. The average price for a typical course with 25-30 authentications is about $20.00 per student per year. No extra equipment is needed beyond the student’s computer and a landline phone or cell telephone.
Cooper believes that cost matters. A former policeman and military security officer before launching a higher education service company, Cooper discovered a biometric pen that had been developed for military use. He piloted it at several colleges successfully, but despite its ease of use and accuracy, the $200 price point was prohibitive.
ED seems to expect technologies to evolve, and places the burden on institutions and accrediting organizations to find solutions, rather than rigidly prescribing the solution. Meanwhile, Jeff Bailey shrugs and says, “People who cheat will always cheat.” Consequently, the best method, he suggests is “multiple assessment points.” An online course should avoid a “big final that encourages cheating by its high stakes.”
Related articles
Sites offering to take courses for a fee pose risk to online ed
edX Announces Option Of Proctored Exam Testing Through Collaboration With Pearson VUE
Online Learning or Open Season for Cheating?
On Becoming an Online Student
Adult students' interest in online education is flat, study finds
edX Curbs the Downfalls of Online Education By Announcing Supervised Final Exams
Proctored exam for Intro to Computer Science now available
EdX to offer proctored exams worldwide
Is "Entitlement" a Dirty Word?
To contact us Click HERE
Saturday, September 22, 2012
By Claire and Jim Castagnera tneditor@tnonline.comJIM:The media cause célèbre this week was Mitt Romney's comment, surreptitiously taped at a gathering of his big-money supports, to the effect that nearly half of all Americans believe they are entitled to food, clothing, shelter and/or health care. The implication, if not the express meaning, of the remark is that people should be provided with the opportunity to try to succeed and prosper … and if they fail, well, that's just too bad.This is the sort of remark that can be made only in front of an audience of those who have succeeded (or inherited) lavishly, and therefore have no fear of what tomorrow may bring them on the financial front. It can only be made to an audience of people who began life's race at a starting line that's literally miles in front of the starting position where most Americans were seeded.It can only be made in front of an audience that never wonders whether a civilized, compassionate society ought to care if the least of its citizens have food, clothing, shelter and health care.Believe me when I say that I'm not in favor of handouts to folks who are capable of taking care of themselves. Some 30 years ago I published a column in the University of Texas student newspaper, when I was on the faculty in Austin, arguing for a mandatory work-requirement for welfare recipients. In the 1990s a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress wrote such a requirement into the law. I applauded them then and I hold that view today. But when you pull down the safety net and leave people dangling, the results are bad for them and bad for all the rest of us, too.My family and I have become obsessed with a TV series called "Breaking Bad." The anti-hero, Walt, is a high school chemistry teacher with a touch of cancer and inadequate medical insurance. Why would Walt, who teaches in a public school, not have medical insurance? Is it because he's in a right-to-work state and has no union to fight for him? We don't know.Suffice to say that Walt's way of breaking bad is to become the number one crystal meth manufacturer in the state. He puts his college education to work, becoming an entrepreneur of the first order. Mitt and friends should applaud him. He is fulfilling their version of the American Dream. Never mind that he leaves a trail of corpses and addicts in his wake.I think it would have been a whole lot better for Walt, his family, and our society, if he had been provided with the health care he needed to cure his cancer. But, hey, maybe that's just me.CLAIRE:An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, right? A healthy population is good for everyone; it's why we try to get as many parents as possible to get their children vaccinated. It's called "herd immunity," because having as many healthy individuals in a group as possible makes for a healthier group overall. The healthy are vaccinated so that the weaker members of the group, who cannot get vaccinated, can still avoid getting sick by default. This benefits everyone.Unless, of course, you are so wealthy you never need share the same airspace with those common folk, let alone the weakest members of the group. If you're so rich that you can afford to convalesce in a 12 million dollar home in La Jolla, then perhaps the value of "herd immunity" is lost on you. Perhaps you really are that out of touch. In fact, it seems plausible.For the rest of us, though, it's an important step toward promoting a healthy, thriving society. I'm tired of hearing about how improving the majority's access to health care or proper housing, or education, or enough money to feed one's children is somehow asking for a handout, when access to these essentials benefits the entire country. I will concede that such measures may slightly inconvenience the wealthy few, but that shouldn't dissuade a presidential candidate who by nature is supposed to do everything in his power to benefit said country.Then there's the fact that Romney seems to misunderstand how our government actually works (or, more likely, he is willfully misrepresenting the facts). According to Romney's recent remarks, taxation funnels money from the rich down to the poor or, more accurately, those lazy people who just aren't trying hard enough. But the truth of the matter is that rich citizens are truly the ones getting the handouts (and demanding the tax cuts). Take this example provided by the Huffington Post:Consider the home mortgage interest deduction, a tax expenditure that costs the federal treasury approximately $130 billion per year … 75% of this tax expenditure is given to the top 20% of income earners. What this means is that the federal government spends almost $100 billion per year subsidizing large homes for upper middle class and wealthy people. Middle-class people get a tiny piece of this pie. Poor people get nothing. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-belkin/romneys-greatest-deceptio_b_1...)And the money for that tax expenditure for the rich comes almost exclusively from poor renters, transferred straight up the line to rich homeowners. Can Romney explain why the rich are entitled to that money, while he so clearly believes that the poor are not entitled to affordable housing or health care? Better yet, can he explain it without using the word "bootstraps"?But the worst part of all of this is the disdain with which Romney clearly regards a large percentage (47 percent, to be exact) of his country's citizens. As a civilized society, we are supposed to help one another, if not for our own personal benefit, then for the benefit of the group at large. We are all entitled to a healthy society if we have the means to foster one. That Romney is so loathe to do so shows how deeply disconnected he is from the majority of us, and what's more, he doesn't care. If voters can't see that by now, then I truly fear for the future of our country.The word "entitlement" is only dirty when used in a certain
context. I think Mitt Romney illustrates that perfectly.
 |
| Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, 2008 US presidential candidate. (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
By Claire and Jim Castagnera tneditor@tnonline.comJIM:The media cause célèbre this week was Mitt Romney's comment, surreptitiously taped at a gathering of his big-money supports, to the effect that nearly half of all Americans believe they are entitled to food, clothing, shelter and/or health care. The implication, if not the express meaning, of the remark is that people should be provided with the opportunity to try to succeed and prosper … and if they fail, well, that's just too bad.This is the sort of remark that can be made only in front of an audience of those who have succeeded (or inherited) lavishly, and therefore have no fear of what tomorrow may bring them on the financial front. It can only be made to an audience of people who began life's race at a starting line that's literally miles in front of the starting position where most Americans were seeded.It can only be made in front of an audience that never wonders whether a civilized, compassionate society ought to care if the least of its citizens have food, clothing, shelter and health care.Believe me when I say that I'm not in favor of handouts to folks who are capable of taking care of themselves. Some 30 years ago I published a column in the University of Texas student newspaper, when I was on the faculty in Austin, arguing for a mandatory work-requirement for welfare recipients. In the 1990s a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress wrote such a requirement into the law. I applauded them then and I hold that view today. But when you pull down the safety net and leave people dangling, the results are bad for them and bad for all the rest of us, too.My family and I have become obsessed with a TV series called "Breaking Bad." The anti-hero, Walt, is a high school chemistry teacher with a touch of cancer and inadequate medical insurance. Why would Walt, who teaches in a public school, not have medical insurance? Is it because he's in a right-to-work state and has no union to fight for him? We don't know.Suffice to say that Walt's way of breaking bad is to become the number one crystal meth manufacturer in the state. He puts his college education to work, becoming an entrepreneur of the first order. Mitt and friends should applaud him. He is fulfilling their version of the American Dream. Never mind that he leaves a trail of corpses and addicts in his wake.I think it would have been a whole lot better for Walt, his family, and our society, if he had been provided with the health care he needed to cure his cancer. But, hey, maybe that's just me.CLAIRE:An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, right? A healthy population is good for everyone; it's why we try to get as many parents as possible to get their children vaccinated. It's called "herd immunity," because having as many healthy individuals in a group as possible makes for a healthier group overall. The healthy are vaccinated so that the weaker members of the group, who cannot get vaccinated, can still avoid getting sick by default. This benefits everyone.Unless, of course, you are so wealthy you never need share the same airspace with those common folk, let alone the weakest members of the group. If you're so rich that you can afford to convalesce in a 12 million dollar home in La Jolla, then perhaps the value of "herd immunity" is lost on you. Perhaps you really are that out of touch. In fact, it seems plausible.For the rest of us, though, it's an important step toward promoting a healthy, thriving society. I'm tired of hearing about how improving the majority's access to health care or proper housing, or education, or enough money to feed one's children is somehow asking for a handout, when access to these essentials benefits the entire country. I will concede that such measures may slightly inconvenience the wealthy few, but that shouldn't dissuade a presidential candidate who by nature is supposed to do everything in his power to benefit said country.Then there's the fact that Romney seems to misunderstand how our government actually works (or, more likely, he is willfully misrepresenting the facts). According to Romney's recent remarks, taxation funnels money from the rich down to the poor or, more accurately, those lazy people who just aren't trying hard enough. But the truth of the matter is that rich citizens are truly the ones getting the handouts (and demanding the tax cuts). Take this example provided by the Huffington Post:Consider the home mortgage interest deduction, a tax expenditure that costs the federal treasury approximately $130 billion per year … 75% of this tax expenditure is given to the top 20% of income earners. What this means is that the federal government spends almost $100 billion per year subsidizing large homes for upper middle class and wealthy people. Middle-class people get a tiny piece of this pie. Poor people get nothing. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-belkin/romneys-greatest-deceptio_b_1...)And the money for that tax expenditure for the rich comes almost exclusively from poor renters, transferred straight up the line to rich homeowners. Can Romney explain why the rich are entitled to that money, while he so clearly believes that the poor are not entitled to affordable housing or health care? Better yet, can he explain it without using the word "bootstraps"?But the worst part of all of this is the disdain with which Romney clearly regards a large percentage (47 percent, to be exact) of his country's citizens. As a civilized society, we are supposed to help one another, if not for our own personal benefit, then for the benefit of the group at large. We are all entitled to a healthy society if we have the means to foster one. That Romney is so loathe to do so shows how deeply disconnected he is from the majority of us, and what's more, he doesn't care. If voters can't see that by now, then I truly fear for the future of our country.The word "entitlement" is only dirty when used in a certain
context. I think Mitt Romney illustrates that perfectly.
Related articles
Basic Human Rights - They Do Exist.
What Mitt Romney And The 47% Have In Common
Mitt Romney vs. the 47 Percent
Welfare Wasn't Always A Dirty Word In The Romney Family
Mitt Romney video: 'I don't care about 47 per cent of voters'
Mitt's Marie Antoinette Moment
Obama jabs at Romney 'entitlement' gaffe
Mitt's Class Warfare
Mitt Romney Video Leaks, Basically Calls Obama Supporters Freeloaders
In leaked video, Romney says 47 percent of Americans are 'dependent,' feel 'entitled'
Kaydol:
Yorumlar (Atom)