do you know a lot of such real cases that received GC's w/o PD being current or just saw or heard a few of them somewhere?Originally Posted by ak7419
do you know a lot of such real cases that received GC's w/o PD being current or just saw or heard a few of them somewhere?
Anyone receiving the GC without the PD being current should return the card to the USCIS. AFAIK - that is right the way to handle it.
I know of one case where someone got greened when his PD was not current. This happened during the 2007 fiasco. He did not return and He is now a citizen.
I would like to side with you on this one. If you get your GC when your date is close to being current, then I think you should keep it. The problem is not with returning GC, but what happens to your case after that when you are trying to reverse the process. It is like a black hole. You sending your approved GC back in that black hole and trying to revert the status of your approved I-485 case back to pending may be too risky. You may remain pending or even worst, unknown status in the system for a long time due to this confusion, while others with PDs similar to yours will get their GCs left and right.
I don't think the USCIS website has guidance on this situation, atleast I could not find it . If that is the case you can claim benefit of doubt and just keep it . I don't think it will be a case of Citizenship denial .
That is another good point that you have brought up! Already we have suffered this excruciatingly painful wait of 10-12 years due to unfair laws. So when you get your GC, run with it. There is no need to show "Stockholm Syndrome" and think of returning it. You deserve it more than anybody else.
Everyone is entitled to take their own risks but it may be worthwhile going through these threads.
https://www.trackitt.com/usa-discuss...te-not-current
https://trackitt.com/usa-discussion-...pd-not-current
https://www.trackitt.com/usa-discuss...pd-not-current
Last edited by suninphx; 12-16-2020 at 09:35 PM.
Suninphx, it is lawyers' job to complicate things. Here is my take on it. You applied for I-485, waited patiently, and one fine day USCIS sent you GC. Now it is not your job to confirm its validity, keep an eye on visa bulletin, keep watching priority dates, etc. etc.
It's a completely different story if you willingly misrepresent the facts, lie on application, etc. But in this case, you have done nothing wrong. If USCIS eventually finds out that they sent you GC a couple of months earlier than it was supposed to, then they should contact you, take the original GC back, and reissue a new GC.
Vedu,
I am not going to argue with you or anyone else on this topic and I won't comment on what you said about lawyers as it's very subjective. Just read through the threads (if you want to) and decide what you want to do. People have made many valid (according to me) points. Your take on this can be different and I am fine with that as it doesn't affect me personally.
I just shared so that it might help people to take the educated decision should the situation arise.
Suninphx,
That's a fair point. But here is an interesting scenario to ponder upon. Say back in 2012, you and your friend had the same priority date and it was current back then. He received his GC and unfortunately you didn't. Then the dates retrogressed for a long time. Now finally your date is about to become current again, but you received your GC a month before that happens. Should you return your GC and should your friend get to keep it? Or should both of you keep it because your dates were current once previously and both of you received your respective GCs after that initial current date? Or should both of you return it because the dates are now retrogressed? What do you think?
Because we waited for a decade it makes more sense to make sure everything is right. We cannot be arrogant/flippant like ROW folks. If their GC is ever revoked, They can reapply at a future time and get it in no time. We do not have the luxury. We cannot plead ignorance of law in most immigration cases. My two cents. Not meant to offend anyone. The readers in this forum are pretty knowledgeable compared to other forums. But is better to see both sides of the coin.
Then point to that law in the USCIS rule book...not to what lawyers are saying. And if indeed, the USCIS rule book says that you should proactively return your GC in such a case, then everybody should do the right thing by the book...there is no doubt about it. But don't do it just because lawyers are saying so. As they say, you shouldn't ask your barber whether you need a haircut.
Last edited by vedu; 12-16-2020 at 10:45 PM.
Vedu,
It's not that complicated
Assuming a visa number was assigned to my friend's case when the dates were current he should be fine. If that's not the case then it's for my friend to decide what he wants to do.
In case of anyone getting approval a month before priority date becomes current then why not do the right thing? As it is we have waited for so long.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?...edition=prelim
I went to this link via USCIS.gov. You will get some details on how it goes if GC is revoked.
You get your GC when they can assign you with a visa number. Obviously in this scenario they had a number to spare for my friend but not for me. So he got it in 2012. If they had a number to spare for me back in 2012, I would have gotten my GC a month or two later and not after 8 years. The context matters and of course it will be different this year with record 120K spillover if you get your GC one month before Your PD is current. Chances are high it would be legitimate. But no harm in checking with USCIS.
Okay, look at this what USCIS did in the recent past when they issued incorrect green cards:
https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/us...correct%20card.
In summary, USCIS issued a recall, gave people time to return the GC, and promised to send them replacement Green Cards within 15 days of receiving the incorrect card. People were not proactively required to inform USCIS about it.
Last edited by vedu; 12-16-2020 at 11:04 PM.
I am aware of that and it's a totally different issue. They issued regular GC's instead of conditional GCs. Fiancées do NOT qualify for regular GCs like you and I. They transition from conditional GCs to a regular one. It's more like one of those where your information is printed wrong in your GC. Anyways, I have provided the source it's up to interpretation what everyone thinks of the information. Some judge may take a favorable view because it was a USCIS mistake while others may not. Either way by not following the laws we will be putting ourselves in a position where we do not control our fate. So, people should take what they will from this discussion.
Would you say these people didn't follow the law by accepting regular GC's even though they clearly knew they were not eligible for them at the time?
You have a visa number available and a GC was sent to you with the errors/misprints in your personal info. Is it an illegitimate GC? I don't think so.
Okay, if the USCIS wouldn't have found it, then it would have been all legal/legitimate then. No need of conditional GCs in those cases because it was USCIS's mistake.
I have shown you the law, You still want to argue that you are right go ahead and disregard it. Let everyone else make their mind as you have made up yours based on the facts presented. I do not want to drag this any further. My intent was not to show off or offend any one. It was just to provide information.
Yes, and I have also shown you how USCIS corrects the situation when it realizes it issued something incorrectly. Let everyone else make their mind as you also have made up yours based on the facts presented. Sometimes due to internal dynamics between DOS and USCIS, there can be a time lag between actual visa number availability and when the bulletin gets published that we don't get to see. Similar to how sometimes it can take up to a year to get your GC even when your date is current, you may also get it little earlier if you date is about to become current, particularly in the last quarter when they are in the process of accelerating visa issuance in order to consume as many numbers as possible.
Okay, here is one other thing I would like to add just for information purpose. Say, if in a rare case you get your GC when your PD is not current and if you decide to keep it, then you can do at least this one small thing to play it as safe as you can. Don't use it, don't update your I-9 form with your employer, don't renew your driving license based on that GC until your PD becomes current in a month or so. Until then continue to use whatever status you were previously in (H-1B, EAD, etc.). When your PD becomes current, then the visa numbers are clearly available to you and you can consider your GC valid. I guess I am just thinking too much about this and give it a rest now!!!
The granting of GC when PD Is not current is a very rare case. in terms of % would that be less than .1% I guess. And even in this case you might get it a month or two early at most. The system typically would not allow such an approval and if anyone granted it that would be an accidental over ride at more that 2 levels. I don't think the USCIS has the time and resources to deny someone citizenship in such cases unless there are other reasons like a criminal case that would give them an excuse to kick that person out.
I think that the system is not built to handle the return of GCs and you might be caught in this undefined state for too long - "Thrishanku Swargha" as they call it .
Once you get your GC there is no need to second guess the process by which it was adjudicated.
Just move on.
Last edited by qesehmk; 12-17-2020 at 07:07 AM.
I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.
Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote