Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Their difficulties can be traced back to 1978 when, while both were single, their mothers applied for visas for them to come to the United States.
The couple married in the Philippines in 1980, and two years later, Salvacion Servano's visa was granted and she left the country. Pedro Servano followed in 1984 after getting his visa, and the couple moved to Philadelphia.
The Servanos applied for U.S. citizenship while living in San Diego in 1990, but an immigration official noticed during an interview that their visa application listed them as single. They were accused of lying and misrepresenting their marital status, and the deportation process began, Cotler said.
17 year years later and this man who is a doctor has made NO effort to fix this? Frankly they brought this trouble on themselves. What do you expect the INS to do, be mind readers??
17 year years later and this man who is a doctor has made NO effort to fix this? Frankly they brought this trouble on themselves. What do you expect the INS to do, be mind readers??
I catch your drift.....it seems to me that already both being legally here in the USA as individuals would trump marriage status.
Now: if only one was a visa holder and the other was not------all the bets would be off.
The guys a doctor, he will be fine anywhere he goes. It is nothing to cry about. The Phillipines is not that bad. It is not like it's iraq or something. He will just be home with his family now, and remember he is a doctor. Lets not shed tears people.
The wife can just start a business there too.
Why is everyone so desperate to come here and stay?
Sorry, but I've heard about cases like this....no sympathy. Sometimes marrying can lose you your visa eligibility altogether, or force you to reapply because you're in a different category. They should have read their paperwork thoroughly; it's pretty clear.
US citizens have the right to sponsor minor children or adult children regardless of marital status. LPRs only have the right to sponsor minor children and UNMARRIED adult children. The article does not state whether the peoples' mothers were citizens or LPRs...makes a heueueueueueuge difference.
Getting married also changes your preference category; staying single means you are in a higher preference category, whereas if you're married you're in a lower preference category. The Philippines is also notorious for visa fraud so the USCIS takes a rather hard line on visa fraud from there. This is technically visa fraud, even if it was a "mistake". You're not allowed to make mistakes like this. The USCIS should have caught this a long time ago and refused to issue the visas altogether, but the beneficiaries are ultimately responsible.
I should add that the preference category for unmarried children of a US citizen is F1, or first. Unmarried children of LPRs are F2, or second preference. Married children of US citizens are F3, or third preference. There is no preference category for married children of LPRs. The below link shows the wait times for the different preference categories. By allowing the status to stay "single" on the application they jumped the queue and didn't do it the legal way. It IS misrepresentation, even if it wasn't deliberate.
Visa Bulletin for December 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3841.html - broken link)
I should add that the preference category for unmarried children of a US citizen is F1, or first. Unmarried children of LPRs are F2, or second preference. Married children of US citizens are F3, or third preference. There is no preference category for married children of LPRs. The below link shows the wait times for the different preference categories. By allowing the status to stay "single" on the application they jumped the queue and didn't do it the legal way. It IS misrepresentation, even if it wasn't deliberate.
Visa Bulletin for December 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3841.html - broken link)
Call me a skeptic but I have to wonder if it wasn't deliberate. It stretches the bounds of reasonable thought that they made this error on their application that just happeed to be IN their favor.
Call me a skeptic but I have to wonder if it wasn't deliberate. It stretches the bounds of reasonable thought that they made this error on their application that just happeed to be IN their favor.
I don't know; maybe they genuinely didn't know that getting married would be a problem but it's ultimately their responsibility to know that it would be. This is in no way a unique situation; when I was a member of a visa forum I heard stories like this all the time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I had to say it 
