本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛"The fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition may not be, in and of itself, a reason to deny an application for admission, readmission, or extension of stay [under TN status] if the alien’s intent is to remain in the United States temporarily. Nevertheless, because the Service must evaluate each application on a case-by-case basis with regard to the alien’s intent, this factor may be taken into consideration along with other relevant factors every time that a TN nonimmigrant applies for admission, readmission or a new extension of stay. Therefore, while it is our opinion that a TN nonimmigrant may apply for readmission in the TN classification, if the inspecting officer determines that the individual has abandoned his or her temporary intent, that individual’s application for admission as a TN nonimmigrant may be refused."
Letter from Yvonne M. LaFleur, Chief, INS Business & Trade Services Branch
(posted on AILA InfoNet as “I-140 Filing Not Dispositive for TN” (June 18, 1996)).
"After considerable discussion between the Nebraska Service Center and AILA's NSC Liaison Committee, the NSC now indicates that the filing of an immigrant petition is simply one factor to consider in the adjudication of a TN extension, and should not automatically result in a denial. The NSC, which has exclusive jurisdiction over TN applications made on Form I-129, had previously indicated that NSC adjudicators were being told to deny TN applications if an I-140 immigrant petition has been filed on the individual's behalf. The basis of the denial had been that the individual no longer has nonimmigrant intent."
AILA InfoNet, “NSC Backs Off I-140/TN Policy Change” (posted on AILA InfoNet at Doc. No. 02111431 (Nov. 14, 2002).
As one court put it, “there is a great difference between wanting to stay and intending to stay and proof of a desire to stay is not proof of an intent to stay.”
Choy v. Barber, 279 F.2d 642, 645-46 (9th Cir. 1960)
"a desire to immigrate to the United States, should opportunity arise, is not inconsistent with nonimmigrant intent"
citing Brownell v. Carija, 254 F.2d 78, 80 (D.C. Cir. 1957)更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Letter from Yvonne M. LaFleur, Chief, INS Business & Trade Services Branch
(posted on AILA InfoNet as “I-140 Filing Not Dispositive for TN” (June 18, 1996)).
"After considerable discussion between the Nebraska Service Center and AILA's NSC Liaison Committee, the NSC now indicates that the filing of an immigrant petition is simply one factor to consider in the adjudication of a TN extension, and should not automatically result in a denial. The NSC, which has exclusive jurisdiction over TN applications made on Form I-129, had previously indicated that NSC adjudicators were being told to deny TN applications if an I-140 immigrant petition has been filed on the individual's behalf. The basis of the denial had been that the individual no longer has nonimmigrant intent."
AILA InfoNet, “NSC Backs Off I-140/TN Policy Change” (posted on AILA InfoNet at Doc. No. 02111431 (Nov. 14, 2002).
As one court put it, “there is a great difference between wanting to stay and intending to stay and proof of a desire to stay is not proof of an intent to stay.”
Choy v. Barber, 279 F.2d 642, 645-46 (9th Cir. 1960)
"a desire to immigrate to the United States, should opportunity arise, is not inconsistent with nonimmigrant intent"
citing Brownell v. Carija, 254 F.2d 78, 80 (D.C. Cir. 1957)更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net