--
Posted via http://expatforums.com
I agree with Ian. Have at least a consultation with a lawyer to set you
in the right direction. You might want to hire the lawyer to continue
with you, since it seems you might have a loooooong overstay involved.
The place to learn about your immigration is at www.uscis.gov, but I'm
not sure you will be able to navigate around in there enough to find
exactly what you need. It's a lot easier to hire a lawyer to help you.
Best Wishes,
Rene
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Yes, you should get a lawyer if for no other reason than to put your
mind at ease. There is a lot of paperwork you need to submit and you
seem to be a bit confused. For example, it's the USC who files the I-
130, not you!
Ian
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Yes - you definately need a lawyer.
However, you may prefer to file the I-485 right now in order to regain
legal status ASAP (rather than waiting to have the I-94 back).
In any case, a discussion with a lawyer is definitely a good thing.
Hi:
On one of the ATTORNEY chat groups, a very fine lawyer asked today about
the need for an I-102. Everyone noted the past practice that neither
LOS nor CSC required the I-102. However, there didn't seem to be
knowledge about what Chicago-Lock-Box wants.
--
Certified Specialist
Immigration & Nat. Law
Cal. Bar Board of Legal Specialization
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Hi:
Could you please describe what happened? It has been common practice to
file I-485's without the I-94 when it has been lost. The question has
been whether or not it was necessary to CONCURRENTLY file an I-102.
However, the way you word your response suggests thats that you could
not even file the I-485 at all without having first obtained the
information from the I-94.
Clarificattion would be appreciated.
Have a good evening
Kat :)
Please, Kat, can I ask a favour: do please break your posts into
paragraph as it is extremely difficult to read such a long chunk of
text!
Now then: WHO actually told you all this information about the need for
the I-94? It wouldn't be the misinformation line, would it?
Kat