nrupa_malhotra Posted June 29, 2015 Report Share Posted June 29, 2015 Hi Friends, I would like to get your suggestion on my condition below. I have an employment based GC in progress (EB2, I-140 approved, I-485 filed few years back, EAD renewed two times, priority date could become current soon - Priority Date not current yet). I also have a family based immigration application (I-130) filed in 2011, (via parents, F1, I’m the daughter - over 21, unmarried, PD not current yet). Recently, I received a letter from the USCIS for an “Abdjudication Interview”. The letter has details about my employment based file, and it has what appears like a generic list of documents that I should bring along. One of the document is the “Affidavit of Support”. Here are my questions: What could be the reason for this interview - is it common for EB2, employment based cases ? or is it due to both type of applications in parallel ? Based on my understanding, for employment based GC, the affidavit of support is not required. Why am I asked for this affidavit of Support ? Could it be due to the family based petition ? Or it could be a generic list sent to all. My parents do not have any income and did not file I-864 with original application I-130 (retired past 5 years). However, since I live with them since past 10 years (same household), can I file I-864A so that my income can be included for sponsorship (as an intended immigration clause) I have completed 40 credits as per the SSA rule - that should technically qualify me for exemption from any type of affidavit of support. Is it possible to do that ? If yes, do I need to show any documentation from SSA ? Are there any chances that conditions from #3 and #4 above is not applicable (I-864A, or exemption I-864w) ? Do my parents need any joint sponsor ? Many thanks - your response will help me greatly. My interview is late next week, and your prompt response would be of tremendous help ! Thanks, Nrupa. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.