EXAM STUDY MATERIALS July 23, 2024 4:26 PM COIL EXAM Questions With Verified Answers Which of the following represent the three largest pathways to LPR status? Pick all that apply: - answer✔✔Employment -Based Immigration, Humanitarian Benefits, Family -Based Immigration Which of the following agencies are part of the Department of Homeland Security? Pick all that apply: - answer✔✔ICE, CBP, USCIS Which federal agency is responsible for issuance of immigrant and nonimmigrant visas at U.S. consulates abroad? - answer✔✔U.S. Department of State Counseling and completion of immigration forms is the practice of law. - answer✔✔TRUE Which of the statements below about accredited representatives is NOT true: - answer✔✔An accredited representative may transfer his or her credentials to another employer What does "CFR" stand for? - answer✔✔Code of Federal Regulations What does "INA" stand for? - answer✔✔Immigration and Nationality Act What does "USC" mean in the citation 8 USC § 1227? - answer✔✔United States Code Where would you find asylum regulations under INA § 208? - answer✔✔8 CFR § 208 What is the difference between Statutes and Regulations? - answer✔✔Statutes also referred to as codes, are laws written and enacted by the legislative branch of government (e.g, U.S. Congress, state legislators). Regulations also referred to as rules, are written by agencies (e.g., Environmental Protection Agency) to supplement laws that were passed b y the legislature. Ling entered the United States on an F -1 student visa in 2014. She stopped attending school two years after she arrived. She is now married to a U.S. citizen and is applying for adjustment of status. Does Ling need to be concerned about the grounds of inadmissibility, deportability, or both? - answer✔✔The correct answer is both. Ling entered with inspection and is eligible to file for adjustment of status. All applicants for adjustment are subject to the grounds of inadmissibility.If Ling is denied adjustment of status and placed into removal proceedings, she is subject to the grounds of deportability because she violated the terms of her student visa. Mateo is the spouse of an LPR. At his medical examination for an immigrant visa at the U .S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez, he admitted he smoked marijuana five times in the last year. EXAM STUDY MATERIALS July 23, 2024 4:26 PM Assuming he is found inadmissible as a drug abuser, which of the following are his options: - answer✔✔He may wait 12 months from the date of his last use of mariju ana and apply again. Wu, from China, has been an LPR since 2005. Ten years ago, Wu was convicted of larceny and sentenced to two years of probation. Which of the statements below best describes Wu's circumstances: - answer✔✔If Wu is placed in removal proce edings, he will be charged with a ground of deportability because he was inspected and admitted as a lawful permanent resident. The fact that Wu was only sentenced to probation does not mean that his conviction can't make him deportable. Similarly, Wu is n ot protected from being placed in removal proceedings simply because many years have gone by since he was convicted. There is a specific ground of deportability for certain firearm offenses but no parallel ground of inadmissibility for a conviction for cer tain firearm offenses. - answer✔✔Under INA § 237(a)(2)(C), a noncitizen is deportable if at any time after admission, he or she is convicted of any law of purchasing, selling, exchanging, using, owning, possessing or carrying any weapon in violation of law or conspiring or attempting to do the same. There is no parallel ground of inadmissibility specifically for firearm offenses. If you encounter a client with prior arrests or convictions, which of the following should you do to better understand the conseq uences of your client's conduct: - answer✔✔Counsel your client about the importance of providing information to you about all prior contacts with law enforcement; DHS will have this information and you need it too in order to counsel the client. Do a law e nforcement data base check (FBI records check and/or state records check) to find out your client's arrest history. Do a FOIA for your client's immigration records if s/he has ever been detained or in immigration court. Obtain copies of all court records r elated to charges brought against your client. In 2014 Enrique sent money to his brother Manuel to buy a fake visa to travel to the United States. Enrique and Manuel now reside together in Chicago and both are planning to immigrate soon through petitions f iled by their LPR father. Which of the following statements is most accurate about Enrique: - answer✔✔Enrique is not eligible to immigrate because he is inadmissible for smuggling and does not qualify for a waiver. Financial support for the brother to buy the fake visa is aiding and abetting smuggling. Enrique is not eligible to apply for a waiver of the inadmissibility because he smuggled someone other than his parent, spouse, son, or daughter. Which of the following stops the running of unlawful presence? - answer✔✔Filing an application for adjustment of status, Filing a timely and good faith application to extend one's nonimmigrant stay, Filing a bona fide application for asylum, as long as the applicant does not work without authorization, Filing a succe ssful application for TPS Pedro was brought into the U.S. without inspection by his mother in 2008 when he was 4 years old. He and his mother returned to Mexico a year and a half later, stayed a month, and then re -
entered the U.S. without inspection. Pedro turned 18 four months ago and is married to a U.S. citizen. He wants to consular process. You advise him that: - answer✔✔He is subject to the EXAM STUDY MATERIALS July 23, 2024 4:26 PM permanent bar. Pedro accrued more than a year of unlawful presence between the time he entered without inspection in 2008 and his departure a year and a half later. For this reason, he triggered the permanent bar when he reentered without inspection. Unfortunately the exception to accrual of unlawful presence for minors under 18 only applies to unlawful presence for purposes of the 3 and 10 year bars. There is no such exception for purposes of the permanent bar. Therefore Pedro did trigger the permanent bar when he reentered without inspection as a young child, and he will need to stay outside the U.S. for 10 years be fore he may apply for permission to reapply for admission. Miguel entered the U.S. without inspection on June 1, 2018 to work the fruit crops on the western slope of Colorado. He stayed five months and returned to Mexico. He did the same thing in 2019 and again in 2020. When he tried to enter the U.S. without inspection in June 2021, he was caught and allowed to return voluntarily to Mexico. He decided to stay in Mexico because his immigrant visa appointment should be scheduled later this year. When he goes to his interview, he is likely to face the following problem: - answer✔✔He is subject to the permanent bar because he attempted to reenter the U.S. without inspection after more than one year of unlawful presence in the aggregate. Because Miguel was never unlawfully present for more than 180 days during each of these visits, he never triggered the 3 - or 10 -year bars under 212(a)(9)(B) when he left the U.S. However, when you add up all the unlawful presence, it works out to more than one year -- and when yo u enter or attempt to enter the United States without inspection after more than one year of unlawful presence in the aggregate, you trigger the permanent bar under 212(a)(9)(C). Isaiah used a fake green card to obtain employment at a record shop. This mak es him inadmissible under INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i). - answer✔✔False Mirna, who has a student visa, entered the U.S. with her infant niece Iliana, falsely claiming that her niece was a U.S. citizen. Which of the following statements best describes the likely consequences of this conduct? - answer✔✔If Mirna ever applies to immigrate or renew her student visa, she will be found inadmissible for smuggling. Neither Iliana nor Mirna is inadmissible for false claim to citizenship in this scenario. Iliana is not inadm issible for making a false claim because the claim was not made by her but by Mirna, her aunt. While a noncitizen can be held responsible for false claims to citizenship made on his or her behalf, this would likely not apply in the situation of representat ions made on behalf of an infant. Mirna is also not inadmissible for making a false claim to citizenship because this ground of inadmissibility is only applicable to false claims made for the noncitizen's own benefit. Mirna's false representation regarding Iliana's citizenship will likely trigger a finding of inadmissibility due to smuggling. According to Department of State guidance, which of the following may raise a presumption of misrepresentation if done within 90 days of entering on a tourist visa? - answer✔✔Marrying and taking up permanent residence, Working illegally, Enrolling in School
entered the U.S. without inspection. Pedro turned 18 four months ago and is married to a U.S. citizen. He wants to consular process. You advise him that: - answer✔✔He is subject to the EXAM STUDY MATERIALS July 23, 2024 4:26 PM permanent bar. Pedro accrued more than a year of unlawful presence between the time he entered without inspection in 2008 and his departure a year and a half later. For this reason, he triggered the permanent bar when he reentered without inspection. Unfortunately the exception to accrual of unlawful presence for minors under 18 only applies to unlawful presence for purposes of the 3 and 10 year bars. There is no such exception for purposes of the permanent bar. Therefore Pedro did trigger the permanent bar when he reentered without inspection as a young child, and he will need to stay outside the U.S. for 10 years be fore he may apply for permission to reapply for admission. Miguel entered the U.S. without inspection on June 1, 2018 to work the fruit crops on the western slope of Colorado. He stayed five months and returned to Mexico. He did the same thing in 2019 and again in 2020. When he tried to enter the U.S. without inspection in June 2021, he was caught and allowed to return voluntarily to Mexico. He decided to stay in Mexico because his immigrant visa appointment should be scheduled later this year. When he goes to his interview, he is likely to face the following problem: - answer✔✔He is subject to the permanent bar because he attempted to reenter the U.S. without inspection after more than one year of unlawful presence in the aggregate. Because Miguel was never unlawfully present for more than 180 days during each of these visits, he never triggered the 3 - or 10 -year bars under 212(a)(9)(B) when he left the U.S. However, when you add up all the unlawful presence, it works out to more than one year -- and when yo u enter or attempt to enter the United States without inspection after more than one year of unlawful presence in the aggregate, you trigger the permanent bar under 212(a)(9)(C). Isaiah used a fake green card to obtain employment at a record shop. This mak es him inadmissible under INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i). - answer✔✔False Mirna, who has a student visa, entered the U.S. with her infant niece Iliana, falsely claiming that her niece was a U.S. citizen. Which of the following statements best describes the likely consequences of this conduct? - answer✔✔If Mirna ever applies to immigrate or renew her student visa, she will be found inadmissible for smuggling. Neither Iliana nor Mirna is inadmissible for false claim to citizenship in this scenario. Iliana is not inadm issible for making a false claim because the claim was not made by her but by Mirna, her aunt. While a noncitizen can be held responsible for false claims to citizenship made on his or her behalf, this would likely not apply in the situation of representat ions made on behalf of an infant. Mirna is also not inadmissible for making a false claim to citizenship because this ground of inadmissibility is only applicable to false claims made for the noncitizen's own benefit. Mirna's false representation regarding Iliana's citizenship will likely trigger a finding of inadmissibility due to smuggling. According to Department of State guidance, which of the following may raise a presumption of misrepresentation if done within 90 days of entering on a tourist visa? - answer✔✔Marrying and taking up permanent residence, Working illegally, Enrolling in School
