Just curious KimandRuss..

[girl 37 7]

I'm curious about the statement in bold (blue) below. Is a woman not allowed to visit her sister? Can you explain? I'm not sure if you've read Valsu's whole, twisted, sorry saga, but she didn't "just enter". She's been in the US for MONTHS and her husband didn't help her file for AOS. I also noticed in another post that you made that you stated that she should've filed herself (second quote, below). That might be difficult if she didn't bring the money with her, because she hasn't been able to work outside the home. You also seem to imply that the USC isn't obgligated to help file if the marriage is on rocky ground, though if you've read Valsu's posts, it seems that one of the main reasons IT IS on rocky ground is because he didn't making filing a priority. An the non-USC, I'd have been extremely angry at my spouse if he didn't help me file too. Women who are used to having a career may not be happy being forced into the role of homemaker.

I also feel it's extremely irresponsible for a VJ mod to suggest that it's fine not file within the suggested timeframe. Not filing on time is just asking for problems.

Seriously, it might be rude to suggest this, but as a mod I think you've been way out of line in several places in this topic.

I'll be closing this thread for violations of TOS (posts made invisible). It seems certain individuals just can't keep their opinions to themselves.

I will add that yes, even with statements that seem 'so certain', you can still wait to apply for AOS although it is not recommended. This woman was not detained because she waited to file for AOS. She was suspected of immigration fraud ..as anyone seperated from their usc spouse just after entering probably would be if they were found somewhere they're not suppose to be.

A word of advice... it's important to have a good look in the mirror before preaching to others. There is no excuse for some of the personal attacks in this thread. If this continues further action will be taken.

While it's certainly best to file for AOS asap.... "Immediate Relatives of United States citizens need only show lawful entry in any status. Status violations subsequent to entry are waived by law." This happens all the time and MANY people wait a lot longer than this, even years, to file for adjustment with no problems.

I don't believe anyone asked for moral judgment or reiteration of personal perception of the facts here. The OP was asking for advice on this particular matter and unless you were sleeping in their bed and living their lives I don't understand how you feel you are in a position to judge or make such comments based off of what was said in another thread. It's probably best not to believe everything you read as fact just because it's been said.

This is a grown woman who I have to believe is capable to make her own decisions and who is probably not without fault herself...the same as the rest of us.

It is not just one person's responsibility to handle any of the immigration process. In fact, it is the beneficiary who is the one applying for AOS. So blaming the OP for not filing for her makes no sense...especially when the relationship was on rocky ground.

This is the last warning to keep your comments and judgements to yourself. If have nothing to say to help this situation...don't post. It's that simple. Further action will be taken if the personal attacks continue.

[Teacher Mark 53]

[rebeccajo 14]

While the application for adjustment is the immigrants, it is impossible for immigrants who file based upon marriage to a USC to support that application without sponsorship from the spouse.

Even if the USC spouse is relying upon a joint sponsor insofar as the financial aspect is concerned, the USC must still sign on as the primary sponsor for that immigrant.

I do agree it is questionable to place the thought into minds of members that refusal by the USC to either cough up the money for the adjustment or to withhold the affidavit of support is a viable alternative when the relationship is 'rocky'. Serious students of the process are very familiar with this scenario as a type of spousal abuse which immigrants are subjected to by US citizens.

Edited December 17, 2008 by rebeccajo

[diadromous mermaid 36]

I'll add that the USC's non-participation in submitting the corresponding documentation for an adjustment of status application is not necessarily so much of an abuse of power, or an issue IF the marriage is terminating. It becomes more of an issue, if the USC demonstrates no interest in ending the marriage yet is unwilling to co-operate with the alien in securing adjustment of status or legal status.

While the application for adjustment is the immigrants, it is impossible for immigrants who file based upon marriage to a USC to support that application without sponsorship from the spouse.

Even if the USC spouse is relying upon a joint sponsor insofar as the financial aspect is concerned, the USC must still sign on as the primary sponsor for that immigrant.

I do agree it is questionable to place the thought into minds of members that refusal by the USC to either cough up the money for the adjustment or to withhold the affidavit of support is a viable alternative when the relationship is 'rocky'. Serious students of the process are very familiar with this scenario as a type of spousal abuse which immigrants are subjected to by US citizens.

[rebeccajo 14]

Said issue being that the USC has not only placed an alien in legal jeopardy, but has also violated implied promises to the US government?

I'll add that the USC's non-participation in submitting the corresponding documentation for an adjustment of status application is not necessarily so much of an abuse of power, or an issue IF the marriage is terminating. It becomes more of an issue, if the USC demonstrates no interest in ending the marriage yet is unwilling to co-operate with the alien in securing adjustment of status or legal status.

While the application for adjustment is the immigrants, it is impossible for immigrants who file based upon marriage to a USC to support that application without sponsorship from the spouse.

Even if the USC spouse is relying upon a joint sponsor insofar as the financial aspect is concerned, the USC must still sign on as the primary sponsor for that immigrant.

I do agree it is questionable to place the thought into minds of members that refusal by the USC to either cough up the money for the adjustment or to withhold the affidavit of support is a viable alternative when the relationship is 'rocky'. Serious students of the process are very familiar with this scenario as a type of spousal abuse which immigrants are subjected to by US citizens.

[Ban Hammer 13,332]

I also feel it's extremely irresponsible for a VJ mod to suggest that it's fine not file within the suggested timeframe. Not filing on time is just asking for problems.

Seriously, it might be rude to suggest this, but as a mod I think you've been way out of line in several places in this topic.

i disagree. the op in this story has stated in previous threads they had money problems. suggested timeframes are just that - suggested, not mandatory.

[rebeccajo 14]

I also feel it's extremely irresponsible for a VJ mod to suggest that it's fine not file within the suggested timeframe. Not filing on time is just asking for problems.

Seriously, it might be rude to suggest this, but as a mod I think you've been way out of line in several places in this topic.

i disagree. the op in this story has stated in previous threads they had money problems. suggested timeframes are just that - suggested, not mandatory.

Charles, "money problems" isn't really a good excuse for allowing your foreign-born spouse to be out of status. Persons legally admitted on a K1 but who have not filed for adjustment prior to the expiration of their I94 are, legally, without status. Once adjustment has been filed, they are STILL without a defined status within the code. The pending application, however, does offer them some legal protections.

Over and over again on VJ we read the standard advice that waiting to file is no big deal. This is poor advice and poor advice indeed.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

One of the main criteria of a successful adjustment of status is that there is a viable and sustaining marriage. In the event that a USC cooperated with an alien's submission, but the marriage was already clearly not viable, the Service would not/ should not approve the application. There's no requirement that a USC follow through on pursuit of permanent residency for a foeign-born spouse, if the marriage is in a terminal state. In fact, it would contravert regulation to do so. I believe the issue becomes more dire and more of an abuse of the USC's power when the USC fails to participate in the acquisition of permanent residency, yet does not believe the marriage is "rocky" enough to terminate.

Said issue being that the USC has not only placed an alien in legal jeopardy, but has also violated implied promises to the US government?

I'll add that the USC's non-participation in submitting the corresponding documentation for an adjustment of status application is not necessarily so much of an abuse of power, or an issue IF the marriage is terminating. It becomes more of an issue, if the USC demonstrates no interest in ending the marriage yet is unwilling to co-operate with the alien in securing adjustment of status or legal status.

While the application for adjustment is the immigrants, it is impossible for immigrants who file based upon marriage to a USC to support that application without sponsorship from the spouse.

Even if the USC spouse is relying upon a joint sponsor insofar as the financial aspect is concerned, the USC must still sign on as the primary sponsor for that immigrant.

I do agree it is questionable to place the thought into minds of members that refusal by the USC to either cough up the money for the adjustment or to withhold the affidavit of support is a viable alternative when the relationship is 'rocky'. Serious students of the process are very familiar with this scenario as a type of spousal abuse which immigrants are subjected to by US citizens.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

"Money problems" are one of the matters the Service is intent on "weeding out" when the USC is initially petitioning for the foreign-born fiancé to come to the USA. For what other reason do you all believe the Affidavit of Support was implemented? Very few aliens are able to access Federal Means-tested benefits for the first 5 years anyway. But the petitioner has vouched to the US government that he or she has the financial means to support the alien through the process and until that alien becomes gainfully employed and has accrued sufficient reserves in the social security system to provide for the "unplanned".

To go through the vetting process, claiming that you meet the benchmarks, and then fall into poverty before completing the process is not acceptable. Yes, on occasion, the USC becomes unemployed, or worse, but it is not his or her right to use that as a reason not to do all that is necessary to maintain the alien's legal status. In such an event, since the sponsor has guaranteed that he or she lives above what is considered the poverty level for his household, if money becomes tight after marriage then changes in their lifestyle to accommodate the submission of applications, or leaning on fmaily to assist is in order.

I also feel it's extremely irresponsible for a VJ mod to suggest that it's fine not file within the suggested timeframe. Not filing on time is just asking for problems.

Seriously, it might be rude to suggest this, but as a mod I think you've been way out of line in several places in this topic.

i disagree. the op in this story has stated in previous threads they had money problems. suggested timeframes are just that - suggested, not mandatory.

Charles, "money problems" isn't really a good excuse for allowing your foreign-born spouse to be out of status. Persons legally admitted on a K1 but who have not filed for adjustment prior to the expiration of their I94 are, legally, without status. Once adjustment has been filed, they are STILL without a defined status within the code. The pending application, however, does offer them some legal protections.

Over and over again on VJ we read the standard advice that waiting to file is no big deal. This is poor advice and poor advice indeed.

Edited December 17, 2008 by diadromous mermaid

[KimandRuss 0]

While I appreciate constructive criticism, I think perhaps you should read my responses again if that's what you took from them.

Not once did I say she could not visit anyone and not once did I say she should file on her own. What I did suggest is that you can still wait to apply for AOS although it is not recommended. And while it's certainly best to file for AOS asap....Immediate Relatives of United States citizens need only show lawful entry in any status. Status violations subsequent to entry are waived by law. And ...pointed out that it was not soley the husband's 'fault' for not filing for his new wife....as it was suggested in the thread by those attacking the OP. What I did suggest is that the reason this woman was detained was not because she was 'out of status'... as was also suggested. Big difference. What I did was clarify misinformation... I did not advocate anything.

I realize you are upset with this OP in that thread for whatever personal reasons you might have but honestly, personal opinions aside..... What is wrong is to attack another member (violation of TOS) over and over again after being asked by two different moderator's to stop. What is wrong is to suggest that one will be thrown in jail for not filing for AOS immediately after marriage. What is wrong is believing everything you read or that everything is black and white when there are several shades of gray...especially with this process and especially in an online forum.

Yes, I have moderating ability and do try very hard to keep my personal opinions at bay when viewing a complaint. What I thought I did was visit a thread numerous times that I had complaints on all day because ot the personal attacks. A thread that I was called into because certain folks couldn't seem to stop. What I did is state the facts... not in support of the OP (whom I do not know) but in defense of the personal attacks and misinformation and because of all the PM complaints we received regarding the topic. With moderating ability also comes a responsibility to answer all the panic messages I get because of the suggestion in an open forum that one will be arrested for not filing for AOS on time.

I think if you truly knew me you would find that I do my very best to be fair and to help anyone I can, to answer questions correctly and to treat everybody with kindness, compassion and fairness. Everybody.

This is all I will say on the matter. If you wish to continue this conversation please contact me via PM.

Have a nice day.

[rebeccajo 14]

There is no status violation if there is no status, Kim.

For the violations to be waived, permanent residency has to be granted. For it to be granted, it has to be applied for.

Persons languishing have no recourse simply because of an inspected entry into the US and marriage to a USC.

Edited December 17, 2008 by rebeccajo

[girl 37 7]

I realize you are upset with this OP in that thread for whatever personal reasons you might have but honestly, personal opinions aside..... What is wrong is to attack another member (violation of TOS) over and over again after being asked by two different moderator's to stop. What is wrong is to suggest that one will be thrown in jail for not filing for AOS immediately after marriage. What is wrong is believing everything you read or that everything is black and white when there are several shades of gray...especially with this process and especially in an online forum.

I wasn't and am still not upset by what the OP wrote. What upset me was what you wrote (the things that were highlighted in bold in my original post). You still haven't clarified what you meant by them. I don't know if the other sentences in your paragraph above are aimed at me, but if they are, you have the wrong person: I didn't post in those threads and I don't believe everything I read.

Anyway, thanks to Rebeccajo and mermaid for your helpful comments.

[Valsu 1]

Charles, "money problems" isn't really a good excuse for allowing your foreign-born spouse to be out of status. Persons legally admitted on a K1 but who have not filed for adjustment prior to the expiration of their I94 are, legally, without status. Once adjustment has been filed, they are STILL without a defined status within the code. The pending application, however, does offer them some legal protections.

Over and over again on VJ we read the standard advice that waiting to file is no big deal. This is poor advice and poor advice indeed.

Money problems are not a good excuse?

If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Plain and simple.

I did lose my job, and went 5 weeks without any pay at all--paying my bills with what little savings I had left.

That hiccup took me 6 months to recover from, and then I went into surgery and got slammed again financially.

I have a notarized affidavit and documentation for all of that, and submitted it in via my attorney; who stated that such hardships ARE legitimate excuses, and because of such, I can almost assuredly get my wife's case completely dropped without even having to go to trial because of the hardships.

They have been provided copies of my bank statement for the entire year, and can monitor each financial struggle we endured.

Maybe $1,010 is nothing for most people, but there are some folks who suffer a hardship, and $1,010 is the difference between putting food on your family's table. I do not have any family or friends that could help us out--especially financially. Most of my family have died, and my wife's family are poor.

Now, "Hindsight 20/20"... Where I messed up was not notifying immigration about our hardship. I was not aware that failure to file the status right away would put my wife at such potential legal risks. We had been misinformed by a number of people who made light of being in "limbo status." After speaking with ICE, and other immigration officials, I discovered that if I had notified them in writing about our hardship, they would have given us an extension waiver notice which would have safeguarded my wife in the event she was inspected by border patrol while out of status.

They work in 90-180 day increments, and ICE will follow up within that time-frame to determine if you have filed or not. You can continue to extend it in writing, for as long as you can continue to prove being in a state of hardship.

So, the crime is not about the money; it was due to failure of notifying immigration of our circumstances.

Indeed, I can now say, "Lesson Learned."

[himher 634]

Please point out that someone WAS actually arrested and detained for being unable to demonstrate legal status. That same someone remains in detention to this day.

I think that the way it is worded, in the context of legal status, implies that a USC immediate relative somehow maintains legal status after I-94 expiration and before AOS filing. Present / expired I94 / no AOS pending is in fact not legal status. The system is pretty transparent. You get a date on your passport when you go through the airport. That date is a free pass to legally travel wherever and do whatever you want to (legally) do while you are in the US. Beyond that date, if you have not continued to the next step in the process and cannot show it, you are not in legal status and are at the mercy of any immigration officer who decides to check you. The chances of that are pretty low in the interior states, but if you live for instance down in Del Rio, Tx, where you cross a checkpoint 20-30 miles inside the border every time you leave town, you either need to show you are pending/legal or be prepared to be detained. Even if you are in the car with your husband or wife or US citizen sponsor. Hell, the border patrol will detain you if you HAVE a green card and are not carrying it with you and cannot show you have legal status. That's why the letter that comes with the green card tells you that you are required to have it with you at all times.

As far as attacks, I think it was also you who pointed out that it is actually the responsibility of the immigrant to file AOS, not the immigrant sponsor. That is not possible without the USC's help. If pointing out that it is the USC's duty to do their part to follow up in the immigration process and if by failing to do so they are and should be held responsible for the consequences is an attack, then I plead guilty to that.

While I appreciate constructive criticism, I think perhaps you should read my responses again if that's what you took from them.

Not once did I say she could not visit anyone and not once did I say she should file on her own. What I did suggest is that you can still wait to apply for AOS although it is not recommended. And while it's certainly best to file for AOS asap....Immediate Relatives of United States citizens need only show lawful entry in any status. Status violations subsequent to entry are waived by law. And ...pointed out that it was not soley the husband's 'fault' for not filing for his new wife....as it was suggested in the thread by those attacking the OP. What I did suggest is that the reason this woman was detained was not because she was 'out of status'... as was also suggested. Big difference. What I did was clarify misinformation... I did not advocate anything.

I realize you are upset with this OP in that thread for whatever personal reasons you might have but honestly, personal opinions aside..... What is wrong is to attack another member (violation of TOS) over and over again after being asked by two different moderator's to stop. What is wrong is to suggest that one will be thrown in jail for not filing for AOS immediately after marriage. What is wrong is believing everything you read or that everything is black and white when there are several shades of gray...especially with this process and especially in an online forum.

Yes, I have moderating ability and do try very hard to keep my personal opinions at bay when viewing a complaint. What I thought I did was visit a thread numerous times that I had complaints on all day because ot the personal attacks. A thread that I was called into because certain folks couldn't seem to stop. What I did is state the facts... not in support of the OP (whom I do not know) but in defense of the personal attacks and misinformation and because of all the PM complaints we received regarding the topic. With moderating ability also comes a responsibility to answer all the panic messages I get because of the suggestion in an open forum that one will be arrested for not filing for AOS on time.

I think if you truly knew me you would find that I do my very best to be fair and to help anyone I can, to answer questions correctly and to treat everybody with kindness, compassion and fairness. Everybody.

This is all I will say on the matter. If you wish to continue this conversation please contact me via PM.

Have a nice day.

[rebeccajo 14]

Charles, "money problems" isn't really a good excuse for allowing your foreign-born spouse to be out of status. Persons legally admitted on a K1 but who have not filed for adjustment prior to the expiration of their I94 are, legally, without status. Once adjustment has been filed, they are STILL without a defined status within the code. The pending application, however, does offer them some legal protections.

Over and over again on VJ we read the standard advice that waiting to file is no big deal. This is poor advice and poor advice indeed.

Money problems are not a good excuse?

If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Plain and simple.

I did lose my job, and went 5 weeks without any pay at all--paying my bills with what little savings I had left.

That hiccup took me 6 months to recover from, and then I went into surgery and got slammed again financially.

I have a notarized affidavit and documentation for all of that, and submitted it in via my attorney; who stated that such hardships ARE legitimate excuses, and because of such, I can almost assuredly get my wife's case completely dropped without even having to go to trial because of the hardships.

They have been provided copies of my bank statement for the entire year, and can monitor each financial struggle we endured.

Maybe $1,010 is nothing for most people, but there are some folks who suffer a hardship, and $1,010 is the difference between putting food on your family's table. I do not have any family or friends that could help us out--especially financially. Most of my family have died, and my wife's family are poor.

Now, "Hindsight 20/20"... Where I messed up was not notifying immigration about our hardship. I was not aware that failure to file the status right away would put my wife at such potential legal risks. We had been misinformed by a number of people who made light of being in "limbo status." After speaking with ICE, and other immigration officials, I discovered that if I had notified them in writing about our hardship, they would have given us an extension waiver notice which would have safeguarded my wife in the event she was inspected by border patrol while out of status.

They work in 90-180 day increments, and ICE will follow up within that time-frame to determine if you have filed or not. You can continue to extend it in writing, for as long as you can continue to prove being in a state of hardship.

So, the crime is not about the money; it was due to failure of notifying immigration of our circumstances.

Indeed, I can now say, "Lesson Learned."

$1010 is a lot of money.

Your legal bills will likely exceed that, I'm sorry to say.

Before my husband arrived in the US, I procured the money necessary to complete his adjustment. This money was set aside for that purpose and that purpose only.