How do you prove non-intent to marry?

[TayRivers 4]

Since you are both in love with each other, then that is the start; however immigration is not so straight forward. You have to let your fiance stay at least 90 days in the US before you both get married. Any earlier will raise a red flag, because immigration will perceive your case as coming to America with the intent of obtaining a greencard through marriage. Secondly, after your marriage, then you should file to "adjust status."

The information in RED is incorrect... There is no magical 90 days that you must wait to get married if you entered the US on a VWP/Tourist Visa. Infact it does not actually matter when you got married it has to do with your intent at the time you entered the USA.

I will give you 3 diffrent situations regarding this and they are legal..

1.

A couple have been married for 8 months and have filed a I-130 it has not yet been approved by USCIS, spouse comes to visit USC spouse for 4 week vacation. At POE when asked reason for visit the spouse tells the officer that he/she is visiting for 4 weeks prior to completing the CR1 visa process. The spouse is admitted to the US. 3 weeks later the couple decide that they no longer wish to be apart so they file for AOS and include a copy of the NOA1 for the I-130. The Alien spouse remains in the US while the AOS is processed.

Six months later the alien spouse is approved at AOS interview for LPR and got a 2 years greencard.

2.

A young couple have been chatting on the internet for the last 18 months, the girl has come to the USA to meet up with her boy friend and spend a few weeks on vacation. At POE she tells the officer that she is visiting the USA for 3 weeks and hopes to go to Orlando to see Mickey Mouse with the friend she is staying with. She is admitted on a VWP valid for 90 days.

After spending 10 days in the US and while visiting Las Vegas the girl and her boyfriend get married. They do not want to have to be apart so the seek help from a immigration lawyer and are advised to file for AOS and I-130. The lawyer tells them they need to file for the I-130 and AOS before the I-94w expires, so that she does not accrue "out of status" time. 3 weeks later the mail the I-130 and AOS packet to USCIS.

Less than 5 months later they have the AOS interview and she is asked "When did you decide to remain in the US?" she tells the story about their sudden wedding and have a few photos to show the IO.. They are approved for LPR and got the greencard in the mail 10 days later.

3.

Jill became a USC in Feb 2009, she is married to Paul who was born in the USA. They are having their first child. Jill's parents have a B2 visa valid for 10 years and are coming to the US to visit for 6 months around the time the baby is due to be born. All goes well at POE and they proudly tell the POE officer that they are about to become grandparents for the first time. The officer wishes them well and they enter the US for thier 6 month stay.

Three weeks later their daughter gives birth 8 weeks early. The baby is in the special care unit but is doing well. The parents talk to the son-in-law and their daughter about being there to help them out in the future as it looks like the baby may have medical issues later on. The parents and the young couple decide that they will stay here in the USA to help. After chatting with a immigration lawyer Jill files a I-130 and AOS for both parents. Five months later both parents are approved for LPR and get their 10 year greencards within a few weeks.

The above cases are all real, I either know the person immigrating or people applying on behalf of the immigrant. None of the people in the above cases were asked for proof that they intended to return home when they entered the USA. They could have been asked.. but were not.

As I said there is no magical 90 day rule and there is no 30/60/90 rule that some lawyers tell people about. As with every immigration case you need to be 100% truthful and if you know in your heart that you did not plan to use your VWP/Tourist visa to get into the US so you could file for AOS then you have nothing to fear. A visit to a good immigration lawyer is always a good idea so that they can make sure that you are taking the best course of action for your individual situation.

[lechatnoir 0]

It only took my husband and I 76 days to AOS from VWP. We were married around the 64th day that he was here I believe? Our interview was about 20 minutes long and we were approved on the spot... however, the IO did ask my husband if he intended to get married when he arrived. It was just a question and when he said no the only follow up question was when did he figure out that he wanted to marry me. There were no accusations or need for us to submit proof. She simply asked him a yes or no question and then 10 minutes later said she was approving the case.

While it seems to be very rare that any issues are happening with adjusting this way... it is not a safe statement to say you can never be denied based on intent. I can't imagine them approving an AOS where someone came into the US got married on day 1 and filed an AOS on day 2. If they did..... well then... the rules mean nothing.

[john_and_marlene 162]

it is not a safe statement to say you can never be denied based on intent.

The case law disagrees with you.

[lechatnoir 0]

I haven't really seen much in this thread aside from a few references to a case here and there that would make me think otherwise. If it was truly the right answer then 1. We wouldn't have been asked about intent and 2. USCIS would change their rules.

[john_and_marlene 162]

I haven't really seen much in this thread aside from a few references to a case here and there that would make me think otherwise. If it was truly the right answer then 1. We wouldn't have been asked about intent and 2. USCIS would change their rules.

Attempting to determine why you were asked the question is only speculation. What is not speculation is that BIA has made a ruling regarding prior intent for immediate family members of USCs. The ruling set a precident and the USCIS HAS changed their rules regarding it--they hade no choice and must abide by the appeal ruling. The appeal ruling is included in the Adjudicator's Field Manual and it is no longer a justification to deny adjustment for the immediate family members of USCs. In the ruling, however, they do uphold that prior intent is a serious matter and specifically limited the ruling to the immediate family members. It will continue to be used to deny other adjustment applicants.

[lechatnoir 0]

Ok, so I went back through the thread and the only reference I saw (unless I missed another one) is this: For this specific concern regarding prior intent, look at the case law appeals ruling in the Matter of Ibrahim (BIA 1981) "Absent other adverse factors, an adjustment application should generally be granted in the exercise of discretion, notwithstanding an aliens entry as a nonimmigrant with a preconceived intent to remain"

This case was from 1981? So, you're saying that all the members on this forum since 1981 have been misinformed and giving people incorrect advice about not coming as a visitor and attempting to adjust?

And if it happened in 1981 why is that nobody except you (on this forum) seems to know about it?

[lechatnoir 0]

I also just looked up that case here: http://openjurist.org/821/f2d/1547/ibrahim...ization-service

And it says he was denied because he failed to appear at a court appearance... I didn't see anything about his case winning based on VWP intent??

[john_and_marlene 162]

I also just looked up that case here: http://openjurist.org/821/f2d/1547/ibrahim...ization-service

And it says he was denied because he failed to appear at a court appearance... I didn't see anything about his case winning based on VWP intent??

Read this from the DOJ: http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/vol18/2866.pdf

[JERIII 8]

Ok, so I went back through the thread and the only reference I saw (unless I missed another one) is this: For this specific concern regarding prior intent, look at the case law appeals ruling in the Matter of Ibrahim (BIA 1981) "Absent other adverse factors, an adjustment application should generally be granted in the exercise of discretion, notwithstanding an aliens entry as a nonimmigrant with a preconceived intent to remain"

This case was from 1981? So, you're saying that all the members on this forum since 1981 have been misinformed and giving people incorrect advice about not coming as a visitor and attempting to adjust?

And if it happened in 1981 why is that nobody except you (on this forum) seems to know about it?

I know about it.

The issue is both clear and unclear. In the matter of Ibrahim, it was ruled that preconceived intent to remain is not enough to deny adjustment. In the matter of Cavazos this ruling was limited to immediate relatives. That's the clear part.

The less clear part is about Visa fraud- it is still fraud, and grounds for refusal of AOS, to have misrepresented yourself in a Visa application, or in a border interview. For example, if you are asked why you are coming to the US and you conceal intent, then you can be denied AOS, not because you had intent, but because you lied about it. Of course, if you reveal intent, you may not be admitted to the US.

On the issue of misadvice on this board - there is incorrect/bad advice on this board. I have probably given some of it, unintentionally, Part of the problem is that we members tend to learn from each other, so that a mistake will sometimes spread, and be accepted by many. While I would not ignore Visa fraud issues, the facts seem to be that few people on waivers or visitor visas are denied because of intent, and few are even questioned about it - it is less of a problem than is generally believed on this board.

[Melian 0]

Well, I'm not even sure it's believed to be such a problem, rather than wished to be a problem. It's an ugly example of envy on the part of those who could have adjusted status (legally) and didn't dare to try, and then prefer to reinterpret their own over-cautiousness as moral superiority, and either scare off or condemn as "line jumpers" those who do what they wish they had.

For what it's worth, my husband visited on the VWP, we were married on the 56th day after he entered the US, flied the AOS on the 93rd day, and were approved in three months, no lawyer, no questions about intent. We had evidence he only intended to visit, but never needed it. Bring what evidence you can gather (why not - you might be glad you did), but most likely you won't be asked for it. I've talked to plenty of couples who did what we did, and none were asked to show evidence.

When it comes to having the moral high ground, trying to make other people's lives needlessly complicated because one is resentful when others have things easier... doesn't really qualify as virtue in my book. So things are easier for people who can marry and adjust status without being separated - they're easier still for couples who are both U.S. citizens and can simply live together whenever they please. It may not be fair, but it doesn't mean those couples are bad, rotten, evil line-jumpers who should choose to endure months/years of separation because some of us have to.

[visacheck 3]

Well, I'm not even sure it's believed to be such a problem, rather than wished to be a problem. It's an ugly example of envy on the part of those who could have adjusted status (legally) and didn't dare to try, and then prefer to reinterpret their own over-cautiousness as moral superiority, and either scare off or condemn as "line jumpers" those who do what they wish they had.

For what it's worth, my husband visited on the VWP, we were married on the 56th day after he entered the US, flied the AOS on the 93rd day, and were approved in three months, no lawyer, no questions about intent. We had evidence he only intended to visit, but never needed it. Bring what evidence you can gather (why not - you might be glad you did), but most likely you won't be asked for it. I've talked to plenty of couples who did what we did, and none were asked to show evidence.

When it comes to having the moral high ground, trying to make other people's lives needlessly complicated because one is resentful when others have things easier... doesn't really qualify as virtue in my book. So things are easier for people who can marry and adjust status without being separated - they're easier still for couples who are both U.S. citizens and can simply live together whenever they please. It may not be fair, but it doesn't mean those couples are bad, rotten, evil line-jumpers who should choose to endure months/years of separation because some of us have to.

BINGO!

[rin and john 71]

Well, I'm not even sure it's believed to be such a problem, rather than wished to be a problem. It's an ugly example of envy on the part of those who could have adjusted status (legally) and didn't dare to try, and then prefer to reinterpret their own over-cautiousness as moral superiority, and either scare off or condemn as "line jumpers" those who do what they wish they had.

For what it's worth, my husband visited on the VWP, we were married on the 56th day after he entered the US, flied the AOS on the 93rd day, and were approved in three months, no lawyer, no questions about intent. We had evidence he only intended to visit, but never needed it. Bring what evidence you can gather (why not - you might be glad you did), but most likely you won't be asked for it. I've talked to plenty of couples who did what we did, and none were asked to show evidence.

When it comes to having the moral high ground, trying to make other people's lives needlessly complicated because one is resentful when others have things easier... doesn't really qualify as virtue in my book. So things are easier for people who can marry and adjust status without being separated - they're easier still for couples who are both U.S. citizens and can simply live together whenever they please. It may not be fair, but it doesn't mean those couples are bad, rotten, evil line-jumpers who should choose to endure months/years of separation because some of us have to.

My wife and I had to go through the K-1 process and then AOS because she could not travel freely to the USA, but I couldn't agree with you more. I wish all those that could get married in the USA would and avoid filing for a K visa or CR visa. Why? Well it would actually shorten the "visa" lines. Any one who condemns the line jumpers, just doesn't understand the process well enough.

Every foreigner that marries a USC is going to go through the AOS "line". That number is fixed. So whether one gets married in the USA or enters via a K visa, the AOS timeline wouldn't change.

For every foreigner that enters via another method (VWP, etc), gets married, and files AOS (effectively "skipping" the visa process), the visa line is shortened for all of those that will follow. By skipping the visa process, those that file directly for AOS are actually decreasing USCIS workload and, in effect, speeding up the process for everyone.

So to all those who went directly to the AOS path, thank you for the help!

John

[john_and_marlene 162]

Sadly, this same topic will come up in the near future. It repeats often and the naysayers will emerge again.

[Kittyfang 6]

I would just like to chime in, as I am one of the line jumpers (I think. I came here from Canada to visit my husband, we got married and we are filing for AoS. The only difference is that I have quite a bit of an overstay).

I can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you that I didn't do that because I wanted to skip any kind of process. I didn't have an evil scheme to avoid the "traditional way" and I sure as heck didn't do it all with any evil intent.

Here's the thing (that applies to me) that we all seem to forget. Almost anyone who goes trough immigration for a spouse or for yourself doesn't know jacksh*t about immigration laws. Every time I speak to friends about how much AoS costs, how long it takes, etc. they look at me as if I'm giving a lecture about how Nasa builds rockets. They're words: "That's just *** ridiculous. You guys are married, what the *** is the big deal?! They should just let you work and sh*t (no, they're not sailors, they just speak as if they were )". The thing is that before we realize we need to follow some kind of procedure, we're not even aware that the procedure exists. I know, it's irresponsible, in some way, then again, we're not all normal responsible people, in charge of their lives, aiming and getting what we want all the time. I, for one, am a basket case, that fell in love with some guy in the U.S. came to visit and decided to stay.

So, for those people who lift their noes at people like me, I say "oh well. I'm sadden that you can't imagine any other path than the one you've chosen. Once in a while, walk in the woods, don't bring a lunch, don't plan the hike, just go and make your own path... It's awesome. "

Sorry for the rant...

Edited October 8, 2009 by Kittyfang

[juliava 80]

I would just like to chime in, as I am one of the line jumpers (I think. I came here from Canada to visit my husband, we got married and we are filing for AoS. The only difference is that I have quite a bit of an overstay).

I can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you that I didn't do that because I wanted to skip any kind of process. I didn't have an evil scheme to avoid the "traditional way" and I sure as heck didn't do it all with any evil intent.

Here's the thing (that applies to me) that we all seem to forget. Almost anyone who goes trough immigration for a spouse or for yourself doesn't know jacksh*t about immigration laws. Every time I speak to friends about how much AoS costs, how long it takes, etc. they look at me as if I'm giving a lecture about how Nasa builds rockets. They're words: "That's just *** ridiculous. You guys are married, what the *** is the big deal?! They should just let you work and sh*t (no, they're not sailors, they just speak as if they were )". The thing is that before we realize we need to follow some kind of procedure, we're not even aware that the procedure exists. I know, it's irresponsible, in some way, then again, we're not all normal responsible people, in charge of their lives, aiming and getting what we want all the time. I, for one, am a basket case, that fell in love with some guy in the U.S. came to visit and decided to stay.

So, for those people who lift their noes at people like me, I say "oh well. I'm sadden that you can't imagine any other path than the one you've chosen. Once in a while, walk in the woods, don't bring a lunch, don't plan the hike, just go and make your own path... It's awesome. "

Sorry for the rant...

You are soooo roght!!!! It reminds me of my husband. He is like "why are you so worry?We have a legit marriage!They can't do anything to you, you are married to a US citizen. Stop freaking out!you will get your GC".

I have another story: 2 months after I filed for EAD he called our lawyer: "where is my wife's work permit?"I told him that the processing times for EAD are on average 3 months at NBC and it really doesn't depend on our lawyer. He just wouldn't understand this. So he made the lawyer call the Missouri office but the funny thing is I got my EAD card 2 weeks later!