Complicated Immigration Help Needed!

[pushbrk 12,898]

You might wonder if you are being used, to come into the USA.

I'd question it, because of the AGE GAP between you. Solely.

Whatever ya do, you won't know 'whats what', until after you file.

Which ever petition you file, front-load it, to cover all red flags plus the 'regular' evidence yer supposed to submit.

I remember when I was 22 - them 'older ladies' were always a boon, for me (no, not a boondoggle).

But I digress.

File Something - see wot happens - that's my best advice for now.

My take is that it's wise to be sure of your life plan first and then follow the immigration path that matches the life plan. Personally, I wouldn't embark on the process at all until I was absolutely certain of the relationship. When I'm absolutely certain of a relationship, I get married. If you're still in the "keep my options open stage" then you're probably not absolutely committed to the relationship. Ultimately your commitment to the relationship will tell you what to do, since you MUST face the fact, you MAY NEVER be together in the USA.

[momof1 205]

Nobody has to show hardship if "forced to stay in the US without them". The hardship must result from the foreigner not coming to the USA. It's NOT the same thing. Who is going to force a US Citizen to stay in the USA? Yes, I realize passports can be held or revoked under certain circumstances like failure to pay child support but that's generally temporary, and NOT a hardship justifying a waiver.

Anytime a "standard" is applied by subjective humans, the outcomes will appear to be inconsistent to some other subjective humans and even to objective ones. It's "human".

It seems like you enjoy picking apart words without providing any sort of substance in your so-called advice.

During waiver processing, you must choose to either live with your spouse abroad or remain in the US without them. You have to show why you cannot do either for the duration of your ban. Proving why it would be a harship to live in your spouse's country is not enough. Waiver denials have said that it would be a harship to live in the spouse's country, but that no one is telling them that they have to do so. So, that would mean that you would also have to show why it is a harship to continue living in the US without them.

Maybe when you've actually been through the waiver process people would take your "advice" more seriously. I'm not a regular poster, but I am a regular reader.

[Boiler 45,537]

It seems like you enjoy picking apart words without providing any sort of substance in your so-called advice.

During waiver processing, you must choose to either live with your spouse abroad or remain in the US without them. You have to show why you cannot do either for the duration of your ban. Proving why it would be a harship to live in your spouse's country is not enough. Waiver denials have said that it would be a harship to live in the spouse's country, but that no one is telling them that they have to do so. So, that would mean that you would also have to show why it is a harship to continue living in the US without them.

Maybe when you've actually been through the waiver process people would take your "advice" more seriously. I'm not a regular poster, but I am a regular reader.

There is an option of a third country, Canada seems popular.

[momof1 205]

There is an option of a third country, Canada seems popular.

Yes, canada is an option. It's not an option for everyone though. I pursued this during our waiver processing as a plan B in case our waiver was denied. I did this because my husband had a lifetime ban. My job classification qualified me for a skilled worker visa and if I got a job offer I could enter Canada under NAFTA requirements without pursuing the skilled worker visa. Not everyone has a skill that would qualify them for this.

The only time a third country has to be discussed for the waiver is if either person is also a national of a third country. Then they have to show why they cannot live in their spouse's country, in the US without their spouse, or in the third country.

[pushbrk 12,898]

It seems like you enjoy picking apart words without providing any sort of substance in your so-called advice.

During waiver processing, you must choose to either live with your spouse abroad or remain in the US without them. You have to show why you cannot do either for the duration of your ban. Proving why it would be a harship to live in your spouse's country is not enough. Waiver denials have said that it would be a harship to live in the spouse's country, but that no one is telling them that they have to do so. So, that would mean that you would also have to show why it is a harship to continue living in the US without them.

Maybe when you've actually been through the waiver process people would take your "advice" more seriously. I'm not a regular poster, but I am a regular reader.

If you can find any advice in the post your responded to, please point it out for me.

I find no disagreement between my statements on the subject and your own. As you know the hardship needs to amount to something significantly more severe than simply being separated. That's a normal hardship, not a severe one. One does not have to go through something to understand the issues associated with getting through it. If that were so, it would be very difficult to find legal assistance for a waiver process, or a burglary, murder, sexual molestation or other criminal defense.

[jbenson1 0]

My take is that it's wise to be sure of your life plan first and then follow the immigration path that matches the life plan. Personally, I wouldn't embark on the process at all until I was absolutely certain of the relationship. When I'm absolutely certain of a relationship, I get married. If you're still in the "keep my options open stage" then you're probably not absolutely committed to the relationship. Ultimately your commitment to the relationship will tell you what to do, since you MUST face the fact, you MAY NEVER be together in the USA.

I totally agree with you. We have already faced the facts that it may never happen. When we were both in the U.S. we were planning on getting married in June 2010, that has always been the plan. Its just now, we are discussing whether we should wait and file the k-1 or wait to being the petition process and get married on our planned June 12th day. The hard part is marrying in Peru. Im not sure I could even afford to get my parents down there to see it. Which I would not be happy if that were the case. Theres a beautiful church in Lima right on the square that my to-be mother-in law has a friend who can book it for less. We went and looked, I really love the church, but theres also a few churches in New York City (where I work) that we like alot too. But you are entirely right, we want to marry now because we love each other and both she and I want to see her documents say my last name, we want to have the law and god witness us as one. We have been struggling with different options, where we could go thats not the U.S.A. because chances are, we won't be able to live here. If that becomes the case, I am going to have to pray my asthma does not put in me in my grave when I move to Peru again. We have looked at places with less humidity, and opening a business there, but it frightens me to think that I could be back there and in the hospital again, not knowing why I cant walk 15 feet without being out of breath.

As far as the 3rd country option, I have no college education and my skill is required in New York City. I work for television shows and my job is entirely based upon my knowledge of New York and its buildings. Thus, my skill really doesnt transfer outside of new york. I am a smart and talented person, but my finances restricted me from attending college. Now I can afford it, but I can't take the time off from work because then I will quickly be unable to afford it again. Theres a few countries with needs for skilled workers, including New Zealand, but again, my skill is not really transferable. I guess Its all about taking the first step and keeping the fingers crossed, if we fail, we fail, if have success, then we can continue to happily live our lives AND we will be together for to do it.

[Boiler 45,537]

CR1 will add about 6 months to the journey.

Your call.

[pushbrk 12,898]

CR1 will add about 6 months to the journey.

Your call.

That's not what I'm seeing, at least from filing to visa interview, I'm seeing one to two months difference.

To the OP, you don't want to file a fiancee petition and then get married. It would just invalidate the petition and cause you to begin all over again.

[Boiler 45,537]

That's not what I'm seeing, at least from filing to visa interview, I'm seeing one to two months difference.

To the OP, you don't want to file a fiancee petition and then get married. It would just invalidate the petition and cause you to begin all over again.

CR1 is 2 months quicker than K1?

[jbenson1 0]

That's not what I'm seeing, at least from filing to visa interview, I'm seeing one to two months difference.

To the OP, you don't want to file a fiancee petition and then get married. It would just invalidate the petition and cause you to begin all over again.

Thank you for that! Would you suggest waiting to get married? Or is that kind of a who knows how long youll end up waiting sort of question. We really want to get married but in our complex situation, we want to make sure that we dont mess anything up as far as being together. Its too easy to do something that will make it harder for us to have our lives together in the same country. Though we really wanted to marry in June, if its not the best option for us as far as beggining our petition, then we would definitely wait.

As far as the waiver portion, what does everyone think? I mean I am going to have to file a waiver, are you more likely to be denied a waiver if its for a K1 vs a CR1? I feel like they would prefer to waive someone who has their husband here, versus someone who has their fiance here, but I could be mistaken. Clearly every circumstance is different, but if you were to take 2 very similar cases, and compare them, one by CR1 one by K1, would one potentially be more successful than the other? Though I dont want to spend many years trying to accomplish this, an extra few months of added time for a potentially more successful petition would be worth it to me. We have the rest of our lives to spend with each other, and though Im sad for everyday I dont wake up next to her, I know someday I will be able to. So if it takes an extra few months to do it one way, but I will have better luck, I will do it that way.

THANK YOU ALL FOR RESPONDING! Everyones input on the subject is great. As each case is similar, each case is also different, and thats why I am really thankful for you help, because each person brings an aspect to the table that will help me, and hopefully someday I will be able to return the favor to someone else in need of help! Thanks again! I look forward to reading more!

[pushbrk 12,898]

CR1 is 2 months quicker than K1?

No, I'm seeing the difference being one to two months, with the CR1 taking longer. I'm not seeing six months longer. I should add that this is "all else being as equal as possible" including how the case is managed through NVC using the shortcuts, not just comparing timelines of cases where you know nothing about how the NVC stage was handled. When the shortcuts are used the difference in timeline is shortened significantly.

CR1 certainly CAN take six months or more longer. By the same token, a given K1 can be delayed for reasons outside anybody's control and often with no clear reason being evident.

[Boiler 45,537]

K1 you can start now.

CR1 obviously takes longer in that you have to wait until June.

Plus or minus whatever the time difference pushbrk is referring to. I thought they were the same give or take.

Waiver makes no difference either way.

[pushbrk 12,898]

K1 you can start now.

CR1 obviously takes longer in that you have to wait until June.

Plus or minus whatever the time difference pushbrk is referring to. I thought they were the same give or take.

Waiver makes no difference either way.

It helps to understand your context. You were quite economical with your words.

K visa cases take the same time at USCIS but breeze through NVC in a week. A fast CR1 case will take at least a month getting through NVC but six weeks is a better expectation using the shortcuts or even electronic processing through Guangzhou or Montreal. That accounts for most of the time difference. The rest comes from some consulates taking more time to schedule CR1 interviews than the K's.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

While Laurel Scott, the Goddess of waivers, often accomplishes the impossible by overcoming 10-year bans with hardship waivers, she clearly stated that a failure to appear in court carries a 5-year waiver that cannot even be overcome by the Allmighty himself.

[Boiler 45,537]

and then she would need a waiver, but you are right processing speeds are not that important.

But with CIR who knows?

Still would go the K1 route.