USCIS scare, AOS approved and Divorce pending

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Hi everyone,

I consulted an attorney yesterday morning and along with the scare came along a whooping 420 $/hr 1-on-1 USCIS consultation proposal. I thought and thought and end of the day decided to leave it on the actions of the USCIS adjudicators.(approval/denial).

Went back home from work and in my mailbox were 5 mails all from VSC. whoa, i said to myself, time to pack my bags, boy !!!!

On opening, 4 of em were Notice of Action (Welcome notice or I-797) and the last mail had it all. The 10-yr PR card.

Finally an end to my waiting.....whew, whatta relief.....thanks to all who responded, advised or even ridiculed. So the moral of the story is.....

"its sometimes better to open ur mouth and tell a lie rather than keeping ur mouth shut by acknowledging the truth and revealing all doubts....USCIS favors the brave too...."

- a happy man

- Atul

atul,

Well that, I'm sure, came as a relief for you and you must be feeling a little better, but why not spring the $400.00 now and just cover all that occured with that immigration attorney, just to be sure that all is in order? I'd approach it like a celebratory splurge, if you will. Best to know that all is well especially with the reception you received at the local office, don't you think? Then you can rejoice and get a real warm and cozy feeling. Good luck!

[attyinsandiego 0]

am1996 what type of law are you in??

I am a mid-level/senior corporate finance associate at a very large national firm. While I am a US citizen, I was not born in the US and have only been naturalized a few years ago. In fact, I've had to deal with the old INS and USCIS all through the undergrad and law school and have numerous friends who've done the same.

NONE of this gives me or anybody else out there ANY credibility, however. Instead of focusing on the person's background (and sooooooooooo many people misstate/exagerate their backgrounds on the Internet), I continue to invite people to examine my reasoning and the support I provide for it and then form their own opinions on the matter.

Yet you speak with quite significant authority. In my several years of practicing immigration law, which by the way has been very satisfying and dare I say quite successful, one of the main lessons learned was humility. You start off filled with notions and concepts of the rules and how they "ought to" apply.

Your points made on the law are excellent --- what you quoted is good case law. Yet, I think you misunderstood my point. Of course regulations should be followed -- but there are several strategic moves an attorney can make within that parameter, and reading them only at one level can really cost the client. It is not "sufficient" to simply follow these --- one must also anticipate the moves of USCIS, the staff that are not legally trained and see how one can avoid them misapplying the law. This is not always possible, but you will be surprised.

I guess what it boils down to is experience in the business. There is the law and regulations, but then there is also the "human side" you are dealing with --- you have to consider that. While one may stick to your position and refuse to make adjustments/compromises, it can cost the client by having it rise to extremely high levels of litigation.

Thanks doing your research --- you did a good job of compiling it. Just remember, with USCIS, the proof is in the pudding.

[rebeccajo 14]

"its sometimes better to open ur mouth and tell a lie rather than keeping ur mouth shut by acknowledging the truth and revealing all doubts....USCIS favors the brave too...."

- a happy man

- Atul

Why does that make me NOT want to jump up and down and be thrilled for you?

I believe the correct quote is "It is better to be thought a fool by keeping your mouth shut than to open it and remove all doubt"

Which you just did.

Just because you are being questioned about a matter does not mean that the person asking the question is on to something. Don't jump to too many conclusions based on a line of questioning.

Especially when you can lie and get away with it.

Edited August 29, 2006 by rebeccajo

[M. 0]

No offense to anyone, especially the OP, but is anyone else...let's say, perturbed, by the hubris of essentially lying to USCIS and now boasting of it?

[ceriserose 1]

No offense to anyone, especially the OP, but is anyone else...let's say, perturbed, by the hubris of essentially lying to USCIS and now boasting of it?

If I didn't think it happened quite often, I would be more concerned. I think that a lot of people who shouldn't be 'let in' get let in and are allowed to stay.

As for lying and boasting, I let karma deal with it. Easier on the stomach.

[JenT 0]

I still have a headache.

I'm with you. I propose Baileys.

** Sharing Baileys with Rosie **

"its sometimes better to open ur mouth and tell a lie rather than keeping ur mouth shut by acknowledging the truth and revealing all doubts....USCIS favors the brave too...."

- a happy man

- Atul

Why does that make me NOT want to jump up and down and be thrilled for you?

I believe the correct quote is "It is better to be thought a fool by keeping your mouth shut than to open it and remove all doubt"

Which you just did.

Just because you are being questioned about a matter does not mean that the person asking the question is on to something. Don't jump to too many conclusions based on a line of questioning.

Especially when you can lie and get away with it.

** and pouring 'Becca a glass **

What shall we toast to?

[rebeccajo 14]

What shall we toast to?

Dumbness.

*clinks glass*

[JenT 0]

Honesty

** clinks back **

[rebeccajo 14]

Honesty

** clinks back **

Here Here!

**buys second round**

[dmartmar 1]

Likewise, if Congress and the courts say that the OP has no obligation to volunteer any information to USCIS that it does not request, then the OP's answer may not have been incorrect, imprudent or as you say, "dumb."

So far, no one has realized, nor acknowledged that a "marriage based" GC approval depends on not only the bona fide intentions before the marriage, but also during and after. A separation or divorce would quickly invalidate the "bona fide" part and replace it with "highly suspicious and questionable," which is why the OP, being fully aware of this and in hopes of still securing a GC anyway, lied to the 'CIS.

So to those looking for any gray areas within and/or blaming the law as a way to justify the OP's "harmless little, white lie," please don't insult our intelligence, face the truth, accept the facts and tell it like it is: yes, it was a dumb move.

Otherwise, the OP wouldn't be here seeking mental, moral and emotional support, due to her guilty conscience and the fear of possibly getting caught.

[geo1234 0]

So far, no one has realized, nor acknowledged that a "marriage based" GC approval depends on not only the bona fide intentions before the marriage, but also during and after. A separation or divorce would quickly invalidate the "bona fide" part and replace it with "highly suspicious and questionable," which is why the OP, being fully aware of this and in hopes of still securing a GC anyway, lied to the 'CIS.

So to those looking for any gray areas within and/or blaming the law as a way to justify the OP's "harmless little, white lie," please don't insult our intelligence, face the truth, accept the facts and tell it like it is: yes, it was a dumb move.

Otherwise, the OP wouldn't be here seeking mental, moral and emotional support, due to her guilty conscience and the fear of possibly getting caught.

Am I the only one who doesn't understand this post? I thought that all these issues were discussed extensively throughout the thread and a consensus was reached on the applicable law? Edited August 30, 2006 by Geo123

[Dr_LHA 3]

Am I the only one who doesn't understand this post? I thought that all these issues were discussed extensively throughout the thread and a consensus was reached on the applicable law?

Just let this thread die "Geo123" (who is obviously either the fiancee of, or another username of am1996).

PS I'm putting you on my ignore list, so don't bother replying, I won't see it.

[geo1234 0]

Just let this thread die "Geo123" (who is obviously either the fiancee of, or another username of am1996).

PS I'm putting you on my ignore list, so don't bother replying, I won't see it.

Huh? Another day, another asinine reply from dr_lha.

[Dr_LHA 3]

You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Geo123.

A thing of beauty.

[ceriserose 1]

So far, no one has realized, nor acknowledged that a "marriage based" GC approval depends on not only the bona fide intentions before the marriage, but also during and after. A separation or divorce would quickly invalidate the "bona fide" part and replace it with "highly suspicious and questionable," which is why the OP, being fully aware of this and in hopes of still securing a GC anyway, lied to the 'CIS.

So to those looking for any gray areas within and/or blaming the law as a way to justify the OP's "harmless little, white lie," please don't insult our intelligence, face the truth, accept the facts and tell it like it is: yes, it was a dumb move.

Otherwise, the OP wouldn't be here seeking mental, moral and emotional support, due to her guilty conscience and the fear of possibly getting caught.

Am I the only one who doesn't understand this post? I thought that all these issues were discussed extensively throughout the thread and a consensus was reached on the applicable law?

I understood it. So it might just be you. I don't know.