Am I just being paranoid?

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

You are wrong but I'm not going to argue with you about it. People can interpret the information I provided how they like (as well as doing their own research). The OP did not have intent, it's not a problem for them, and intent is not questioned (in most cases). But again, if they have proof of intent it is enough to deny, assumption is not enough.

I find it extremely irresponsible of you to say if someone admitted they had intent they would be fine. Admitting immigration fraud is never good. Ignorance of the law is NEVER an excuse, if you knew anything about law you would know that.

Immediate relatives are exempt from the 30/60/90 day rule. See here: http://www.hooyou.com/familybased/exceptions.html

Vanessa, it says right here in your link:

"(3) Where a finding of preconceived intent was the only negative factor cited by the

immigration judge in denying the respondent's application for adjustment of status as

the beneficiary of an approved immediate relative visa petition and no additional

adverse matters are apparent in the record, and where significant equities are

presented by the respondent's United States citizen wife and child, a grant of adjustment of status is warranted as a matter of discretion."

That says that known intent, by itself, is not enough of a negative factor to deny an AOS.

Anyway, to the OP. It is obvious you did not have intent anyway, and in fact I remember advising you to do this when you posted on here about your daughter's health changes. There is no 60/90 day rule (and in fact there never was, that rule is in the Foreign affairs manual and not in USCIS rules). To the others, the Op got married after 12 days yes, but then her husband returned home and they started the CR-1 visa process. He came back to visit for a bit and while here, her daughter had a significant change in her health care status and they made the decision to file AOS. Not that any of this matters, but just to clarify the situation.

OP - you are being paranoid and everything is fine...really. Relax This is going to be a very normal AOS case, just like the others.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Vanessa, it says right here in your link:

"(3) Where a finding of preconceived intent was the only negative factor cited by the

immigration judge in denying the respondent's application for adjustment of status as

the beneficiary of an approved immediate relative visa petition and no additional

adverse matters are apparent in the record, and where significant equities are

presented by the respondent's United States citizen wife and child, a grant of adjustment of status is warranted as a matter of discretion."

That says that known intent, by itself, is not enough of a negative factor to deny an AOS.

No it doesn't you're misreading. "A finding of preconceived intent" means they assume it, not that they know it.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

No it doesn't you're misreading. "A finding of preconceived intent" means they assume it, not that they know it.

No, you don't know the legal definition of the word "finding." A finding is not a guess or an assumption, it is a declared fact agreed upon by powers that be.

finding

n. the determination of a factual question vital (contributing) to a decision in a case by the trier of fact (jury or judge sitting without a jury) after a trial of a lawsuit, often referred to as findings of fact. A finding of fact is distinguished from a conclusion of law which is determined by the judge as the sole legal expert. Findings of fact and conclusions of law, need not be made if waived or not requested by the trial attorneys, leaving just the bare judgment in the case.

[EM_Vandaveer 2,408]

I got married 11 days after entry. And at the time there was no intent to stay. And obviously it is possible to adjust from VWP. Plenty of people do so successfully.

Edited November 24, 2012 by EM_Vandaveer

[MrsB2012 10]

My husband came under VWP in June, he had absolutely no intent to stay here longer than 3 weeks and here we are almost 6 months later, married and going through the AOS process. We got married about a week before his 90 day stay expired because up till that point he still hadn't made up his mind whether he was going to stay here & marry me or return home. Obviously I can't tell you yet if our case was successful because we're still waiting for our interview. However, my brother's sister in law did something similar to you- husband came here under VWP (btw- he came here with 3 huge suitcases, tons of money, no return ticket & ended up in secondary screening at POE & was questioned for 3 hours). They married a few days after he arrived here, files for AOS 30 days later and he had his GC in hand less than 4 months from submitting the application.

I know the stress and panic you're feeling because I felt it too initially. However, I honestly think you're overreacting. You guys will be fine. I've read a lot of accounts where it has never even come up in the interview. Relax, everything will be okay. Wishing the best for your daughter...

[VanessaTony 3,567]

No, you don't know the legal definition of the word "finding." A finding is not a guess or an assumption, it is a declared fact agreed upon by powers that be.

finding

n. the determination of a factual question vital (contributing) to a decision in a case by the trier of fact (jury or judge sitting without a jury) after a trial of a lawsuit, often referred to as findings of fact. A finding of fact is distinguished from a conclusion of law which is determined by the judge as the sole legal expert. Findings of fact and conclusions of law, need not be made if waived or not requested by the trial attorneys, leaving just the bare judgment in the case.

A "declared fact" is not the same as a known fact. A "finding" is a "determination", as your own definition states. A determination is based on whatever evidence they do or don't have. There would be no "finding" if the fact was known, it would simply be, fact.

Again, there is no point in arguing because we will never agree. I simply ask that you stop stating that people can go about declaring they they DID have intent and that there will be no penalties for doing such. You do not know this. You have no knowledge of this. We DO have evidence that intent can and has been used against people (whether known or assumed) so it is always better to err on the side of caution and not violate immigration law by entering with intent. The OP had no intent so none of this is relevant.

[ValerieA 350]

We DO have evidence that intent can and has been used against people (whether known or assumed)

Please provide links to this evidence...

Edited November 25, 2012 by ValerieA

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Please provide links to this evidence...

As i stated, . You are free to use Google. You are also free to use the search function on this site. You will find what you need.

**Edit - I will state it again. Intent is unlikely to be an issue for the OP, none exist for them and they have evidence of such which is why this is off topic.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Vanessa&Tony

[Moomin 292]

Now I have heard that USCIS reps have given false info before but it was a level 2 rep and when I called again Tues I asked a different women the same thing and she said "yes, he can adjust here, you do qualify"

The customer service reps know about as much about immigration as a customer service rep at Walmart knows about the process of making Walmarts own brand sausages. They are hired to provide basic information and that's it. So yes - they can provide you with info that's "their best guess", and the ones I like the most are the ones being honest and transferring you to either a tier 2, or refer to their webpage(or an infopass appointment).

I can't say you won't have to worry however, it is legal to AOS from WVP, otherwise the option would not be there. Personally, I'd advise you to focus more on the evidence you have together rather than the evidence of your spouse meant to leave. Because the evidence that'll demonstrate a bona fide relationship(along with the affidavit of support) is definitely asked for and will be crucial to your spouse getting a greencard.

And then I'd ask you to call the airline company where you spouse was meant to use. Either cancel ticket, or ask if the seat was given away to someone else when your husband did not show up. Usually, you can get a confirmation through email. It's not really crucial however sometimes the airlines mess up and forget to take the original name of the ticket/seat and it looks as if that person left the US. THat's a no-go when adjusting status. As I said, please focus on the relationship evidence and your daughter getting better, and don't let anyone give you nightmares about the process.

[ValerieA 350]

As i stated, . You are free to use Google. You are also free to use the search function on this site. You will find what you need.

**Edit - I will state it again. Intent is unlikely to be an issue for the OP, none exist for them and they have evidence of such which is why this is off topic.

And you keep declining to provide links to defend your stance, therefore I decline to believe you HAVE any proof, since I spend considerable time on this forum and have yet to see ONE case denied because of intent. You have made these statements, not me,, hence it is up to you to provide them.

[mymarriagejourney 113]

My husband came on a student F1 visa, went back home for 2 months due to some financial concerns, worked it all out, and returned on his F1 visa with the intent of starting classes the following week. We ended up getting engaged shortly after his arrival and married a month later. He delayed school due to the vast difference in tuition for international students versus domestic students.

None of our timing was even questioned during the interview. Considering that he came on an F1 visa and didn't go to school that semester, they could have questioned intent, and we were prepared to explain our decision process.

My husband comes from a country that is targeted for high fraud and we have some other red flag per USCIS' guidelines. We were approved and my husband will return to school this coming semester (at resident rates, thank goodness...).

I wouldn't worry. If your marriage is real, you will be approved.

[Moomin 292]

OP, disregard this because I still don't think it belongs in your topic. Please just click the report button by my/our names and ask a mod to split the topic if you like.

Please provide links to this evidence...

And you keep declining to provide links to defend your stance, therefore I decline to believe you HAVE any proof, since I spend considerable time on this forum and have yet to see ONE case denied because of intent. You have made these statements, not me,, hence it is up to you to provide them.

How about the Stokes interviews where couples randomly - or "randomly" - are interviewed when arriving on tourist visas, getting married and adjusting. Without any solid evidence present, USCIS only needs doubt to pull that off. And AOS from tourist visas result in an interview. However..

Denying the i485 without an interview and without any solid proof of immigrant intent is different(based on no proof of immigrant intent alone, and lack of proof). If this ( http://www.justice.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/lib_indecitnet.html ) is still up to date, it says what Jimvaphoung says especially in the last part of this post; http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/267632-aos-after-an-overstay-on-a-vwp/page__view__findpost__p__4101129 and in this post: http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/267632-aos-after-an-overstay-on-a-vwp/page__view__findpost__p__4101205

It's a risk of nano size because AOS through VWP isn't really a risk per se. But it is possible because VWP's can't appeal the decision.

Are you guys talking about actual people who's had their cases denied, or are you talking about the link ebove?

[ValerieA 350]

OP, disregard this because I still don't think it belongs in your topic. Please just click the report button by my/our names and ask a mod to split the topic if you like.

How about the Stokes interviews where couples randomly - or "randomly" - are interviewed when arriving on tourist visas, getting married and adjusting. Without any solid evidence present, USCIS only needs doubt to pull that off. And AOS from tourist visas result in an interview. However..

Denying the i485 without an interview and without any solid proof of immigrant intent is different(based on no proof of immigrant intent alone, and lack of proof). If this ( http://www.justice.g...indecitnet.html ) is still up to date, it says what Jimvaphoung says especially in the last part of this post; http://www.visajourn...ost__p__4101129 and in this post: http://www.visajourn...ost__p__4101205

It's a risk of nano size because AOS through VWP isn't really a risk per se. But it is possible because VWP's can't appeal the decision.

Are you guys talking about actual people who's had their cases denied, or are you talking about the link ebove?

Thanks for the links The first one just takes me to a DOJ index, and I am too sleepy and lazy to read through all the volumes contained there. What Jim said in the last two was the general consensus in 2010 around here, but we believe that may have been in error. All I am looking for is actual cases where someone got denied because they had intent. I haven't seen any on here, and there are a lot of people who come through this site. I would think that, in the 3 years I have been a member, I would have seen someone say "Hey, my AOS was denied because they said I had preconceived intent. How can I overcome this?".

You are right, this is a separate topic. However, we have this discussion around here every couple of months on someone's thread, it seems. It is relatively pointless now, because all we do is fight about it, with no resolution.

[ceadsearc 516]

There was a case here a few months back where someone has trouble because of intent. If I recall correctly they were here on an F-1, adjusting status, and during their interview the adjudicator determined that they thought the person had intent. I remember it because it was the first case I ever saw where intent was actually a problem.

That said, I honestly don't know how it ended up. I remember the person in question panicking but I don't know if they were actually denied. I'll try to find the link again to post it (on my phone now so not super easy). But, as I said, I am not sure they were actually denied over it or if the IO just scared them about it.

[ceadsearc 516]

Ah, here is the case I was thinking of. http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/345924-usc-married-f-1-student-and-applied-for-aos/

OP never updated so no idea how it ended up.

Anyway, I do not think the OP of this thread has anything to worry about.