AOS in Detroit - from Tourst visa

[aaron2020 11,651]

Your lawyer gave you out-dated information.

Under Matter of Battista and Matter of Cavazos, USCIS can not deny the AOS of an Immediate Relative of a USC for having the preconceived intent to immigrate.

The 30/60/90 presumption of immigrant intent is irrelevant for IR of a USC since preconceived intent to immigrate is not a factor that USCIS can use.

[Penguin_ie 5,993]

**** Mod note: the arguing stops here. if you have advice directly relevant to the Op;'s question, feel free to post. If you want to argue the 30/60/90 thing or case law, take it to a separate thread in General Immigration. ******

[Cheezees 1,514]

Yes, the lawyer is misinformed. It happens. Even if intent is discovered AFTER the immigrant becomes an immediate relative, the AOS cannot be denied. And in the OP's case, this is irrelevant. Please let your lawyer know the precedent that USCIS follows Per Matter of Cavazos, etc.

[EM_Vandaveer 2,408]

Not the first and not the last time that somebody's lawyer gave them completely wrong information.

[Pitaya 2,577]

~One argumentative thread removed, and other admin action taking for defying moderator's explicit directive~

Pitaya

VJ Moderation

[nkgeicher 8]

Thanks to all of you to give such a comprehensive and convincing inputs.

I am thankful to the mangers of VJ also for providing this wonderful platform to people to share their knowledge with others.

I am more confident now to apply for AOS of my wife!!!

[Cheezees 1,514]

Thanks to all of you to give such a comprehensive and convincing inputs.

I am thankful to the mangers of VJ also for providing this wonderful platform to people to share their knowledge with others.

I am more confident now to apply for AOS of my wife!!!

Yes. You have no worries!

[aaron2020 11,651]

Best of luck. Your wife adjusting status from entering on a visitor visa will not cause any problems.

[Shauneg 762]

Best wishes.

[Cathi 5,748]

Boiler makes 3 long time posters vs. you.

Include me-4 long time posters vs him.

OP you will be fine. Good luck!

Edited July 11, 2016 by mimolicious

[EM_Vandaveer 2,408]

On 7/10/2016 at 10:54 PM, eric1225 said:

Aren't you contradicting yourself in this sentence? What's short relationship? It's when you fall into the 30/60 guidance rules. Thus, it does have something to do with the 30/60 rules, in another word, short relationship, USCIS wants to make sure and investigate more the marriage is bona fide. I mean, they need to make sure every marriage is bona fide. But you will just be more likely to be picked up as the red flag case because you fall into their guidance.

Ok, so I adjusted from VWP. My intent was NEVER questioned, even though we were practically engaged when I entered. I did say "boyfriend".

We met in April.

We entered the US 13 June, got married 24 June.

Our short courtship was quickly questioned at interview.

We said we just KNEW.

My husband had a divorce *between wedding & divorce being final, less than a year elapsed* so he was asked about that. Youthful mistake, crazy ex.

That was it.

Intent was never mentioned.

Intent for all intent and purposes, is determined at POE.

Unless one commits misrepresentation, one wont be questioned on it @ interview....

 

 

Edit: Sorry, I completely forgot about and only saw the mod's post AFTER I posted this. Since it contains anecdote from our interview someone might find helpful, I will leave it here.

Mods, feel free to edit or delete.

Edited March 11, 2020 by EM_Vandaveer