K1 visa

[GreatDane 366]

8 minutes ago, Itsmheetina said:

 

Hello 

but everyday we have a communication calls and messages and also we have a lot of proof that our relationship is still ongoing and still strong even not seeing for 6 years because he waited  to be a us citizen, that’s why he didn’t get a chance to travel to meet me 

13 years living together and have 3 children is not yet considered by USCIS? 

Thank you 

There is no way around it. He could have visited you during the six years where he waited to be a citizen. Not liking the answer does not change it. The only way he can apply is if either you visit him or if he sees you. The rest is considered after you meet the basic filing requirements to evaluate your petition.

[mushroomspore 3,044]

14 minutes ago, Itsmheetina said:

Hello 

yes i know but i am still looking for other idea or answers to my question.

if my post disturb you 

sorry for that, but this is very important for me

 

thanks 

Well that was my point. You already asked and you're not getting a different answer. This is a legal situation you're asking about. The legal requirement for K1 is that you must have met in person face-to-face within 2 years. All applicants must obey this requirement or else you will be denied. There's nothing else to discuss.

[mlh 93]

He also could have come back and married you at any time during those 6 years, and even being a LPR, he could have filed to bring you to the US as a spouse and that would have taken 2 years instead of the ~12-15 months that it takes a USC to petition their spouse, and you could have been here a few years already.

 

As mentioned above, you won't get a different answer here since it is a requirement of a K-1 to meet in the previous 2 years.

[Dee elle 1,368]

28 minutes ago, Itsmheetina said:

 

Hello 

but everyday we have a communication calls and messages and also we have a lot of proof that our relationship is still ongoing and still strong even not seeing for 6 years because he waited  to be a us citizen, that’s why he didn’t get a chance to travel to meet me 

13 years living together and have 3 children is not yet considered by USCIS? 

Thank you 

You must have evidence of your relationship which MUST include personal visit within 2 years 

He could have married you when he became an LPR and you would have been able to be in the US 2 years later. 

[Dee elle 1,368]

31 minutes ago, Itsmheetina said:

Hello 

yes i know but i am still looking for other idea or answers to my question.

if my post disturb you 

sorry for that, but this is very important for me

 

thanks 

There are no other ideas or options. 

[Going through 5,671]

47 minutes ago, Itsmheetina said:

 

Hello 

but everyday we have a communication calls and messages and also we have a lot of proof that our relationship is still ongoing and still strong even not seeing for 6 years because he waited  to be a us citizen, that’s why he didn’t get a chance to travel to meet me 

13 years living together and have 3 children is not yet considered by USCIS? 

Thank you 

Doesn't matter.  

You have to meet the basic K1 requirement of physically seeing each other within the last 2 years before filing.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Going through
clarification of one sentence.

[Mimicherie 142]

Why can’t he go see you? I mean you’re the mother of his 3 kids. Surely he’s within status to travel. I don’t get what’s the problem with him paying you a visit. Also, if his kids are under 18, they automatically get to become US Citizens under their US citizen parent, so they all can go see you and it can be a little family reunion.

[geowrian 22,338]

Very strange...why hasn't he visited you or married you since coming to the US in 2012? That's a very, very long time apart...barring a very good reason, this will raise a huge red flag to anybody looking at the case.

 

There are exemptions to the 2 year meeting requirement, but these are extremely difficult to obtain and not one I suggest pursuing except in very, very specific and limited cases. Other than that, you MUST have met withing 2 years. This is a requirement by law (IMBRA), not something they can overlook because you have an ongoing relationship or lived together previously.

Even if you do meet once, I would expect some questions regarding why you didn't do so, marry, etc. for such a long period of time. Not judging here, but this is highly unusual and will likely raise questions with the CO.

 

1 hour ago, gsdc23 said:

Why can’t he go see you? I mean you’re the mother of his 3 kids. Surely he’s within status to travel. I don’t get what’s the problem with him paying you a visit. Also, if his kids are under 18, they automatically get to become US Citizens under their US citizen parent, so they all can go see you and it can be a little family reunion.

The kids aren't citizens until they enter the US as immigrants (i.e. via a CR-2 visa or K-2 then complete AOS). Specific issues noted in bold below.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-parents

"Children of U.S. Citizens Residing in the United States

Children who were born outside the U.S. but now live in the U.S. may acquire citizenship under Section 320 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). A child born outside of the United States automatically becomes a U.S. citizen when all of the following conditions have been met on or after Feb. 27, 2001: 

• The child has at least one parent, including an adoptive parent, who is a U.S. citizen by birth or through naturalization;
• The child is under 18 years of age;
• The child is a lawful permanent resident (LPR); and
• The child is residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the U.S. citizen parent. "

 

and

 

"Children of U.S. Citizens Residing Outside the United States

Children residing outside of the United States may obtain citizenship under Section 322 of the INA. A child who regularly resides outside of the United States is eligible for naturalization if all of the following conditions have been met:

• The child has at least one parent, including an adoptive parent, who is a U.S. citizen by birth or through naturalization; 
• The child’s U.S. citizen parent or U.S. citizen grandparent meets certain physical presence requirements in the United States or an outlying possession;  
• The child is under 18 years of age;
• The child is residing outside of the United States in the legal and physical custody of the U.S. citizen parent, or of a person who does not object to the application if the U.S. citizen parent is deceased; and
• The child is lawfully admitted, physically present, and maintaining a lawful status in the United States at the time the application is approved and the time of naturalization."

Edited August 8, 2018 by geowrian

[Mimicherie 142]

2 hours ago, geowrian said:

Very strange...why hasn't he visited you or married you since coming to the US in 2012? That's a very, very long time apart...barring a very good reason, this will raise a huge red flag to anybody looking at the case.

 

There are exemptions to the 2 year meeting requirement, but these are extremely difficult to obtain and not one I suggest pursuing except in very, very specific and limited cases. Other than that, you MUST have met withing 2 years. This is a requirement by law (IMBRA), not something they can overlook because you have an ongoing relationship or lived together previously.

Even if you do meet once, I would expect some questions regarding why you didn't do so, marry, etc. for such a long period of time. Not judging here, but this is highly unusual and will likely raise questions with the CO.

 

The kids aren't citizens until they enter the US as immigrants (i.e. via a CR-2 visa or K-2 then complete AOS). Specific issues noted in bold below.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-parents

"Children of U.S. Citizens Residing in the United States

Children who were born outside the U.S. but now live in the U.S. may acquire citizenship under Section 320 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). A child born outside of the United States automatically becomes a U.S. citizen when all of the following conditions have been met on or after Feb. 27, 2001: 

• The child has at least one parent, including an adoptive parent, who is a U.S. citizen by birth or through naturalization;
• The child is under 18 years of age;
• The child is a lawful permanent resident (LPR); and
• The child is residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the U.S. citizen parent. "

 

and

 

"Children of U.S. Citizens Residing Outside the United States

Children residing outside of the United States may obtain citizenship under Section 322 of the INA. A child who regularly resides outside of the United States is eligible for naturalization if all of the following conditions have been met:

• The child has at least one parent, including an adoptive parent, who is a U.S. citizen by birth or through naturalization; 
• The child’s U.S. citizen parent or U.S. citizen grandparent meets certain physical presence requirements in the United States or an outlying possession;  
• The child is under 18 years of age;
• The child is residing outside of the United States in the legal and physical custody of the U.S. citizen parent, or of a person who does not object to the application if the U.S. citizen parent is deceased; and
• The child is lawfully admitted, physically present, and maintaining a lawful status in the United States at the time the application is approved and the time of naturalization."

Hm, well I thought I read in her post that all the children came into the US with the father when the mother filed. Now that he is going under naturalization, if he’s approved/granted citizenship, his children can as well since they’re in the States, but I guess laws have changed since I became a citizen under my immigrant, turned citizen parents. 

[Ontarkie 14,557]

~~Duplicate threads merged. Do not start more then one thread for the same or related topic.~~

[geowrian 22,338]

10 minutes ago, gsdc23 said:

Hm, well I thought I read in her post that all the children came into the US with the father when the mother filed. Now that he is going under naturalization, if he’s approved/granted citizenship, his children can as well since they’re in the States, but I guess laws have changed since I became a citizen under my immigrant, turned citizen parents. 

If they came as immigrants (i.e. it was an F2B category and they were derivatives at the time), then the children would derive citizenship when he did. I'm not 100% sure that's the case here or not...a re-reading suggests it might me.