Proposed to now fiance here on B2 visa

[SunflowerSweet 1,321]

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

I don’t know if they are common place. I know they occur. Such as http://myattorneyusa.com/uscis-and-the-3060-day-rule-and-the-effect-of-preconceived-intent-on-adjustment-of-status which has a long list.  I expect visajourney’s filters to delete the url so you will just have to do a search on google.  
 

I know when I had my AOS interview from my first marriage, I had left the USA for a family emergency and reentered the USA on my I-20 with clear immigration intent.  I was unaware of the rule.  My attorney went nuts.  
 

It didn’t come up during the interview but she prepared a statement for me to sign.  
 

Just how many marriage based green cards have you obtained for yourself or your spouse?

Imagine giving any attorney still talking about the “90 day rule” any sort of serious consideration. This is why the rumor keeps persisting and we see new threads popping up all the time about a rule that DOESN’T EXIST.
 

Yeaaaah your situation is entirely different to OP’s. You *did* leave and re-enter with intent, which is against the law. In this case the person came to visit, was proposed to while on this visit, and decided to stay. Completely legal, no issues.
 

In your case, you weren’t aware it was fraud, you weren’t stopped and turned away at POE, and it didn’t come up in your interview. You’re lawyer actually sounds rather competent. They had a healthy level of concern about the issue, correctly were alarmed that you entered with intent, had a method to be forthcoming in case it was asked about, but ultimately did not tell you AOS was no longer and option for you. We hear a lot of horrible attorney stories here, yours is not one.

 

Even though what you did by leaving and re-entering was “wrong”, even you weren’t hindered from adjusting it sounds like. OP has been correctly instructed that their fiancé should not do this. Nothing you said explains why you are trying to scare the OP into a lawyer.

 

Also, I know it wasn’t me that you asked, but since it’s apparently relevant I’ve helped file for and obtain hundreds of family-based visas, green cards, etc. The attorney I worked for was one of the good ones, too.

Edited February 20, 2020 by MorganandMichael

[DELETEME1234 208]

15 hours ago, Jorgedig said:

Not allowed.  B visas are for visiting, not working.

If we’re going to be pedantic then it must be said that there are plenty of exceptions that allow you to work or do employment related things on B visas; in particular the B-1 visa. If they got a combo visa (that states both options) or got admitted on the VWP as WB for that matter, then it remains the question if it’s legal or not. There are poorly classifiable exceptions like performing professional services in the US for a non US employer. Additionally it should be said that even though it shouldn’t be encouraged to work while not authorised since it’s still illegal, inadmissibility based on unauthorised work is waived for USC spouses, meaning that yes one shouldn’t work illegally but in a situation like this it shouldn’t case worry and it is advised to cease doing remote work. 

14 hours ago, Mike E said:

I would hire an attorney if for no other reason than to help craft a response to USCIS's likely accusation that she used her B2 with an intent to immigrate.

This would be literally throwing away money. USCIS will most likely not even wonder or ask about her state of mind while crossing the border, much less accuse her of anything close to that. USCIS is well aware that current precedent is that intent is determined at the border. The fact that she was let in means that her intent was not to immigrate. 

13 hours ago, MorganandMichael said:

Not sure about Trump, but there sure will be people who will push back on adjusting from a tourist visa, regardless if you are in the legal clear to do so. 
 

Not really sure what the hang up between “real visitors” and laptops is, both my husband and I brought our laptops on all of our visits. They are portable, being able to travel with them is almost intended. 

Honestly, it’s just crab mentality and typically it devolves into petty and pathetic levels.

 

First it is claimed that AOS isn’t possible or legal, then when someone comes along to point out that isn’t the case then they try to point out how impractical it is, often times not realising how insignificant most of it sounds vs. being away from your loved ones. Cue over exaggerating EAD processing times (e.g. average processing time is 4 months? Let’s just say 6-7 months) and statements like ‘I couldn’t imagine not working for 4 months, it would be career suicide’ as if to place oneself above the other in a moral sense.

And if all of that fails then we can always go with plainly getting petty which manifests by either giving the OP the third degree e.g. ‘No immigrant intent? If that’s so then how do you explain X, Y, Z?’ acting out the fantasy of being the IO during the interview, asking the questions they claim will be asked even though we, here on VJ, have yet to hear of a case in which the IO was even in the slightest concerned about intent when crossing the border or by making up arbitrary ‘tells’ like bringing your laptop with you. 

 

If all else fails and you are confronted about this, use emergency escape hatch by passive aggressively stating that you don’t care about some random person on the internet or by saying that you’ll sleep soundly knowing you did it the legal way and find a new AOS’er to start from the top. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

I don’t know if they are common place. I know they occur. Such as http://myattorneyusa.com/uscis-and-the-3060-day-rule-and-the-effect-of-preconceived-intent-on-adjustment-of-status which has a long list.  I expect visajourney’s filters to delete the url so you will just have to do a search on google.  
 

I know when I had my AOS interview from my first marriage, I had left the USA for a family emergency and reentered the USA on my I-20 with clear immigration intent.  I was unaware of the rule.  My attorney went nuts.  
 

It didn’t come up during the interview but she prepared a statement for me to sign.  
 

Just how many marriage based green cards have you obtained for yourself or your spouse?
 

 

To prove you’re point you post a link to a blogpost that describes in length the ‘30-60-90 day rule’, something that has been debunked on VJ ad nauseam by now. As for the list of cases the author quotes a lot of them are irrelevant, outdated, or otherwise not indicative of USCIS’s adjudication practices. 

 

If you frequent VJ it might also be known to you that for reasons beyond my comprehension, a lot of immigration attorneys are not very knowledgable in their field of expertise. 

 

What makes me chuckle is that you say ‘My attorney went nuts’ and immediately after that you say ‘It didn’t come up during the interview[…]’ and do so without realising the incongruity between the two events. 

 

That’s not to say that I’d advise people to leave the country sans AP while awaiting AOS but that’s for different reasons. Fact of the matter is anyone can try to be admitted into the country with the intent to marry an USC and adjust their status. Once they are allowed in there is practically nothing stopping them. The CBP officer determines your intent and that is a legal necessity since as of yet we cannot read minds. The only exception is if you make it blatantly clear you had different intentions, say… an instagram post with your ‘Good luck in America party’ and to drive home the point for good measure add some screenshots in your AOS packet perhaps. And even then I wonder if the IO wouldn’t just rather find a different reason to deny to prevent all the ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ that are tied to intent. 

 

To be clear (and comply with VJ ToS) this is not legal. The issue is however that it pertains to thoughts in one’s mind so it’s very hard to prove and a lot of people will try to be admitted to adjust their status. I can’t blame them (this is opinion, doesn’t change legality) if I’m honest. 

 

Being with your spouse, middle of the road in terms of fees, interview and adjudication by USCIS and ‘doable processing time’ vs. being away from your spouse, potentially most expensive costs-wise, final decision by consular officer who seem biased to deny in certain places, some of the longest processing times. When looked at it from that perspective, I can see why people might be inclined to choose the former.

 

I’m grateful the AOS process was available in our situation due to how things developed, but I sympathise with the ones that didn’t happen to find themselves in my situation.  

[Boiler 45,525]

I still think 6 months is reasonable when looking at EAD, we are of course guessing and they could prioritise it and it becomes no longer be an issue, nothing to suggest that will happen.

 

Now that does make the expedite option much more relevant and many on here seem to have success, just not something you can assume.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Boiler

[DELETEME1234 208]

59 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I still think 6 months is reasonable when looking at EAD, we are of course guessing and they could prioritise it and it becomes no longer be an issue, nothing to suggest that will happen.

 

Now that does make the expedite option much more relevant and many on here seem to have success, just not something you can assume.

Meh… the USCIS guideline is that they try to adjudicate within 90 days, admittedly that hasn’t happened for a while but if we then go and see the different estimates from different sources then we find that the Lawfully app estimates between 3-4 months based on historical data from their users, VJ (which prides itself to be more accurate than USCIS) indicates 4 months (both based on my timeline for example as well as currently processed NOA PD), USCIS itself indicated 4 months last I checked as well.

 

Now obviously these are not guarantees and it does not, like you said, take into account expedite requests (although by now it kinda seems part of the standard procedure here to ask for an expedite), but it feels disingenuous to state 6 months or more when most estimates point towards a more expeditious timeframe. On top of that, and that is the actual core of the criticism, often times these timeframes are not stated to inform, but to discourage. And the discouragement is not done in the best interest of OP but because of a misguided crab mentality.  

 

The other day I came across a post in which people where advising OP to send back their fiancé after proposal, to get a K-1 visa even though they were ready to get married then and there. That’s just borderline malicious..   

[Boiler 45,525]

My assumption of 6 months is based on those I have seen of late who have posted their actual dates for normal processing. I have no idea how many successful expedites there are, just that now they seem common compared to being unusual.

 

So if the 4 months includes expedited cases, my 6 months does not, we may agree. Or to within a margin that does not matter. I have certainly seen comments that suggest there has been a significant increase in expedites, which presumably impacts normal processing.

 

You will see some weird comments, all you can do is correct them, they are entitled to their opinions per the VJ ToS, my Bible.

[SunflowerSweet 1,321]

7 minutes ago, Poseidon1212 said:

Meh… the USCIS guideline is that they try to adjudicate within 90 days, admittedly that hasn’t happened for a while but if we then go and see the different estimates from different sources then we find that the Lawfully app estimates between 3-4 months based on historical data from their users, VJ (which prides itself to be more accurate than USCIS) indicates 4 months (both based on my timeline for example as well as currently processed NOA PD), USCIS itself indicated 4 months last I checked as well.

 

Now obviously these are not guarantees and it does not, like you said, take into account expedite requests (although by now it kinda seems part of the standard procedure here to ask for an expedite), but it feels disingenuous to state 6 months or more when most estimates point towards a more expeditious timeframe. On top of that, and that is the actual core of the criticism, often times these timeframes are not stated to inform, but to discourage. And the discouragement is not done in the best interest of OP but because of a misguided crab mentality.  

 

The other day I came across a post in which people where advising OP to send back their fiancé after proposal, to get a K-1 visa even though they were ready to get married then and there. That’s just borderline malicious..   

I’ve pointed out in multiple threads over the years that giving misleading (even flat out false) advice based on your moral stance on a certain issue is just all kinds of dirty. I certainly wish it was cracked down on more because I see it happening almost daily. Thankfully there are usually enough other voices to correct over the few, but the fact that it keeps happening at all is discouraging. 
 

I pointed this out in another thread once and it ended with a vaguely threatening “I hope you never get cancer” and me getting suspended for 24 hours. I’m a little gun-shy now because that goes on my permanent account record, where giving false advice doesn’t seem to follow anyone as seriously. 

[Boiler 45,525]

3 minutes ago, MorganandMichael said:

I’ve pointed out in multiple threads over the years that giving misleading (even flat out false) advice based on your moral stance on a certain issue is just all kinds of dirty. I certainly wish it was cracked down on more because I see it happening almost daily. Thankfully there are usually enough other voices to correct over the few, but the fact that it keeps happening at all is discouraging. 
 

I pointed this out in another thread once and it ended with a vaguely threatening “I hope you never get cancer” and me getting suspended for 24 hours. I’m a little gun-shy now because that goes on my permanent account record, where giving false advice doesn’t seem to follow anyone as seriously. 

If you have not been on a VJ Holiday you have not been trying! 

 

24 hours I think is the minimum.

 

No penalties I am aware of for misinformation. Obviously there are cases where we can get it wrong and even the common stuff sometimes is commented on by people who no clue and is effectively a guess or an assumption as opposed to more annoying stuff.

 

[DELETEME1234 208]

12 minutes ago, MorganandMichael said:

I’ve pointed out in multiple threads over the years that giving misleading (even flat out false) advice based on your moral stance on a certain issue is just all kinds of dirty. I certainly wish it was cracked down on more because I see it happening almost daily. Thankfully there are usually enough other voices to correct over the few, but the fact that it keeps happening at all is discouraging. 
 

I pointed this out in another thread once and it ended with a vaguely threatening “I hope you never get cancer” and me getting suspended for 24 hours. I’m a little gun-shy now because that goes on my permanent account record, where giving false advice doesn’t seem to follow anyone as seriously. 

I feel that the reason for that is a significant amount of people who are part of the mod team agree with said moral stances and as such are ok with that level of misinformation, if not actively do it themselves. 

 

Your experience sounds beyond what I expected, yet it does not surprise me if I’m honest. 

 

Tied to these observations, I can speak from my own experience that it causes people to forego on asking questions. I for example won’t post questions regarding my own situation because I’ve got no appetite for micro aggressions or passive aggressive nonsense. Instead I scour through hundreds of topics to find similar cases and distill from that what I can. I feel there might be more people, in particular AOS people or people that undergo certain life events that might elect not to ask advise because of how they see others being treated. 

 

Either way, we’re moving more and more away from the topic at hand and wouldn’t wanna get a slap on the wrist for being off topic

[Tjg312 14]

Hey guys,

Late to respond but I wanted to say thank you to everyone who posted, even to the people knocking on using AOS in our situation🙄 We are going to go ahead and get married in Hawaii and come back home and file for an AOS

Can't wait to get the ball rolling on this and looking forward to using all the amazing resources on this site!

[Tjg312 14]

So just wanted to give an update... we got married in Hawaii on 3/20 and FINALLY finished our AOS packet and shipped it out on 5/1.

I just receieved notification last night of my card being charged for the fees for the AOS packet. So let the journey begin I guess

 

Thanks for everyone for their advice. I was worried about the i-944... we couldn't get her diplomas certified by that website since they haven't been sent from Spain yet, but it appears the photocopies without certification seemed to have passed.. hopefully!