B1/B2 Visa

[russ 1]

As the saying goes, it takes 2 to tango. Somehow I don't think this whole marriage thing is going to be news to her.

I don't think the law cares on this point. She could meet and marry someone else entirely once here. There could be dozens of people that want to marry you (for purpose of argument, let's say you are a famous model with lots of admirers). What other people want or intend isn't relevant.

Most normal people talk about marriage for years before actually deciding to do so (or not in many cases). Says nothing about intent. Also, the assumptions made by USCIS are not the law, just the guidelines they use. What would actually happen in court with an immigration judge is often a different thing.

Sat, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe even if you intend to get married in the US at the time of entry, you aren't breaking the law. Intending to adjust status (having immigrant intent) is the key here.

Or lets say you are already married and visit the US on a B visa. (This is a common situation for American expats). If you intend to adjust status when you arrive, you are breaking the rules. If you decide not to return home after vacationing for a few months, you are probably not.

[mox 298]

I don't think the law cares on this point. She could meet and marry someone else entirely once here. There could be dozens of people that want to marry you (for purpose of argument, let's say you are a famous model with lots of admirers). What other people want or intend isn't relevant.

Let's not split hairs here, because the USCIS sure isn't going to. What we're talking about is the intent for this specific woman to marry this specific man. IF she is entering the country with immigrant intention--and let's face it, if they've already decided to marry then she's already decided to immigrate--then she is entering fraudulently on the B1/B2, even if she also happens to be entering on her Visa for the stated reason.

Most normal people talk about marriage for years before actually deciding to do so (or not in many cases). Says nothing about intent. Also, the assumptions made by USCIS are not the law, just the guidelines they use. What would actually happen in court with an immigration judge is often a different thing.

Which is why I am suggesting that IF there is intent to marry (and it sounds to me like there is) the K-1 is the better--no, ONLY--way to go. It removes all doubt, and you don't have to hinge your future on what a court decides.

Sat, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe even if you intend to get married in the US at the time of entry, you aren't breaking the law. Intending to adjust status (having immigrant intent) is the key here.

Assuming you are correct, let's be realistic. Someone who is entering the United States with the intent to marry is about 99% likely to have immigrant intent. And in this specific example, it would be more like 100%.

Or lets say you are already married and visit the US on a B visa. (This is a common situation for American expats). If you intend to adjust status when you arrive, you are breaking the rules. If you decide not to return home after vacationing for a few months, you are probably not.

But that's not what this specific case is about. This specific case is about an unmarried couple who SEEM to be trying to make a decision as to the best way to go about getting married in the United States. If that is indeed the case, then the K-1 (or K-3 if he wants to travel) is the best way to ensure that there aren't problems later that could potentially ruin at least one of their lives.

And again, I apologize to the OP if I'm wrong about this. It seems that the OP wants to use technicalities like not being "technically" engaged as some sort of plausible deniability in case things turn south. I just think that's a bad way to go.

[Fettman 0]

I don't think the law cares on this point. She could meet and marry someone else entirely once here. There could be dozens of people that want to marry you (for purpose of argument, let's say you are a famous model with lots of admirers). What other people want or intend isn't relevant.

Let's not split hairs here, because the USCIS sure isn't going to. What we're talking about is the intent for this specific woman to marry this specific man. IF she is entering the country with immigrant intention--and let's face it, if they've already decided to marry then she's already decided to immigrate--then she is entering fraudulently on the B1/B2, even if she also happens to be entering on her Visa for the stated reason.

Most normal people talk about marriage for years before actually deciding to do so (or not in many cases). Says nothing about intent. Also, the assumptions made by USCIS are not the law, just the guidelines they use. What would actually happen in court with an immigration judge is often a different thing.

Which is why I am suggesting that IF there is intent to marry (and it sounds to me like there is) the K-1 is the better--no, ONLY--way to go. It removes all doubt, and you don't have to hinge your future on what a court decides.

Sat, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe even if you intend to get married in the US at the time of entry, you aren't breaking the law. Intending to adjust status (having immigrant intent) is the key here.

Assuming you are correct, let's be realistic. Someone who is entering the United States with the intent to marry is about 99% likely to have immigrant intent. And in this specific example, it would be more like 100%.

Or lets say you are already married and visit the US on a B visa. (This is a common situation for American expats). If you intend to adjust status when you arrive, you are breaking the rules. If you decide not to return home after vacationing for a few months, you are probably not.

But that's not what this specific case is about. This specific case is about an unmarried couple who SEEM to be trying to make a decision as to the best way to go about getting married in the United States. If that is indeed the case, then the K-1 (or K-3 if he wants to travel) is the best way to ensure that there aren't problems later that could potentially ruin at least one of their lives.

And again, I apologize to the OP if I'm wrong about this. It seems that the OP wants to use technicalities like not being "technically" engaged as some sort of plausible deniability in case things turn south. I just think that's a bad way to go.

I am more in agreement with you about the K-1 issue. My original question was asked out of total ignorance. In fact I was more interested to see if she could just come here to visit while the K-1 was being processed. The answer to that was pretty much no, even with an existing visa (if I understood Sat right). I have no desire to risk our futures to make something easier or because it is cheaper. However, I am not going to be the "good boy" and do the right thing just because it is the right thing. The government makes nothing easy for most of us and some of that for good reason, but other times not so much. In the end I do not want to have to worry that some evidence or something will come up "proving" that we committed fraud. Plus, I would like her to be able to go visit her family and such as soon as she can. As I said before we both more prepared for the K-1 visa than for some sort of crazy system of trying to use a loophole. She needs time in Russia to prepare to move her and I need time here to prepare for her arrive.

Yes, I am looking for the "best deal" to get out of the system. I do hope you are coming down on me like this because you are a genuinely nice person and not because you like to judge people. I came asking a question, options were offered and I explored all sides of the matter before coming to a decision. I appreciate the frankness from everyone on their thoughts and ideas. For now, I think the K-1 visa is the "best deal". I believe all of life should be about minimizing risks, but at the same time I weigh them to make decisions. I still believe they would have a hard time proving intent, but in this case why tempt fate just so I can save a few hundred bucks. And when it comes to technicalities I believe many people get caught and released on them. I am sure we all "technically" break the law everyday.

I have no hard feelings toward anyone (looks at Moxcamel ) I truly appreciate the honest feedback. I understand this is not legal advice and I would hardly take what is said here to be the same as what an immigration lawyer can tell me. So, with that issue out of the way I suppose her chances of being able to visit me are slim to none after I have submitted my application?

Plus I wanted to be able to propose to her in Vienna in two weeks . I have to take advantage of such things

[mox 298]

Yes, I am looking for the "best deal" to get out of the system. I do hope you are coming down on me like this because you are a genuinely nice person and not because you like to judge people.

I hope I didn't sound like I was "coming down" on you. I just think you're entitled to hear the blunt and honest truth, which is sometimes (often?) different than the things we want to hear. I'm definitely not judging you. Just calling it as I see it.

Plus I wanted to be able to propose to her in Vienna in two weeks . I have to take advantage of such things

Not to beat a dead horse, but this pretty much seals it for you that the K-1 or K-3 is the only way to go.

Best of luck to you, I wish you both well! Do stick around and keep us all up to date on your progress. This is a very supportive community, and you'll want all the support you can get.

[Fettman 0]

Yes, I am looking for the "best deal" to get out of the system. I do hope you are coming down on me like this because you are a genuinely nice person and not because you like to judge people.

I hope I didn't sound like I was "coming down" on you. I just think you're entitled to hear the blunt and honest truth, which is sometimes (often?) different than the things we want to hear. I'm definitely not judging you. Just calling it as I see it.

Plus I wanted to be able to propose to her in Vienna in two weeks . I have to take advantage of such things

Not to beat a dead horse, but this pretty much seals it for you that the K-1 or K-3 is the only way to go.

Best of luck to you, I wish you both well! Do stick around and keep us all up to date on your progress. This is a very supportive community, and you'll want all the support you can get.

*insert some contrary statement about technicalities and intent*

I was not looking to hear anything really except what my options are. As I said, I have resigned myself to the K-1 process a while ago and in fact have it all ready to go, just have to wait until after her interview.

*kicks the dead horse a few more time*

If someone wants to put a few more bullets in its head be my guest

I plan on sticking around at least until everything is said and done. So far most of the people I have met here have been really nice and informative, except for that Moxcamel person

[mox 298]

So far most of the people I have met here have been really nice and informative, except for that Moxcamel person

He really is a jerk. No idea what his girl sees in him.

[Satellite 1]

Sat, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe even if you intend to get married in the US at the time of entry, you aren't breaking the law. Intending to adjust status (having immigrant intent) is the key here.

You are correct. In theory, some people use a B2 visa to marry in the US and then the US spouse returns abroad! Later that same couple again come to the US to visit. Mostly a European thing involving Americans living abroad.

As for coming here on B visa while the I-129F is pending simply requires luck and extra proof of intent to return to Russia. Being denied doesn't cost you anything unless you lie once interrogated by the POE, if it even comes to that. However, you do lose out an a plane ticket if you are sent home and you can be detained for many hours. Otherwise it won't really hurt your pending K1 visa.

[Fettman 0]

Sat, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe even if you intend to get married in the US at the time of entry, you aren't breaking the law. Intending to adjust status (having immigrant intent) is the key here.

You are correct. In theory, some people use a B2 visa to marry in the US and then the US spouse returns abroad! Later that same couple again come to the US to visit. Mostly a European thing involving Americans living abroad.

As for coming here on B visa while the I-129F is pending simply requires luck and extra proof of intent to return to Russia. Being denied doesn't cost you anything unless you lie once interrogated by the POE, if it even comes to that. However, you do lose out an a plane ticket if you are sent home and you can be detained for many hours. Otherwise it won't really hurt your pending K1 visa.

Well, we are thinking now to postpone apply for the K-1 so she can visit in January, meet my folks and see some of my America. (Orlando is hardly the same as Virginia). Now that she has the visa does she have to show an invitation or something when she arrives? I guess I am in the dark about what the POE will require from her, if anything. Any advice about that would be appreciated.

[Satellite 1]

Now that she has the visa does she have to show an invitation or something when she arrives? I guess I am in the dark about what the POE will require from her, if anything. Any advice about that would be appreciated.

Have her bring everything pertaining to the job interview. That is usually more than enough. Have her NOT mention you or any of her plans after the interview if any. Find out how much it costs to change tickets. If they ask to see return tickets, it will be wise that when she says she is returning right after the interview that her tickets say the same thing. Once you are in you can do so many things here. For example file for extension of status. Change to another non-immigrant status, change to immigrant status, appeal if necessary. File for asylum if necessary, Jewish folks, political folks against Putin, and other non-main stream believers are again being granted! And all of this is done while you are here in the US. It's a great system once you are in the door. Others will also recommend she bring some documents showing she is wanted back at her school, home, and has commitments she'd want to return to. Keep in mind most of this might not be necessary at all. Depends on the POE officer you get.

[slim 1,525]

It seems that the OP wants to use technicalities like not being "technically" engaged as some sort of plausible deniability in case things turn south.

Why not? The current administration uses technicalities like "high-level, reliable inteligence data" and "extraordinary rendition" all the time to explain daily SNAFUs.

Surely you could prove or disprove just about anything you wanted to using their own jargon against them. Something as simple as an intention to marry cannot be proven until there's actually documented evidence. A paper trail must be submitted. There must be a K-1 visa applied for, a marriage license, something of that nature with an approved governmental representative's signature on it or else it's just not real.

I had every intention of marrying Salma Hayek and Mariah Carey in a joint ceremony while I was in high school. Did that make them my fiancees?

As my boss at work says...... "If it aint on DVD, then it aint me."

And back on topic, this is kind of what seems to happen more than it needs to on this forum; we look at everything from the American perspective, from our side looking through the govt. to the impending visitor or immigrant. We must prove or disprove ourselves (and our S/Os) through valid evidence and, in turn, have plausible deniability of any suspected or possible wrong-doing. Guys, keep in mind, you're simply trying to get someone you love to come be with you in the smoothest and most efficient manner possible. That's all. It's not like you invaded a sovereign nation, toppled their government and then started a civil war or anything based on faulty "high-level, reliable inteligence data". Gosh, now that would be extraordinary.

[mox 298]

It seems that the OP wants to use technicalities like not being "technically" engaged as some sort of plausible deniability in case things turn south.

Why not? The current administration uses technicalities like "high-level, reliable inteligence data" and "extraordinary rendition" all the time to explain daily SNAFUs.

And look how well that's worked for them. And besides, I hold myself to a higher standard than our government.

Surely you could prove or disprove just about anything you wanted to using their own jargon against them. Something as simple as an intention to marry cannot be proven until there's actually documented evidence. A paper trail must be submitted. There must be a K-1 visa applied for, a marriage license, something of that nature with an approved governmental representative's signature on it or else it's just not real.

Unfortunately the government is much better at playing their game than we are. Yes you could use all kinds of technicalities and jargon and what-have-you, and maybe you could even get a court to side with you after a lengthy and expensive trial. Or not. But why take that chance?

I had every intention of marrying Salma Hayek and Mariah Carey in a joint ceremony while I was in high school. Did that make them my fiancees?

As I said, it takes two to tango.

And back on topic, this is kind of what seems to happen more than it needs to on this forum; we look at everything from the American perspective, from our side looking through the govt. to the impending visitor or immigrant. We must prove or disprove ourselves (and our S/Os) through valid evidence and, in turn, have plausible deniability of any suspected or possible wrong-doing. Guys, keep in mind, you're simply trying to get someone you love to come be with you in the smoothest and most efficient manner possible. That's all. It's not like you invaded a sovereign nation, toppled their government and then started a civil war or anything based on faulty "high-level, reliable inteligence data". Gosh, now that would be extraordinary.

I think giving advice on how to "beat" the system is just inviting trouble, and the problem with that is that it's not us who have to live with the consequences. I can't even imagine how heartbreaking it would be for the OP's fiancee to be not only turned away but denied entry for years because they mis-used the B1/B2 Visa.

Giving advice on how to work within the system, and even (legally) exploit weaknesses in the system that can be used to our advantage (such as the "RFE trick") is much more responsible and more likely to result in a happy reunion. Trying to exploit the system might be faster, and may even work 90% (made up statistic) of the time, but the stakes are just much too high.

[Satellite 1]

I think giving advice on how to "beat" the system is just inviting trouble, and the problem with that is that it's not us who have to live with the consequences. I can't even imagine how heartbreaking it would be for the OP's fiancée to be not only turned away but denied entry for years because they mis-used the B1/B2 Visa.

IF you get denied entry on a B1/B2 because you are inadmissible because you really need a K1 visa (suppose somehow the POE officer figured it out) that does not bar you from getting a K1 in the future nor does it put any kind of barrier.

Instead you are probably thinking of potential problems with AOS. Guess, what, you are in the US and together when you appeal or have troubles with this step. A big victory in my opinion.

Giving advice on how to work within the system, and even (legally) exploit weaknesses in the system that can be used to our advantage (such as the "RFE trick") is much more responsible and more likely to result in a happy reunion. Trying to exploit the system might be faster, and may even work 90% (made up statistic) of the time, but the stakes are just much too high.

Let's not forget that adjusting status from B1/B2 is NOT illegal.

[mox 298]

Giving advice on how to work within the system, and even (legally) exploit weaknesses in the system that can be used to our advantage (such as the "RFE trick") is much more responsible and more likely to result in a happy reunion. Trying to exploit the system might be faster, and may even work 90% (made up statistic) of the time, but the stakes are just much too high.

Let's not forget that adjusting status from B1/B2 is NOT illegal.

Entering on a B1/B2 with intent to marry is though.

[Satellite 1]

Entering on a B1/B2 with intent to marry is though.

Nope, that is legal too. Only entering with the intent to adjust status from a B1/B2 is illegal. A lot of things happen in Vegas as a tourist that you wished stayed in Vegas

[russ 1]

Entering on a B1/B2 with intent to marry is though.

Not true.