Jump to content

pushbrk

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    40,344

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    55

pushbrk last won the day on November 15

pushbrk had the most liked content!

88 Followers

See all followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • City
    Dumaguete

Immigration Info

  • Immigration Status
    Other
  • Place benefits filed at
    California Service Center
  • Local Office
    Spokane WA
  • Country
    China
  • Our Story
    The marriage associated with immigration ended after 12 years.

Immigration Timeline & Photos

pushbrk's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Helpful Reply Rare
  • Amazing Content Rare
  • Helpful Reply Rare
  • Helpful Reply Rare
  • First Post

Recent Badges

14.1k

Reputation

Recent Profile Visitors

81,205 profile views
  1.    Cathi reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  2.    TBoneTX reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  3. pushbrk
    Not my/our job to explain the "why" of any US Government website content. The fact is IMBRA applies to fiancee visas only and nothing else. Does not apply in a spouse case but AWA does.
  4.    .yana reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  5.    .yana reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  6.    Miller Family reacted to a post in a topic: Spousal visa
  7. pushbrk
    We don't know if it's Adam Walsh Act related yet. If it is, it's probably a don't do it case.
  8.    OldUser reacted to a post in a topic: Spousal visa
  9.    JD2 reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  10. pushbrk
    I don't understand why AWA issues are being discussed in the IMBRA topics forum, but since the Moderators decided to keep it here, let's make a couple things clear. 1. IMBRA and AWA came to be around the same time, but they are very different. IMBRA does not apply to spouse cases, and it isn't about any US Government staff determining whether the petitioner is dangerous to the foreign fiancee. It's about making sure the fiancee is fully informed. PEROID. 2, AWA related convictions relate to both spouse and fiance cases, and definitely ARE about US Government employees judging whether the foreigner is in danger from the USC petitioner. AWA convictions don't usually get approved by USCIS at all, but they are NOT about informing the foreigner. That won't help get the petition approved. 3. The only way it would matter if it's the Philippines is that the foreign spouse can't get a divorce there. If divorce is decided, the USC has to get it, and then cooperate with the former Filipino spouse to provide the necessary documentation to get the divorce recognized by the Philippine Statistics Authority, so the Filipino can be free to marry again.
  11.    Lance27 reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  12.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  13.    OldUser reacted to a post in a topic: Adam walsh act
  14. pushbrk
    Doesn't matter in this case. What matters is AWA or not.
  15. pushbrk
    This criminal record only matters in a spouse visa case, if it falls under the Adam Walsh Act. None of the above matters one little bit (in a spouse visa case) if AWA is not part of the story. But yes, how he feels about it has no bearing. If it falls under AWA, it's probably wise to forget about bringing a spouse from another country. This is the IMBRA forum, but this is not an IMBRA related case. It's about Adam Walsh Act only.
  16. pushbrk
    He either needs to search the records and find out of file in the blind. If his crime falls under the Adam Walsh Act, USCIS will find it and he'll hear it from them in a year or so. He knows where the crime occurred, and when. Searching for the record is not difficult.
  17. pushbrk
    Start by clicking on the word guides at the top of any page here. Then you study the form instructions carefully. If you want to be spoon fed through the process, hire a professional. Visajourney is about helping you do it yourself, with emphasis on DO It and SELF.
  18. pushbrk
    I appreciate the recognition. Thanks to all.
  19. pushbrk
    There's more than one way to skin a cat. Provide too much and they don't have time to look at any, or look at the less important stuff. Better to concentrate on the primary evidence that is actually important. This is from years of experienced. (Been a member here 20 years now) To rely on one person's experience tends to fall into the trap of coincidental correlation or "Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc", the most common logical fallacy trap for humans.
  20.    pushbrk reacted to a post in a topic: How to prove IRA withdrawals for I-864 current income?
  21. pushbrk
    Yes, either this or a qualified joint sponsor. This is something knowable before you filed the petition. Time for the US Citizen to move back to the USA and go to work.
  22. pushbrk
    No
  23. pushbrk
    It generally takes another six months after you send your response. One data point doesn't provide much information, but I've been watching this for 20 years now. After the Consulate sends your case back to NVC recommending they send it to USCIS, you're a year away from a decision. Read my first response to you again and get to work.
  24. pushbrk
    Did PSA correct it for you? What did you need to do to make that happen?
  25. pushbrk
    No
  26. pushbrk
    In order to have additional assets considered, you'll need an updated I-864 and to upload a new complete financial package including the updated affidavit and updated evidence for each asset. You cannot just add the asset documentation. It must both be stated in the affidavit AND documented.
×
×
  • Create New...