jan22

At the consular interview.  You can slow down the case at NVC if it appears it will be ready to send to interview before you meet the 212e requirement.

The benefit to being from a visa waiver program country is being able to travel to the US for up yo 90 days without a visa, once ESTA is approved.  It actually can be more difficult for a citizen of a VWP country to get a visa approved because of this.  Applying for a tourist visa instead of using ESTA usually indicates to a consular officer that the applicant intends to spend more than 90 days in the US — which leads them to question how strong the ties to the home country can be if the applicant can be gone that long on a visit.
 
The multiple visa applications almost assuredly led to the ESTA denial — they make her appear to be desperate to get to the US, which leads to a question as to why and what her plans are.  She would be best served to wait a year or two and the apply again for ESTA.  Another visa application now — which is likely to get denied once the consulate officer knows that ESTA was denied, creating a vicious circle — will only lengthen the time she should wait to apply again for ESTA, IMO.
 
 
 

The benefit to being from a visa waiver program country is being able to travel to the US for up yo 90 days without a visa, once ESTA is approved.  It actually can be more difficult for a citizen of a VWP country to get a visa approved because of this.  Applying for a tourist visa instead of using ESTA usually indicates to a consular officer that the applicant intends to spend more than 90 days in the US — which leads them to question how strong the ties to the home country can be if the applicant can be gone that long on a visit.
 
The multiple visa applications almost assuredly led to the ESTA denial — they make her appear to be desperate to get to the US, which leads to a question as to why and what her plans are.  She would be best served to wait a year or two and the apply again for ESTA.  Another visa application now — which is likely to get denied once the consulate officer knows that ESTA was denied, creating a vicious circle — will only lengthen the time she should wait to apply again for ESTA, IMO.
 
 
 

OP:  FYI, when the J1 is sponsored by a Fulbright — i.e., is US government funded — a waiver is very difficult to get approved.  Perhaps they’ll be a little more flexible with the J2 dependent…you can only apply and find out.
 
I don’t want to sound harsh, but you didn’t “age out” from the J2.  You benefited from it for the full duration of the J1 program, if I understood your post correctly.  After that, a choice was made to not comply with the requirements for which the J1 was granted for 20 or so years, which  is only now an issue that must be addressed for immigration to the US.  I would urge you not to approach the waiver application with the primary reason being aging out of being a dependent of the J1 — if that was a reason for a waiver, every dependent would just wait until they turned 21 to avoid the requirement.
 

The “J” visa is designed to be an “exchange” visa.  The visa holder comes to the US to experience US culture, education, environment, the people and attitudes, etc. There are specific targeted programs for some countries to facilitate interactions between the countries in certain areas.  The goal is for that person to then take what they have learned about/from the US back to their home country and share it, resulting in a better understanding between the people of both countries.  Lofty goal that may or may not work — but has no chance if the visa holder and family never return to the home country to share their experiences.

In the past, a student visa could not be issued until 120 days before the program start date listed on your I-20.  That has been changed, and you can now be issued a student visa up to 365 dats before the start date.  So, I would apply as early as possible, just in case you end up with a lengthly administrative processing time.

In the past, a student visa could not be issued until 120 days before the program start date listed on your I-20.  That has been changed, and you can now be issued a student visa up to 365 dats before the start date.  So, I would apply as early as possible, just in case you end up with a lengthly administrative processing time.

In the past, a student visa could not be issued until 120 days before the program start date listed on your I-20.  That has been changed, and you can now be issued a student visa up to 365 dats before the start date.  So, I would apply as early as possible, just in case you end up with a lengthly administrative processing time.

Vietnam is, in fact, a signatory to The Hague Adoption Convention; the Convention went into force there in 2012.  OP — you should read the State Department information carefully:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/VietNam.html
 
Being able to adopt a child in Vietnam and adopting a child in Vietnam and qualifying to immigrate that child to the US are two different things.  I don’t say this to be rude or unsympathetic, but to be realistic about the situation.  I believe it is highly unlikely — essentially impossible — that the Vietnamese Hague Central Authority, USCIS, and the US Department of State will approve an adoption for immigration of a newborn to a (by then) 70-year-old father.

Vietnam is, in fact, a signatory to The Hague Adoption Convention; the Convention went into force there in 2012.  OP — you should read the State Department information carefully:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/VietNam.html
 
Being able to adopt a child in Vietnam and adopting a child in Vietnam and qualifying to immigrate that child to the US are two different things.  I don’t say this to be rude or unsympathetic, but to be realistic about the situation.  I believe it is highly unlikely — essentially impossible — that the Vietnamese Hague Central Authority, USCIS, and the US Department of State will approve an adoption for immigration of a newborn to a (by then) 70-year-old father.

Vietnam is, in fact, a signatory to The Hague Adoption Convention; the Convention went into force there in 2012.  OP — you should read the State Department information carefully:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/VietNam.html
 
Being able to adopt a child in Vietnam and adopting a child in Vietnam and qualifying to immigrate that child to the US are two different things.  I don’t say this to be rude or unsympathetic, but to be realistic about the situation.  I believe it is highly unlikely — essentially impossible — that the Vietnamese Hague Central Authority, USCIS, and the US Department of State will approve an adoption for immigration of a newborn to a (by then) 70-year-old father.

Vietnam is, in fact, a signatory to The Hague Adoption Convention; the Convention went into force there in 2012.  OP — you should read the State Department information carefully:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/VietNam.html
 
Being able to adopt a child in Vietnam and adopting a child in Vietnam and qualifying to immigrate that child to the US are two different things.  I don’t say this to be rude or unsympathetic, but to be realistic about the situation.  I believe it is highly unlikely — essentially impossible — that the Vietnamese Hague Central Authority, USCIS, and the US Department of State will approve an adoption for immigration of a newborn to a (by then) 70-year-old father.

Vietnam is, in fact, a signatory to The Hague Adoption Convention; the Convention went into force there in 2012.  OP — you should read the State Department information carefully:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/VietNam.html
 
Being able to adopt a child in Vietnam and adopting a child in Vietnam and qualifying to immigrate that child to the US are two different things.  I don’t say this to be rude or unsympathetic, but to be realistic about the situation.  I believe it is highly unlikely — essentially impossible — that the Vietnamese Hague Central Authority, USCIS, and the US Department of State will approve an adoption for immigration of a newborn to a (by then) 70-year-old father.

Vietnam is, in fact, a signatory to The Hague Adoption Convention; the Convention went into force there in 2012.  OP — you should read the State Department information carefully:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/VietNam.html
 
Being able to adopt a child in Vietnam and adopting a child in Vietnam and qualifying to immigrate that child to the US are two different things.  I don’t say this to be rude or unsympathetic, but to be realistic about the situation.  I believe it is highly unlikely — essentially impossible — that the Vietnamese Hague Central Authority, USCIS, and the US Department of State will approve an adoption for immigration of a newborn to a (by then) 70-year-old father.

Just to be sure I understand your plans —
You are go8ng to file the I-130 while in the US on the NATO visa, but indicate you will be applying for an immigrant visa in Canada, i.e., you are NOT going to file to adjust your status in the US; While the I-130 is in process, you will continue to live in the US and do your NATO job; When the I-130 is approved, and you have been documentarily qualified at NVC, you will return to Canada to attend your visa interview and remain there until the visa is issued; After the visa is issued, you will enter the US using the immigrant visa and become a legal permanent resident; You will continue with your NATO job until the end of the contact/assignment. if the above is accurate, I don’t see any problem from an immigration standpoint.  There might, however, be an issue from an employment standpoint.  If you get placed into AP, you will likely not be able to use your NATO visa to re-enter the US to go to work even if it is not cancelled…the reason for the AP and the immigrant intent will be visible to an immigration officer at the POE, so even if the visa appears valid on its face, there is the possibility of being turned away at the POE.  
 
It will be a decision of the sponsoring country (I’m assuming Canada) as to whether they want to continue to be represented by someone who is a US LPR, as they might see a possibility that you can no longer fully reflect their interests versus that of your new country.  If you haven’t already discussed your plans with them, I urge you to do so.  You don’t mention whether you wife is employed and able to meet the requirements of the Affidavit of Support on her own, or if you are planning on using your continued salary to meet the requirements.  If the latter, it is critical to be able to prove your position and salary will continue.  You also will, BTW, lose any privileges connected with the NATO visa.

An easier path, IMO, would be to file the I-130 and, once it’s approved, delay the process at NVC until close to the time your NATO position is going to end and return to Canada after the position has ended.  Your wife will still remain in the US — likely for the about same amount of time as in your scenario.  You then enter as an LPR with none of the possible NATO complications.  If your wife cannot meet the AOS requirements, you can hopefully have a credible job offer ready or you can have a joint sponsor.
 
 

Even though the leaflet is 2013 doesn’t mean it isn’t accurate information.  This has been an established part of the re-entry permit process since at least the early 1990’s and is still a part of the process.  
 
If, however unlikely it would be, the re-entry permit is denied, the individual would go through the same process discussed here many times — return to the US, be interviewed at the POE, explain the absence (and, in this case, show the I-131 receipt), and get admitted to the US.  The worst case scenario would be a referral to an immigration judge.

This is not accurate.  There is an established process where, after biometrics, you can leave the US and, on your application form, request to pick up the issued permit at the Embassy/Consulate nearest you.  This process would not exist if you weren’t supposed to leave until the permit is issued.  It is described in USCIS literature at: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/guides/B5en.pdf.

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household 
 

The answer to the question for almost all applicants will be "Yes".   It is not asking if you actually are inadmissible under a public charge finding. Rather, it is asking whether you have to meet the requirement for not becoming a public charge.
 
If you read the "Alert" on the DHS home page for the I-485, it makes it somewhat cIear that this question was added to the newest form to collect the data to show the applicant overcomes the public charge requirement.   On page 8 of the instructions for the I-485 (https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-485instr.pdf ), there is a link to a list of those who can answer "No" to the question (i.e., those who are exempt from this inadmissibility): https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-g .
 
Even with the link, it is not easy to find the list, though!  The link only takes you to the Volume 8 (Admissibility) Part G (Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility) -- a whole chapter on public charge.  The link doesn't take you specifically to Chapter 3, where you need to start looking.  This link (https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-g-chapter-3) takes you to Chapter 3 (ApplIcability).  In this chapter, you need to scroll down to Part C ( Exemptions) to see the list of categories of those to whom the public charge does not apply (i.e., those who are exempt from it).   Unless your parents fall under one of those categories, you have to say "Yes" to question 61 and answer the required questions that follow it.

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household 
 

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household 
 

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household 
 

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household 
 

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household 
 

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household 
 

Getting married before ever meeting in person, then applying for the spousal visa immediately after that first and only meeting, is a blueprint for how to get a spousal visa denied.  During the visa interview, the consular officer must be convinced that the marriage is a valid marriage and not one just for immigration purposes.  With just one meeting — that occurred after the marriage — that will be very difficult. 

Waivers for the two-year meeting requirement for a fiancée visa are extremely rare for a reason.  People can be far different in person than they appear online.  Having two young children that make travel planning more complicated is not a reason for a waiver.  

Waivers for the “consummation” meeting after the wedding are non-existent.  There is no provision for this meeting to be waived.  Even if there were, it would not be approved in a case where it means the couple would have never met at all before the immigrant visa was issued.
 
You will need to figure out how to meet — perhaps in a third country so you don’t have to travel as far and he doesn’t need a US visa.  Even without it being a requirement, I would urge anyone (especially with young children involved) to meet before marrying anyone and bringing them into a household