pushbrk

I understand the belt and suspenders mind set, but I don't subscribe to it in this context. Avoiding obligating a joint sponsor when not absolutely necessary would be my priority. YMMV

Everything has a context. The reason you would file an I-864 with no income or assets is that the petitioner is required to do so in that circumstance. In such a case, a joint sponsor would be required. In the OP's situation, they clearly qualify, and the home equity would be considered within its context as part of the totality of circumstances. By your logic marriages fail often, so why would anybody try it? Qualifying as sponsor using assets is allowed. It requires properly completed affidavit and properly documented qualifying assets. Anything marginal is risky, but those will clearly qualifying finances are routinely successful using assets to sponsor an immigrant.

This is an example of documentation and completion errors. They qualified, but what they presented did not make that clear enough.

Easier for me, as I primarily hang out in the spouse visa forum. However it is not correct that USCIS or Consular Officers "do not allow" equity in a primary resident to be used as an asset. What's true is they don't consider it liquid. In this case, they will know the sponsor has lower expenses because they pay no rent, and they have sufficient liquid assets to make up for the income shortfall.

Too general. When done properly, this should be fine. It's the D/R, not India.

USCIS will not be involved in the financial part of the decision on a spouse visa case. That is all submitted to NVC and the Consulate.

The 90k in the bank can carry the day. Just a few statements with the oldest being at least a year old will do. With regard to the apartment, sure listing it as an assets and documenting the equity is certainly allowed, but when evaluated, the equity will not be considered liquid. What it's good for is to show you don't pay rent, and are solvent. USCIS has nothing to do with evaluating an Affidavit of Support in a spouse visa case. That will be NVC and a Consular Officer.

Time to "come to jesus" on this. You were advised properly back in February.

Just so you understand, you must do this before you file petitions for the children. If you file and they get denied at interview, your husband will have a visa that expires in six months and your children will have nothing and no way to accompany your husband to the USA.

Do you mean you DID NOT MEET the physical presence requirements. If so, have you looking into your children's citizenship through your parents. (Grandparents, as mention in the previous topic)

If petitions are needed for the children, the above is certainly ok to try, but don't get your hopes up. It's the petitioner's responsibility to do their homework. It's pretty difficult for any politician to spend their political capital when USCIS and NVC have done nothing wrong.

The question relates to the children being biological children of the US Citizen petitioner. If the US Citizen petitioner was a USC at the time of each child'e birth and meets the physical presence requirement, they don't need visas. They need Consular Reports of Birth Abroad, and US Passports. Please clarify whether the petitioner was a US Citizen when each child was born, and whether they lived in the USA at least 5 years, one year of which was after turning age 14. If so, they are US Citizens and cannot be issued immigrant visas. You take the CRBA, and US Passport route.

The actions you did not take (filing the childrens' petitions when you filed for your spouse) are the reasons for any separation. What you can do to avoid separation now, is to delay your spouse's interview until they can all go together. Are these the petitioner's step children or their natural children?

Be cautious of any advice from others about whether you should do it yourself. They know nothing more about your aptitude, attitude, or capability to do homework, read carefully, interpret literally, and respond accuratly, than that you found the wrong forum on this website and hijacked a post in the wrong forum. Make your own decision based on those factors. The partner page is there for good reason. https://www.visajourney.com/partners/

The above suggestions are great for an initial submission, but mostly would look contrived, if done at this stage. Anything created after receiving the NOID, is weak, at best. Seems there is plenty of non-contrived evidence available that was not submitted initially.

Can, yes, but in 20 years I have not seen any reports of visa denials based on tax filing status. What I...HAVE....seen is many visas issued when the petitioner filed single in a spouse visa case. I'm one of them. After 20 years here, I see it as extremely low risk. Yes, bonafides are best demonstrated with other primary evidence, like time together in person.

Tax anamolies aside. The question was regarding impact to the spouse visa process. Yes, amend later.

In my twenty years here, I've never seen filing as single be an issue in the visa process. Many do exactly that, then amend their return after their spouse arrives and is assigned a Social Security number. In reality, NVC won't care at all, and the Consular Officer doesn't either. Just have your spouse explain, they don't have an SS number and you'll amend the returns after she arrives. Works every time it is tried. Unless you are an IRS employee, this is a non-issue, and if you were, you would have done it correctly. For rank and file taxpayers, there is no penalty for overpayment of taxes. That's the result of your filing choice. A later choice to amend, will cancel out the overpayment.

Exibiting such an attitude in your response, would be counterproductive.

In my 20 years dealing with USCIS related issues, I've learned the difference between primary and secondary relationship evidence. I did not suggest USCIS will contact a utility company. If you secured a joint mortgage, that's easy to document and it's dated. The other primary evidence I suggested is also dated. Don't try to contrive anything. They would see right through that, and its not going to help.

Stick to real evidence. Yes, they can detect contrived evidence. Compare what primary evidence you could have sent to what you did send,and provide it. Primary evidence is passport stamps and boarding passes for visits, your actual joint mortgage paperwork and similar. Photos together during those visits are also good but they are secondary. Send them.

You don't say if you were asked to submit one. If you were, it's because you checked the box saying the name of a location in the USA where your spouse would adjust status, instead of or in addition to applying for a visa at a Consulate abroad. It's a fairly common mistake and adds close to a year to your overall timeline.

This is definitely a new thing for me. Maybe it's a new policy they are following in the case of having both petitions. If so, it's a good thing, particularly if they will approve the I-129f in specific cases where the K3 visa is actually preferred. This happens when the immigrating spouse really doesn't want to maintain permanent residency in the USA yet. Not the visa is not REALLY "obsolete". It is on the books and part of law, but it is processing policy that has rendered the K3 visa "virtually obsolete". Now if there no wish to actually obtain and use the K3, and the adjudicator who called goes ahead and approves the I-130 now, then filing the second petition did as hoped as far as the timeline is concerned.

OK, so what did you already send, and what from the list can you add to that? It seems you should have plenty of evidence, but you did not include much of it in your petition. What you say you have, should be enough. Send it. Your trips to see each other and the joint mortgage are key. I guess they haven't seen any of that yet.

A notice of intent usually gives you the opportunity to respond. What did they suggest you do?