beloved_dingo

I have been here since 2018, to get advice on filing the I-129f for my (then) fiancé. Now he's a citizen, and I can say with certainty that we would not have had the smooth journey we had without VJ. We did everything DIY, never got an RFE, never had a hiccup throughout the whole experience. The advice here is invaluable, and I am still here because in the last 5 years I have also learned A TON, and I want to keep helping others with their immigration journeys. I have noticed some threads recently (over the last few months) where comments seemed to become unnecessarily rude and unproductive. I do think most of the time the moderation team intervenes though, and cleans up those threads and/or locks it. However, it can take several hours or more before administrative action is taken. Frankly, this is the nature of forums. I was a mod for years on another forum, and it was impossible to please everyone or catch every infraction in a timely manner no matter how hard you try to keep everything clean, friendly, in-line with TOS, etc. I have certainly seen posts here that I thought were "over the line" as far as having a harsh/sarcastic/antagonistic tone. You do have to report these posts if you want anything done about it, which has already been said ad nauseum. However, I have also seen new users get very reactionary, question seasoned members' advice, get mad because they got a "confused" reaction, etc. There is nothing wrong with being blunt or even a bit harsh in those cases as long as you are still being constructive. It can be frustrating to give advice to someone, only for them to make it clear they will be upset unless you say what they want to hear. A few things that stand out to me in this thread so far: The first posts when searching "trans" are off-topic political posts instead of something immigration related. On the flip side, if you search "gay", the first results are immigration specific, and more than half of the results on the first page are immigration specific. Regardless of your political stance, shouldn't trans people be able to find relevant immigration information here? The "confused" reaction is perceived by many to be used in a negative way. So is it constructive to have it here? I don't personally mind it, and I have used it myself, but it's worth considering. People need to report posts. I report posts a lot. If you have issues with what you are seeing, report it. @TBoneTX and I have radically different political views. But I have never, not once, seen TBone be disrespectful to any member of this forum. TBone is an invaluable resource of information here, and he is responsive to reports/issues in threads. The off-topic thing is a separate issue but I tend to just avoid threads that do not interest me and/or have a sensitive topic that I'd rather not be a part of. If there was a way to hide/block threads from view, perhaps that would be helpful. I would use that feature if we had it. People with different political views are also welcome to post whatever political threads they want so it's not like it's "only right-wing takes allowed!" The "I'm out" thing was, imo, completely fine when it was specifically a @Mike E thing, we are all different people with different quirks/habits, but perhaps the recent trend of many other users adopting this phrase has become a bit too much. Especially when multiple people do it in the same thread. Threads aren't an airport, there's no need for every person to announce departure. Just my 2 cents. Overall my experience here has been good and I also like that this website is not an echo-chamber. People from all backgrounds, cultures, and political beliefs co-exist here. And that's a good thing.

This is so true! I used to love going to the movies, but over the last 5+ years there have been very few movies I've been excited to see. I think we are going to see both of them, but I had no interest in dealing with the opening weekend. I really liked Cillian Murphy in Peaky Blinders and I have heard Oppenheimer is good, but too long. We may go see it next weekend. I was on the fence about Barbie for awhile but it seems like silly fun and I like how colorful it is. My husband also said he'd go with me so why not 😅

How much time did you spend together with your ex before the K-1 was denied? Had you both met in person before filing the K-1? When did that first relationship end, and when did you meet your current partner? How much time have you spent in person with your current partner? What is the age difference with your current partner? Does your current partner have kids?

Possible. This tactic is used in discovery in both civil and criminal cases - instead of trying to stonewall discovery and not provide information at all, you can instead bury the other party in paperwork by providing them every scrap of paper that is remotely or tangentially related to the case. However, for the average Joe, it's harder to provide tons of pages of evidence if the relationship isn't bona fide to begin with. So I seriously doubt this would apply to many marriage-based immigration cases. I agree with you, but I also think that the focus should be on high-quality evidence. We sent over 500 pages of evidence with our I-751, but 90% of it was strong evidence of financial comingling and living together. If you send 500 pages consisting of photos, chat logs and affidavits, it's not going to look good.

Tbf, he may not know the answers to these questions, since he is posting on behalf of his friend. His friend needs to join VJ to get advice. The couple in question better hope they actually live together because I'd be willing to bet they are getting a surprise visit sometime in the near future. It's unfortunate that the USC wife blundered questions so badly. Either there is truly something fishy going on, or she got really taken off guard and drew a blank on certain answers, or she had legitimate reasons for not knowing certain things but failed to adequately explain. For example, it's possible she doesn't know the exact amount of rent because the husband handles all finances/pays all bills. But if she just fumbled and threw out an incorrect number, it looks quite bad. And I don't personally know my husband's full SSN by heart ( I do know the last 4), but I can tell you for certain my husband has no clue what my SSN is. 😂 It's all the little things that seem "off" that add up and paint an bad picture for USCIS.

It's good that her divorce was final 3 years before she visited you, but it is NOT good that you haven't seen each other in 3 years. COVID may explain the lack of visit in 2021 but it's 2023 now. Why hasn't she visited?

You do not have to wait 90 days. If someone has told you about a "90 day rule", they are wrong. It's a very persistent myth.

When was the divorce finalized? And was it finalized before her 2 visits to see you in Nigeria?

Unfortunately, pregnancy is not grounds for an expedite. Her mother having Parkinson's is unfortunately also not a circumstance that is relevant to the expedite. If she had complications from pregnancy or a high risk pregnancy, you would possibly have a better shot at an expedite since she is the U.S. citizen, because health of the U.S. Citizen can be a factor to expedite. However, pregnancy alone is not.

I saw this yesterday evening and thought "Well, that's enough internet for today". Can you imagine applying this nonsense to any kind of crime? "Well, he only beat him with a baseball bat for 10 seconds, so it wasn't really assault!"

It is a red flag to USCIS, because you can't prove a negative. There are many threads here with K-1 couples running in to that issue. See below comment.

Just one final update in our journey - My husband applied for his U.S. passport on 5/25. The status updated to "In process" on 5/31. Yesterday, it changed to "Approved" and today it is out for delivery, per the tracking number. We paid for expedited service and faster shipping, and it's been exactly 7 weeks since we submitted the application.

Leaving the U.S. as an LPR is not illegal Visiting your home country as an LPR is not illegal Even extended absences (6+ months) are not illegal, but can possibly cause LPRs issues Straight from a CBP article: If you are a lawful permanent resident (green card holder), you may leave the United States multiple times and reenter, if you do not intend to stay outside the United States for 1 year or more. If you intend to stay outside the United States for 1 year or more, you must apply for a re-entry permit with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) prior to leaving the United States. https://help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-820?language=en_US Another CBP article: Lawful Permanent Residents (LPR) of the U.S. must present a Permanent Resident Card ("Green Card", Form I-551), a Reentry Permit (if gone for more than 1 year), or a Returning Resident Visa (if gone for 2 years or more) to reenter the United States. LPRs who are out of the U.S. for more than 180 days are subject to new immigrant inspection procedures as per 8 USC 1101. https://help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-1191?language=en_US ANNND here's another one: Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) Frequently Asked Questions What will happen if I am out of the United States for more than six months? Staying outside the United States for more than 6 months but less than one year will subject you to additional questioning when you return to the United States but you are not required to have a Reentry Permit. https://help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article1687?language=en_US No one here has being speaking about leaving for over a year, and even then it is not "illegal". There is nothing illegal about taking one 4-5 month trip back to the home country after becoming an LPR. Even longer absences are not "illegal", there are just additional steps to take to avoid problems - otherwise we wouldn't even have options like a Reentry Permit or a Returning Resident Visa. Your speeding analogy is not relevant.

I would recommend thoroughly reading the I-134 instructions. All the information you need is there. You only need the most recent tax return. It is also advisable to provide paystubs and/or a letter from your employer (on letterhead) verifying your employment and salary. You can also provide a letter from your bank, as detailed in the I-134 instructions.

I thought wrapping up some things in the home country after activating the green card is fairly normal? Unless OP plans to habitually take long trips out of the U.S., I don't see what the issue is. There are frequently posts here about doing just that. Here's one example.

I agree that CR1 is the better choice, and one big reason is avoiding AOS. However, just want to point out that timelines are quite different now than they were in 2017/2018, so the process will likely take closer to 2 years, not 1. K1 timelines are similar though. It no longer has a time advantage over CR1. Also, do you have a source for this statement below? I have not seen any indication that USCIS treats the Utah/Zoom marriage any differently. Of course, the couple still has to see each other in person during or after the ceremony for it to be valid.

Well you've only alluded to it being her preference once, below: But prior to that post, you said this: Regardless, I'm fairly certain that when she is actively in labor or is in an emergency situation, she will do what is best for her and the baby in the moment, regardless of whatever plan you both have. Good luck.

Because adding the complication of being admitted into the U.S. as a tourist during an emergency is ridiculous! In an actual emergency, she would need to go to the ER/hospital that is closest to her. And labor can VERY QUICKLY go from routine to emergency (life or death) in a heartbeat. Why add trying to cross a border into the mix? Edit: Let me put this a different way - in an emergency, the person that should deal with the headache of crossing a border should be YOU, going from the U.S. to Canada, not your spouse in labor.

Most couples discuss marriage before getting married. It is even more important to discuss when your partner lives 9000 miles away. I know from experience - my husband is Australian. If you truly do not discuss a word of this before she arrives (the only way that it would be remotely legal, on her end) then you will be springing something HUGE on her. What if she wants to return to Australia before staying in the U.S. permanently, to see family/friends, say goodbye, get belongings, and tidy up loose ends? As others have mentioned, she won't be able to work/travel for at least 6 months (possibly much longer). If she wants to return to Australia after her visit, then you'd have to do consular processing anyway, and your plan is not worth the risk since it is on shaky legal ground at best and is downright illegal if she is privy to the plan whatsoever. Btw - CBP can check phones and electronic devices. So if you do discuss this with her, it is possible CBP will find evidence of it. Don't risk it. One last thing. You can't say "We didn't plan to get married it was a last minute thing" when her trip isn't until October. Something that is months away is not "last minute". It's also odd to say "we" if she is supposedly completely unaware of your plan.

Perhaps I am confused and/or misinformed but I don't think OP's business activities in the U.S. are illegal. Checking work emails or taking work-related phone calls for your job back home while visiting the U.S. is not illegal. My understanding is you cannot engage in or accept U.S. based work while on a B1/B2. "Employment" on a visitor visa is not allowed but that means you cannot get a job in the U.S. (or perform tasks that could be paid work in the U.S.) while visiting. It does not mean you cannot maintain your overseas business while traveling. How would business owners manage to travel if they could not at least maintain contact with their employees or answer emails while out of the country? To look at it another way, you are also not allowed to use a B1/B2 for "study". That clearly means "attending school in the U.S." It does not mean that it is illegal for a visitor to the U.S. to engage in schooling activities in their home country (studying for an exam they have to take when they get home, writing a paper, or responding to an email from a classmate/teacher). Can someone point to a specific rule that disallows this type of thing? The only thing I can find is wording similar to "[a]n individual on a visitor visa (B1/B2) is not permitted to accept employment or work in the United States." (from here https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-visit/visitor.html) OP has not accepted employment or work while in the U.S. They have handled routine business affairs from their current overseas job while traveling. I can't find a single source that says this violates their visa.

The bank letter is specifically mentioned in the I-134 instructions as a type of evidence you can provide, as @meladee already said (twice). The bank letter also =/= bank statements. Here's a screenshot of the instructions: It's just one piece of evidence that can be provided for the CO to consider.

OP didn't mention bank statements. I agree with your assessment.

When you say you married again, do you mean you just had a wedding ceremony in the U.S., or do you mean you actually got a marriage certificate from the U.S. and the equivalent from Costa Rica?

I don't use Twitter and I think Elon Musk is an idiot but I am already tired of hearing about "Threads" and find it baffling that people are celebrating Zuck's alternative to Twitter. Meta practically having a monopoly over social media is not a good thing.

This is correct. @Seino you and your fiancée need to make sure you calculate the household size correctly, as step one, so you know how much income is needed to satisfy the requirements. There's a huge difference between what is required for a household of 5 vs. a household of 2. You can delay things a bit, if needed, at this stage. We did that with our K-1 because my partner was visiting me in the U.S. when we received "Packet 3". See my timeline below. We waited until the day he was flying home to send Packet 3 back (2 months later), which helped with the timing of everything. Now this was Australia and all consulates are a little different, but I've heard it's possible to delay this way pretty consistently across the board. If I were her, I would go ahead and reach out to her old employer to get the ball rolling there. Considering she is a former employee in good standing, she made be able to get "rehired" and get a start date before she even leaves the UK. Then fly back to the U.S. to restart her job and start getting paystubs. You can also use a joint sponsor, as previously noted. I would still encourage her to pursue getting her job back, and use a joint sponsor as a Plan B.