beloved_dingo

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.

Then you should be fine. You'll need paystubs to show proof of your current income.

You have to file AOS by mail regardless. Foxit Phantom pdf has a free/trial version that is good for filling out pdfs. You can also print it and fill it out by hand, using black ink. I would only do this if you have good/clear handwriting.

If you are a regular W-2 employee (not self-employed), then current income is most important (part 6, question 7). The 2nd question you are referring to is the amount from your 2022 tax return - in other words, not current income. Is your current income well above the 125% threshold? How long have you been at your current job?

I assume you would like to obtain a green card on the basis of being a widow of a U.S. Citizen? I don't know much about this topic, but here is the page on the USCIS website: https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-eligibility/widower And here is the eligibility criteria from that page: Eligibility Criteria You may be eligible to receive a Green Card through widow/widower status if you: Were married to a U.S. citizen at the time he or she passed away Either have a pending or approved Form I-130 or you have filed a Form I-360 within 2 years of your spouse’s death Are not remarried Were not divorced or legally separated from your spouse at the time he or she died Are able to prove that you were in a bona fide marital relationship until the time of your spouse’s death Are admissible to the United States

N-400 interviews are generally short - 15 minutes. The overwhelming consensus here is that N-400 is the easiest part of the immigration journey.

Did you recently file for citizenship? Regardless, it is not unusual and isn't something to worry about. Sometimes cases are transferred just to balance case load. The notice you receive will tell you where your case was moved to.

Not just celebrities - wealthy people in general. I work with a few people (all C-Suite/Partner level) who have openly talked about getting a prescription for it specifically to lose weight. One of them still eats like a horse so I'm not sure it's working for him 😂

The daughter is a U.S. Citizen with an expired U.S. Passport.

Expedited service is currently 7-9 weeks.

How close is your income to the 125% of the poverty guidelines?

Do you send any proof of current income with the I-864? Or only the tax return(s)?

@Dan and Akari Here is a recent post I made with links to threads where being "too married for a K-1" became a problem. You cannot prove a negative. If USCIS suspects you are married, there is nothing you can provide to them to overcome the suspicion.

F2B - 21+ children of LPR F1 - 21+ children of US citizens These are 2 of the categories listed in your first post. How is a child over 21 "brought up/educated in the U.S."? They wouldn't need a visa to the U.S. at that age if they were raised here. And are we just ignoring the countries that have education on par or even better than the U.S.?

If you are only taking issue with the timing/restrictions of certain visas, why do the skills and/or benefit to the U.S. economy matter? Children of U.S. citizens/LPRs are not more likely to be skilled/educated/whatever than spouses, siblings, or parents.

Why should parents or spouses of U.S. Citizens need "experience of qualifications" to immigrate? You seem to assume that most people with no education who immigrate to the U.S. will become some kind of freeloader, living off the backs of others. It is a fact that many immigrants come here and become experienced, qualified and educated in the U.S. after immigrating because the U.S. offers those opportunities (that perhaps their home country does not). Also, having experience or qualifications before immigrating to the U.S. does not mean that the experience carries over or that the immigrant will utilize their prior work/education in the U.S. Perhaps the stay at home mom in the prior scenario is a doctor in her home country, but is no longer a doctor in the U.S. But by your logic, she "deserved" to immigrate because of her qualifications over someone else less skilled, even though her education/skills are not being put to use on U.S. soil.

What in tarnation... First of all, "unskilled" workers are just as important to the economy as "skilled" workers. If companies were full of C Suite executives and had no entry level/blue collar positions, they'd fail pretty fast. Next, you can't categorize whether someone will "benefit" the American economy just based on their immigration category, but even if you could, are you saying that a woman who immigrates through marriage and becomes a stay at home mom while her spouse works, has no value? That, because she does not have a job, she should have less priority even though she is the spouse of a U.S. Citizen? Does an illegal immigrant who works and pays taxes have more value than the parent of a U.S. Citizen who immigrates legally and retires? The value of a person, immigrant or not, should not be tied directly to their skills or productivity. If it is, that leads down an ugly road.

I never implied it did. Not sure what the issue is here, and OP seems aware that they need to spend more time together in person.

Just keep in mind that @Mike E and I are agreeing that you need more time in person to successfully obtain a visa. The rest is semantics.