Demise

Well looking at the actual changes to the policy manual I don't really see that much being different, it mostly just codified things that the VAWA teams already did. The current admin loves to claim about widespread fraud because it's an easy allegation to make, it's difficult to disprove, and there's always going to be at least 1 incident of fraud in no matter what you look at. You can look at parking meters in any large city and you'll find some genius who figured which washers fool the meter into thinking its a quarter. Numbers going up is not any evidence of fraud. Funnily enough the amount of men who filed went up less than the overall number of applications filed (and it's "male applicants" rather than husbands, so sons and fathers too), so comparatively the rate is lower than it used to be. Parent applications weren't even being accepted until FY 2017. Of note is that number of approvals has been going up, number of denials has been for the most part flat so denial rate has in fact been going down. Then there's the fact that a lot of people simply do not know what avenues of relief are available. A lot of this spreads by online posts, maybe lawyer advertisements, and word of mouth. Also, not all immigration lawyers do VAWA, and as they start doing them and get more proficient in them, they will try less solid cases. Finally, fraud in immigration means that you lied, not that the case would never get approved. If you submit a case that's literally "On or around June 11, 2007 my USC son called me the b-word" then yeah if he did then it's not fraud, this case would never in a million years get approved but it is not fraud. So all in all I suspect that it's just a scare piece.

It will be faster if you file because immediate relative category has no statutory caps so it never has any backlogs. She can petition him in F2A, and yes conditional permanent residents can sponsor relatives, that one is backlogged about 2 years. In any case that's done on form I-130. The processing times on USCIS.gov are roughly accurate but difficult to navigate. The one that is accurate in this case is the SCOPS one. NBC time only shows time estimates for adoption based I-130s, and field offices only really deal with ones that are concurrently adjusting status where the main hold up is the I-485.

So in this case you do this: You take a fresh I-765 form, fill it out correctly (initial, (c)(9)( ) category), you write "AMENDED" on the top margin of the first page, and you send in the new amended I-765 form and copies of I-485 and I-765 receipt notices to whichever place that has your I-765, the address will most likely be on the bottom of your I-765 receipt notice. In this case you do not have to pay because you aren't making a new filing, you're just fixing an existing one. You can also write a cover letter explaining that originally you ticked the wrong box and are fixing that issue in the form but it likely wouldn't be necessary here.

Send a copy of cover + all pages. There's 2 reasons for this: 1. There is such a thing as a non-citizen national, which are generally people born in American Samoa (though some other instances exist like child born to NCN abroad or possibly birth in US minor outlying islands). The passports they get look the same aside an annotation on one of the back pages. NCNs are treated as US permanent residents for purposes of sponsoring a relative. 2. Record keeping in US honestly kinda sucks and if you gave up your citizenship then that'd be pretty much just evidenced by a stamp somewhere in the visa pages and possibly a hole punch through the whole booklet which may or may not show up on the photocopy. Alternatively you can sidestep this whole thing by giving them a different proof, like a copy of a birth certificate or naturalization certificate or certificate of citizenship.

It's not the law and it's not the policy, and media these days is pretty dumb and sensationalist, even lawyer offices do that thing where they will beat the drum about anything just do end with "get a lawyer btw our number is ...", so as is a DUI wouldn't disqualify you. In any case, this bill will just die in the senate. They managed to get the Laken Riley Act during the honeymoon period and dems right now are struggling with their own base wanting them to be obstructionist.

1. In Part 1 (Application Type) tick box 1: "I am a lawful permanent resident or conditional permanent resident of the United States, and I am applying for a reentry permit." 2. That's not applicable to this case, Parole in Place is basically special thing to clear entries without inspection for family of US military. Just skip to Part 2. The form is definitely confusing. All in all these are the questions that an LPR seeking a re-entry permit would need to answer: Part 1: Tick box 1 only. Part 2: 1-11 Part 3: All (1-6) Part 4: 1-4, 7.a. - 9.c. (Skip 9.a. if this will be sent to their US mailing address). Part 5: All (1) Part 6: Skip Part 7: Skip Part 8: Skip Part 9: Skip Part 10: All (signature in #4 needs to be done with a pen by the parent, USCIS does not accept digital signatures as far as I know). Part 11: If you you (or someone else is) translating for the parent, all filled and signed by the interpreter, otherwise skip Part 12: If you're the one actually preparing the form you should fill this out and sign it, otherwise skip Part 13: Unless something needs explaining this can be skipped, from the list of questions only Page 7, Part 4, Question 1 could ever require elaboration if your parent was ever in removal proceedings, and maybe Page 7, Part 4, 3.a.-3.b. since it's common for people who AOS'd to get advance parole and it could be many years since that happened. If you somehow need more space you can reprint this page as many times as needed. Questions might differ on the online form, if USCIS is at all smart they'll likely skip whatever is not applicable.

If you weren't in the critical period (between RFE and decision) I'd ask if you have applied for advance parole, however in this case even if you've got it, I'd recommend against any international travel until you have your green card in hand for one very simple reason: It's easier to fight any possible denial while inside the US, if you get denied while abroad you're kinda just screwed and would have to do a whole another process of getting an I-824 to transfer the case to NBC, then DS-260, medicals again, consular interview, and it's just a massive mess to fix. I'd recommend reaching out to your senator or congressman and having them contact USCIS on your behalf over attempting an infopass. The process is pretty simple, you go to their house or senate page, look for contact link, send them a message explaining your situation, they will send you a privacy release form that you will then need to fill out, sign, and send to them. They will then send that to the USCIS congressional liaison that will make whoever is sitting on it take a look and report back. It's not uncommon to hear "it'll be done when it's done" and then a day or two later see something happen because someone had to pull them out the stack to investigate and at that point they might as well just push it forward. I do not recommend trying infopass with VAWA cases. The privacy protections of VAWA simply hide most things from view of rank and file employees so they might see very little or see nothing at all, especially now when it's unclear where the case is currently at. RFEs for medicals typically originate from the NBC (in Lee's Summit, MO), but they can also originate from the local field office, and theoretically they could also originate from Vermont/Nebraska. The field office has geographic jurisdiction, they were able to tell you which one it is by where you live even if their system didn't show them anything.

Technically Matter of Sesay (BIA, 2011), does permit a K-1 to AOS (based on I-129F) after termination of marriage, provided that they married the petitioner within the 90 day period. But it'll be an uphill battle since you'd need to prove that you entered into the marriage in good faith, it was legit while it lasted, both which due to brevity would require some pretty good reasons for why you noped out, and hope that the petitioner is oblivious or cooperative and doesn't pull the I-864. K-1 can only really adjust via a petition filed by whoever got them the K-1, be it the original I-129F, a subsequent I-130, or a VAWA or Widow(er) I-360. If you came on a K-1, married, divorced, didn't get to AOS, and then you'll marry someone else you have to proceed as if you entered without inspection and there's a good chance that they might try to slap you with a marriage fraud finding under 204(c).

Yeah put the old passport # in 21.b., old passport expiration date in 21.e., and issuing country in 21.d.

Bit of a late reply. Since you know about her, and you married while she was under 18, I'd list her, and do explain in the last section basically what you said here. "Didn't know about her at time of marriage to [spouse], didn't live with us at any time, I had no role in her life, only listing her since technically she is a stepdaughter".

For I-765: (c)(9)( ). This is the general category for applicants for Adjustment of Status under INA 245, doesn't matter if it's via marriage (I-130 or I-129F), other family (I-130), work (I-140), investors (I-526), special immigrants (I-360), S-visas (I-854), T-visas (I-914), U-visas (I-918), or Diversity Lottery. There are a few groups that adjust via different sections of law and use different codes (asylees, refugees, and pre-1972 registry applicants). Do not use A6, A6 only exists due to a quirk in the law where technically K-1 visa holders are eligible to work incident to status, however that is only valid while the K-1 is (so 90 days), so that will in the absolute best case scenario only get them an EAD valid for a couple of days and more likely the K-1 period will expire by then and the I-765 will just be denied for mootness. Again, use (c)(9)( ). I-765, #24: K-1 for the husband, K-2 for the stepdaughter. I-765, #25: Same as above, if their admission periods expired "K-1 expired" for husband, "K-2 expired" for daughter. In the event you'd file I-765 after I-485 that's when you can alternatively put down "Pending I-485", or "Applicant for Adjustment of Status". Ultimately USCIS is not too picky about what you put in there as long as it makes sense. I-765, #21.b. - Put down whichever passport he was admitted on, in this case it'll be the newer one. It's not an uncommon scenario for the visa to be physically in an old passport. I-765, #21.c. - Leave blank, this field is for cases where you enter US on something that is not a passport (e.g. Any WHTI Document (Canadian Enhanced Driver's License, NEXUS, Sentri, etc), Canadian birth certificate (if under 16, or under 19 if traveling with a school/religious/youth group), Border Crossing Card, US green card, Refugee Travel Document (US or otherwise), Re-entry permit, UN laissez-passer, maybe 1954 convention stateless travel document (not sure, US never signed that one) and probably some others). In any case, leave that one blank, or if it being blank bothers you just put in "n/a".

Assuming that this is an IR5 case (and judging from OP's post history it most likely is) there is one edge case - if mother married her husband while OP was under 18. Stepparent-stepchild relationships work both ways when it comes to sponsoring. But that's about it and even if, mother's husband would need his own I-130. Just bringing this up in the unlikely event that's the case since it'd save some wait.

The rules are as follows: 1. You've been married to a US citizen for at least 3 years. 2. You've been an LPR for at least 3 years. 3. Your US Citizen spouse has been a US citizen for at least 3 years. In other words it's basically 3 years from whichever is last: 1. Date of marriage (2021 in your case) (example case being an LPR marrying a USC) 2. Resident since date (2023 in your case) (example being the typical marriage AOS or IR1, which is by far the most common scenario) 3. Date of spouse's naturalization (2025 in your case) (example being two LPRs marrying and soon thereafter one of them naturalizes, or another LPR petitions for spouse as an F2A, spouse comes to us on F21/FX1, and the LPR sponsor spouse naturalizes) In your case you're actually in a funny scenario, you'll become eligible both under the 5 year general provision and 3 year spouse of USC provision at about the same time in January 2028. So honestly, just file under the 5 year one when that becomes available in roughly October 2027, it's easier since you do not need to yet again prove that the marriage has continued to be legit, and since USCIS interviews for naturalization (they have to give you the exam portion somehow) they will most likely just switch you from 3 to 5 year provision unless you don't meet the physical presence requirement under 5 year provision.

Master hearings are generally very brief. If you have a lawyer your lawyer will be doing 99% of the talking. Other than that the way it'll basically just look like: If it's the first one: Do you admit or deny the allegations in the NTA? What language do you speak? What is the designated country of removal? If it's any then it's basically just taking attendance and the status of your case. E.g. Did you show up? Good. Is the I-360 still pending? Yes: Reschedule for another one. No: Either grant a motion to terminate or schedule you for an individual hearing. (Similar vein with EOIR-42B where if it's still backlogged - reschedule, if it's current - individual hearing, COR can only be granted by an IJ). That's about it, master hearings are for the most part just procedural.

Her, but hey always happy to help