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.

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.

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.

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

Depends on the size of the business — you would need to invest enough to own at least 50% of an operating business. If you purchased only 50% of a business, it would need to include a stipulation that you would be the controlling partner because an E Treaty Investor visa is specifically to allow a business investor to develop and direct the business in which he/she invested. The investment also must be sufficient to ensure the investor’s commitment to making the business successful. I would recommend a lot more research on not only the requirements for an E2 visa but also on the proposed type of businesses you are planning to invest in. I doubt that a $100,000 investment in either of the types of businesses you stated would meet the requirements. You would most likely not be able to purchase a controlling interest in an active, profitable off-license business or grocery store for that amount. It probably wouldn’t cover the cost of purchasing the stock to sell or the equipment needed to operate. The profit margins for small grocery stores in the US run, on average, between 1 to 3% — not sufficient to establish and support your family in the US for a $100,000 investment. (Major supermarkets operate with a larger margin, but your proposed investment would be insufficient for investing in one if the major chains). As to an off-license business — you would need to also check the requirements, cost, and length of time to get (or retain, if you buy an existing business) a liquor license. The requirements vary from state to state. Some, for example require the licensee to be a US citizen or LPR, which you will not be. Good luck in your research!

I agree, it is likely because of aging out. The CSPA age protection cannot be calculated exactly, since the Priority Date is not yet current, assuming you are from the Philippines. The current PD is 02/01/2004 — 10 months before your PD. it is clear, however, that the older “child” has aged out from CSPA protection even if the PD was current as of this month. The petition was pending approval for 4 years, 5 months, and 29 days. So, as long as a visa number is available (I.e., the PD is current) before they turn 25 years, 5 months, and 29 days old, they would qualify for the visa. As of October 1, 2024 (this month), the older child was 25 years, 7 months, 10 days old and has aged out. There is still a possibility that the younger one will qualify, although it will likely be close. He/she is currently (as of Oct 1), 21 years, 9 months, and 20 days old (although you said 22 years old). If a visa number is available in the next +/-3 years 8 months or so, the younger will not age out. The PD has to advance more than 10 months before their PD will be current. Historically, the F-4 PD moves very slowly, if at all, during a Fiscal Year. For example, looking at the F-4 PD for Phillipines on October 1 of the last five years, it was: Oct 2024 2/1/2004 Oct 2023 8/22/2002 Oct 2022 8/22/2002 Oct 2021 8/22/2002 Oct 2020 1/1 2002 So, for 3 years prior to this year, the PD did not move at all. It made a large jump this year, but it is unlikely to do so again. I would likely send an e-mail to NVC, asking about this, especially highlighting that the younger “child” has not yet definitely aged out of CSPA protection.

Cannot be done for non-immigrant visas. Either the children return to home country and submit passports through the Embassy process there or you re-apply and start the process over again in Canada.

How much marijuana? And was the pipe a second charge under drug laws (that is, was it for possession of drug paraphernalia under the state’s drug code)?

There really isn’t enough information provided here to give a thorough, reasoned response. The details of what you referred to as his “criminal history” are very important. For example, how many criminal convictions? For what crimes? Over what period of time? At what age were the various crimes committed? Did any of the crimes involve a weapon? Were any violent acts resulting in serious injury? Assuming all of that information has been shared with multiple lawyers, including Hacking, and all have refused to take the case, I there is a reason for that which we here are not aware of and that moving forward is with US immigration is highly unlikely. Sorry to be so blunt, but hopefully, it will help you take a serious look as to whether there truly is anything else you could do toward successfully pursuing US immigration. Actions such as trying to get a prior conviction relabeled/charge reduced after the fact so it sounds better/less serious, may be expensive and not achieve results that would advance the case. While it is truly horrific that he suffered abuse from the very people who were supposed to protect him, that will not factor into a decision as to whether or not he is ineligible to enter the US. Assuming all of his issues are waiverable, it could be useful in a waiver application, showing his rehabilitation and how far he has come…but that still isn’t a guarantee. You have some very serious choices to make — I wish you all the best in making a decision and developing a plan that will allow the two if you to live together happily, whether that’s in the US, NZ, or elsewhere.

This is only the second business day since her interview. Hopefully, you’ll see a change in the system soon!

The key to the issue is in the first sentence of the FAM quote — it only becomes an issue in the US or for immigration if the intent is to practice polygamy in the US. That usually only has an effect if there is an attempt to immigrate the second spouse (e.g., immigrate spouse 1, divorce them, “remarry” spouse 2, immigrate them, all live happily together in US). No divorce of spouse 2 is required, but there should no longer be a spousal relationship. Technically, if that relationship with spouse 2 is maintained on trips outside the US, and that can be proven, there might be an issue. Just like “intent is decided at the border” for other issues, once the immigrant visa is issued and the person is admitted to the US, and naturalized, it becomes very difficult to prove the intent to practice polygamy in the US. None of this is an issue for any biological children involved. If they are his biological children, regardless of whom the mother may be (former spouse, current spouse 2 with/without an ongoing spousal relationship, child from an adulterous relationship, born out-of-wedlock — whatever), he can petition for the child(ren) without repercussions. OP, to answer your question, you will have to prove — as does any parent petitioning their child — the relationship between you and each child.

While this is far from the OP’s topic and question, I would like to address a couple of your statements that are not accurate, as they may cause future misunderstandings for others with other topics. The “silly stuff” you mention is included to give people a sense of American culture and wide variety of interests, attitudes, and humor — as we all do in life, the Embassy FB page does not focus solely on “serious” topics. The Embassy FB page is 100% managed by an American officer. They will take down any post that appears to be more about domestic issues than foreign affairs related or that has potentially sensitive information, including law enforcement issues. And, anything with an outside link will be immediately taken down for cybersecurity reasons, as it could introduce a virus into the system. Most importantly, US Embassies DO close for holidays — they close for all US federal holidays and the majority of the local county’s federal holidays, up to a total number allowed per year. They may be open for a local federal holiday, if it exceeds the annual total allowed. (They also close for the two days that are the “weekend” for the host country). There is always a US officer on duty 24/7 for emergencies involving an American citizen (for example, the death of an American citizen, a crime involving a US citizen, etc) when the Embasst is closed. It was almost certainly the duty officer you spoke with on the phone. BTW, not all duty officers would have deemed your request an emergency and would have told you to return when the Embassy was open, unless it was almost the last day to get a ballot.

Assuming OP is from a country where polygamy is legal, as long as he doesn’t practice polygamy in the US or try to immigrate the second spouse (assuming the wife in the US is wife #1), there will be no repercussions in the US. OP — you need to file an I-130 for each child, assuming you did not meet the requirements to transmit US citizenship to them.