Randy W

Fraud MUST be intentional, in order for it to be fraud. That is, they must knowingly break the law in order to gain something to which they are not entitled. That's why I object to the use of the word when we either aren't sure or when we do know that the intent to break the law was not there. This case is apparently NOT fraudulent - but her lawyer can better address that issue. My guess it will be a much more amicable case than what we are implying.

One advantage you have while in the US is access to the immigration courts, which will rule on the facts and the law. A USCIS ruling doesn't have to be the final word.

The I-130 is the application for the CR-1. By "getting burned", what do you mean? What happened to those people? Sorry, I think the word "fraud" is tossed around too easily here and at VJ - it's a very serious accusation, and we don't know the details. Her lawyer and the USCIS should be able to sort out her status, hopefully for the better.

Now, wait Dan! In one sentence, you call it fraud. In the next, you are promoting it. Waiting one month changes only apparent intent, not the actual intent. It seems the issue here is the B-1 visa. There is nothing wrong with getting a B-1 visa, nothing wrong with using it, and nothing wrong with getting married anytime, anywhere. So the issue would be over-staying the B-1 and filing the I-485 while here. Doesn't she simply need to return to China to await the processing of the I-130? If she does, what are the complications of the over-stay, and having filed the I-485? and , yes, talk to an immigrations attorney. Did her latest B-1 application state that she was married?

I agree - I don't think he should have stepped in without making sure with you that he knew what was going on. Kids can learn how to manipulate this way.

They will tell you to go ahead and use the downloaded forms if you haven't received the packet. I don't think we have any indication as to whether there's an advantage to doing this, though.

On a practical level, you can do it. On a technical level, it's not advised. As your last sentence states, "ANY LENGTH" can be considered grounds for abandonment, so even if you're out for a month, they seem to imply they can keep you from returning. Living in China can certainly be considered abandonment. I believe we've heard from people, though, who have maintained their green card status with annual visits to the states.

By the luck of the draw, you may get one who speaks your language. They don't honor any requests.

Works the same with IR-Visas I have seen cases where parents visit and then adjust status. The child would have to arrive on a visitors visa, and then you would file I-130/I-485/I-864 after the child is here on the visitor's visa. Remember that China is different, though - the catch is how to get the original visa.

It's been done by SheLikesMe?, but their situation was that the CR-2 was all but approved, waiting (for issuance) for the girl to finish school. Will it be impossible to do a visiting visa first, and permanent paperwork after she is here? That would be a K-4. If they treat it like they do K-2's, it can be done fairly quickly. The only(slight) complication is scheduling an interview date. They have a tendency to ignore requests unless one somehow catches their eye. The catch is that your wife would have to have been given a K-3.

It's been done by SheLikesMe?, but their situation was that the CR-2 was all but approved, waiting (for issuance) for the girl to finish school.

Same way they give it to the Chinese - pointing. Jiaying didn't even want to bother driving 5 miles to Chinatown for the test.

Texas allows interpreters for the written test, but not for the driving test.

I think rumors get started when we take one person's experience as gospel, when the truth may be that that particular case was simply slated for closer scrutiny by the powers that be at GUZ. In reality, the VO has leeway as to what he will accept as evidence.

I assume you had a figure on the I-134 where it says "I own real estate values at ________", and "with mortgages and other encumbrances thereon amounting to __________" that would have greatly exceeded 125% of the poverty line? If so, perhaps another VO would be more receptive to your situation, but that may be an attempt you can't afford to make. A co-sponsor would seem to be prudent here.

The VO's are not tax accountants and complex tax returns can cause problems. They are instructed to look for numbers on a tax return at a specific place and if it's not there they request more info. Your objective here is to get the visa as easily as possible. So I'd suggest ordering tax transcripts and submitting them instead of a tax return and using a co-sponsor. You can obtain a transcript by calling (800)¨C829¨C1040 and they usually arrive in less than 10 days. You want this to be a simple overcome. Avoid listing assets or real estate, they can cause requests for appraisals. When you submit, provide your I-134 with 3 years tax transcripts as well as an I-134 from your co-sponsor. I'd recommend 3 years tax transcripts from your co-sponsor as well. But the tax transcripts are going to show the same thing. The key for him would be to demonstrate that he actually has assets that he can draw from. I think the income thing may be a lost cause, since it's negative.

Employment authorization of some kind is ALWAYS required, even though some hire without it. Her employer may be required to show this. On the other hand, some employers choose to not hire with anything less than the EAD.

The K-1 provides DHS work authorization, good for 90 days, to any employer who is willing to hire her. After that, she needs EAD or a green card.

Historically (meaning 2 years ago), the DOS computers were updated on Saturday by the folks at GUZ.

Yes - the whole issue with the FBI background check/mandamus thing was that people were suing their way to citizenship. That is, after so many months/years of waiting, they could bring a mandamus suit and get their citizenship without waiting for the background check. Completely ignoring their own responsibilities there, the USCIS blamed the FBI. If there is a new law, I hope someone can find it. Either way, we're increasingly in between and rock and a hard place with these delays. The USCIS has a legal layer in place to deal with the courts. Unfortunately, they don't show us the same courtesy.

Don't ask me to quote a source for this, but I think it's not possible any more. That is, I think a law was passed that prevents the court from ordering the USCIS to approve an application before the background check is complete. If it's not a background check, that may be a different matter.

There used to be a requirement like that for US passport photos, until about 2 years ago. Turned to the side, hair pulled back, one ear visible, something like that.

I hate to bring up another layer, here, but have you thought about filing for EAD for her?

Yes - it helps, when going to the SS office to bring a copy of the internal SS memo which states that K-1's are eligible for SS. I'll post it tonight if someone doesn't post it before then. Be sure to apply before 75 days have passed. After that, they won't process the application.

I don't think that the stamp conveys any rights that you don't have WITHOUT the stamp. As such, I would not reccomend that anyone go out of their way to go through JFK in order to get the stamp. With or without the stamp, you have the right to an SS #, and to be hired by any employer who will hire you with the knowledge that, although your employment eligibility expires in 90 days, you will be eligible to apply for EAD. There are plenty of them that will. You may also apply for a 90 day EAD which will expire before you ever get it. No - the K-1 is all you need for 90 days.