frank1538

Congratulations and best wishes.

Congratulations. Looking forward to your report.

That's wonderful news, Rich. You guys have overcome too many obstacles for this last phase to be anything other than a walk in the park. Best of luck to you.

April 18th. We're going to visit some friends in Dongguan, and Jingwen wants to spend a little money in Macau before we head down to Zhanjiang to visit with her family. We'll head back to the US sometime in early May.

It is clear that a K-1 visa holder, still in status, does not need an EAD to obtain a Social Security card if applied for within a certain timeframe. There is some uncertainty regarding whether a K-1 visa holder actually needs and EAD to work. Ken's fiancee's SS card has a "VALID FOR WORK ONLY WITH DHS AUTHORIZATION" stamp on it, and I don't think this is in error. As much as I would like to think that Randy's post that the K-1 visa, itself, is sufficient documentation, I'm not so sure. When you look at the I-9 Handbook For Employers ( http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/handboo...20handbook' ), it seems fairly clear that USCIS does not consider the K-1 visa or notation of K-1 on the I-94 as proper documentation unless the I-94 has an "employmennt authorized" stamp on it which I think NY POE still provides. Also, when you look at the listing of visa categories that don't require anything else other than the classification, they all relate to employer specific classifications which a K-1 is not. Granted, the I-9 handbook hasn't been updated in quite a while, but it does post date the K-1 visa category, so one would have to assume that the K-1 status was considered. Further, this information bulletin suggests that a K-1 visa holder needs an EAD in order to verify employment eligibility to an employer: http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2004,0615-eib108.pdf So, I think FuManChu and NY-Viking are right when they say that a K-1 visa holder needs an EAD in order to be able to document employment eligibility to an employer. On the question of what to do with a Social Security card when there is a name change, take a look at: http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/ssa.cf...li=&p_topview=1

I apologize for my post - maybe a bit over the top. And, yes, Jingwen's been gone for a couple of weeks, and I ran out of Cheetos last night. Stocked up again this morning - should last me until I join her in April.

When you refer to the I-693, I'm assuming you're referring to the vaccination supplement. I would be inclined to wait for an RFE. I say this because I am aware of an instance or two where the applicant did not send in the vaccination supplement but took it to the interview. So, it may be possible that you won't even get an RFE. If you try to send it in now, you run the risk that it won't get associated with you initial application. By waiting for an RFE (if one comes), you'll have the RFE notice with all the identifying information on it that will be returned when you send in the vaccination supplement. The RFE procedure will increase the chances that the missing document will actually get into your file.

Great news. Congratulations.

These links provide guidance on appealing a USCIS decision to deny or revoke a petition and may be useful if it comes to that. Technically, a Department of State outright denial of a visa application, as opposed to a "blue slip" situation, is not appealable.

When I read some of these posts, I reach only only conclusion - it's like you're saying "there's a problem, but I'm not paying to fix it." Just WTF do you want? Here's your cake. Try to eat it too. You decide. Do you want to stop the flow of undocumented aliens into the US or do you want to change the immigration practices and pay for the staffing so that more aliens can come to the US legally and others can staill have their visas processed promptly? Do you want to provide a workforce so that business can make a reasonable profit or do you want to pay more for your food and other goods so that business can make a reasonable profit? Do you want to close the borders to immigration from some countries or do you fear Latinos more than terrorists? Do you want to set immigration limits by country and do you want to pay to build the fence higher and increase border patrols? Do you want to deport everyone here illegally, including most of their children who are here legally, or do you want to make 11 million people part of the American dream and are you willing to pay either way? The current policy ain't broke. It's been designed to accomplish exactly what's happened. Spew forth the rhetoric about illegal immigration but don't fund the laws already on the books. This side of the face says "look, I helped pass the law that makes it a criminal offense to hire undocumented workers" while the other side of the face says "don't worry about it, we won't fund enforcement." One side says "we don't want your immigrants" while the other side says "we'll work with you because we want your oil to satisfy our demand." I said this to my ex spouse, and I'll say it here. Money makes people mean. I'm in a piss poor mood tonight, so if someone wants to ax this post, go ahead.

Welcome to Candle. Hopefully, you will get some good advice here. Do you think your husband's age had anything to do with the denial? If you're 50, he's 90.

Maybe Li's fingerprints got caught up in the great bogus biometrics scam: http://candleforlove.com/forums/index.php?...ndpost&p=192669

Your lawyers can best advise you on your options, but as a general rule, "...Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this Act is inadmissible." http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/s....htm#slb-act212 "Willfully misrepresenting a material fact" sounds a lot like "Material misrepresentation" which DOS defines as "...giving fraudulent documents or telling a consular officer false information in an interview. The information must be important and make a difference in whether the consular officer issues a visa applicant a visa." http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/glossary...ary_1363.html#m There is a limited waiver exception to the ban on admissibility: "...The Attorney General may, in the discretion of the Attorney General, waive the application of clause (i) of subsection (a)(6)© in the case of an immigrant who is the spouse, son, or daughter of a United States citizen or of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, if it is established to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that the refusal of admission to the United States of such immigrant alien would result in extreme hardship to the citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent of such an alien..." http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/s...t-frame.htm&2.0 We have one CFL member who is attempting to obtain a similar but not identical waiver for his wife, and if his experience is an indicator, your lawyer is right in suggesting that the likelihood is not very good. I am sure you will note that this particular waiver is only available when the alien is a spouse, son, or daughter of a US citizen, and I don't know if the type of visa (immigrant or non immigrant K-3) would make a difference. Again, your lawyers are best able to advise you, and what I say should NOT be taken as any sort of legal advice, but if I were in your shoes, I'd probably try to get to the bottom of the first visa application and see if there really was fraud or a material misrepresentation. Fraud is difficult to prove because it requires the VO to show that the alien had the intent to deceive. Whether a misrepresented fact is material can be analyzed in a number of ways, but I like to use two methods. First, if the true fact were known, would the visa have been denied? If the answer is "yes", I would conclude that the fact was a material fact. Second, if the true fact were known, would it have led to some other inquiry that might show inadmissibility. For example, if an applicant lied about having lived in another country for more than six months, the fact that the individual actually lived somewhere else is not in an of itself a basis for inadmissibility, but the lie would preclude the VO from requiring a police clearance which might have shown inadmissibility. If it turns out that there really wasn't fraud or a misrepresentation of a material fact, maybe the consulate would view your current petition in a more favorable light.

Another success!! Nicely done and congratulations.

I merged the topics into this first one and deleted some of the posts.

How important? Very. It is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. With the exception of the sealed vaccination envelope, I would make copies of everything, and a copy of the contents of the sealed envelope should actually have been given to you by the civil surgeon (ask him or her for a copy of the contents if not). Sure, it's a precautionary measure, but what would happen if you got an RFE? It would be nice to know what you submitted and why someting wasn't just right. The information may be fresh now, but you will soon forget whether you've sent in this or that. Make the copies.

Congratulations and long overdue. Best wishes to you both.

Petitioners are not allowed at the interview, but that doesn't stop you from going to Guangzhou to provide support and otherwise prep your SO for the interview. Some applicants will bring the petitioner's passport or copy with them to the interview and make sure the VO knows that you are there waiting. Whether this influences the outcome of the interview is anybody's guess. In addition to support, to me, one advantage to being in Guangzhou is that you are on site if a problem arises.

The short answer is no: http://uscis.gov/graphics/i-693faq.htm "...Ks: If you were admitted to the United States as a fiance(e) (K-1), child of a fiance(e) (K-2), Spouse of a U.S. citizen (K-3), or child of K-3 (K-4), and received a medical examination prior to admission, then you do not require another medical examination as long as your application for adjustment of status (Form I-485) is filed within one year of your overseas medical examination. You will, however, be required to submit a vaccination supplement with our adjustment of status application. The vaccination supplement must be completed by a designated civil surgeon." Many civil surgeons either don't know this or try to get you to have another exam for the money. You may need to shop around for a civil surgeon who will not want to give another exam.

At least you're together in the US with this latest black hole. Best of luck during your government's request to keep the demand for gasoline up.

A word of caution. A K3 entitles her to mulitple entries, however, she is still required to apply for a reentry permit, which is also good for two years. Currently, the NE service center is about three months behind on these applications. You can apply while here in the US and pick the reentry permit up from the local consulate. Larry T 202606[/snapback] Are you sure about this? For some reason, I thought re-entry permits were available only to legal permanent residents. As a K-3 visa holder, she would not be an LPR.

The K-3 is a multi-entry visa, so your wife will be able to re-enter the US as long as the visa is still valid (2 year validity, I think). Just a couple of points of clarification. The CR-1 classification is an immigrant classification, so if she were to first enter the US on her CR-1, upon entry she would become a legal permanent resident. While it would take a while for her to actually receive her green card, her passport would be stamped with the I-551 stamp, essentially proof of her status an an LPR. As an LPR, she would also be able to re-enter the US. Before I abandoned the I-130 in favor of the K-3, I would be inclined to ascertain where both petitions are in the process. If it looked like the I-130 might get to Taipei first, I would consider going with it rather than the K-3.

Welcome to Candle. Sounds like your SO may have already cleared the namecheck and she's just waiting for the scheduling of the interiview. Good luck.

I signed the cover letter which started out something like "On behalf of my wife, Jingwen XXXXX, I am enclosing..." I thought that my signing the cover letter would reinforce my involvement in the process and couldn't hurt since a bona fide marriage would be what would have to be established as part of the AOS.

I'm a bit confused by your timeline which indicates K-3. Maybe Chengdu was similarly confused. If you're truly seeking only an immigrant visa (CR-1), you should only be filing the I-130. If you really want a K-3 visa, Chengdu is right in that you need to file both forms. IMHO, going after a K-3 visa if direct consular filing for the CR-1 is really available to you seems unwarranted.