Bottom of Page 2

http://w3.uchastings.edu/boswell_01/PDF/8usc1227.pdf

Good god.

I did and do suggest to the OP to cut losses and prepare to defend for possible future demands.

I watch illegal immigration every day. Do you actually think after this CIS has the energy or will to take an action against this person? I suspect they do not.

Suggesting otherwise is nearing drivel.

Yes, I understand that the Judge is the one to make the final decision. I believe the evidence is high against her. She has the right to appeal, but that does not mean she will do so, nor that she'd win the case. (She may not even show up in court.) One of the most important things here is the removal of the Affidavit of Support.

I take great exception to this comment, D&N. Drivel? How can you say such a thing? You suspect CIS doesn't have the energy or will to take action. I know otherwise! Please do NOT speculate!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are a couple dynamics going on here that tend to make discussion futile. With the rare notable exception, people are giving their opinion without example or much explanation. I would submit that it adds nothing of value to the discussion to assert that one person is speculating and the other "knows". Until the instant case has actual action or result, nobody "knows" and EVERYBODY is "speculating". What varies is the amount of knowledge upon which they base their speculation. I doubt any of us is completely familiar with the knowledge base of the other posters involved, so to assume what they do or don't know, is IMO, foolish.

Essencially, this discussion has boiled down to some people saying "maybe" and others saying "probably not". It's wise to realize both can be concurrently true. A side point has been about whether any actions that may be initiated by USCIS will result in actual loss of LPR status and deportation. Several examples supporting the probably not, on that both points have been given but I don't recall seeing any examples supporting the "maybe" or "probably" side yet. It makes me think the "probably" side is aware of either no examples or only one case about which they don't care to share details. So be it but "I know and you don't." won't get us anywhere as an unsupported statement.

I really do not know what is going here, but if someone chooses to be a bit more ambivalent about their personal journey while providing extremely helpful posts that are specific to the issues posted - I fail to see the problem.

I actually think it would make little difference if DM veered from her course of 'ambivalence' and elected to spill her guts completely.

She'd then likely be shot down as 'bitter' or 'a fluke'.

pushbrk,

I've been active on this site for 3 years. For 3 years I maintained a very private profile.
Suffice it to say I would not say "I know" unless I do know. I'm asking those participating in this thread, (well actually, for the most part in this particular forum) to refrain from guessing or placing a spin on what he or she has read or "thinks" might happen. What I contribute here is not speculation. It is experience!

DM -

I was researching around via google last evening about withdrawing the I-130 after conditional residency has been lifted.

I was wondering if you could expound a bit more on how a USC can do it. By expound, I guess I mean the 'mechanics' of it, and an example of what it would take to get the attention of the service. I know you already tried to make this clear, but I'm not quite sure I'm following it either. And there isn't loads of information out there so I'm sure this contributes to the dismissive comments.

In the case of a K1 beneficiary where an I130 is never filed (and thus cannot be retracted) is there any relief for the USC?

"I know" is only half the equation. Your assertion that about what others know or don't know is the other half. Since we are not talking about a case where the whole picture is known, anybody's assertions as to the ultimate outcome are speculation or SWAG or something along that line. I'm just saying that others are not convince in the face of everything they understand from their experience when nothing more is offered besides, "I know and you don't." particularly when all presented evidence is to the contrary.

In response to LAL, my comments refer to the instant unresolved discussion, not to the global value of any poster's contribution to VJ.

I have yettosee a case where to paraphrase USCIS/ICE whatever have acted on to paaphrase a he said/she said situation.

But I am sure there must be one, at least.

All the cases I have seen is where there has been substantial evidence, basically a situation they could not ignore.

For example if the OP's soon to be ex had been boasting about her strategy to independent witness's who were prepared to testify.