Possible AOS from B2?

[Boiler 43,508]

Yes he did. That is the first thing that he brought up when advising us to AOS. However, he thought that the time is short for us to AOS and also obtain advance parole and he was very hesitant to assure us that we would get the AP in time for my wife to travel back to Brazil on April 5. She has very serious reasons for needing to be back there by that date(for her, not necessarily for immigration). So anyways, he was very optimistic about our chances for AOS, but not so much for AP.

That seems a very reasonable comment.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I agree with Boiler that she's not likely to be coming back with the B2, so even if it was revoked it wouldn't change anything. There's no harm in applying for an extension. I wouldn't get my hopes up of having it approved. It would be different if she'd been given the standard 6 months entry, but the CBP officer cut her time dramatically shorter than usual. In the meantime, she's married a US citizen.

She would need to overstay by 180 days or more before it would adversely affect her chances of getting a CR1.

If you decide to have another consultation with the lawyer, ask him what happens if CBP found something in her luggage that might be construed as evidence of preconceived intent. Perhaps a letter from you. Or maybe a document that would be needed for an AOS application, but generally not needed for a tourist visit. If he's an educated lawyer, he'll tell you that they can't deny for preconceived intent. Then ask him about her statement to the CBP denying that she lived in the US and intended to immigrate. Combined with evidence of preconceived intent, could that statement be construed as a material misrepresentation? Could the AOS be denied for this, and could she subsequently be banned for fraud?

I know the answers to these questions because I've read the cases where this is exactly what's happened. I'm just curious what your attorney thinks about it.

[Journeyer 17]

I agree with Boiler that she's not likely to be coming back with the B2, so even if it was revoked it wouldn't change anything. There's no harm in applying for an extension. I wouldn't get my hopes up of having it approved. It would be different if she'd been given the standard 6 months entry, but the CBP officer cut her time dramatically shorter than usual. In the meantime, she's married a US citizen.

She would need to overstay by 180 days or more before it would adversely affect her chances of getting a CR1.

If you decide to have another consultation with the lawyer, ask him what happens if CBP found something in her luggage that might be construed as evidence of preconceived intent. Perhaps a letter from you. Or maybe a document that would be needed for an AOS application, but generally not needed for a tourist visit. If he's an educated lawyer, he'll tell you that they can't deny for preconceived intent. Then ask him about her statement to the CBP denying that she lived in the US and intended to immigrate. Combined with evidence of preconceived intent, could that statement be construed as a material misrepresentation? Could the AOS be denied for this, and could she subsequently be banned for fraud?

I know the answers to these questions because I've read the cases where this is exactly what's happened. I'm just curious what your attorney thinks about it.

First of all, there were not any documents or letters or anything like that in her luggage, nothing. Only her clothes, some jewelry, and some coffee she brought from Brazil for me. I could talk to the attorney again and ask those questions, but it is a moot point since she is not staying to AOS, right? I just do not want the extension filing or a possible overstay when they deny it to have an effect on our CR-1. I already know that the lawyer we talked to will say they won't deny the AOS(I think he is a little too overly confident), but I just do not see us taking a chance of going down that path.

The thing that worries my wife about filing the extension is that the IO interrogating her told her that he is personally deporting her if she stays past the I-94 date. I don't know if that is really possible even if she legally files for a 3 month extension, the person was a real goon. I realize that they were doing their job by questioning her, but being hateful is not a part of the job. I am afraid we are regressing into a totalitarian state in the US. This is not the same country I grew up in and it is very sad.

[Boiler 43,508]

IO interrogating her told her that he is personally deporting her if she stays past the I-94 date.

That is what is called bluster, his job is to sit behind his desk at the airport. I ma really surprised they let her in at all with her past travel pattern. But the one thing you can soon see is that there is an exception to every situation. Even if the odds are very low.

I have never seen anybody set up by the PoE for subsequent charges of misrep etc, I am not saying it does not happen when you think of the millions of cases dealt with every year.If it happened with any frequency I am sure I would have come across it.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

I have never seen anybody set up by the PoE for subsequent charges of misrep etc, I am not saying it does not happen when you think of the millions of cases dealt with every year.If it happened with any frequency I am sure I would have come across it.

You don't remember the Japanese woman from a few months back who did actually enter on a B-Visa already married to a USC who was taken into secondary? She lied to CBP about being married to a USC and was actually planning to AOS once in.

CBP uncovered the lie at POE but still let her in.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

First of all, there were not any documents or letters or anything like that in her luggage, nothing. Only her clothes, some jewelry, and some coffee she brought from Brazil for me. I could talk to the attorney again and ask those questions, but it is a moot point since she is not staying to AOS, right? I just do not want the extension filing or a possible overstay when they deny it to have an effect on our CR-1. I already know that the lawyer we talked to will say they won't deny the AOS(I think he is a little too overly confident), but I just do not see us taking a chance of going down that path.

The thing that worries my wife about filing the extension is that the IO interrogating her told her that he is personally deporting her if she stays past the I-94 date. I don't know if that is really possible even if she legally files for a 3 month extension, the person was a real goon. I realize that they were doing their job by questioning her, but being hateful is not a part of the job. I am afraid we are regressing into a totalitarian state in the US. This is not the same country I grew up in and it is very sad.

Sorry about pressing you on the attorney. I just cringe when an attorney is over confident. I got the same attitude from my divorce lawyer. "Don't worry. I've had much tougher cases than yours. You'll be fine." After reading the state family code I brought up several points I thought might be an issue. He admitted those things were possible, but again assured me that I had nothing to worry about. Some of those issues did come up, and my over confident attorney was suddenly not so confident. He was totally unprepared to deal with them, and acted like it was a total surprise.

Intimidation is a common law enforcement tactic. They use it because it works. They frequently lie about what they can or will do in order to coerce a confession. A lot has changed in this country since you and I were born, but this particular tactic has been around long before either of us. One thing that has changed is that they don't beat you with a rubber hose during the interrogation anymore.

It can definitely be traumatic if you don't know why they're doing it, but it's a lot less scary when you realize that they are toothless - all bark and no bite. This doesn't just apply to CBP and ICE, but to ALL law enforcement officers in the US. Personally, I think that everyone who lives in or visits the US should be trained in how to deal with law enforcement, understand the tactics they use and know your rights when dealing with them. They wouldn't actually do this because then nobody would be afraid of them, and that would take away a very powerful interrogation tool.

Only an immigration judge can order your wife deported. The IO was blowing smoke.

[Journeyer 17]

That is what is called bluster, his job is to sit behind his desk at the airport. I ma really surprised they let her in at all with her past travel pattern. But the one thing you can soon see is that there is an exception to every situation. Even if the odds are very low.

I have never seen anybody set up by the PoE for subsequent charges of misrep etc, I am not saying it does not happen when you think of the millions of cases dealt with every year.If it happened with any frequency I am sure I would have come across it.

I am surprised that they let her in also. But I have to tell you, I think maybe I said this here before, but not sure. She is an attorney, for the most part retired now, although she still occasionally takes a few cases and does some personal favors on business law matters for friends/family. But she is VERY good at arguing and winning. I know this first hand, lol. I honestly believe that she could have convinced them to lift the 1 month limit if she would have persisted, but she was so upset at the time by this persons complete disregard for courteous discourse that she just wanted to get out of there and get on her flight to Baltimore. I just find it ridiculous that they would waste tax payers money setting someone up if they could have just put her on a plane back at their discretion. Although it is becoming more clear each day that wasting tax payers money is what our federal government really excels at. I also think it may be just a little more sensible to put distinct limits on travel for the B2 to begin with instead of making everyone just have to guess about things like that. So if the rule should be only 6 months in and 6 months out, then they should just set it up that way to start with. Playing these games is just dumb. I also would like to know where it is written that you cannot use a B2 to visit a boyfriend/girlfriend, or a fiance. In our case there was never any preconceived intent to marry and AOS, never. So no matter what they would have decided in case we did AOS, if they would have ruled there was intent at the time of her arrival, they would have been wrong. The fact that a person is, as one poster here said, playing Russian roulette with that option is just nuts. We need immigration reform here, badly. No wonder we have so many illegals or out of process people here, the immigration process is a mess. I got flamed for saying this before, but it really upsets me that there are thousands of illegals here in MD and that my wife, who has never been here out of status, has to be separated from me for many months and who knows how long because we are doing things the legal way. The fact that they do not consider long separation from a spouse to be a hardship is just inhumane, period. Well, that is my rant for now.

[Boiler 43,508]

You don't remember the Japanese woman from a few months back who did actually enter on a B-Visa already married to a USC who was taken into secondary? She lied to CBP about being married to a USC and was actually planning to AOS once in.

CBP uncovered the lie at POE but still let her in.

She lied, not the same situation. No set up involved. Chinese I think.

Did she adjust and if so what happened?

[Journeyer 17]

You don't remember the Japanese woman from a few months back who did actually enter on a B-Visa already married to a USC who was taken into secondary? She lied to CBP about being married to a USC and was actually planning to AOS once in.

CBP uncovered the lie at POE but still let her in.

What happened after that? Did she still try to AOS and get denied?

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

I also would like to know where it is written that you cannot use a B2 to visit a boyfriend/girlfriend, or a fiance.

This is not written anywhere because of course you can use your B2 to visit your SO. OP, I have a question. I seem to recall you said that your wife did not ever mention a boyfriend in the States. If that is true, I am inclined to think it's possible they gave her a harder time because she was here so often and for so long without a compelling reason. If she had admitted a bf, they might have said, "oh, that is why you are here so often, okay, have fun." Without this compelling reason to be here, it may seem weird she is here so often (hence the accusation of living here). On the other hand, the fear is that mention of an American bf would cause them to deny entry based on immigrant intent, which is a possibility too.

if you apply to extend her B-2, if they deny it OR if they approve it, her B-2 will be invalidated and she would need to apply for a new one for a new entry.

Also, as Jim mentioned, she would only be negatively affected for CR-1 if she overstays 180 days.

What happened after that? Did she still try to AOS and get denied?

Since she both lied at POE and had immigrant intent she said she realized her error and was going home to apply for CR-1. She may have lied here too though. *shrug*

Edited December 30, 2010 by Harpa Timsah

[Journeyer 17]

Sorry about pressing you on the attorney. I just cringe when an attorney is over confident. I got the same attitude from my divorce lawyer. "Don't worry. I've had much tougher cases than yours. You'll be fine." After reading the state family code I brought up several points I thought might be an issue. He admitted those things were possible, but again assured me that I had nothing to worry about. Some of those issues did come up, and my over confident attorney was suddenly not so confident. He was totally unprepared to deal with them, and acted like it was a total surprise.

Intimidation is a common law enforcement tactic. They use it because it works. They frequently lie about what they can or will do in order to coerce a confession. A lot has changed in this country since you and I were born, but this particular tactic has been around long before either of us. One thing that has changed is that they don't beat you with a rubber hose during the interrogation anymore.

It can definitely be traumatic if you don't know why they're doing it, but it's a lot less scary when you realize that they are toothless - all bark and no bite. This doesn't just apply to CBP and ICE, but to ALL law enforcement officers in the US. Personally, I think that everyone who lives in or visits the US should be trained in how to deal with law enforcement, understand the tactics they use and know your rights when dealing with them. They wouldn't actually do this because then nobody would be afraid of them, and that would take away a very powerful interrogation tool.

Only an immigration judge can order your wife deported. The IO was blowing smoke.

No problem at all about that. The attorney made me cringe also being so overly confident.

I think it is a little different, a lot actually, of a situation with law enforcement when interrogating terrorists or dangerous criminals. But when you have someone from another country/culture visiting your country and they are obviously not a threat to anyone, and they are treated in that way it really gives a bad impression of our country. I mean, especially for a little 5' 2" woman being dragged into a little room and interrogated by some gorilla like goon. Even being a man, I think I would be freaking out a little if I went to Brazil to visit and got dragged into a little room where they screamed at me in Portuguese and I may not be able to comprehend everything they were saying or why exactly I was in that situation.

[Journeyer 17]

If she had admitted a bf, they might have said, "oh, that is why you are here so often, okay, have fun."

If she would have told them that, she would not be here now, IMHO.

if you apply to extend her B-2, if they deny it OR if they approve it, her B-2 will be invalidated and she would need to apply for a new one for a new entry.

I don't think that is 100% accurate. If they deny it and she is still here when she receives the denial, that will invalidate the multiple entry visa, because it would put her immediately out of status. But if they approve it, the visa will remain valid because she will never have been out of status. Can anyone else here confirm that?

[Boiler 43,508]

O do not think anybody is assuming that they will give her an extension. But if they did she would remain in status until the extension runs out.

[Journeyer 17]

O do not think anybody is assuming that they will give her an extension. But if they did she would remain in status until the extension runs out.

Lol, I for one am not assuming that. I assume they will deny it. But it would be nice if it bought us a little extra time together before she returns.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

If she would have told them that, she would not be here now, IMHO.

One does not have to withhold information about relationships at POE to be granted entry.

I don't think that is 100% accurate. If they deny it and she is still here when she receives the denial, that will invalidate the multiple entry visa, because it would put her immediately out of status. But if they approve it, the visa will remain valid because she will never have been out of status. Can anyone else here confirm that?

I remember reading that, but a cursory glance tells me I am wrong. However, the reason the denial of extension invalidates the B-2 is not because of overstay, although the internet chat claims so. People overstay and re-use their visas in some cases (an overstay CAN invalidate the visa... it all depends on length of overstay etc). Anyway, the reason it is invalidated when an extension denial is received is because the law states it, that's all.

Edited December 30, 2010 by Harpa Timsah