Sending in I129F Before Divorce Final

[kennym 275]

Look at what's at stake and the potential hurdles down the road.. Remember; you're swearing to; "you free to marry when filling your petition". If you feel the potential problems down the road are significant enough and the impact to you and your relationship is severe enough, then I would cancel the petition and wait until the divorce is final..

You're gonna be sweating this for a long time otherwise...

[L+T 71]

I would not say it is a fraud tag, many others here have made same mistake, and they simply get RFE / Denial. It is fraud if you knowingly do this, as the petition states, to the best of your knowledge it is true. But a mistake is a mistake. I think if the consulate catches it, they will send back to USCIS for denial. If not, they are likely free and clear, even if AOS finds it, it's kind of late, they are already married and whats done is done, and the mistake can equally be shared by all parties including USCIS for not inspecting the required divorce decree, which is a mandatory document for 129f approval.

[L+T 71]

Now that i read again... It also sounds like the case with the OP that the Judge was allowed to over-ride the 6 month waiting period. This may be legal and law in cali. Either wait 6 months or get Judge to stamp and sign early. Now that i read the OP statement again, this was likely the case, as law may be written to wait 6 months OR Judge approval. Looks legit based on law and documents provided. Just not very clear as to what the OP has, asked for, and is doing with limited statement.

[jake0926 1]

Now that i read again... It also sounds like the case with the OP that the Judge was allowed to over-ride the 6 month waiting period. This may be legal and law in cali. Either wait 6 months or get Judge to stamp and sign early. Now that i read the OP statement again, this was likely the case, as law may be written to wait 6 months OR Judge approval. Looks legit based on law and documents provided. Just not very clear as to what the OP has, asked for, and is doing with limited statement.

I noticed that too.

Looks like the OP might be ok.

Looks like a question for a divorce lawyer really.

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

Being overly familiar with California divorces. The judge is allowed to sign the divorce with a future effective date. California law says a diviroce can't be effective any sooner than 6 months from the day it is opened. However if all the final rulings are in place he can sign it and state that the effective date is in the future. ( Been there done that )

[L+T 71]

Being overly familiar with California divorces. The judge is allowed to sign the divorce with a future effective date. California law says a diviroce can't be effective any sooner than 6 months from the day it is opened. However if all the final rulings are in place he can sign it and state that the effective date is in the future. ( Been there done that )

Ah, so that blows that theory.

[Removed-02242014 19]

well just know that it may or may not come up during interview. USCIS is just checking to see if your paperwork is good. A CO may examine closer and say hold up "They filed fiance and was engaged before they divorce". Easily explained but just be prepared. Congratulations though.

Not a chance .... Not an issue ... we're good

[Removed-02242014 19]

Being overly familiar with California divorces. The judge is allowed to sign the divorce with a future effective date. California law says a diviroce can't be effective any sooner than 6 months from the day it is opened. However if all the final rulings are in place he can sign it and state that the effective date is in the future. ( Been there done that )

---------- Yes! You are absolutely right-on ... and they said because it had the date STAMPED on the official document of decree It was a legitimate filing. Out of the woods for sure. Wooo Hooo

[del-2-5-2014 1,339]

The race isn't over until you are at the finish line.

Many people forget that.

I consider the swearing in ceremony the end of the race. What do you consider the end, just curious.

OP was not free to marry on the date he signed the 129F but Judge said he was so that's okay I guess.

Edited July 22, 2012 by Gowon