Former K1 fiancées that didn’t marry my groom and left US.

[LookyWhatIFound 38]

That would be the International Marriage Brokers Act which was enacted last year.

"IMBRA imposes limitations on the number of petitions a petitioner for a K nonimmigrant visa for an alien fiancé(e) (K-1) may file or have approved without seeking a waiver of the application of those limitations. If the petitioner has filed two or more K-1 visa petitions at any time in the past, or previously had a K-1 visa petition approved within two years prior to the filing of the current petition, the petitioner must request a waiver...."

Is the waiver part of the K1 packet you ask for at time of new filing or something you can do in advance?

The IMBRA Waiver Request is a letter you put together, basically documenting why you should be allowed to file your I-129F again. The IMBRA Special Topics forum has sample letters that people have put together.

[azcactus 0]

That would be the International Marriage Brokers Act which was enacted last year.

"IMBRA imposes limitations on the number of petitions a petitioner for a K nonimmigrant visa for an alien fiancé(e) (K-1) may file or have approved without seeking a waiver of the application of those limitations. If the petitioner has filed two or more K-1 visa petitions at any time in the past, or previously had a K-1 visa petition approved within two years prior to the filing of the current petition, the petitioner must request a waiver...."

Is the waiver part of the K1 packet you ask for at time of new filing or something you can do in advance?

The IMBRA Waiver Request is a letter you put together, basically documenting why you should be allowed to file your I-129F again. The IMBRA Special Topics forum has sample letters that people have put together.

Thank you. Are the chances good if I can explain that my fiancee didn't want to come to US and backed out of our K1?

[DA BOMB 1]

Poor Girl, she was asking a real question and we are all telling her to run.

That's the best advice we could give her.

Amazing how everyone pounces on her lol GEEZ!!! Ever think that his past petition was filed BEFORE the IMBRA law went into effect?

[DA BOMB 1]

Thank you. Are the chances good if I can explain that my fiancee didn't want to come to US and backed out of our K1?

Yes az, and save your messages from her and your NOAs for supporting evidence.

[kitkat1 5]

Ever think that his past petition was filed BEFORE the IMBRA law went into effect?

What difference in the world does that make? None!

The fact still remains that her fiance has filed two previous petitions, hasn't done any research on his own regarding filing a third one, and has told her that it's best to lie about it.

[LookyWhatIFound 38]

That would be the International Marriage Brokers Act which was enacted last year.

"IMBRA imposes limitations on the number of petitions a petitioner for a K nonimmigrant visa for an alien fiancé(e) (K-1) may file or have approved without seeking a waiver of the application of those limitations. If the petitioner has filed two or more K-1 visa petitions at any time in the past, or previously had a K-1 visa petition approved within two years prior to the filing of the current petition, the petitioner must request a waiver...."

Is the waiver part of the K1 packet you ask for at time of new filing or something you can do in advance?

The IMBRA Waiver Request is a letter you put together, basically documenting why you should be allowed to file your I-129F again. The IMBRA Special Topics forum has sample letters that people have put together.

Thank you. Are the chances good if I can explain that my fiancee didn't want to come to US and backed out of our K1?

Yes, I don't think its a problem, and that was out of your control. The law was initially enacted to prevent men from abusing foreign women, of all things!

[brnidokiegurl 1]

(The fact still remains that her fiance has filed two previous petitions, hasn't done any research on his own regarding filing a third one, and has told her that it's best to lie about it.)

[DA BOMB 1]

Ever think that his past petition was filed BEFORE the IMBRA law went into effect?

What difference in the world does that make? None!

The fact still remains that her fiance has filed two previous petitions, hasn't done any research on his own regarding filing a third one, and has told her that it's best to lie about it.

It makes a difference because the jerk lawyer that advised the USC to lie also probably didnt tell him about the IMBRA law. And for your info. there was only ONE previous approved petition and the reason most hire a lawyer is so they dont have to do "research" on their own. It doesnt make her guy a sneaky criminal as most have tagged him as.....it makes him lucky to have a gal who will find the facts so they can fire this idiot lawyer steering them in the wrong direction.

Edited February 26, 2007 by MRS BILLY BONG

[msu17 0]

I go with Orange flag See how he responds after you present him with our advice etc. If he dismisses it or makes you feel silly/stupid for not following lawyer #2, think hard about it. If he says ok and listens then I wouldnt be as concerned. But PLEASE if he acts like the 1st situation, get out! I dated a man like that for 5 years and it was HORRIBLE, you absolutely dont want to be married to someone who doesnt respect your opinion and what makes you comfortable.

Ever think that his past petition was filed BEFORE the IMBRA law went into effect?

What difference in the world does that make? None!

The fact still remains that her fiance has filed two previous petitions, hasn't done any research on his own regarding filing a third one, and has told her that it's best to lie about it.

It makes a difference because the jerk lawyer that advised the USC to lie also probably didnt tell him about the IMBRA law. And for your info. there was only ONE previous approved petition and the reason most hire a lawyer is so they dont have to do "research" on their own. It doesnt make her guy a sneaky criminal as most have tagged him as.....it makes him lucky to have a gal who will find the facts so they can fire this idiot lawyer steering them in the wrong direction.

[kitkat1 5]

It makes a difference because the jerk lawyer that advised the USC to lie also probably didnt tell him about the IMBRA law. And for your info. there was only ONE previous approved petition and the reason most hire a lawyer is so they dont have to do "research" on their own. It doesnt make her guy a sneaky criminal as most have tagged him as.....it makes him lucky to have a gal who will find the facts so they can fire this idiot lawyer steering them in the wrong direction.

You appear to be missing the point. He filed two previous petitions - whether or not it was pre-IMBRA and whether or not they were approved does not matter. He still filed TWO previous petitions. I didn't say he was a sneaky criminal but I will say that someone who suggests lying during a process as important as this one is someone I would not think highly of. And a lawyer can only give half way decent advice to someone who supplies ALL the truthful information.

[JenT 0]

Ever think that his past petition was filed BEFORE the IMBRA law went into effect?

What difference in the world does that make? None!

The fact still remains that her fiance has filed two previous petitions, hasn't done any research on his own regarding filing a third one, and has told her that it's best to lie about it.

It makes a difference because the jerk lawyer that advised the USC to lie also probably didnt tell him about the IMBRA law. And for your info. there was only ONE previous approved petition and the reason most hire a lawyer is so they dont have to do "research" on their own. It doesnt make her guy a sneaky criminal as most have tagged him as.....it makes him lucky to have a gal who will find the facts so they can fire this idiot lawyer steering them in the wrong direction.

You can spin this anyway you like but the facts remain as they are.... it's up to the OP to decide what's true or not. I hope she makes the right decision.

[gwenneh 7]

You appear to be missing the point. He filed two previous petitions - whether or not it was pre-IMBRA and whether or not they were approved does not matter. He still filed TWO previous petitions. I didn't say he was a sneaky criminal but I will say that someone who suggests lying during a process as important as this one is someone I would not think highly of. And a lawyer can only give half way decent advice to someone who supplies ALL the truthful information.

No, he filed ONE previous petition and married ONE person on a J-1, according to the OP: "I talked to him and figured that he has filed the particular K1 for one fiance, the second one was just someone who got to US with a J1 visa (work) that he didn't file, someone else. After he married her, he filed for green card for her, but she didn't get it and flew home."

Either way, the waiver will be necessary as the approved K-1 was within the required time frame.

Edited February 26, 2007 by Gwen666

[TimsDaisy 0]

Um, did I miss the part where the OP mentioned he got DIVORCED after he married one who promptly bailed the country (and I'm guessing the marriage) after failing to get a green card?

If you are in love and you go through with this process, I think you are one of the few situations where people here would urge you to retain a QUALIFIED attorney because you are going to have A LOT of convincing to do. A K1, a marriage to someone here on another kind of visa who bailed (no mention of attempt at a K3), there's lots of stuff here that might set off an adjudicator's fraud-detection instinct.

So, read the hell up on the basic instructions on the forms. Apply basic rules of language interpretation (ie: if it says tell us if you filed a petition in the past then TELL THEM). Then seek marriage counseling when you are together to see if it's right. Then find a really good attorney. Then file your paperwork. Then prepare to wait a long, long time. Best of luck.

Oh - make sure he's divorced.

[DA BOMB 1]

It makes a difference because the jerk lawyer that advised the USC to lie also probably didnt tell him about the IMBRA law. And for your info. there was only ONE previous approved petition and the reason most hire a lawyer is so they dont have to do "research" on their own. It doesnt make her guy a sneaky criminal as most have tagged him as.....it makes him lucky to have a gal who will find the facts so they can fire this idiot lawyer steering them in the wrong direction.

You appear to be missing the point. He filed two previous petitions - whether or not it was pre-IMBRA and whether or not they were approved does not matter. He still filed TWO previous petitions. I didn't say he was a sneaky criminal but I will say that someone who suggests lying during a process as important as this one is someone I would not think highly of. And a lawyer can only give half way decent advice to someone who supplies ALL the truthful information.

I understand that you do not think highly of the seemingly unethical thought process of the OPs fiance, however, you're not engaged to him. (Too often we open ourselves up to personal interjection of complete strangers on here) The point Im trying to make is this: If I hire an immigration lawyer - who holds a license to practice for being a so called expert in the immigration process - and this lawyer told me to omit information because it would bog down my application ....well hell....if I didnt know the seriousness of my actions (because I hired him so I didnt have to reasearch this myself) I would follow the advice of my "immigration expert". Dirty rotten jerkoffs morelike...read the newest post on the poor couple who waited over a year only to find that their case was CLOSED due to a lawyer not giving them correct and timely information. This lawyer has all the facts otherwise he would not tell the USC to omit it from the application. If I was the OP I would have the USC (and the snake lawyer) include not only the previous K1 also but the AOS attempts on the J1 (who you mistook as the second K1). All this information comes out anyway since we're all scanned into the system.

[kitkat1 5]

If I was the OP I would have the USC (and the snake lawyer) include not only the previous K1 also but the AOS attempts on the J1 (who you mistook as the second K1). All this information comes out anyway since we're all scanned into the system.

Right - no argument there - that's what we are saying. He MUST include all previous information - he cannot lie. If his lawyer suggested that he lie, he should fire the lawyer.

Either way, the waiver will be necessary as the approved K-1 was within the required time frame.

Right - either way he is required to file a waiver and to tell the truth.