short trip to overseas.. does 90 day rule reset?

[TNJ17 1,329]

50 minutes ago, Mollie09 said:

 

?!?!

None of this matters. They won't get a ban.

A ban is actually possible here because they must not have mentioned anything about their wedding and her wanting to stay. If any of it comes up at the interview and cpb feels like they lied about their intent she gets slapped with a misinterpretation charge and lifetime ban. Not really worth the risk. 

[Diane and Chris 651]

The fact remains that she initially did not intend to adjust status when she first entered the US. She did intend to adjust status after her trip to her home country and having a “reception” with family. Why didn’t she marry in front of family while she was there?  Because she knew she would not be allowed re-entry after marriage to adjust status. They knew exactly what they were doing. It would be interesting to know what she told them at POE upon arrival on her second visit. 

[Boiler 43,429]

I do not think your assumption she would not be allowed back in after marriage is correct.

[Diane and Chris 651]

34 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I do not think your assumption she would not be allowed back in after marriage is correct.

So you’re saying that if she told them she was entering on her visitor visa to get married and adjust status that would have been ok and she is good to go?  

[Boiler 43,429]

5 minutes ago, Diane and Chris said:

So you’re saying that if she told them she was entering on her visitor visa to get married and adjust status that would have been ok and she is good to go?  

Nope

[Orangesapples 1,954]

5 hours ago, David & Zoila said:

It might be difficult explaining how they just happened to have a "Reception" in her home country, came back to USA and got married immediately.  Hard to prove the wedding was spontaneous when the reception has already occurred prior to the wedding and re-entry into the country.

Thankfully, they won't need to explain it

[Orangesapples 1,954]

5 hours ago, David & Zoila said:

Misrepresentation or omitting information could cause a ban.  It's so clear here what they did.  There's no getting around it.  This was visa fraud and they were just lucky they didn't get caught...YET.

Nope, intent no longer matters and no one is going to prosecute them for fraud. Please stop with the misinformation 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

1 hour ago, TNJ17 said:

Yeah this is exactly the issue for the OP. They left to go have a reception then back. They can prove their misinterpretation easily here. 

Except there's no issue for OP. USCIS is not going to try and prove fraud. They should just adjust and relax

[Orangesapples 1,954]

1 hour ago, TNJ17 said:

A ban is actually possible here because they must not have mentioned anything about their wedding and her wanting to stay. If any of it comes up at the interview and cpb feels like they lied about their intent she gets slapped with a misinterpretation charge and lifetime ban. Not really worth the risk. 

If it was an actual risk, it wouldn't be worth it, true. Fortunately, it's actually not a risk in the least. Please show me at least one case when someone was given a lifetime ban or a misrepresentation charge when they tried to AOS based on intent. There's no such case. Actually, there's a legal precedent for not taking intent into consideration. Misinformation doesn't help anyone

[NikLR 13,220]

Intent cant be the underlying reason no.  But they could find ways to make the OP's life difficult to adjust with long "security checks" etc... 

Does the OP need to relax? No. They committed fraud.  Will anything likely happen to them? Very doubtful.  Unless the CBP has some evidence she lied to them and chose to pursue it, the USCIS likely won't even have a clue the about the issue. 

YES I have a huge issue with this happening but I also understand that people chose to bend and break laws that arent really able to be enforced. 

[Ryan H 3,790]

Moved from Bringing Family Members of US Citizens to America form to Adjustment of Status from Work, Student, & Tourist Visas forum.

[SunflowerSweet 1,321]

Good lord. None of you have to LIKE what the OP did. It’s pretty clear they didn’t have the best intentions. But lying to them and telling them that their partner HAS to leave the country and file for a visa is... also morally questionable. Because it’s untrue and they don’t.

 

The intent was determined at the POE and thus they are good to go. I get it may make people here who did everything the “right” way a little upset that they have it easier but jeez. She’s in the country so she can adjust. No reason to force them to separate. 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

14 minutes ago, MorganandMichael said:

Good lord. None of you have to LIKE what the OP did. It’s pretty clear they didn’t have the best intentions. But lying to them and telling them that their partner HAS to leave the country and file for a visa is... also morally questionable. Because it’s untrue and they don’t.

 

The intent was determined at the POE and thus they are good to go. I get it may make people here who did everything the “right” way a little upset that they have it easier but jeez. She’s in the country so she can adjust. No reason to force them to separate. 

Exactly. Giving OP misinformation is not helping. They can adjust just fine, like many others have done before them. 

[TNJ17 1,329]

1 hour ago, Orangesapples said:

If it was an actual risk, it wouldn't be worth it, true. Fortunately, it's actually not a risk in the least. Please show me at least one case when someone was given a lifetime ban or a misrepresentation charge when they tried to AOS based on intent. There's no such case. Actually, there's a legal precedent for not taking intent into consideration. Misinformation doesn't help anyone

Actually there is. There was a thread here recently, and I believe you commented on it, about someone who came on a visitor visa and adjusted status. Then a member of their family tried to apply for a visitor visa with tons of ties to their home country and was denied and they said the IO who interviewed them said they would never issue a visitor visa for anyone in their family because this one member of their family had entered the US on a visitor visa to get married and adjusted status. Now, you tell me if it’s worth risking something like that. It might not affect them directly but it may affect indirectly. And it’s so not worth the risk. 

[SunflowerSweet 1,321]

7 hours ago, TNJ17 said:

Actually there is. There was a thread here recently, and I believe you commented on it, about someone who came on a visitor visa and adjusted status. Then a member of their family tried to apply for a visitor visa with tons of ties to their home country and was denied and they said the IO who interviewed them said they would never issue a visitor visa for anyone in their family because this one member of their family had entered the US on a visitor visa to get married and adjusted status. Now, you tell me if it’s worth risking something like that. It might not affect them directly but it may affect indirectly. And it’s so not worth the risk. 

That’s... a completely different situation and that’s not really what the OP is asking about here. Sure, it’s something to consider and maybe should have been mentioned as a possible risk if they do decide to adjust, but that’s not what you were telling them before. You just told them she had to leave.