Not getting married. No money to send her back.

[etripke 0]

If she got her temporary EAD issued at the airport...

No... A K-1 is work authorized incident to status regardless of the issuance of the stamp at the POE. The POE simply provides the documentation that the employer needs to fulfill the I-9 requirement. Subtle difference.

Jon, show me a link on this please.

Thanks

[1HappyGuy 45]

If they still intend to marry, then get married. That's a lot cheaper than a ticket back to Russia. The civil ceremony can be really cheap. I spent $128 for ours and that included three certified copies of the marriage certificate. The clerk even took pictures with my camera of our wedding.

As far as the question about how can she work. If we have 12 million illegal aliens in this country don't you think that a few have gotten jobs without legal paperwork.

Once they marry, they have fulfilled the K-1 visa requirement to marry in 90 days. It seems that quite a number of people wait to adjust status, so if money is a real problem they can delay filing for AOS.

[payxibka 10,044]

If she got her temporary EAD issued at the airport...

No... A K-1 is work authorized incident to status regardless of the issuance of the stamp at the POE. The POE simply provides the documentation that the employer needs to fulfill the I-9 requirement. Subtle difference.

Jon, show me a link on this please.

Thanks

(9) Employment authorization . An alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(K) of the Act shall be authorized to work incident to status for the period of authorized stay.

http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?...c4f52a9c4795f46

[Karly-n-Bruce 0]

(9) Employment authorization . An alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(K) of the Act shall be authorized to work incident to status for the period of authorized stay.

http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?...c4f52a9c4795f46

Right after the part you quoted:

K-1/K-2 aliens seeking work authorization must apply, with fee, to the Service for work authorization pursuant to § 274a.12(a)(6) of this chapter.

When you click on "§ 274a.12(a)(6)" above, you get this: (6) An alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant fiancé or fiancee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(K)(i) of the Act, or an alien admitted as a child of such alien, for the period of admission in that status, as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the Service; (Revised 8/14/01; 66 FR 42587 )

LINK

[payxibka 10,044]

Right after the part you quoted:

K-1/K-2 aliens seeking work authorization must apply, with fee, to the Service for work authorization pursuant to § 274a.12(a)(6) of this chapter.

When you click on "§ 274a.12(a)(6)" above, you get this: (6) An alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant fiancé or fiancee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(K)(i) of the Act, or an alien admitted as a child of such alien, for the period of admission in that status, as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the Service; (Revised 8/14/01; 66 FR 42587 )

LINK

Yes, A K-1 is automatically employment authorized (EA) incident to status. However, EA by itself is not sufficient to fulfill all the requirements to be employed as you also need an employment authorization document (EAD) for the I-9. This has been discussed many times before....

[Karly-n-Bruce 0]

Right after the part you quoted:

K-1/K-2 aliens seeking work authorization must apply, with fee, to the Service for work authorization pursuant to § 274a.12(a)(6) of this chapter.

When you click on "§ 274a.12(a)(6)" above, you get this: (6) An alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant fiancé or fiancee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(K)(i) of the Act, or an alien admitted as a child of such alien, for the period of admission in that status, as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the Service; (Revised 8/14/01; 66 FR 42587 )

LINK

Yes, A K-1 is automatically employment authorized (EA) incident to status. However, EA by itself is not sufficient to fulfill all the requirements to be employed as you also need an employment authorization document (EAD) for the I-9. This has been discussed many times before....

I hate it when people say something like that. Excuse me if I wasn't a member when it was discussed or perhaps not in that part of my journey to have to pay attention/read about it, or if I didn't do a super search to maybe find a topic or post that pertains to this subject. There are new people that join all the time or members move to a different part of their journey and become active in a different part of the forum. I realize many questions are asked over and over again, but I think it's easier to post a question and get an immediate response than to search for however long in order to find an answers that may be outdated or wrong. I don't understand why people have to be so rude in responding to a question that's been asked before (I'm not saying you were being rude fwaguy, your comment simply sparked something in me). Why not be curteous to the member and simply answer his/her question without giving attitude or brushing them aside to "read the guides". I'm sorry, this is totally off topic and I'm done ranting...

Bottom line seems to be a K-1er needs an EAD or EAD stamp in order to legally work in the US after entry, right?

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Right after the part you quoted:

K-1/K-2 aliens seeking work authorization must apply, with fee, to the Service for work authorization pursuant to § 274a.12(a)(6) of this chapter.

When you click on "§ 274a.12(a)(6)" above, you get this: (6) An alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant fiancé or fiancee pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(K)(i) of the Act, or an alien admitted as a child of such alien, for the period of admission in that status, as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the Service; (Revised 8/14/01; 66 FR 42587 )

LINK

Yes, A K-1 is automatically employment authorized (EA) incident to status. However, EA by itself is not sufficient to fulfill all the requirements to be employed as you also need an employment authorization document (EAD) for the I-9. This has been discussed many times before....

I hate it when people say something like that. Excuse me if I wasn't a member when it was discussed or perhaps not in that part of my journey to have to pay attention/read about it, or if I didn't do a super search to maybe find a topic or post that pertains to this subject. There are new people that join all the time or members move to a different part of their journey and become active in a different part of the forum. I realize many questions are asked over and over again, but I think it's easier to post a question and get an immediate response than to search for however long in order to find an answers that may be outdated or wrong. I don't understand why people have to be so rude in responding to a question that's been asked before (I'm not saying you were being rude fwaguy, your comment simply sparked something in me). Why not be curteous to the member and simply answer his/her question without giving attitude or brushing them aside to "read the guides". I'm sorry, this is totally off topic and I'm done ranting...

Bottom line seems to be a K-1er needs an EAD or EAD stamp in order to legally work in the US after entry, right?

Having a status that also confers authorisation to work, and then having the document to show that one is authorised to work are two entirely different things. The employer has to ask to see certain proofs before hiring an individual, under the I-9.

[Geraghty 0]

Didn't he sign a document saying that he could support her? He must have met the poverty guidelines because she's here. I find it hard to believe he can't afford a plane ticket. I think there must be something else going on and he's just not willing to pay. I think it would be fair if she is sent back if they do not use the fiance visa as intended and he should pay for the plane ticket. The fiance visa is meant for people to get married, not for people to come over and work out their problems and think about getting married. He should pay for her to go back home to her family while they "work out their personal problems".

I hope that title got a laugh.

I am writing this not for myself, but for a couple that we met on this website that wished to remain anonymous for now. He is from the US, and has brought his fiancée here from Russia.

She is here on K-1, already has her SSN, and State ID card.

For personal/financial reasons they have chosen to not get married within the 90 day K-1 visa period. Since this a public forum the reasons will not be stated. She knows that she must leave when the visa expires, but they do not have the money to buy a return ticket to Russia (they never thought they would need one). She is working to help pay for the return ticket, but is also trying to find a way to stay in America while they sort their problems out. Marriage to the petitioner is currently not an option.

What I am asking the forum is: Has anyone experienced a situation similar? Will they send her back right away (hunt her down… lol). Can she continue to work to make the money for the return ticket? Will they put her on a plane and send her fiancée the bill?

Any details on any options or information on what will happen is greatly appreciated.

Thanks in Advance.

[Nessa 23]

so bottom line is, if she didn't receive the EAD at the airport (temporary and valid for 90 days) she is not supposed to be working.

[payxibka 10,044]

I hate it when people say something like that. Excuse me if I wasn't a member when it was discussed or perhaps not in that part of my journey to have to pay attention/read about it, or if I didn't do a super search to maybe find a topic or post that pertains to this subject. There are new people that join all the time or members move to a different part of their journey and become active in a different part of the forum. I realize many questions are asked over and over again, but I think it's easier to post a question and get an immediate response than to search for however long in order to find an answers that may be outdated or wrong. I don't understand why people have to be so rude in responding to a question that's been asked before (I'm not saying you were being rude fwaguy, your comment simply sparked something in me).

It just bugs me when people are too lazy to use the resources (such as the search function) and instead want other people to simply spoon feed them the information because they will not take responsibility for themselves. (Karly-n-Bruce, I am not saying you are being lazy, your comment simply sparked something in me).

See the fallacy in your statement?

Edited July 3, 2007 by fwaguy

[Karly-n-Bruce 0]

I hate it when people say something like that. Excuse me if I wasn't a member when it was discussed or perhaps not in that part of my journey to have to pay attention/read about it, or if I didn't do a super search to maybe find a topic or post that pertains to this subject. There are new people that join all the time or members move to a different part of their journey and become active in a different part of the forum. I realize many questions are asked over and over again, but I think it's easier to post a question and get an immediate response than to search for however long in order to find an answers that may be outdated or wrong. I don't understand why people have to be so rude in responding to a question that's been asked before (I'm not saying you were being rude fwaguy, your comment simply sparked something in me).

It just bugs me when people are too lazy to use the resources (such as the search function) and instead want other people to simply spoon feed them the information because they will not take responsibility for themselves. (Karly-n-Bruce, I am not saying you are being lazy, your comment simply sparked something in me).

See the fallacy in your statement?

Are you mocking me?

[Nessa 23]

[CountryBoy 0]

Sounds to me like the petitioner wants her to stay, but she won't get married. Do I have that much correct so far? Do you believe that maybe he is using the excuse of no money for a plane ticket as an excuse to keep her here against her will? (if he is, then at least HE is living up to his statement of intent to get married .. although I wouldn't call his actions at all honorable)

Something sounds fishy to me about the above scenario; he can't afford a ticket to send her back, can he really afford to pay for the wedding and for the filing of her AOS paperwork?

I hope that the individuals either work their issues out or acquire the money for the return ticket. I know that I don't want my tax dollars paying for their mistake.

Sorry I don't really have any advice for your situation,

CB

I hope that title got a laugh.

I am writing this not for myself, but for a couple that we met on this website that wished to remain anonymous for now. He is from the US, and has brought his fiancée here from Russia.

She is here on K-1, already has her SSN, and State ID card.

For personal/financial reasons they have chosen to not get married within the 90 day K-1 visa period. Since this a public forum the reasons will not be stated. She knows that she must leave when the visa expires, but they do not have the money to buy a return ticket to Russia (they never thought they would need one). She is working to help pay for the return ticket, but is also trying to find a way to stay in America while they sort their problems out. Marriage to the petitioner is currently not an option.

What I am asking the forum is: Has anyone experienced a situation similar? Will they send her back right away (hunt her down… lol). Can she continue to work to make the money for the return ticket? Will they put her on a plane and send her fiancée the bill?

Any details on any options or information on what will happen is greatly appreciated.

Thanks in Advance.

[LaL 418]

I hope that the individuals either work their issues out or acquire the money for the return ticket. I know that I don't want my tax dollars paying for their mistake.

just out of curiosity, why would your tax dollars come into play to send someone back with the current status quo immigration policy?

[Nancy2015 2]

Ken, this is almost too bizarre. How did he manage sponsorship to begin with?

Well, 125% of the poverty guideline for the family of two is $17,113 a year. Maybe that's what the petitioner is making - in this case I understand why they can't afford a plane ticket.