jdh

Big difference, for sure.
He is absolutely within his rights to do so. Many of us on this forum are doing this process, have done this process and will continue to do this process with no issues.
The spouse of a US citizen is allowed to adjust fom a visa waiver program/visitor status.
Overstay is overlooked for the spouse of a US citizen.
Intent is overlooked for the spouse of a US citizen.
These directives are all a part of the adjucators field guide.
If you don't know, its probably best not to add to the confusion.
If you know and choose to argue it out of some sort of envy or distaste that others choose a different rout - well, that's just not nice.

AOS is always discretionary, but as long as you have a legitimate relationship and carefully put your package together there is nothing to worry about.

ManCharsey - I can't believe you made it through that whole list...
I got bored reading about half way down...good ol' ADD kicking in.
Really need to be sure you read the guide when you have this many questions and look at the example forms.

Exactly - if his parents/brother are not dependent upon him for financial support/care than they are not included in his household size.
Similar to filing taxes - you only include those who depend upon you financially.
However, if he is depending on their financial resources to help him reach the income requirements and they live in the same principle residence than he would include them in that case.

It means the amount of people the petitioner/co-sponsor is financially responsible for.

I did not include all pages...so far no RFE...hopefully they won't need more.

AoS through the VWP program and the like is not a loophole. That of course doesn't mean it is not abused from time to time.
Further it doesn't look like these poor folks are out to abuse anything - they asked a question about the proper way to go about things and got an answer. No need for a bombardment.

This stance makes no sense whatsoever, aside from your obvious bitterness towards anyone who doesn't adjust the way you did...
Just because someone didn't go the K-1 route does not mean they have incurred a possible ban. I adjusted as a Canadian visitor and abode by every law and policy the USCIS has in place, under their guidance and in their time frame - I would have incurred no possible ban had I applied for AP and used it....I have no clue why you feel I shouldn't have been able to have it issued aside from your aforementioned bitterness.

AoS through the VWP program and the like is not a loophole. That of course doesn't mean it is not abused from time to time.
Further it doesn't look like these poor folks are out to abuse anything - they asked a question about the proper way to go about things and got an answer. No need for a bombardment.

To be precise, the USA is a (constitutional) federal republic based on a democratic system. Don't confuse with democratic republic (or "people's"), you wouldn't like to see this happen

Bull #######. I am not missing the point.
Government; Republican government. One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. [black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626
THAT is how the US government was designed to operate. The founding fathers were very much against so called 'democracy'. They are very similar and very different.
Notice that in a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the free citizens. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. To solve a problem, only the whole body politic is authorized to act. Also, being citizens, individuals have duties and obligations to the government. The government's only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively pre-defined for it by the whole body politic.
In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people, is obliged to its owner, the PEOPLE. "WE the PEOPLE."
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/demrep.html
http://www.c4cg.org/republic.htm
There is another couple links, but I am sure any source that doesn't agree with your side of a debate is instantly defined as "not reputable"...I've met folks that debate like you before.
So, how about you focus on your opinion and I will stick to knowing the truth about US history and the way the county was formed. You can join those who try to manipulate the constitution into saying things it was never intended to say and I will stick to fighting you tooth and bone to maintain its integrirty.
As to the 'test' - I assure you I will be fine, not that it is any of your concern. I've never failed a test in my life, and that one will not be the first.

Uh uh...I pledge a legiance go the flag of the United States of American and to the REPUBLIC of which it stands.
The difference was important to the founding fathers...
Government; Republican government. One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. [black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626]
Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, pp. 388-389.
Check out this article and many others on the topic some time...
http://www.thisnation.com/question/011.html
Back to topic....

The USA is not a democracy either. They are a republic...quite a different thing...just an FYI.
Being able to come over and adjust our status without an I-94 ect does not preclude us from being required to follow the law. In other words we cannot lie at the border about our intentions.
So would it be a violation of TOS to recommend it to all Canadians? Yes...because it is not the route for all Canadians. It is only an option for those that have come here and decided after entry to stay. That same thing applies to all those who AOS regardless of country...

This is not true and apparently a common and dangerous misunderstanding of immigration law.
Please stop spreading this misconception.
If you overstay your lawful stay you become unlawfully present...ie. illegal.
Do not think for a second that if you have overstayed and happen to be detained by the police for some reason and they notify ICE or otherwise catch the attention of ICE that you will not be placed into removal proceedings the same as any other person who has established an unlawful presence within the US.
Studies have shown that up to 50% of illegal aliens consist of those who have entered on a legal visa but overstayed that visa. You are indeed counted with those who entered the country illegally when you overstay your lawful duration of stay.
For the OP this is insignificant, as has already been covered, in that she has applied for AOS and has entered a new lawful status while a decision is pending.

Yes, typically they come calling when someone reports you for whatever reason. Since you probably hadn't moved, they knew exactly where to find you.
Let's get this out of the air right away though - you have been in trouble and done something illegal. That's why they came for you and treated you like a criminal. Doesn't mean you aren't a good person, but saying that to an immigration officer will just tick them off.

I think you are misunderstanding the way in which USCIS determines things like this.
You view it in black and white - that's not how they work.
Let me break down your post in the the way USCIS will:
"I believe I have a legitimate reason to be here." I don't care what you believe.
"My first and foremost reason for visiting the country when I first applied for my B2 was tourism." Your first reason for visiting isn't in question...irrelevant.
" I want the extension for the continuation of my travelling - not to get married." You are getting married?
"As i showed in my first post I am more than happy to apply for a K fiancee visa..." You may be applying for a K Visa?
You have intent to immigrate. Case closed.
"The B2 visa extension is totally seperate to my future marriage.." There is no such thing as seperate. You have intent. Extension denied, red flag raised.
See what we are saying?

listen to me, you r in a good shape , so don't get confused with 2 many opinions

You have permanent residence in the United States...you can travel all you want..l

Who cares...the spirit of their answers remains unchanged.

####### off with the fear mongering. AOS in this manner IS one of the legal ways. It is authorized by USCIS. If you have nothing that is accurate and helpful to add to the conversation just keep to ourself.
You don't know what her intent was and regardless she is here now and if she wants to Adjust status within the country she is welcome and legal to do so.

Indeed. I wish the mods would remove posts that have completely incorrect information. +1 to the above.
I am generally completely a proponent of folks staying and adjusting but in your particular case I think it may be beneficial to go home. Not because you are not eligible to adjust, because you completely are, but because you do not have the funds and if you overstay and get denied you will risk a ban.
Typically I am not concerned with overstay because the vast majority of folks that AOS from a VWP or tourist visa have no issues. Your situation does concern me a little because of the extremely short time frame. Don't get me wrong, no one can say that you didn't fall in love quickly, but it does mean you will very likely receive heavy scrutinization come interview time which increases a risk of denial, a risk that is always there for everyone however small.
Please don't base your decision on the folks who pass out incorrect info on here - it happens every time someone mentions adjusting from a VWP/Tourist visa.
Good luck.

####### off with the fear mongering. AOS in this manner IS one of the legal ways. It is authorized by USCIS. If you have nothing that is accurate and helpful to add to the conversation just keep to ourself.
You don't know what her intent was and regardless she is here now and if she wants to Adjust status within the country she is welcome and legal to do so.

So you're saying he filed for the years he worked but wasn't required to file for 2009 so he doesn't have that available? If so, that is fine, he can include a letter stating he was not required to file in 2009 and stating why.

Good point re: not being on the lease. Our IO did ask about my husband not originally being on the lease and wanted documentation (which we had) that the property manager knew he lived there. And that was just a regular complex.
If your wife lives in government housing and you aren't allowed to live there, you should not be living there, period.

Sure. I guess my point would be that it doesn't really matter how he got an SSN...the SSN isnt necessarily the misrepresentation issue. It would be on all the forms like for employment where it says to check if you are a us citizen or another box for permanent residents etc.
I guess there isnt much help we can give at this point..lWithout the OP giving more information in regards to how he didn't realize he was an alien or when he misrepresented it would be really hard for us to do anything but speculate.
I would suggest either sharing more info or high tailing it to a qualified lawyer, if you can find one of those.