DandT14

Your only issue as far as what you said at entry would be if you lied. Like if you said you didn't have a boyfriend and you were just there to see the sights (with your cat.) That could be a problem. But if you entered with no intent to stay and told the officer that, that's fine. It was true at the time, and you changed your mind later.
The whole process is very scary. I was a nervous wreck and probably annoyed everyone here with all my questions. But I really think you'll be fine. From what you've said, I don't see any real obstacles for you. My husband overstayed so long, it really sucked. It was like this constant threat hanging over us, and he couldn't drive, work, etc. We were scared to file though, because we thought "now they'll know he's here." But it is a HUGE relief to have it done and behind us. I wish we would have gotten on the ball and filed sooner.
So get those papers in!

Thank you Tintin and Mike,
I'm actually moving your topic to Site Discussion as a more appropriate location for this discussion, but I would have to say, yes, some of the more 'seasoned' members here sometimes forget what it is like to be new at this. Some have become jaded and cynical for whatever reason and become impatient with those who don't have their level of experience or knowledge. Instead of moving on and leaving a post that asks a question they may have seen asked many times, they respond with a snarky comment that offers no help, or give the answer in such a tone as it can be intimidating and off-putting rather than reassuring - or at the very least, informative.
Basically, on Visa Journey there are no stupid questions - except for the ones someone didn't ask and should have. If you are curious about something, you should be able to ask the question and get the a courteous response. Even if someone is suggesting that you should read over the guides, it should be done with consideration rather than with an 'attitude'.
While we recognize that there are many different personality types active on Visa Journey and in forums such as Off Topic and the Politics and Religion forums things can get rather 'strong' at times, in the immigration forums themselves there is never any excuse for someone to be rude, condescending, obstructive, snarky or any other similar adjective. That being said, some of our more seasoned members who are extremely helpful do sometimes tend to be blunt. There is a difference between being blunt and being a bully. Any comments that end up insulting or attacking the poster are always inappropriate. If someone is being offensive, or inappropriate, then the best thing to do is to use the report button and ask a moderator to take a look. It may be that someone is overly sensitive to a blunt poster - or it may be that someone is being unnecessarily aggressive and do need to mind their manners better.
So, thank you for reminding all of us, especially those of us who have been around for a while, that it is much easier for the newcomers to benefit from our knowledge and experience, if we are willing to remember what it was like to encounter all of the tangles and complications of the visa processes for the first time, and what it was like to feel overwhelmed and not knowing exactly where to start.

OP please clarify this for me as it seems that Iam the only one one here that is getting your message right.
You are only concerned about her not working if you should divorce. You are not divorcing her because she is not working at a job.
On the other hand, your relationship is not working out, she threatens to leave every time.
Please clarify because folks are taking this on a different tangent.

So you're wife's been here for all of three months and she doesn't have a job yet? Divorce that slacker.
Seriously, when I was a new and very young bride, trying to make my way in a foreign country, with no friends and no immediate family but my husband, I freaked out. A lot. I often thought, "I left all that behind for this -- to live in a country where people make fun of my accent, where I am always the last one to get the joke, the one who had to and has to compromise all the time?" And I'd get angry and say spiteful things like, "I wish I'd never come here" and "I want to go home." I'd pack my bags and call my parents and say that was it.
But I didn't leave. Why? I had a husband whom I loved, and who loved me, and who listened to why I felt so desperate. It was never about him, it was about feeling powerless in a situation that I willingly entered because I loved him. I remembered I had vowed to stay with him and support him in good times and in bad. Ours was no great love story, a pretty average transnational romance that ended after ten mostly happy years due to us just growing up and wanting different things in life. But what we were very good at doing was listening to each other and really trying to understand what was going on underneath frustration. It was part of our vows. Did you not make similar vows?
It's one thing if someone is being abusive -- emotionally, physically or otherwise -- and another if that person feels lost, powerless, confused. In the former case, leaving is obviously the right thing to do. In the latter, the relationship can often be saved. This goes for either sex, lest someone accuse me of naturally siding with a woman here. The immigrant spouse is going to take a while to get accustomed to his or her new environment. It isn't plug and play. I would encourage you to seek counselling if things "just aren't working out" before you walk away from a marriage.
While writing this, my boyfriend asked me what I was posting about and I told him. He's Korean-American, and he suggested (as did Mr Smiley above) that your wife reach out to the Korean community in your town. Do you live anywhere near LA by any chance? There's gigantic Korean community here if you live within driving distance. He was also shocked that anyone could complain about an immigrant spouse (whose first language is almost certainly not English) not having a job after three months when there are so many native speakers who have been unemployed for many months in this environment.
In any event, he and I both wish the OP and his wife the best and hope they at least work a little harder to try to make this relationship work. Better to put the work in now and realise it can't be saved than to regret not doing so.

WRONG. The INA I posted is VERY CLEAR that it does NOT require a conviction for a prostitution charge. This is not a CIMT issue (which does require conviciton), it is a prostitution issue and while there IS a waiver available (which I posted previously), there does NOT need to be a conviction. Read the INA link I posted before.
I am not stating I know whether the OP is guilty or not, it's irrelevant. The truth of the matter is she was arrested for prostitution. THAT is the problem. Being convicted would be worse, but simply being arrested subjects her to a section of the INA where they can use their discretion to deny her. They have decided the evidence means she should be denied.
And once again, the OP needs to talk to her lawyer. This is beyond DIY, it's not necessarily totally over but it will not be easy nor will it be cheap.

Can you see the word "conviction"? No. Because it's not required. Did you see the link i posted about the CIMT where it DOES mention conviction? The lack of the word conviction is pretty clear that a conviction is not required. Why? because if it WAS required like the CIMT one it would MENTION conviction. It's quite obvious you are not in the legal profession in any form because you would know that what IS there is just as important as what is not.

Unless you were denied without prejudice then you can't simply file again. It doesn't sound like you were denied without prejudice. I think they'd reject another filing, but your lawyer might know more than I do about this.
FWIW, while prostitution is a crime involving moral turpitude, they don't usually use the moral turpitude clause in these cases. Prostitution is it's own class of inadmissibility. A conviction isn't required. If the IO believes that the intending immigrant has engaged in prostitution within the past 10 years then they are inadmissible, and can't adjust status. Remember that adjustment of status is discretionary, and the IO has all the discretion.
Police aren't neophytes when it comes to the law in prostitution stings. They don't generally start kicking down doors until they've secured the evidence they need to take the case to court. Conversations are usually recorded, and they wait for the target to speak the magic words - what they'll do for how much money. If the police report says this conversation took place then that would probably be enough for an IO to conclude that the intending immigrant engaged in prostitution. The facts would not need to be proven in court. Immigration law doesn't require it.

When I thought I couldn't get the employment letter, I was told 6 months paystubs would work too. I took both, didn't actually need any of it though.
Good Luck!

Harpa provides a lot of good help to people who need it. She gives accurate information without trying to scare people. I appreciate it, even if she forgets to blow kisses when she's done typing.

Harpa provides a lot of good help to people who need it. She gives accurate information without trying to scare people. I appreciate it, even if she forgets to blow kisses when she's done typing.

Harpa provides a lot of good help to people who need it. She gives accurate information without trying to scare people. I appreciate it, even if she forgets to blow kisses when she's done typing.

Harpa provides a lot of good help to people who need it. She gives accurate information without trying to scare people. I appreciate it, even if she forgets to blow kisses when she's done typing.

I don't see how I am being unnice. Should I put a smiley on things? The only thing I see that was slightly not nice was that there was lots of bad info here, but that was just true. It's hard when people make random guesses and cause undue stress. Of course, we all make mistakes, but randomly guessing is harmful.

I don't understand. How does what I said make me selfish? I wasn't suggesting she should drag her kid with her to chase a man. I was suggesting she should have stayed with her child.
It's true that a child has two parents (usually). And usually, they are both important to the child. And if my choice was staying in my country with my kid, or leaving my kid so I could be with a man, I guarantee I would choose to stay with my kid. I don't think that makes me selfish, I think it makes me a woman who loves her children more than anything else in the world. There's not a chance I'd be living in one country while my children were in another. My children can't leave the US. So my Canadian husband had to move here to be with me. Had he refused, I wouldn't have a Canadian husband. Simple as that.

This is the worst part of your whole story. No man is worth giving up your child for. I saw someone the other day who casually mentioned her teenage son wasn't immigrating with her. That's something I can never support or understand.

A filter can be designed to be used in several ways. I'm suggesting using filters to alert Mods to posts that most likely are offenders, but not as a way to automatically censor posts. Whatever action taken, should be done by the Mods and with careful consideration as to the context in which the post was made and whether or not it contributes to the overall conversation of the thread.
I'm not in favor of suspensions or bans except in extreme cases where someone is just looking to cause trouble. If the behavior is addressed and dealt with rather than the person, then we are being more inclusive than exclusive. Especially considering that most active members on the board are quite capable of and have from time to time, violated the TOS. We're here to engage in online discussions/arguments which can get heated at times. That heat has actually helped generate a lot of hits for this site. I'm sure Captain Ewok is aware of that benefit and doesn't want to impede upon its outcome while still maintaining a sense of civility and order on the boards. If only his Mods would also be online for that as well so that they aren't going overboard with their moderation.

This is the worst part of your whole story. No man is worth giving up your child for. I saw someone the other day who casually mentioned her teenage son wasn't immigrating with her. That's something I can never support or understand.

Some marraiges are clearly fraudulent based on the part of the immigrant, we've had many evidences of that on VJ, even in the past few weeks. To think otherwise is to be shortsighted.
On the other hand, yes some international marriages fail just like any other marriage can fail. You can't just ask USC to fold their hands and not take action if they have evidence of being used fraudulently. Only the USC knows.
One key difference, when a regular mariage fails most likely there will not be a I-864 dangling on the USC.
Gowons advice for anyone going through this is not to engange some poor foreigner, have your foreign Spouse being an equal participant in the process and let him/her also have vested interest financially. This way when the excrement hits the fan there is very little animousity.

Uh...what?
You said you got the NOA's but then you said you didn't get the email NOAs. Then you said the hard copies are on their way. So what exactly did you get? I'm confused.

I think you're misunderstanding. Vanessa is trying to look at the situation as an unbiased observer, and from the IO's point of view. Clearly, the IO looking at your file saw fraud. No doubt about it. The question is, why?
Jaynarl, I'm the one who suggested you post your story in the main forum so that you could get help from the longer term members. I was concerned that you were going the wrong direction by claiming wrongdoing on the IO's part. But, I don't have anywhere near the knowledge that some of these other people have.
I assume that your main goal is to get your wife her greencard. People like Vanessa and Harpa are the ones who have the knowledge to help you. It's nice to have people come, pat you on the back, and agree with everything you say. But you're going to get help from people who see things differently than you do. People who can offer new information.
If you really want help, you should answer their questions and be open to hearing their opinions.

Here's my interpretation and speculation of what the redflags were.
The wife has overstayed her visa. She meets, falls in love with, and gets married to a USC man on disability in a matter of months.
Included with their application is pictures which were, at best, confusing. (Apparently there were pictures of friends in there?) At worst, they looked staged. The first question out of the IO when she saw the wife was "who are you?" That implies to me that she felt she had seen pictures of someone other than the wife in the application.
Also included with the application was a sealed I-864 package, demonstrating that the sponsor didn't really trust them with her information. Somehow the IO knew the maiden name of the sponsor, but the applicants did not. (When did the sponsor/friend change her name? How long have they been friends?) No one will ever know what else the sponsor might have thrown in that envelope.
We don't know what the other evidence included with the application was. But the evidence brought to the interview was, for the most part, weak.
Maybe there are lessons to be learned there for others. In any case, I don't see racism or discrimination. I see an IO doing their job. Maybe not nicely, but they're not required to be nice.

So it was a misunderstanding. It doesn't need to be a big deal. People who come in here screaming that AOS from a tourist visa is illegal or wrong really piss me off. I just wanted to clarify that Linda is not one of "them."
Just one comment here - It's correct that overstay is not usually an issue when you file for AOS. But, as someone whose husband overstayed for nearly two years, I don't recommend it as a plan of action. It means he'd be here out of status, and that severely limits your life. Not to mention that he would constantly be subject to deportation, even though it's not likely. And, if for some reason, your relationship didn't work out and he left without the AOS completed, he'd suffer consequences in the future. His chances of getting a tourist visa again would be really low. I think having him overstay for any length of time is the last thing you should do.

Here's my interpretation and speculation of what the redflags were.
The wife has overstayed her visa. She meets, falls in love with, and gets married to a USC man on disability in a matter of months.
Included with their application is pictures which were, at best, confusing. (Apparently there were pictures of friends in there?) At worst, they looked staged. The first question out of the IO when she saw the wife was "who are you?" That implies to me that she felt she had seen pictures of someone other than the wife in the application.
Also included with the application was a sealed I-864 package, demonstrating that the sponsor didn't really trust them with her information. Somehow the IO knew the maiden name of the sponsor, but the applicants did not. (When did the sponsor/friend change her name? How long have they been friends?) No one will ever know what else the sponsor might have thrown in that envelope.
We don't know what the other evidence included with the application was. But the evidence brought to the interview was, for the most part, weak.
Maybe there are lessons to be learned there for others. In any case, I don't see racism or discrimination. I see an IO doing their job. Maybe not nicely, but they're not required to be nice.

Here's my interpretation and speculation of what the redflags were.
The wife has overstayed her visa. She meets, falls in love with, and gets married to a USC man on disability in a matter of months.
Included with their application is pictures which were, at best, confusing. (Apparently there were pictures of friends in there?) At worst, they looked staged. The first question out of the IO when she saw the wife was "who are you?" That implies to me that she felt she had seen pictures of someone other than the wife in the application.
Also included with the application was a sealed I-864 package, demonstrating that the sponsor didn't really trust them with her information. Somehow the IO knew the maiden name of the sponsor, but the applicants did not. (When did the sponsor/friend change her name? How long have they been friends?) No one will ever know what else the sponsor might have thrown in that envelope.
We don't know what the other evidence included with the application was. But the evidence brought to the interview was, for the most part, weak.
Maybe there are lessons to be learned there for others. In any case, I don't see racism or discrimination. I see an IO doing their job. Maybe not nicely, but they're not required to be nice.

I think you're misunderstanding. Vanessa is trying to look at the situation as an unbiased observer, and from the IO's point of view. Clearly, the IO looking at your file saw fraud. No doubt about it. The question is, why?
Jaynarl, I'm the one who suggested you post your story in the main forum so that you could get help from the longer term members. I was concerned that you were going the wrong direction by claiming wrongdoing on the IO's part. But, I don't have anywhere near the knowledge that some of these other people have.
I assume that your main goal is to get your wife her greencard. People like Vanessa and Harpa are the ones who have the knowledge to help you. It's nice to have people come, pat you on the back, and agree with everything you say. But you're going to get help from people who see things differently than you do. People who can offer new information.
If you really want help, you should answer their questions and be open to hearing their opinions.