Villanelle

https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/planner/applying7.html There is also a pdf I am having trouble linking but you should be able to find with Google. https://www.ssa.gov › pubsPDF EN-05-10035 - Retirement Benefits - January 2022 - Social Security SSA also has various calculators and planners but most require you to be logged in to SSA account. Now while you can combine credits (examples of which are in the link above) the most important factor is qualifying (both age and total credits) One of you needs to be eligible -ON THEIR OWN- for the spouse to get spousal payments. So if Mr qualifies but Mrs doesn't, Mrs can be paid based on Mr records. If both Mr and Mrs qualify but Mr gets more- Mrs can use some of Mr records to supplement and get maximum amount. From my understanding you can't combine credits the way you explained where you have 7 and he has 5. One of you needs 10.

It doesn't automatically become null and void. If or when she uses the c09 EAD from your AOS package then it voids her f1. Heres an article from a random attorney blog discussing it in more detail https://anwarilaw.com/immigration-services/green-cards/adjustments-of-status/employment-authorization-document/ead-pending-485-status/

Did you open the sealed envelope?

You can count credits earned by your spouse during the marriage. You can even claim the credits if divorced as long as you don't remarry. The main issue is not combining credits for most but rather eligibility to enroll is based on age and that is non transferable meaning your spouse may qualify before you if they are older. You will have to wait until you turn of age or otherwise qualify. Sometimes this means the working spouse retires and loses employee health plan both spouses were under. Retired spouse can get medicare. Other spouse if too young to qualify will need to obtain another plan from an employer or marketplace. I would suggest using a broker https://www.ncoa.org/article/what-is-a-medicare-broker-and-why-should-you-consider-talking-to-one Their services are free and they can help you compare and plan. Typically they will come to you. Personally I think a broker is more helpful than the 800 Medicare's phoneline as they can really sit and spend time with you. There are many factors to consider when one spouse is going to become eligible before the other so you really need someone to review your personal situation. There are various penalties and benefits to waiting. Also every state has different programs that will vary. You may qualify for extra help. You may want a plan that has extra perks or you might not. If you don't know what the donut hole is find out before you enter it!

USCIS doesn't make the laws, congress does. So why does Congress oppose it? Because it's not fair and yes, Congress does care about making laws that are fair and just and follow the concepts our nation was built upon as well as current POV of the general public. The flow of immigration in and out of any nation is a complex topic that I'm sure you can find many published opinions on online if you are inclined.

I didn't see a mention in the list of the NOA for the 129f. That is the #1 key document needed to establish a basis for adjustment. As to the OPs question about will any of this trigger removal- if a 485 is filed and denied yes it technically should be forwarded to the courts. But reading this story I am reminded of a story posted about 10 years ago which if this is case I should really consider starting up a psychic hotline (lol) but basically it was a post from a USC trying to petition for a love (and I believe her child) BUT he had strong views of the government and privacy and 100% refused to provide things like his tax returns and income/SSN/bank statements for the 864. He found the whole 864 unacceptable for a variety of paranoid reasons and no one here was able to talk some sense into him. It was explained to him that bringing her on the K and refusing to sign the 864 would put her in an awful spot. I can only hope this is not the continuation of that story.. It's concerning that the OP here is saying things like minimal involvement and signatures. Gives me the impression he might be considering forging the signatures or otherwise obtaining such under false premises. It would explain why AOS would only be for him and not mom. I mean mom would have to appear for an interview most likely... I would encourage the OP to message @Family privately about the specifics if they are uncomfortable posting it publicly. I am concerned perhaps they didn't tell the attorney the whole truth of the situation because no attorney would support them obtaining signatures improperly or forging them. But the bottom line is if you don't give the full story you won't get the correct help you need.

In a VAWA case the immigrant is the petitioner. They can DIY self file, hire an attorney or obtain pro bono assistance through various means. He has zero part in her VAWA case. This can be hard for some to accept. It's important to note a finding of the immigrant being a victim of abuse is simply that. USCIS will determine she is a victim but they do not make an official determination he is an abuser. I know it seems like splitting hairs because how can she be a victim and he not an abuser but it's a very specific distinction in the legal world. Because they don't make any determinations about him- he has no avenue to participate if that makes sense. VAWA cases can be complex. You still need to prove bonafide marriage as well as abuse. Physical violence is typically easily proven through photos, medical records, police reports and ROs as well as her statement and statements from others who were aware or present.

I agree with @Family above. For VAWA purposes one can claim physical abuse or extreme cruelty (mental abuse) or both. You have to prove what you claim. As explained one act of violence is enough. Financial abuse would need more than just stopping her debit card. There would be no reason why a reputable attorney would suggest she adds such a claim to her case unnecessarily and unwarranted. For family court however and to some extent any RO hearings things like preventing her access to joint accounts or cutting her off financially can be an issue. Yes, the marriage was short but it's still a marriage and he can't just change the locks or cut her off in most jurisdictions hence the advice to contact a family law attorney for assistance.

Concern A- immigration As explained she can file for VAWA with what she has and be approved. There is nothing you can do about this. She can choose to leave the US or she can stay. Heck she can even return home now and file for VAWA from overseas as long as she left due to the abuse and files with in 2yrs of a divorce being granted. So please get it out of your head that you have any power in her immigration process at this point and start focusing on what maybe you can influence the outcome of like Concern B- child custody and support/ divorce family court. Do you want your child to grow up overseas or do you want them in the US? Do you intend on having a relationship with the child? If so please understand that means having a relationship with the mother in some capacity. It can be friendly or cold. It can be supervised through the courts strictly or it can be handled with mutual maturity. There are many posts on VJ from people who believe their ex's are intentionally exploiting 'the system' in a malicious way and they are helpless to stop it. Please consider if you want to join them (and which side would you be exactly)? Concern C would be the criminal /civil justice system. This would be DV arrest and or RO. The standard of proof for each concern outlined above varies. You are in a difficult situation where the outcomes of the processes above are both independent and impacted by each other. I would suggest contacting a family law attorney asap preferably one familiar with fighting abuse allegations and if served with a RO obtaining proper representation for the hearing.

Oh my. I am going to strongly advise you to stop what you are doing for a moment and take a step back from the situation. Now I don't want to make assumptions and try to avoid stereotypes but feel it's important to recognize that there is a lot and I mean a lot of misinformation in the Filipino community about divorce/abuse/visas. Perhaps you have seen another active thread on VJ this week about how ones wife keeps threatening to go to a shelter. Some of this can be attributed to the CFO seminar and some is just fueled by gossip and misinformation. But for whatever reason women from that region will encourage others to pursue VAWA regardless if its necessary or warranted. Now to be clear your wife 100% qualities for VAWA. Not sure if you understand what that means or why so I will explain it to you briefly here. You guys are married. You filed for AOS but she doesn't have the card yet. You hit her. Again YOU HIT HER. Doesn't matter that it was just one incident. One act of physical violence is enough to qualify and be approved for a GC through VAWA. You admitted to hitting her. Some would say you conveniently admitted so when you were under the impression you guys were reconciling only to be told after the admission that she will be separating. Now to me it appears she is intentionally laying out her VAWA case. Nothing wrong with that. As I said she has a valid case. What you should be concerned about is the general misinformation I discussed above. Many people don't realize they have a valid case and are encouraged by others to strengthen their case by filing police reports or staging false claims of violence. Typically I would advise you right now to never be alone with her but also understand if you were to take that approach the marriage is 100% over and it's not completely clear that she is intending on filing VAWA and feels the same although all signs point to such. So I would advise you to be completely honest and straightforward with her. Acknowledge that she has a valid VAWA case and ask her if she is going to pursue it or if she can excuse your one transgression (which was completely unacceptable) and attempt to save the marriage by returning home and attending couples therapy as well as you obtaining therapy on your own. Be aware though if you do attempt reconciling and it doesn't work out you very well may end up arrested for a DV charge. You still may be charged actually if she decides to take your messages to the police along with pictures of her injuries but typically police don't like to file charges like that after the fact as evidences can be faked or altered. Which is why misinformation may encourage her to return home and call the police for a valid report. You also may be getting a restraining order served to you next week... In which case it should be clear the marriage is over and she is pursuing VAWA. As for all your ranting about who will pay for such-and-such, there are tons of programs and resources for victims of violence. She will have no problem finding an attorney and will be able to get various assistance for medical and other social services. If she does file for VAWA then you are off the hook for the 864 you signed for her and her children. But you will still be responsible for your child once born. A divorce court may also be harder on you then a normal divorce case might be as courts do not like abuse and often will punish the abuser. Which as hard as it may be to accept you are the abuser. You need to take responsibility for such and accept all the consequences. I would suggest an attitude adjustment is needed here. Right now you are all ' Im not paying for that' Really?! How about taking responsibility for what you did. Why shouldn't there be consequences? What does your mother think of your behavior? What would your employer think? You need to prepare yourself for the consequences of your actions as well as ensure you protect yourself from this snowballing into something larger.

You will not get feedback. It will just sit and expire. Do you know what the issues may be so you can address them in a subsequent filing? Many people opt to marry and file the CR rather than attempt for the K again.

Again it won't "affect" in the sense it won't 100% prevent or bar you from receiving a future visa. Yes, it was misleading and you are not the first to complain about such and surely won't be the last. CBP often takes advantage of the fact that you are tired and being detained and under stress to pressure you into signing things. I assume you have a copy of the statement since you posted what appears to be snippets from it earlier. Since you seem to be determined to apply again I imagine your best chance would be to speak with an attorney. Have them review your statement and prepare a rebuttal of sorts outlining what was taken out of context and attempt to clarify it. Most likely it will be denied again but you never know. I get the feeling you want to try again and won't be satisfied until you do so go ahead and try again. Perhaps once it's denied a second time you will accept it and start exploring other options as others have been suggesting.

Honestly because it's better for them to say something like that then to tell you the harsh reality. I believe if you try to recall the exact words they used it was more along the lines of this won't impact your ability to file for the F1. Your statement is also not an absolute denial reason for the F1 (makes you ineligible or inadmissible). So technically they didn't lie they just presented it in a way that made it seem 'better' than it was in reality so you walked out pleasantly rather than enraged causing a scene. My previous spouse had a similar experience with USCIS. At their citizenship interview they were told everything was great, passed the exam, had everything needed except oh wait we see here a criminal record for a serious offense! But don't worry all you need to do is submit the records for it here is the slip for that and once you send it to us we can wrap this up have a nice day. We left feeling like it was all ok. It wasn't until later when I looked into exactly what this record was that I had no idea about did I see that regardless of what records were later sent there was no way it would be approved and understood the Officer was being polite and minimizing the issue to avoid a scene.

I believe there are a variety of countries that participate in a reciprocal program for child support and adoption/custody. (Hauge convention). There are also countries that are the opposite. If he has proof of semi regular payments he doesn't necessarily need the letter from the mom. A letter would be very important if he didn't have any records. He can write his own statement and upload it in lieu of the moms. In it he can explain there is no present order and there was no order in his divorce and attach the decree. He can then outline how and when he made payments and attach the documentation for it.

When there is an order for support you must show its being paid as ordered. When there isn't an order you cannot be penalized for not showing proof of specific payments because no order exists demanding specific payments. So no order simply means you don't need to show you are complying with the order as there is none. You still need to show GMC which includes showing proof of supporting your children regardless if there is an order or not. A letter from the mom would be helpful but not sure if that is possible to obtain or not. He should have proof of whatever payments he sent or items purchased for the child out of moral obligation not 'kindness' as you described it. Not sure if that was simply poor wording choice on your part but IMO if he was to describe it as kindness in the interview it wouldn't go well.

Pankajkumar Patel and his wife Jyotsnaben entered the United States illegally in the 1990s. In 2007, Patel applied to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) (a component of the Department of Homeland Se- curity (DHS)) for adjustment of status under §1255(i). See 8 CFR §245.2(a)(1) (giving USCIS authority over applica- tions for adjustment of status made outside of removal pro- ceedings). If granted, this adjustment would have excused Patel’s illegal entry and made him a lawful permanent res- ident. (Patel’s wife, the other petitioner in this case, applied for derivative adjustment of status based on Patel’s appli- cation.) While his request to USCIS was pending, Patel also applied for a Georgia driver’s license. On that applica- tion, he checked a box falsely stating that he was a United States citizen. USCIS denied Patel’s application for adjustment of sta- tus because of that misrepresentation. One of the eligibility requirements for adjustment is that the noncitizen be stat- utorily admissible for permanent residence. 8 U. S. C. §1255(i)(2)(A). You can Google his name and find the court rulings with the specifics.

AWA and IMBRA are 2 separate things but they do intersect. The applicable codes and policies are referenced below. "DHS is also authorized to collect the biometrics of U.S. citizen and lawful permanent resident petitioners of family-based immigrant petitions, and U.S. citizen petitioners of nonimmigrant fiancé(e) petitions, to determine if a petitioner has been convicted of certain crimes pursuant to the AWA, Public Law 109-248, 120 Stat. 587 (2006) (codified as amended in scattered sections of 18 and 42 U.S.C.) (see sections 402(a) and (b) for the applicable immigration provisions), and IMBRA, Public Law 109-162, 119 Stat. 2960 (2006) (codified as amended at 8 U.S.C. 1375a). The AWA: Prohibits U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who have been convicted of any “specified offense against a minor” from filing a family-based immigrant visa petition on behalf of any beneficiary, unless the Secretary determines in his or her sole and unreviewable discretion that the petitioner poses “no risk” to the beneficiary. INA section 204(a)(1)(A)(viii)(I), (B)(i)(II); 8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)(A)(viii)(I), (B)(i)(II). Renders ineligible to file “K” nonimmigrant fiancé(e) petitions those U.S. citizens convicted of such offenses, unless the Secretary determines in his or her sole and unreviewable discretion that the petitioner poses “no risk” to the fiancé(e) beneficiary. INA section 101(a)(15)(K), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(K). Independent of the AWA, USCIS is also required to disclose information regarding certain violent arrests and convictions for some U.S.C. petitioners who file K-visas for fiancés or spouses in accordance with IMBRA, 8 U.S.C. 1375a."

USCIS can not give legal advice. The 800 number is helpful for some but contains the same information found online at USCIS website

John I wholeheartedly agree with everything you have said but feel you misspoke above and where you wrote AWA should be replaced with IMBRA. AWA refers to the Adam Walsh Act and it applies to everyone. IMBRA is specific to the K process. The international marriage broker act covers a variety of things and is designed to ensure the immigrant fiance is aware of any criminal records the petitioner may have as well as allow denials for" the immigrants protection" in addition to AWA and making sure if a broker was used it was done properly. So a spousal visa won't deal with IMBRA and I believe it's IMBRA causing the delays and not soley AWA cases as actual AWA cases are a relatively small percentage filed.

@Cody Lehr Can you please provide some more details about what exactly happened? I understand you wanted to forget it but there has to be more to it than what you've posted. So far you've posted there was an 'incident'. You described it as 'minor assault during high-school' and mentioned a bruise on their leg. You also stated some thing about going to an office in a mall where you were advised to do community service rather then go to court where you might lose. The Juvenile system can vary based on location. Sounds like you avoided the system by completing community service and staying 'clean'. This implies you did something that could have been charged but they used discretion and didn't. I also find your choice of wording a bit concerning. Most here are reading it as you got into a physical altercation with another boy and he ended up with a scuffed knee. But you never clarified if that was the case. Perhaps it's just me being too involved in the DV community but when I read it I can see this being an incident with a female in which a bruise was left on her leg and words thrown around like 'assault'. It would also explain why you are concerned about it and decided to accept community service rather than go to court. Courts typically don't get involved in minor high-school hallway fights with minimal injuries. The specifics do matter.

Because you live together and he qualifies as a household member as Dad you have 2 ways of doing the 864. One is what you did. A household member. You did it correctly by filing the 864a for him only. Provided your household count is you, your spouse, and dad = 3, you need to show combined income for household size 3. If you add mom as household member you would then be size 4 and need income for 4. If Dad was used as a joint sponsor then you would have your 864 size 2 that wouldn't be sufficient and Dad would have to fill out his own 864. On it he would count his household size and include the immigrant. If it's just mom, dad + immigrant = 3. He should include an 864a from mom even if she doesn't have income in that scenario. I understand your concern because it is sort of a loophole when someone can be used as a household member. As a household member you can count their income but you don't need to count people who may be in their household but are not in yours. You should leave it as is. If they want dad to be a joint rather then a household member they will tell you but I don't forsee such.

Don't bring an entourage! Your wife is fine and if you need to bring the children because you don't have child care available thats ok. But this is not a hearing where character witnesses are required.

Yes^^^ you were very lucky. I was originally worried you might have said something in the interview turning it into something larger unintentionally. This is why I suggested reading the guidance on drug charges. Marijuana is the only drug with waiver available but there are strict guidelines about what can be excused with a waiver. I assume the amount (weight) wouldn't be an issue as you must have had a minimal amount to only get a ticket. But other guidelines say no trafficking which can broadly apply if you described in the interview that you 'bought it for a friend and was driving it to him.' Hes in another town so now one could argue you are/were involved in trafficking. Perhaps they simply need a document showing the amount/weight to satisfy the requirements they have to follow. But most likely this is going to fall under a misunderstanding (on your part) about how this was to be disclosed. At the medical I believe you either fill out a basic questionnaire or they might have just asked you various questions. Depends on the dr office procedures i suppose. But one of the questions is have you EVER used any drugs. If you did answer honestly the dr would have asked for more details. If you explained you smoked once or twice its the Drs discrdiscretion how to handle it. In Jamaica its absolutely 1 yr ban with drug testing. Other places are more lenient. If they did a drug test and it came back negative the dr most likely determined you had no drug issue making you medically ineligible. As I said there are various steps for someone to be ruled medically ineligible or not. it seems none occurred or you would have remembered. Again they may ask for an updated medical. They shouldn't but they can say they need it or can't find it or perhaps they want it because it will help support the approval when it comes back acceptable/ no drug issues. If you are currently using I would suggest you stop as even if it is legal where you live it is still a problem for immigration as federally its illegal and immigration is under federal. This is why you need someone familiar with Canada specifically. I am not, but I understand it's similar to the UK with a system of infractions or cautions or what not. Many people have issues in determining if whatever it was is considered a 'charge' or 'crime' or however the US describes it. This is why the instructions use broad wording along the lines of ever been arrested detained charged by any authority even if you were told records are expunged or removed. It's always best to just disclose everything and let them sort it out which it appears you tried to do. You said you found some discrepancies which you should discuss with the attorney. I am assuming as Boiler already posted it was somehow overlooked at the K interview. When asked about arrest records you said you submitted them and I suppose the Officer didn't realize there were 2 'criminal' issues that needed to be addressed. But you want an attorney who knows the criminal system in Canada and how your offense should be viewed by USCIS. Make sure the attorney you choose is also familiar with the district you live in for immigration court purposes. The US is divided into several circuit district courts and they don't always agree. If you are on a border of 2 districts most attorneys will be familiar with both. Again depending on how it's viewed will determine what needs to be done about it if anything. Most lawyers won't speculate but I am not a lawyer so heres my speculations. Perhaps others have additional input. Starting with the best case: Scenario 1 would be they determine it's a non issue due to how it converts and you didn't misrepresent at any point. Scenario 2 would be it does convert to something and as I said they just need documentation to show it can be waived and then you have to go through the waiver processing. This can also include them determining you did misrep in some form and would be addressed with the waiver as well. There are also various policies about being underage as well as what can be described as a get out of jail free card for excusing certain minor offenses but I am not sure how that would apply here if it could at all. Where you are in the process impacts what applies to you. If it's an issue for 485 approval various policies apply but if it's about the k approval thats a different problem with different policies. Which brings us to Scenario 3 the worst one. Scenario 3 is they decide your K was issued incorrectly. They can revoke the K approval. Thats ok. Would suck big time but not the end of the world. You would have to submit a 130/485 package immediately. You will lose your current work authorization and would have to wait for a new EAD to be issued. You can attempt to expedite the EAD. Your attorney might be able to transfer the pending 485 to the newly filed 130 but to do so requires both sides to be active. Meaning once the 129f approval is canceled you can't switch. So the 129f needs to still be active. A 130 needs to be filed and be in active status. A transfer request can be made and is almost always given as a courtesy but they are under no obligation to do such. Not all attorneys are familiar with such unless they specialize in removal proceedings or other complex issues. Other people in similar situations choose to speak to their employer for some time off. Then there are those who say nothing because unauthorized work is forgiven and they will not need to update their work authorization with their employer for some time so they figure they will have a new EAD card by then. The employer would be the one facing penalties for you working w/o valid EAD. Not sure what your profession is as in some there can be long term repercussions if it's discovered you worked w/o auth and didn't update them on the change in your work status. If you have a contract there may be a clause about such in it. The good news is they seem to have determined the marriage is bonafide which means this is most likely just a paperwork type issue rather than a prove you are telling the truth type issue if that makes sense. You used wording of they are going to seek inadmissibility based on what you did as a teenager which implies the 129f is fine and the issue lies with the 485 guidelines of drugs/crimes/misrep etc but you can also be found inadmissible because your underlying petition (129f) is voided because it was done wrong. That's why I suggested writing out everything you can remember being said in the interview. You may be interpreting what was said wrong, hearing what you assumed or simply not able to read between the lines and decode what the Officer was trying to tell you 'off the record' about why you would want to bring an attorney with you. I would also bring your spouse even if they don't specifically demand her to come if possible. They might not want to speak to her but it's better if she's there in case they do.

So the first thing you want to do is sit down and write out everything you can remember being asked and the answers given. Have your wife do the same separately so you don't influence each others recollection. Do this asap as memories fade and can be unreliable in general. You can make notes as well as to the tone or attitude you perceived as well. Now regarding the waiver it's not as big a deal as it seems. It's just costly as you need an attorney to prepare it. I know it may seem overwhelming to establish 'hardship' when its Canada but most waivers are approved IF the attorney or self preparer knows how and what to write. Yes, it can be a hardship if you have 2 USC children and a stay at home wife. An experienced attorney can make it work. I would also suggest reading through some of the guidelines for drug use and inadmissibility. Some resources online are long winded policy and others are reader friendly blog type explanations by attorneys or legal groups. Now a few things you seem to be confused about. There is no sworn statement about not using drugs, that's not how it works. You can also find information about drugs in the medical guidance from CDC. When it comes to drugs it's a 2 fold issue. One is the criminal aspect the other is a health aspect. Only the panel physician/ civil surgeon can make the determination if you are a drug user (which makes you medically ineligible). They do this by asking questions in the medical and if needed sending you for drug testing and or a psych evaluation. So question 1- did you disclose at the medical the drug use? If so and your medical was approved it was determined you have no drug issue preventing you from receiving the visa. If you can't remember you can attempt to contact whoever did your medical. Im not sure if they would give you a copy of it but they may be able to give you information contained in it in some fashion. If you didn't disclose the drug use in the medical that could be the issue now. Another thing that stands out in your post is how you said "I admitted to marijuana use and being arrested once for assault, all in my home country." It is not clear if you disclosed (admitted) to drug use or a drug charge/crime. You said you paid a 70$ fine which means criminal element was involved, different from admitting to simply using it. This could be the issue as well. Both of these scenarios should be able to be handled by an attorney with experience but in different specific ways. So yes, it is going to be important to have an attorney with you who has an understanding of the overall situation and can make sure you don't put your foot in your mouth answering questions making things worse. Or possibly clarify something you might have said already that triggered you down this path providing that's what happened. You also mentioned the last time you used marijuana was 2006 2007. That's not 20 years ago. You also said I have no drug related charges which umm isn't a ticket for 70$ a drug charge? It wasn't 70$ for littering because you tossed the stub on the floor when you were done right? They also may ask for an updated medical which you shouldn't have any issue getting. This is another cost to you though. If you have to do the waiver it can take 6months to a year for it to be processed. The only good news is most likely you will be past 2 years of marriage by the time the GC is approved so no ROC. You will definitely spend more money on waiver fees then ROC would've cost but it does help offset the total cost. You also will have a longer wait for Naturalization as you need to be a GC holder for 3yrs and that clock doesn't start until the card is actually issued. Make sure to submit your EAD renewal as early as you can as you probably will be needing it for a while if this isn't resolved in the upcoming interview with the attorney. You can use your states bar association website to find an attorney. You want one who is familiar with inadmissibility/waivers and Canada specifically.