pushbrk

If you cannot edit the DS 260 then stop worrying about it. If asked at the interview, just be factual. Clearly, you are not hiding anything. These are not disqualifying issues, but your obfuscating attitude about them could be a problem. Smile, and say, yes, I had some vehicle related violations back then. They can read the dates and do the math.

The US Citizen can authorize the other parent to appear in their behalf. It is not required they be there.

You (the OP) keep minimizing and downplaying these offences. The dates don't matter, so get those thoughts out of your head. If asked, explain them directly and concisely without editorial comment. I don't really understand what those offences are. The terminology is not familiar to me. Sounds like you were never arrested or convicted. Please be clear about that. Did you ever go to court and be sentenced? Did you lose your driver license for six months? Personally, I don't consider speeding tickets or failure to have a current inspection to be criminal matters. You are disclosing these because they are on the report. Unless one or more is an actual criminal offence, I would neither worry about them or tick yes to that question. If you do, then see if a question comes up about them. If it does, answer "five traffic related offences, related to insurance and inspection stickers". If you try to minimize and downplay instead of giving direct answers, they are likely to start wondering what else you are misrepresenting.

Replying to myself after reading more of the thread about having an I-485 denied. Completely different context. Proof of Citizenship is definitely required of the US Citizen as part of an I-485 filing, just as it is for an I-130 (if USC not LPR). But proof of citizenship at NVC stage in connection to an I-864 is not. It is required of non-petitioner sponsors.

There is no instruction for a petitioner to provide evidence of US Citizenship in the context of an already approved I-130 in a spouse of US Citizen case. You have quoted instructions in a different context. My advice is correct for the context in which the question was asked. You're welcome to show me the full context of the part of the instructions you are misinterpreting.

It's not. With this as a concern, an immigrant visa should have been pursued. I'll just offer to any reader that this is why I so often criticize those who tell strangers they can "do it yourself". Trying to do it themselves without doing the homework, is why we are having this discussion.

Proof of US Citizenship is not a listed document for the petitioner in a spouse of US Citizen case. Your example is in a different context, and I suspect there is more to the denial than is explained initially. I didn't read the whole thread, but required documents for adjusting from K1, are not the same as for a spouse visa case. Context matters....greatly.

Nice answer, really, but what they will look at and care about is less predictable than you might think. It's all circumstantial. But, unless there's more too it, they don't care if you met before a divorce was final, if that's the whole story. A common fraud scenario is when one or both divorce and marry so the first can immigrate, then divorce the petitioner, remarry their ex, and bring them. This is not something that is assumed or even suspected, just because you met while one of you was still married. There would have to be other factors pointing to such a concern.

A joint sponsor must provide evidence of EITHER US Citizenship or a Green Card, and evidence they are living in the USA currently. A US Citizen Petitioner with an approved I-130 and a US address as their current address, needs neither of those, as they've already provided evidence of citizenship with their petition. Yes, the petitioner must provide an I-864 no matter what.

Absolutely correct. The "on the ground" security checks for Pakistani males in particular are extensive, expensive, and take as long as a year or more. They do not begin them until they have otherwise decided to issue the visa. If the applicant has a common name, expect a longer delay.

Yes, I had forgotten that change. It's been the other way for a couple decades.

Click on the word Guides at the top of any page here. Direct Consular Filing is for special circumstances only, not just "wanting".

You make no mention of visiting your wife in person after or during the Utah Marriage. If you did not do that, withdraw those two petitions, go visit her and file again. Without evidence of being together during or after the legal proxy marriage, BEFORE filing the I-130s, they will be denied. If you did "consummate" and provide evidence of being together after or during, then be advised that you filed into a year or more long black hole. Nothing at all is happening except movement up the line. Details matter. Use this time to do your homework on the rest of the process.

Applying for EAD is free, and you get a photo ID for EAD that also documents your Advance parole. My advice is to apply for it. Again, there is no fee with you do it all together.

The critical timeline for Adjusting status it the time it takes for Advance Parole, and EAD, which is more like six months. With those, he would be able to work and be re-admitted to the USA until the I-485 is processed. You are in this situation because you didn't do your homework the first time. Be sure you do it now, before making further decisions. You've come to the right place for help, but YOU must do the homework yourself.

The online i-130 still has some known glitches, but since they are known, they seem not to present any big problem. You save a few bucks too. Otherwise, it's just personal choice.

If you filed in August, it is very likely you will have completed the required two years by the NVC stage anyway, but the requirement must be fulfilled before the visa is issued, not some other earlier time.

Having started looking into where to live, is nice evidence. I have a friend who has lived in the Philippines with wife and step children for 11 years. He looked into a VA loan for a house. That will be his domicile related evidence.

One recent pay stub, will be sufficient evidence of current income. No need for employer letter. It's pay stub OR employer letter. Pay stub is actually better. Use official instructions instead of artificially contrived advice. Even official instructions say six months of pay stubs, but that is an artifact. Most pay stubs show year to date income, and have for decades. There are exceptions, but not with government jobs.

There are two places for the beneficiary's current address on the form. Yes, in English, except for the second place where name and address in another alphabet is required, if applicable. Romania uses the same Roman alphabet used in the USA, but they do use some special characters. Only of those characters are part of the name and address would the "native alphabet" section be applicable.

Always best to declare and document assets when income is marginal.

For the "reader" do note that no US Immigration forms use the term "Last Name". The field is called "Family Name" with (Last Name) in parenthesis. There's three spaces for names. "No Family Name", and "No Middle Name" are the correct entries if those names don't exist. Many older people from Indonesia, for example, only have a single name. I've known many people with two middle names. In that case enter both middle names in the middle name field. The kind of error mentioned above is pretty common and the Consulate will deal with it properly. The sooner the correct name is entered properly, the better though.

Your 401k should carry the day.

A Consular Officer must be convinced your parents will be supported by you or by themselves instead of the American taxpayer. It seems they are fully able to support themselves, so concentrate on showing that they can, and how they will.

If applying for a green card and applying for an immigrant visa were the same thing, I wouldn't have mentioned it. The I-864 instructions don't specifically say equity in the primary residence is not liquid. They tell what IS considered liquid. It's our collective knowledge that tells us equity in the primary residence is not accepted, because it isn't liquid. Read the definition of what is considered liquid. Read all of it and interpret it literally, and you'll understand that selling your home and using the equity to support an immigrant "harms the sponsor". Sounds to me like you hired a lawyer not familiar with family based immigration. You must become an A-Student of the entire I-864 instructions to understand context, but how to use assets of the intending immigrant are covered on page 10.