Dashinka

Hmm, Mann and his lawyers were admonished pretty hard by the judge. Mark Steyn’s Last Laugh Isn’t Over Yet: The Latest Twist in the Hockey Stick Legal Saga If that visitor would have gone to Mr. Steyn’s home last night (March 12th), he would probably have heard more popping of corks and clinking of glasses celebrating a further decision by the same judge. In an eviscerating judgement, the court ruled that Dr. Mann and his counsel acted in “bad faith” on multiple occasions in presenting false claims related to the plaintiff’s grant funding. Judge Irving said: “Here, the Court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that Dr. Mann, through [his lawyers] Mr. Fontaine and Mr. Williams, acted in bad faith when they presented erroneous evidence and made false representations to the jury and the Court regarding damages stemming from loss of grant funding. . . The Court does not reach this decision lightly.” The judge wasn’t mincing his words in writing of Mann and his two lead lawyers as follows: “They each knowingly made a false statement of fact to the Court and Dr. Mann knowingly participated in the falsehood, endeavoring to make the strongest case possible even if it required using erroneous and misleading information.” The judge further admonished Dr. Mann in the latter’s claims denying these charges of bad faith and false representation of losses in grant funding, accusing of conduct “bordering on frivolity”: "Dr. Mann's assertion that there was no falsehood or misrepresentation in his testimony or his counsel's conduct borders on frivolity…the record plainly shows the deliberate and knowing misconduct of Dr. Mann's counsel in eliciting false testimony from Dr. Mann and misrepresenting his grant funding…Dr. Mann's counsel's bad faith misconduct is an affront to the Court's authority and an attack on the integrity of the proceedings warranting sanctions." The court was convinced that “the record plainly shows deliberate and knowing misconduct of Dr. Mann’s counsel in eliciting false testimony” which was presented to the court and jury. The court awarded monetary sanctions to each defendant (Mr. Rand Simberg and Mr. Mark Stein) who can now sue for expenses incurred in responding to Dr. Mann’s bad faith and conduct. The monetary sanctions awarded to each defendant were appropriate in the Court’s view because “the misconduct of Dr. Mann and his counsel (1) was extraordinary in its scope, extent, and intent; (2) subjected a jury not only to false evidence and grievous misrepresentations about a crucial part of Dr. Mann’s case, but also to additional trial proceedings for correcting the record and the jury’s impressions thereof that otherwise likely would have been unnecessary; (3) further complicated a trial already rife with convoluted and difficult legal and factual issues; and (4) burdened Defendants and the Court with the time-and resource-intensive task of ascertaining the true extent of the misconduct and determining appropriate remedial measures for the same, all without any meaningful acknowledgement of the nature of the misconduct by Dr. Mann or his attorneys.” https://tilakdoshi.substack.com/p/mark-steyns-last-laugh-isnt-over

Ignore the USCIS account now. My wife received random notices up to six months after her oath ceremony. Congratulations on becoming a USC!

Hmm, so is USCIS scrutinizing AOS's from NIVs more (not K1's)? Possibly. Hacking seems to think so.

I may have mentioned this before in other threads, in my job, I often have Australians and Koreans together in a meeting, and I often have to act as the translator as my Korean colleagues have a hard time understanding the Australian accent of some of my Australian colleagues.

Honestly, I do not see all the hype with Aldi. I realize it is anecdotal, but I was not impressed by anything there the few times I ventured in. I can say similar things about Trader Joes. Early to bed....

OK, I looked at the website, and have some questions. First of all, what are "functional mushrooms"? I know edible mushrooms a bit, and like them, I guess I never heard edible things described as functional. Secondly, their website claims Holy! Water contains ketones. Which ones? I am not apt to be drinking acetone (dimethyl ketone). I suspect she didn't pursue the EB5 is that she doesn't meet that bar yet.

Yes, take everything with you just in case. In fact you should take a complete copy of the package you submitted. As to the GC, I am pretty certain you should get a 10 yr GC. Good Luck!

Another source for a template. Good Luck!

Do a quick search on you favored search engine of "I751 affidavit letter", and there should be examples in the photos/images section. Yes, they should be notarized. Is USCIS specifically asking for these? Good Luck!

Congratulations!

Hmm, well not for the speeding ticket, but the fine for failure to appear seems a different item. I would error on the side of caution and say yes, and provide the detailed explanation. This should not be impactful. Bet you wished you just paid the speeding ticket in the first place. Good Luck!

Here you go. https://www.historyhit.com/oldest-foods-ever-discovered/

That is the general rule of thumb, but not official rule. As to your research, I agree, this is most likely not considered work, just make certain. Good Luck!

ESTA/VWP is automatic 90 days. To the OP as others have stated, the big question would be related to if doing research as you said would be considered work. I expect there are a lot of resources in the academic community that can answer that question. The other issue would be returning soon after an almost maximum visit. You may want to take a miss on that trip. Good Luck!

Trying to build up you immune system? Superior minds want to know. Btw, you can buy canned and packaged foods from Walmart. Maybe @Neonred will tell you about his experiences there.

You forgot to add: All queen and king size sets shall have four pillowcases.

Agree, but when has the bureaucracy worried about things like that.

Hard to say in this current environment. She should be entitled to a hearing in front of an immigration judge.

Maybe it is time to see about unraveling some of this. I do wonder how entwined Canada's new PM was with Brookfield Asset Management. Exclusive: Andrew Weissmann in Crosshairs as War on Big Law Continues For years, Andrew Weissmann was one of the most visible and vociferous critics of Donald Trump, as a former deputy to Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller and MSNBC legal analyst who wrote a book wondering if the president “paid bribes to foreign officials,” or had “Russian business deals in the works” when he ran for president. Now Weissmann is facing hard questions of his own, about eerily similar themes. In a pair of letters obtained by Racket, District of Columbia U.S. Attorney Ed Martin demanded to know why Weissmann ignored an alleged “conflict of interest” in signing off on a $4.5 billion settlement involving the Brazilian construction conglomerate Odebrecht in 2016, the largest such case in history. Weissmann had been (and is now) a partner at Jenner & Block, which represented a reputed key player in the story, a Canadian private equity firm called Brookfield Asset Management that until January was chaired by that country’s new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. https://www.racket.news/p/exclusive-andrew-weissmann-in-crosshairs

I suppose, but she was probably not a high priority, and she was apparently working illegally while inside the US. Should CBP bend over backwards for someone committing visa fraud? The bigger question is how many instances of things like this will it take to start reviewing the VWP/ESTA program?

Probably more related to the land border crossing where immediate flights, or proximity to an airport were not convenient. Detention allows for babysitting until that can occur. My nephew was turned away from Canada once at a land border as he was heading there to do some work (technician working on industrial equipment). He was told to get a proper Canadian work permit, but of course he could re-enter the US as a USC.

It is all about context. As to the OP, no one knows exactly what went on between the sister and the CBP officer, but if a question was asked about what a person's plan was when requesting entry, and the response was visiting family, taking care of my mother, or something like that, a CBP officer can imply illegal work on a visitor visa. Now I am not suggesting that was what exactly happened, but it could have. There was a similar story a while back with someone attempting to enter on a K1 being turned around when they were flippant about getting married after entry. Essentially, their response was maybe I will get married, and maybe I won't. The CBP officer turned them away. The upshot is you have to answer the CBP officer's questions truthfully, but there is no need to add information, be flippant, or sarcastic.

Fair enough regarding the English proficiency test. That being said, it does exist.

I agree with @OldUser on this one. Since you are living apart, but still apparently in a committed marriage, you need to provide all the evidence you can to show that the marriage is still bonafide and that would include evidence of every visit. You should also explain why you are still in this situation (I assume spouse wants to keep current job, or something like that). This is not an impossible hill to climb, but it is higher. Good Luck!

I don’t disagree, but I highly doubt it is am immediate RFE unless it is the only evidence submitted. And based on my simple search here, it appears it is definitely not a cut and dry issue. Sure USCIS has access to a lot of sensitive personal information, but the OP has a valid concern about if the package falls into the wrong hands. As I said, YMMV, and I would expect the IO would look at the package as a whole rather than an occasional redaction. Also you could say the same thing about photos being captioned and dated by hand, or any document, redacted or not as fabricated. I know, photos are secondary evidence, but it was my experience that IO’s do give them a little weight. Our IO at my wife’s GC interview loved our wedding photos.