Amhara

You will need a lawyer to help you. I think the biggest question is why all of a sudden the plans changed from just visiting on the VWP to adjusting status? And that the answer to that might hold the solution. Getting pregnant on the trip would not be a reason as many people here have overseas spouses that are pregnant.
 
But honestly, you have to admit that the situation looks like intent from the start.. 
 

Well they obviously think there’s something not right or they wouldn’t issue a NOID. You don’t get a NOID for nothing. What exactly does the letter say? 

If you file through 5 year, you don’t need to get a divorce.  😐  There won’t be any suspicion of why you didn’t file sooner.  The question may come up, but not every permanent resident wants to become a citizen.  They may wait to apply because of financial reasons, not wanting to take the oath, not wanting to jeopardize their citizenship in their home country.  Only get divorced if you need to, but not for immigration purposes (may the divorce not be necessary!)

@Inesmlm That’s great to hear!  Gone from a tough spot to much better!  Phew!  Great work on your part for the further diligence and research!!

I feel like it’s something they’d probably like to enforce but simply don’t have the resources to do so.
 
Also, sponsors must file a change of address form.  I had no idea, until I read a random comment on here once.  It had been 8 months at that point, so I sent in my husband’s form (I had filed my change of address on time - had no idea a USC was also supposed to).  
 
I think I got a letter saying it was filed.  I remember seeing the USCIS envelope in Informed Delivery and panicked that it was a late fee or something.  

Though for the most part, that seems to apply to petitions where simply filing provides an immigration benefit, which I-129Fs do not. The policy memo introducing the change seems to have been directed at 'placeholder' filings for the most part, and it doesn't seem like there have been any significant changes in the rate RFEs or denials are issued on K-1 petitions going by reports here.

Judgement call based upon the circumstances, especially local customs. Some people may do something and be fine and others may have an issue.
Usually it involves some sort of ceremony (i.e. an engagement ceremony with wedding attire and/or a religious leader and/or rings). This includes non-legal weddings (including religious weddings).
Sometimes it has been due to activities that only married couples do. For example, there was a recent case of 2 engaged individuals traveled together (unsupervised) and regularly stayed at the same room. In the beneficairy's local culture, usually only married couples did that.
Sometimes simple things like calling each other wife/husband nicknames has raised scrutiny.
 
The issue is the burden is on the applicant to show that they qualify for the benefit being sought. It's possible not to be legally married but also not convince a CO that you are free to marry (I saw "convince" because you cannot prove a negative). This is what "too married" refers to.

WHAT?! you mean if i would have applied for this darn thing when Obama was in office it would have skipped the interview stage? 

Okay.  Well, I didn't read it.
 
But "cutting" K-1s implies policy change (an annual quota, like for other visas).  Changes in acceptance rates related to higher scrutiny (resulting in longer APs, thereby changing the statistics) is entirely different.

The article says that the I-129F petition approval went from 90% in 2016 to 66% in 2017. Which... honestly I find it VERY hard to believe unless when they say "approval" they mean "approval with no RFE".

But the article also says things like:

"Under Obama, the immigrant didn’t even face an overseas interview to see if the relationship was real. "

"the latest data available that in FY 2016 the denial rate was about 20 percent, a huge increase from the 2015 rate of less than 1 percent. "

So you know....

Did you even read the article in it entirety?  So many flaws that it's hard to accept any fact or argument being brought forth

Yes. But only because:
1) A refused spousal visa due to not being in a bona fide marriage can be reaffirmed by USCIS where as a refused K-1 for the same type of reason dies.
2) Can't be "too married" for a spousal visa.
3) Fewer hurdles (no IMBRA).
Edit: I do disagree with the term "safer", though. One has fewer restrictions and more opportunities, but the burden to show a bona fide relationship/marriage is equal.
 
In most cases, a spousal visa is the better choice. But there are situations where a K-1 is better, or even the only actually viable option.

"Cut"?  How?  Unlike other family reunification visas, fiancee and spousal visas for partners of USCs do not have annual limits to the numbers given out.

"Safer"?  Not necessarily.  Red flags are red flags, and high-fraud embassies will scrutinize both types of applicants.
 
What consulate are you talking about?

And 80% is about normal 

This.  There have been countless threads lately from people who either A) didn't know AOS was even a thing, or B) had some vague notion of it, but didn't plan for the cost or understand that it should be done promptly after marriage to avoid issues with being out of status.

I think I had same thing.. I’m not sure that does that means

@Inesmlm
I sympathize with you.  But thanks for letting us know about the embassy option to get the US Passport at the embassy.  I hope you will be there long enough to be able to get it before heading back!  Sometimes, the US Embassy has an email address to ask and confirm these questions.  But I am glad you posted here, but one of us may need this info in the future!

Fair enough, I apologize. Again I didn’t mean to instruct anyone not to answer but rather give an helpful answer. 
 
This doesn’t seem or sound like a constructive post. 
 
 
 

I just had a few hours and checked the status of some cases. I noticed that only on May 23, around 75 cases were either approved or the cards were mailed for the case numbers within WAC18074* and WAC18075*. This progress on a single day is beyond impressive for the USCIS. For other cases it still shows "transferred on June 11".  

Contact your US Representative and/or ombudsman.  This needs attention.  April/May 2018 are getting approved.

@Roy&Chanel I hope I didn't mess up the thread tracker! 
 
My husband finally received his approval - within 514 days, or 1 year, 4 months, and 28 days, or 16 months and 28 days.
 
Now, we only have 6 - 9 months to hear back on when Dallas will schedule his USC interview.  After all this, that's not a lot of time.  It's almost done.  Almost.

Checked the case status today and says that my n400 interview has been scheduled.  No date yet.
 
I-751 Submitted 12/30/17
N400 Submitted 10/10/18
Bio appointment 10/23/18
Los Angeles local office
 
I-751 still pending, so I assume, I'll have a combo interview.

Philadelphia Office -
I received notification today of my N400 interview being scheduled (applied Dec 2018). I am a ROC Dec 2017 filer and haven't had a ROC update since April 2018 - case received at local office. 

All, 
 
I'm a divorce waiver filer and got approved on 04/16. I jointly filed to CSC in Dec 2017 and requested a waiver in Nov 2018 once the divorce proceedings had commenced. They sent me an RFE in March 2019 requesting the divorce decree. I responded to the RFE on April 4th and got approved on 04/16.