Elf

Hi,
As a USC, your husband is entitled to his SSDI and SSI benefits. Your husband getting these benefits will not affect your AOS. As long as the Joint Sponsor can meet the I-864 requirements, you do not have a problem with your husband receiving benefits.

It doesn't matter which of those you get. I got the simple shot at CVS and just showed the civil surgeon the "record of immunization" printout the CVS pharmacist had given me.

They will abandon their minor children to move to the US?
What Parent would do that?

On the I-864 for you, you are the intending immigrant. No form is needed to include your income if it is legal and can continue after becoming a permanent resident.
On the I-864 for your daughter, you are just the sponsor's household member. You are not a sponsored immigrant. You need to fill out an I-864A if the sponsor needs to include your income.

1. yes
2. yes
3. In principle, if his current income is enough, that's enough. He should attach an employer letter (if possible) and as many pay stubs as possible. As for his taxes, he needs to provide information from his tax returns if he was required to file. If he had non-negligible income anywhere in the world (not just in the US), he had to file US taxes. If he had no income anywhere and thus was not required to file US taxes, then per the I-864 instructions he would attach a statement saying that. If he was required to file US taxed but didn't, he should file back taxes ASAP.

When a person enters the US with an immigrant visa, they automatically become a US permanent resident. The immigrant visa itself turns into an I-551 (green card) valid for one year. They also mail you a plastic green card if you have paid the fee.
In this case, since the chid is a permanent resident minor residing in the US with a US citizen parent, the child will also automatically become a US citizen. This happens by automatic operation of law and you don't get any document showing it. If you want to prove the child's US citizenship, you would show the proof of the parent's US citizenship at the time when the child is under 18 + proof of the child's permanent residency at the same time when the child is under 18 + proof the child lived with the parent in the US. And those together serve to prove the child's US citizenship.
Because these two things happened quickly in succession (becoming permanent resident, then becoming citizen), it may seem odd that the child is getting the plastic green card after becoming a US citizen. But it is not really that strange. And actually the plastic card is not really needed in this case, because all that is needed is to prove the child's permanent residency at this brief time, which the stamped immigrant visa in his foreign passport already serves. But since you paid for it, you will get it.
You applied for the child's US passport, which means the child is already a US citizen.
You don't need to file N-600 to apply for a Certificate of Citizenship. It is your choice whether to apply for it or not. AFAIK there is no benefit that she can get with a Certificate of Citizenship that she cannot get with a US passport.
She cannot "renew" the passport -- but she can apply for a new one with the old passport as proof of citizenship, unless she lost it.
She doesn't need to prove permanent residency because she is a US citizen; instead, she may need proof of US citizenship. A US passport or Certificate of Citizenship serves as proof of US citizenship if she needs one. But if she lives in the US she may almost never need such a proof.

They m arried in 1998, and are still together now, 17 years later? Nope, that is not immigration fraud.

We have a web cache set to a few days to speed the site up -- I'll see if I can lower the limit to one day. Sorry for the inconvenience!

You can apply for an EAD before AOS based on your K-1 entry, but it will cost you $380, the EAD will only be valid as long as your I-94 is, and it is not renewable. It takes 60-90 days to receive, so you will not have much time to work using it, if any. It is a complete waste of time and money to do so.
The fees for the I-765(EAD-work authorization) and I-131(AP-advance parole for travel) are waived when filed with a pending I-485, the EAD/AP will be valid for a year, and are renewable(also for free).
Print out your I-94 info > https://i94.cbp.dhs.gov/I94/request.html
Follow this guide for getting the SSN > http://www.visajourney.com/content/ssn
Follow this guide for AOS > http://www.visajourney.com/content/k1k3aos
The fees are listed here > http://www.uscis.gov/i-485
You need all the supporting documents for each form as well, so read the instructions for each one. You can also search here on VJ for what to include with each form if you get stumped. There are also example forms here on VJ you can look at when filling out the forms. They can be helpful.
And here are the details you need about whether or not you need to see a civil surgeon > http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/551080-immunizations-ds-3025-or-i-693/

I-485, I-765, and I-131 each require two photos of the beneficiary. The I-130, if petitioning a spouse, requires one photo each from the petitioner and beneficiary. (The I-130, if petitioning a spouse, also requires one G-325A each from the petitioner and beneficary. The photo isn't strictly part of the G-325A, but people like to organize it that way.)

Okay, he does not need an I-864A. What he does need is proof of his current income plus proof that his income will continue from the same source once he becomes a permanent resident. He needs a letter from his employer that clearly states his salary plus stating that his job is permanent and will continue once he becomes a permanent resident. He should also add in recent pay stubs. Send another copy of his 2014 transcript too.
You also provide again your tax transcript plus documentation of your current income with a letter from employer and/or recent pay stubs. List your spouse on Part 6 #3 Person 1 of your I-864. Check the box for #17 and list his name there.
Fill out a new I-864 and make sure it is the latest form edition from the USCIS website. Add a statement in your cover letter for the RFE that you erroneously filed the I-864A, but as your spouse and the intending immigrant, he does not actually need one, so you have filled out a new I-864 and provided all supporting documentation for each. List what each of you has included.
Your assertions that the immigrant's income cannot be used and even if it can, the USC still needs to meet the 125% requirement on their own are incorrect. Please read the I-864 instructions.
The intending immigrant's income may be used. If they are working legally in the US and their income will continue from the same source once they get their green card, then it most definitely may be counted. The USC spouse could be unemployed and add their immigrant spouse's income to their I-864 to meet the 125% requirement.
As to the above from tarzan31, the immigrant spouse's income can be used, even if they do not share the same residence as the USC spouse.

OP: It seems that during your nine-day tenure here at the forum you may have a misunderstanding of the rationale for the various AOS forums.
On page 2 of Form I-485, Part 3. Processing Information, What will be your answer to the question, "In what status did you last enter?"

For a better understanding of this point, please read the pinned thread at the top of this forum page: http://www.visajourn...ment-of-status/ HTH.

Good luck on immigration journey.

1. You can only go into F-1 status after entry when you enter on an F-1 visa. You cannot use an F-1 visa to enter at this point as you are doing Adjustment of Status. You also cannot enter as a Canadian visitor. You can only use AP to enter. When you enter on AP, you don't have F-1 status or any other status; you are a parolee.
2. AP and passport should be enough. Maybe also I-485 receipt to be safe.
3. It doesn't really matter. Maybe I-130 and I-485 will be approved together or I-130 first then I-485, but what really matters is the I-485.

The expiration date is only for government internal purposes. It is not relevant for you the user. What is relevant for you is what editions it says are accepted on the USCIS webpage for the form. The latest edition is always accepted, and as you can see in the case of I-485, editions going back 5 or 6 years are also still currently accepted.

It really goes both ways. Spousal/fiance visas can easily be abused, so these are targets for fraud. The embassy CO's are the last line of defense and they are the only ones that have a personal interview with the party(ies) involved in the case. I think they are in the best position to catch discrepancies in the case. It's their job to be skeptical and questioning, so I appreciate them.
But it gets frustrating (like lutz said) when you see people that meet through hunka-chunka-cherry-Asian-love-blossoms.com, they get an interview within a week, and they are asked, "What's your name? What's their name?" before being told, "Your visa is printed. Come back tomorrow." Then you wonder, okay, this place, which may or may not be located on the Pacific Rim, consists of 20% of all spousal/fiance US visas issued on the entire planet, but that's cool?
Regardless, it would be irresponsible of the embassy CO's to rubber stamp all visas. I think every applicant needs to prepare their case to address any potential issues. Give them more reasons to say 'yes' than reasons to say, 'wait a minute...'.
Is Ghana denying more cases than they should be? Probably. Are they seeing more fraudulent visas than other embassies? Probably. Either way, it's our responsibility to prove to the government that we qualify for this visa - it's not a right. I wish they would look at everything (or at least the majority) of documents presented before they said no. If they are going to say yes, sure they don't need everything. But if you are going to say no, at least look at what the person brought!

It's not the immigration officer being dumb, it's the amount of spouses who get their tourist visa after promising the officer that they only want to visit and then change their mind as soon as they get to the States and apply to adjust their status.
THAT is what they are wary of when deciding to approve or deny a spouses tourist visa. You may be only interested in doing things in the right and proper way but unfortunately the actions of all the people before you who decided they didn't want to wait for a proper spouses visa means that the innocent people get punished.

The amount of artificial stuff in things... If I want to eat strawberry whatever, I want REAL strawberry flavor, not artificial stuff!
Cool whip. I cannot understand why anybody buys that stuff... You want whipped cream and you eat vegetable oil that tastes horrible?!
How tv is full of joint lawsuits and you need to hurry up, because "offer ends soon".... "Victims of mesothelioma or their loved ones, call now!" Been going on for at least a year and it drives me nuts.
How tv is full of medicine commercials that can save your life, but oh wait, we gota tell you that this and that and these could be side effects, and you could actually also die if you take this.. Plus, on a small print that stays on the screen for a split second it reads that none of the claims are FDA approved. Can't belive they're alowed to sell all this stuff... And I also find it strange that they suggest that you as a patient should ask your doctor if you could benefit from this medicine. Where I com from, I go to the doctor and the doctor will tell me my options
How when watching tv, you have to turn up the volume to hear anything of the actual show, but then jump a foot in the air and get a mini heart attack every time the show goes on commercial break, bcause the commercials are significantly louder than the show.
How some people think brang is an actual word.
That pople call it homemade and baking when they bought a cake mix, added water and put it in the oven.
That people LIKE these "homemade" cakes
That Fanta doesn't taste the same, because it doesn't have real sugar in it.
Bill O'Reilly, but let's not go there...

an I-134 presented for a tourist visa would not even be used by most CO's to line a litter box.....it's absolutely worthless, not legally enforceable and is nothing more than window dressing.
What may come into play is how the daughter got to the US...if via a K-1 or a marriage within country, that's a plus; if via a 'mind change' at baggage claim, that could work against this case.
The idea is that if a family plays by the rules, they will (likely) get the benefit of the doubt; if they show a tendency to disregard the rules, well, if disregarded by an adult child, a CO might wonder who taught them that rules are meant for others....(that would be the parents)....
just some things to think about.
As far as some other person 'guaranteeing' that the applicant will return home, well, just how will that happen? No one has legal authority over someone in B2 status (except possibly ICE, and they are not likely to chase down one overstayer), the USC husband cannot 'force' MIL to hop on a plane, he cannot physically carry her to the boarding gate, etc. While he might ask her to leave his house, that is not the same as 'ordering her' to leave the country. I am not sure why people believe that some silly statement about 'making sure that he/she returns'.....will somehow convince a CO to issue a visa.....there is NO legal mechanism in place that bestows some sort of power or authority to an American citizen to lord over someone here on a visa.
Lastly, (well, probably not!), this other concept that somehow a 'notarized' letter has some special magical quality about it is also without merit. All notarization does is confirm that Mr. X or Miss Y signed the document in question; it does not make what is written true or enforceable. Notarized letters hit the round file as quickly as those that are not notarized.
A letter has no power to govern the actions of somebody in the US in some particular status.

arken is mistaken. You can translate your own documents, and indeed dozens of people have posted here saying they did exactly that without issue.

My husband naturalized and became a U.S. citizen in 2012. He stood, raised his hand, and repeated these words:
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."
He still has a valid British passport, UK driver license, UK credit card, UK eBay account, UK iTunes account, and will collect his UK pension. He is both British and American. He flies to Heathrow and enters with his UK passport. He returns to Houston And enters using his US passport.

A discussion about the applicant's finances is likely to surface during an interview in which the entire family is seeking visas, whether some third party brings up the topic or not.
The proposed trip must make sense....relative to the applicant's current situation.

The proposed trip on a B2 visa must make sense from the financial perspective of the applicants. If the cost of the trip is disproportional to their income, then the CO will likely wonder (a) why someone would want to spend such a sum and (b) if that person is really going to try and find another way to pay for the trip, by working without permission while in B2 status...and if the CO has doubts, guess what the outcome of the interview will be?

If the petitioner and beneficiary don't sufficiently prove their case, it does not matter what country they are from.
But the fact remains that fraud in various forms exists in a higher percentage of cases from Ghana than Sweden.
Marriage for money remains an issue....marriage only for a visa/green card remains an issue.
It is up to the individuals involved to prove the validity of their relationship to the CO, and to no one else.
An approved petition is not an approved visa. The people rubber stamping petitions are just checking off boxes on documents requested/enclosed....nothing more.
The CO's job is to determine the validity of a relationship as best they can....the responsibility of providing proof is up to the two parties involved (petitioner and beneficiary).
Meet the requirements, expect visa issuance; fail to meet it, expect delays at the very least.
No one posting on this site save for me has ever interviewed somebody overseas for a visa. So what is your point of reference as to any 'knowledge' about the entire process?
You are only seeing one case (yours) or perhaps hearing about a handful of others, whose reports of what happened at their interview is laced with mostly unfounded opinions about why the case (a) should have been approved and (b) why it was sent back, but in both cases, the blame is only directed at the 'rude' CO 'clerk' who 'knows nothing.' Not hardly.

Again, for the learning impaired, if you've not been a CO, you have no idea of their background and skills.
My comment about having an envelope ready should be read again....I said that if I got pushback or reluctance to provide what I asked for, then the applicant and the petitioner would have left me no choice but to send their case back....I did not and would not stand for someone just trying to intimidate me using a variety of ways (ones they thought would work) instead of doing what I asked.
You choose to categorize my techniques as 'a power trip'...yes, I had the power, but I had little tolerance for those who just wanted me to change my mind without sufficient cause, wanted to call me names, threaten me with bodily harm (or even death!), etc. When they crossed that line, their case went back. If I asked for X, Y or Z and got only excuses instead, back went their case. If they brought me credible X, Y or Z, then their case would be approved. Only when either the applicant (or more often) the petitioner wanted to challenge me without providing what I asked would I resort to immediately sending the case back (and the petitioner would be warned that would happen....it was up to the petitioner to decide).
What I would not (did not) do is ask for X, Y or Z, get it, then find something new to delay their case, because that would not be fair. But I was not a pushover. Many people tried all sorts of ways to convince/intimidate/threaten me to issue a visa without sufficient evidence....that's what envelopes are for.
Those who complied and qualified in all other respects or who proved the validity of their relationship via interviews, documents, photos, whatever, were issued. I cared not where they were from, but when I worked in high fraud countries, a lot of those cases got put under a microscope for good reason.
I had been given a consular commission, from Congress, to carry out my duties in certain ways. I made my own decisions without help from third parties, because at the end of the day, it was my name on the approval line. So I took my responsibility quite seriously, and did not fall prey to tears, begging, whining or threats. And that's just the way it is.
Obviously those whose applications were denied often vehemently disagreed....but disagreement does not equal instant qualification. I don't doubt that many unhappy BFs, GFs, petitioners, etc, thought that if they wrote their congressman/senator, why, all would be well....they were surprised when nothing happened. Congress lacks the authority (on purpose) to order a CO to issue or deny a visa. In fact, NO ONE, including the president of the US, is empowered to tell a CO what visa to issue and which one to refuse.
Yes, that represents a lot of authority...but that's the current law(s). Like it or lump it.
What we have not heard from some of those whose cases were denied was how certain questions were answered, what background issues their beneficiary might have had...etc...we only hear their opinions about the situation...but skillful interviewing comes with experience and there are many many variables involved, beyond merely perusing a bunch of documents.
There are a lot of very common ways in which people exhibit discomfort or evasiveness during an interview, and when those indicators are present, more detailed questions will follow...and when the applicant gives up answering those questions, well, that is NOT a reason to issue a visa. It's time to get to the bottom of whatever might be going on...and that takes time, time the CO does not have ...each applicant (for an IV) might be allocated 30 minutes or so (there are people in the waiting room)...after that, if little progress is being made, then the CO either asks for X, Y or Z within a certain time frame, or, if instead, gets a lot of push back from either party instead of acquiescing to the CO's request, then time is up and the case will be sent back, and USCIS can take over, because they have almost unlimited amounts of time to deal with these types of cases.

from one of your first postings, "I hope I get a lot of input here because it will really help with deciding whether to file or not."
So, some of us have indeed given you some input...and some reasons why getting a tourist visa might be challenging...you mentioned that your husband has a tourist visa...has he used it? If so, for how long did he stay in the US? If he has used it properly, that would enhance your chances of getting one as well (you did not mention this early on)...
Once again, rather than take issue with some of us (some who have considerable experience in this area), you left out certain information that might have steered the responses in a different direction....thus, all most of us had to work with was what you provided at the outset...but again, thank all of your countrymen who decided to abuse the privilege given to them, making it tougher for others to enjoy the same privilege.
And what 'racist' comments were made by anyone? I said that many people from many different countries have left kids and spouses behind, not just Filipinos. However, the Philippines do not enjoy the visa waiver program for a reason (actually, several). That well-known fact (to the consular community) does not reflect a racial bias when it comes time to adjudicate visas, but rather it provides a base line from which they try to determine the bona fides of those who are applying now, often giving similar reasons for their return as were given by those who didn't, making the CO's job tough as well.
I don't believe that 'visa abusers' are a race.