Just Paul

We married less than a year after we met.  We applied 4 months after marriage.  We did live together in Mexico for the last 2 of the months.  
You can file online from anywhere.
 
I know people that have filed a week after marriage and had no issues.   Each case is done on it's own merits.  The key is having the nest evidence submitted that you can such as co mingling of assets, time together, etc.  Letters from friends are not of any value unless you have nothing else to offer.

There is no standard timeline.  Variables include the field office and your specific case.   File now and get the ball rolling.  You can always reschedulte appointments.

If they are fornicating, as the OP puts it, they are probably meeting in person.

There is no standard timeline.  Variables include the field office and your specific case.   File now and get the ball rolling.  You can always reschedulte appointments.

I would do this if A) she were dead B) I needed to pee C) it was nearby and D) it didn't have to be in the AM

There is no standard timeline.  Variables include the field office and your specific case.   File now and get the ball rolling.  You can always reschedulte appointments.

yes

Every case is different.  You can use USCIS and the timelines on this site as reference points.  We got to the US in 103 days in 2018 as a CR-1.
 
Since you are going down the K1 route you need to be aware that driving will depend on where you live.  You can't work until you get an EAD. You can't travel internationally with out AP.  Get a SSN as soon as you can when entering the US.  The whole AOS process doesn't even start until after you get married.

Paul, I got good news… She passed her ROC/US Citizenship interview today 7/1/22!!! Now we just await the oath ceremony! 🙌🙏

We had our ROC interview tuesday morning at Phoenix USCIS.  It went well even though Mary answered "No" when asked if she ever went by any other names.   She forgot her maiden name.   She was also asked about our wedding date and she messed that up too.   She was so nervous and anxious for a few days before.    We were asked about 10 questions one of which was how we met / married.  The IO asked if we had any questions a few times.  We also let the IO know we had filed the N-400 and they checked to see where it was at.  The IO also joked "Are we missing something" as my stack of folders was bigger than their folder.
 
The IO mentioned that they have had a lot of interviews rescheduled because the USC didn't attend.  I whipped out the NOA and we agreed that the interview letter isn't clear.
 
Mary's case was updated to approved and card ordered the next day.
 
Hopefully we will get the biometrics notice soon for the N-400.
 

The key thing about obtaining a B visa is proving that he does not have immigrant intent.  First it is hard to prove a negative. And the having a pending K1 or Spousal Visa Petition indicates that he has Immigrant Intent. 

I have help to file many petitions.  I personally prefer online but when you file paper you can include a cover letter and include everything that you want in the order that you want.   Send it via USPS and use return receipt.

Nothing special to take.  Of course Mary went with 5 inches of copies of everything we did in the US process and never opened it.  Wait for her in the car, if it becomes a combo interview then they will want you there too.  Chances are they will realize the need for the ROC interview right beforehand.  Otherwise they usually schedule another one ASAP.
 
I-751 interview was pretty easy . . .
 

The key thing about obtaining a B visa is proving that he does not have immigrant intent.  First it is hard to prove a negative. And the having a pending K1 or Spousal Visa Petition indicates that he has Immigrant Intent. 

In normal times it's better to apply for the tourist before applying for the fiancé visa.   But given the fact he is Nigerian and the soon to be father of an US Citizen, just apply for both now,

@cuongvt101 the best advice I can give you to be there when she interviews at HCMC
 

@cuongvt101 the best advice I can give you to be there when she interviews at HCMC
 

@cuongvt101 the best advice I can give you to be there when she interviews at HCMC
 

then you aren't DCF. DCF filers skip the the NVC entirely.

Not an issue. A marriage is a marriage.  

Ok as an former RF Engineer and Pilot I'll weigh in here in a greatly oversimplified way.  The real issue is the receivers in the planes don't have the correct rf filters built in.   They never did and the FAA thought it wouldn't be an issue.  The FAA doesn't understand cell system design and thought that the emissions only travel on a horizontal plane.  Unfortunately some RF energy goes "Up".  C-Band towers at the end of runways can cause issues with the receiver for the IFR approach.   2g, 3g, 4g, 5g and 6g are simply standards for the core (landside processing and network) and RAN (RF side).  To have faster "speed" you need larger contiguous RF blocks.  In 2g we had 1.2mhz channels so you would be lucky if a cell sector had 10 megabits per second. 3g it is common to have 5 and 10 mhz channels. In 4g we have some channels at 20mhz getting over 160 megabits per channel, or higher, is a reality. Opening up the C band allowed for even bigger channels along with faster modulation techniques.   You "could" build 4g gear in C Band.
 
So wireless is not completely wireless.   Just the "last mile" to you is.   Wireless mostly makes sense for a mobile user (talking the US Market not developing nations) The cost to operate a network to deliver a bit if data is much cheaper and more reliable over fiber.  It takes less power, is less subject to outage and is easier to secure.
 
Soup to nuts the FAA issue is one where they haven't (allowed avionics to) keep up with technology.  This has come up in the past and not with just the "wireless" industry.  It's a $5 part that cost thousands to install because, well it's government.  Another solution is already there in the GPS network by using 2 sources. 

They just apply for the Visas.  There is no invitation or support.  They will be approved or denied based on their ties to Nigeria and their non immigrant intent.

Ok as an former RF Engineer and Pilot I'll weigh in here in a greatly oversimplified way.  The real issue is the receivers in the planes don't have the correct rf filters built in.   They never did and the FAA thought it wouldn't be an issue.  The FAA doesn't understand cell system design and thought that the emissions only travel on a horizontal plane.  Unfortunately some RF energy goes "Up".  C-Band towers at the end of runways can cause issues with the receiver for the IFR approach.   2g, 3g, 4g, 5g and 6g are simply standards for the core (landside processing and network) and RAN (RF side).  To have faster "speed" you need larger contiguous RF blocks.  In 2g we had 1.2mhz channels so you would be lucky if a cell sector had 10 megabits per second. 3g it is common to have 5 and 10 mhz channels. In 4g we have some channels at 20mhz getting over 160 megabits per channel, or higher, is a reality. Opening up the C band allowed for even bigger channels along with faster modulation techniques.   You "could" build 4g gear in C Band.
 
So wireless is not completely wireless.   Just the "last mile" to you is.   Wireless mostly makes sense for a mobile user (talking the US Market not developing nations) The cost to operate a network to deliver a bit if data is much cheaper and more reliable over fiber.  It takes less power, is less subject to outage and is easier to secure.
 
Soup to nuts the FAA issue is one where they haven't (allowed avionics to) keep up with technology.  This has come up in the past and not with just the "wireless" industry.  It's a $5 part that cost thousands to install because, well it's government.  Another solution is already there in the GPS network by using 2 sources. 

I find duct tape is extremely effective too.

Ok as an former RF Engineer and Pilot I'll weigh in here in a greatly oversimplified way.  The real issue is the receivers in the planes don't have the correct rf filters built in.   They never did and the FAA thought it wouldn't be an issue.  The FAA doesn't understand cell system design and thought that the emissions only travel on a horizontal plane.  Unfortunately some RF energy goes "Up".  C-Band towers at the end of runways can cause issues with the receiver for the IFR approach.   2g, 3g, 4g, 5g and 6g are simply standards for the core (landside processing and network) and RAN (RF side).  To have faster "speed" you need larger contiguous RF blocks.  In 2g we had 1.2mhz channels so you would be lucky if a cell sector had 10 megabits per second. 3g it is common to have 5 and 10 mhz channels. In 4g we have some channels at 20mhz getting over 160 megabits per channel, or higher, is a reality. Opening up the C band allowed for even bigger channels along with faster modulation techniques.   You "could" build 4g gear in C Band.
 
So wireless is not completely wireless.   Just the "last mile" to you is.   Wireless mostly makes sense for a mobile user (talking the US Market not developing nations) The cost to operate a network to deliver a bit if data is much cheaper and more reliable over fiber.  It takes less power, is less subject to outage and is easier to secure.
 
Soup to nuts the FAA issue is one where they haven't (allowed avionics to) keep up with technology.  This has come up in the past and not with just the "wireless" industry.  It's a $5 part that cost thousands to install because, well it's government.  Another solution is already there in the GPS network by using 2 sources.