olafgypsy

the "K-1 can work without EAD" theory is all conjecture until we get some people to actually gets a credible employer to give them a frickin job.... or until the USCIS provides additional guidance to clarify.

Yup, that's probably true. But I would argue that if employers refuse to hire someone on the basis of the documents listed in the I-9 handbook (and btw, how crazy is it that a one-page form requires an 80 page handbook to fill out?) it is because they haven't read the handbook. If I were an average employer, looking at what the handbook says, I would feel compelled to take the K-1 with I-94 as evidence of employment authorization. That's all I'm sayin' . . . .

Guys, the manual for employers about how to fill out the I-9 is very clear about what documents employers MUST accept as evidence of employment authorization. It even shows pictures of the different documents. I am quite aware that having a social security number and being authorized to work are two very different things.

It is not just having the I-94 that is evidence of authorization: it is having the unexpired I-94 WITH a K1 visa that is evidence of authorization. This is why many POE's have stopped giving out the EAD stamp to K1s and have told people that "it's not necessary, you are already have proof of work authorization." It is true that having a valid I-94 by itself is not evidence of work authorization -- it has to be an I-94 with a certain type of visa.

Hey; I just wanted to shed some light on this, as I've been doing some research. My fiance is due to enter the USA in two weeks' time, so I researched employment eligibility. The most helpful source of information is the _Handbook for Employers_: Instructions for Completing the Form I-9 (employment eligibility form). It is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/m-274.pdf.

On pg 31, Under "List A: Documents that Verify Both Identity and Employment Eligibility," USCIS lists BOTH "Unexpired foreign passport with a temporary I-551 stamp" AND "unexpired foreign passport with an unexpired Arrival-Departure record, form I-94, bearing the same name as the passport and containing an endorsement of the alien's non-immigrant status, if that status authorizes the alien to work for the employer."

This last bit is singularly unhelpful until you consult the SSA website's section for employers, "classifications that allow you to work," http://www.ssa.gov/immigration/visa.htm. This page does indeed list K-1 visa holders as authorized to work in the U.S.

Support for this authorization can be found in INS regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(6): http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/jan...8cfr274a.12.pdf.

So it appears a K-1 fiance does NOT need the EAD stamp to work legally. The stamp is simply an extraneous (unnecessary) verification of a privilege K-1 visa holders already have, for 90 days after they enter the U.S, AFTER they obtain a valid social security number. However, once the visa holder's K-1 status expires (i.e, after 90 days) they are no longer authorized to work in the U.S. unless they have obtained another EAD from USCIS using that form, I-775(?)

The SSA cannot require any documentation from the K-1 visa holder other than their valid i-94 for issuance of SS#.

However, the SSA is very unhappy with this situation, as it appears to have resulted in SS# fraud by K-1 visa holders who enter the U.S. on the K-1, do NOT marry the USC petitioner, and then continue to work beyond the 90-day expiration. The SSA would like to put in place controls that enable them to withhold the social security number from the K-1 visa holder until the couple provide documentation of legal marriage: http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/audittxt/A-08-07-17044.htm.

If various SS offices have been inconsistent about their issuance of SS#'s to K-1 visa holders, it is probably because there is currently some controversy and haziness concerning this issue in the SSA.

Did you even read 8 CFR §274a.[12].[a]?

"Aliens authorized employment incident to status. Pursuant to the statutory or regulatory reference cited, the following classes of aliens are authorized to be employed in the United States without restrictions as to location or type of employment as a condition of their admission or subsequent change to one of the indicated classes. Any alien who is within a class of aliens described in paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6)-(a)(8), (a)(10)-(a)(15), or (a)(20) of this section, and who seeks to be employed in the United States, must apply to U.S.Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for a document evidencing such employment authorization."

How you read that and came out with "So it appears a K-1 fiance does NOT need the EAD stamp to work legally." I just can't work out.

A K1 holder is under the definition of §274a.[12].[a].[6]. Yes they are authorized to work, but to have a job they have to have documentary proof of this. Simply having an unexpired I-94 is only proof of status, not proof of employment authorization. Your employment authorization will either come from a category [a][6] EAD card or an unexpired I-94 with a temporary EAD stamp on it.

Also, the SSA has nothing to do with you being work authorized, they don't control work authorization, approve it or deny it. What they do is internal from USCIS and in no way impacts or dictates any permission to work.

You haven't found the magical answer to the K1/EAD/SSN debate.

Yuck, that sounds horrendous. It definitely seems like the USCIS officers expect you to have quizzed each other and memorized weird facts about one another before the interview. Not really sure what that proves, but forewarned is forearmed, I guess.

Hey; I just wanted to shed some light on this, as I've been doing some research. My fiance is due to enter the USA in two weeks' time, so I researched employment eligibility. The most helpful source of information is the _Handbook for Employers_: Instructions for Completing the Form I-9 (employment eligibility form). It is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/m-274.pdf.

On pg 31, Under "List A: Documents that Verify Both Identity and Employment Eligibility," USCIS lists BOTH "Unexpired foreign passport with a temporary I-551 stamp" AND "unexpired foreign passport with an unexpired Arrival-Departure record, form I-94, bearing the same name as the passport and containing an endorsement of the alien's non-immigrant status, if that status authorizes the alien to work for the employer."

This last bit is singularly unhelpful until you consult the SSA website's section for employers, "classifications that allow you to work," http://www.ssa.gov/immigration/visa.htm. This page does indeed list K-1 visa holders as authorized to work in the U.S.

Support for this authorization can be found in INS regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(6): http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/jan...8cfr274a.12.pdf.

So it appears a K-1 fiance does NOT need the EAD stamp to work legally. The stamp is simply an extraneous (unnecessary) verification of a privilege K-1 visa holders already have, for 90 days after they enter the U.S, AFTER they obtain a valid social security number. However, once the visa holder's K-1 status expires (i.e, after 90 days) they are no longer authorized to work in the U.S. unless they have obtained another EAD from USCIS using that form, I-775(?)

The SSA cannot require any documentation from the K-1 visa holder other than their valid i-94 for issuance of SS#.

However, the SSA is very unhappy with this situation, as it appears to have resulted in SS# fraud by K-1 visa holders who enter the U.S. on the K-1, do NOT marry the USC petitioner, and then continue to work beyond the 90-day expiration. The SSA would like to put in place controls that enable them to withhold the social security number from the K-1 visa holder until the couple provide documentation of legal marriage: http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/audittxt/A-08-07-17044.htm.

If various SS offices have been inconsistent about their issuance of SS#'s to K-1 visa holders, it is probably because there is currently some controversy and haziness concerning this issue in the SSA.

Hey; I just wanted to shed some light on this, as I've been doing some research. My fiance is due to enter the USA in two weeks' time, so I researched employment eligibility. The most helpful source of information is the _Handbook for Employers_: Instructions for Completing the Form I-9 (employment eligibility form). It is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/m-274.pdf.

On pg 31, Under "List A: Documents that Verify Both Identity and Employment Eligibility," USCIS lists BOTH "Unexpired foreign passport with a temporary I-551 stamp" AND "unexpired foreign passport with an unexpired Arrival-Departure record, form I-94, bearing the same name as the passport and containing an endorsement of the alien's non-immigrant status, if that status authorizes the alien to work for the employer."

This last bit is singularly unhelpful until you consult the SSA website's section for employers, "classifications that allow you to work," http://www.ssa.gov/immigration/visa.htm. This page does indeed list K-1 visa holders as authorized to work in the U.S.

Support for this authorization can be found in INS regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(6): http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/jan...8cfr274a.12.pdf.

So it appears a K-1 fiance does NOT need the EAD stamp to work legally. The stamp is simply an extraneous (unnecessary) verification of a privilege K-1 visa holders already have, for 90 days after they enter the U.S, AFTER they obtain a valid social security number. However, once the visa holder's K-1 status expires (i.e, after 90 days) they are no longer authorized to work in the U.S. unless they have obtained another EAD from USCIS using that form, I-775(?)

The SSA cannot require any documentation from the K-1 visa holder other than their valid i-94 for issuance of SS#.

However, the SSA is very unhappy with this situation, as it appears to have resulted in SS# fraud by K-1 visa holders who enter the U.S. on the K-1, do NOT marry the USC petitioner, and then continue to work beyond the 90-day expiration. The SSA would like to put in place controls that enable them to withhold the social security number from the K-1 visa holder until the couple provide documentation of legal marriage: http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/audittxt/A-08-07-17044.htm.

If various SS offices have been inconsistent about their issuance of SS#'s to K-1 visa holders, it is probably because there is currently some controversy and haziness concerning this issue in the SSA.

If my fiance was from a country where I could pursue my career just as well as I can in the U.S, then hell no. I would move out of the U.S. to be with him rather than having to deal with the nightmare of U.S. immigration.

Hey; I just wanted to shed some light on this, as I've been doing some research. My fiance is due to enter the USA in two weeks' time, so I researched employment eligibility. The most helpful source of information is the _Handbook for Employers_: Instructions for Completing the Form I-9 (employment eligibility form). It is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/m-274.pdf.

On pg 31, Under "List A: Documents that Verify Both Identity and Employment Eligibility," USCIS lists BOTH "Unexpired foreign passport with a temporary I-551 stamp" AND "unexpired foreign passport with an unexpired Arrival-Departure record, form I-94, bearing the same name as the passport and containing an endorsement of the alien's non-immigrant status, if that status authorizes the alien to work for the employer."

This last bit is singularly unhelpful until you consult the SSA website's section for employers, "classifications that allow you to work," http://www.ssa.gov/immigration/visa.htm. This page does indeed list K-1 visa holders as authorized to work in the U.S.

Support for this authorization can be found in INS regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(6): http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/jan...8cfr274a.12.pdf.

So it appears a K-1 fiance does NOT need the EAD stamp to work legally. The stamp is simply an extraneous (unnecessary) verification of a privilege K-1 visa holders already have, for 90 days after they enter the U.S, AFTER they obtain a valid social security number. However, once the visa holder's K-1 status expires (i.e, after 90 days) they are no longer authorized to work in the U.S. unless they have obtained another EAD from USCIS using that form, I-775(?)

The SSA cannot require any documentation from the K-1 visa holder other than their valid i-94 for issuance of SS#.

However, the SSA is very unhappy with this situation, as it appears to have resulted in SS# fraud by K-1 visa holders who enter the U.S. on the K-1, do NOT marry the USC petitioner, and then continue to work beyond the 90-day expiration. The SSA would like to put in place controls that enable them to withhold the social security number from the K-1 visa holder until the couple provide documentation of legal marriage: http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/audittxt/A-08-07-17044.htm.

If various SS offices have been inconsistent about their issuance of SS#'s to K-1 visa holders, it is probably because there is currently some controversy and haziness concerning this issue in the SSA.

Hey; I just wanted to shed some light on this, as I've been doing some research. My fiance is due to enter the USA in two weeks' time, so I researched employment eligibility. The most helpful source of information is the _Handbook for Employers_: Instructions for Completing the Form I-9 (employment eligibility form). It is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/m-274.pdf.

On pg 31, Under "List A: Documents that Verify Both Identity and Employment Eligibility," USCIS lists BOTH "Unexpired foreign passport with a temporary I-551 stamp" AND "unexpired foreign passport with an unexpired Arrival-Departure record, form I-94, bearing the same name as the passport and containing an endorsement of the alien's non-immigrant status, if that status authorizes the alien to work for the employer."

This last bit is singularly unhelpful until you consult the SSA website's section for employers, "classifications that allow you to work," http://www.ssa.gov/immigration/visa.htm. This page does indeed list K-1 visa holders as authorized to work in the U.S.

Support for this authorization can be found in INS regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(6): http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/jan...8cfr274a.12.pdf.

So it appears a K-1 fiance does NOT need the EAD stamp to work legally. The stamp is simply an extraneous (unnecessary) verification of a privilege K-1 visa holders already have, for 90 days after they enter the U.S, AFTER they obtain a valid social security number. However, once the visa holder's K-1 status expires (i.e, after 90 days) they are no longer authorized to work in the U.S. unless they have obtained another EAD from USCIS using that form, I-775(?)

The SSA cannot require any documentation from the K-1 visa holder other than their valid i-94 for issuance of SS#.

However, the SSA is very unhappy with this situation, as it appears to have resulted in SS# fraud by K-1 visa holders who enter the U.S. on the K-1, do NOT marry the USC petitioner, and then continue to work beyond the 90-day expiration. The SSA would like to put in place controls that enable them to withhold the social security number from the K-1 visa holder until the couple provide documentation of legal marriage: http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/audittxt/A-08-07-17044.htm.

If various SS offices have been inconsistent about their issuance of SS#'s to K-1 visa holders, it is probably because there is currently some controversy and haziness concerning this issue in the SSA.

Thanks KitKat! That's really great information. You can bet I will be researching my ### off in the next week.

I would like to say I am VERY PROUD to see the posts following kikats because they were all helpful and not judgemental.

Just follow everything kitkat posted and post questions but ignore criticisms.

Thanks everyone. This advice is really helpful. I will be consulting with an immigration lawyer some time this week. One thing I'm still confused about, and am wondering if people could weigh in on . . . at what point would the K1 visa be approved? Does it need to be approved before we can start the waiver process? Or would we wait until after (God willing) a waiver is approved and THEN try to get K1 approval?

Hello everyone. Today my fiance and I had our interview at the consulate (Bogota) and received some shocking news -- my fiance has a ten-year ban against him for overstaying a J1 visa. Because we were uneducated about the immigration laws, we did not realize this would happen. Further complicating our case, our consular interviewer seemed doubtful our K1 visa would be approved in any case because of the numerous careless mistakes I made on the petition regarding biographical info. Basically, we did everything wrong.

Now I am wondering what to do next. What we would want to do in a perfect world is withdraw our petition and start over. But is it possible to withdraw a K1 petition and submit again for the same person?

Another option: what would happen if we canceled this petition (is that even possible at this point?), got married in Colombia, and started the process over again, this time with an I-130? The advantage of this approach is that we would have time to build a case for the I-612 (petition to remove the ten-year-ban), which we would then have all ready to file after the interview.

One thing I'm confused about: all the information I've read seems to indicate that the I-612 can only be filed after the visa is approved. But the consular officer neither approved nor denied our visa: she just expressed doubts about our case. ??????????? She then told us to return for a waiver interview. Does that mean our visa was approved?

Sooooo confused.

Thanks for the replies! NigerianLove, no secret; simply the information I've gleaned from reading the ColombiaClub thread, as my fiance is from Colombia. There, it seems that unless you're using assets such as investments or a savings account to prove you're above the poverty line, you don't need the bank letter.

Hello everyone! My fiance and I have our visa interview on August 21st. My question is about the supporting documents for the I-134:

If I have a copy of my 1040, W-2s, and a signed letter from my employer indicating annual salary and benefits, do I have enough supporting documents?

I'm mainly wondering if I need to order a *transcript* of my taxes for the past year as well; I know the bank letter is not necessary because I am not using assets to qualify.

OskaryAndrea -- Congratulations on receiving your visa!! I am so happy for you both!

I have a question for you:

Reading this forum, I've gotten the impression that couples in which the US citizen is female and the Colombian citizen is male are scrutinized more at the interview. This is the case for me and my fiance: he is a 25-yr-old Colombian male and I am a 24-yr-old American female. Do you have any tips or advice for us going into the interview?

I think I have completed a miricle. I actullay got a Colombian to have a sense of urgencey about sometning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How did you do it? LOL . . .

After three months of lost faxes, lost mail, the run-around from the embassy, and my incessant worrying, the embassy *finally granted my fiance a visa interview for August 21st. My Colombian fiance's response: "See, I told you not to worry!" My response: "If I hadn't worried, we would never have gotten an interview date!!!!" Although I admire his constant faith that things will turn out well no matter what (and that's one of the reasons I love him), I just can't change my innate nature as a worry-wart . . .

CONGRATULATIONS Oskar and Andrea. No one deserves this more than you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, it appears that the embassy never received our fax My fiance is going to go to the place where he sent the fax from and try to figure out what happened. Meanwhile, our (couriered) packet should have arrived at the embassy by now . . . so hopefully we will get an early July interview

Now I'd like the vets' opinions on the photos that we will take going in to our interview: we have a couple of photos of the two of us together from when he was in the U.S, but there is nothing in the background that indicates where they were taken. We *do have a photograph of the two of us from my college graduation, where I'm in a cap and gown with my diploma. From graduation we also have a picture of me, him and my sister. Then we have a 3 or 4 pictures of the two of us together on our trip to Cartagena, and then the photos we had professionally taken in Bogota when we got engaged (2 of those, from the same place). But all told, it's only about 12 pictures. Is that going to be enough? I guess we could also take some pictures of me with his family and him, when we get there . . . it still doesn't seem like enough . . . other people are saying 25 - 30. I think the most we can scrape together is about 15.

I am sorry that you had trouble with your fax. You are the first one that has reported a problem on this thread. I can't imagine how they lost a fax. . . .

Thanks for your response! My fiance is going to try calling the embassy tomorrow between 2 and 4 to see what the situation is. I'll be sure to report back what actually happened; whether they really lost it, or we made a mistake on our end of things, or what.

OK, I have a question: due to the embassy not getting our fax (or maybe, not accepting our fax) and our failure to follow up by courier (stupid, stupid), it looks like we may not get a June interview after all. So here's my question: will we have to wait until mid to late June to find out when our interview is? Or will they schedule our appointment as soon as they have accepted and processed our document?

Also, how long does it take them to process the documents once they are received? I am still holding out hope that maybe, just maybe, they received our fax and just have not entered it in their system yet . . .

OK, here's my situation:

On Monday we FINALLY got word that the last document we needed (a German police certificate) would be available, and translated into English, by next week, so we decided to fax the cover letter, front page of his passport, DS-230 Part I, and OF-169, to the embassy, immigrant visa unit. He sent it to 571-315-4155, the fax number listed for the immigrant visa unit. We did not follow up with courier, figuring it was unnecessary.

This morning I called the visa information line, and the woman I spoke with told me that they had no record of receiving his information. I hope this just means that they have not entered it in their system yet, but I'm worried . . . today he is faxing them a letter asking them to call him to confirm their receipt of his documents. If he does not hear from them by 3, he will send the documents via courier.

Do you think this means they really did not receive his information? I would be so upset if that were the case, because it means we likely have missed the cut-off for a June interview date.

Has anyone RECENTLY had success tracking their packet's shipment to the consulate through DHL? The search terms other members have suggested (Expedite IV Section, Expedite NIV Section, Correspondence, I-730) no longer appear to be working.

Yes, I think it's a good idea to just fax and deliver the first packet and then fax a correct address. My fiance lives in Bogota, which is why it's so strange to me that he hasn't received it after over a month . . . At least he'll be able to pick up the next packet himself.

Unfortunately I don't have ready access to a fax machine and neither does he; wish they had an email address or something. Somebody made a comment about how faxing was easier for them because they could sift through the inquiries and decide which ones to answer . . . the same would be true for email, no? But now that I think of it, internet service is unreliable in Bogota, so maybe that's why they insist on faxes. Oh well . . .

Does anyone know how I can contact the embassy in Bogota? According to their recorded message, they are no longer taking inquiries about immigrant visa applications. The problem is that the NVC sent out my petition on March 21. Over a month later, my fiance has received no packet 1. So I really need to contact the embassy, but I have tried 3 different numbers and none of them are working. The NVC told me I had to contact the embassy directly, the woman on the phone at the embassy switched me to a pre-recorded message that said something like, "This number is not taking inquiries," and the number THAT message directed me to didn't ring through at all. I'm really frustrated . . . what should I do?

My fiance and I decided to wait for Packet 1 to arrive at his house because we were waiting on some documents anyway. But the fact that it has not arrived makes me think they have the wrong address. We don't want to send them the packet 1 materials, even knowing that they probably have our petition already, and risk the Packet 2 never arriving, especially because at this point we don't know if we will ever be able to get ahold of a human being who can help us fix the problem.

I'm ridiculously jealous of VSC filers.

Me too.

Grass is always greener. I'm a VT filer and I was ridiculously jealous of people who got their approvals in 3 days. There are other VT filers who had to wait a month and a half, and nobody can figure out why. It's such a weird system. Ah, the US government. And don't even get me started on the IRS . . .

Congratulations and good luck with the next step!

And yeah, there was a rash of INSANELY fast approvals in VT (within 1 - 3 days) that made being a VT filer both a euphoric and CONFUSING experience. ("Why did they approve this guy who applied only yesterday and I'm still waiting? Thank God I'm a VT filer!" etc. etc.)

But, CONGRATULATIONS