TracyTN

Be a gentleman to your FUTURE WIFE to protect her from your b@stard friends who emotionally torment her. I'm not even going to address the cocaine/hooker issue cos Lord knows how you spun that one.
Who cares about insulting me? You let the world sh!t on the woman you claim to love and want to spend the rest of your life with.
Priorities, man!

Believe me, mate, this has nothing to do with your 'couplehood'.
Correct me if I am wrong, but as I recall your manner of introducing yourself and your 'couplehood' to this forum was to share with us how your fiance was to stupid to follow your directions of how to spend your money?
You give slimey git a whole new meaning.

I bet he refused to answer her calls till she took that post down, any takers?

Oh you speak Palin quite plainly. Especially that bit where you sugar-coat something to suit your own agenda.

Wow, seriously. Even this thread turns into the same old sh!t. Hmmmm, who's to blame?

Perhaps you may not have a coke habit, but a ####### habit instead. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I guess you know him best - if you think the police and ICE situation will keep him away, then I'd tell him. I'll be curious to see what CBP does with him after he's been reported to ICE and (hopefully) has a restraining order out against him. I suppose there are no guarantees, though. I would be sure to be in a safe place on Saturday, preferably with other people around you so that you are not in harm's way. Maybe even a shelter where you cannot be found.
I can't believe he hit you in front of your sister on Easter (well, I can't believe he hit you any time, but you get my meaning!). My sister would have had him out of there at gunpoint - but I suppose that's par for the course when your brother in law is a sheriff's deputy.

Uh, yeah. I'll say so.
Listen Julian, I am putting my big girl hat on right now (I may still be in my silky peignoir but don't let that distract you). Your fiancee is a very sweet girl who is obviously in love with you. It would behoove you to start treating her with a little respect now and again. Whatever your "issues" might be right now, I would start thinking about getting things right with her before she tells you to sling your hook again. If the volcanic ash cloud permits, you might also consider booking a flight out to LAX pronto.

Contact ICE while you still have a chance.
Also get in a women's support group for domestic violence victims.
You seem to be suffering from battered women syndrome and he may be either on drugs, bipolar or just looking for a way to scare you into going through with the green card.

Read my article to learn more about domestic violence and drug use.
Sorry your going through this all.
Once you leave him completely (get a restraining order), you will feel much better.
Leedah

I think you missed my point. There are plenty of people who entered with a non-immigrant pass with the intention of immigrating, and they successfully adjusted status. There are also others that were denied when they did not intend to immigrate at the time they entered. Your actual intent; i.e., what's going on in your mind, at the time you enter is not ultimately the deciding factor. What determines your fate is what USCIS believes was your intent when you entered. If the evidence is against you, then it won't much matter what your actual intent was.
This is just plain wrong, and that is absolutely not the conclusions the BIA came to in the precedent cases. You are basing your opinion solely on the Battista case. There were mitigating factors in that case, including the fact that the respondent had an approved immigrant visa petition filed by his father that he could have pursued instead of the non-immigrant B2 visa he ultimately obtained. His counsel pointed this out in arguing against the preconceived intent.
In each case the BIA reiterated that adjustment of status is discretionary. The adjudicator is supposed to weigh the positive and negative factors to determine whether adjustment should be granted. They determined that one negative factor - preconceived intent - does not outweigh multiple positive factors. That does NOT mean that preconceived intent is not a negative factor - the BIA emphatically stated in each case that it IS a negative factor, and that it must be considered. If there aren't enough positive factors to outweigh it, then it CAN be used to deny.
It's also worthwhile to note that none of these cases would be in the BIA files if an immigration judge had not already DENIED the adjustment of status. Are you seriously going to recommend that someone risk this because you believe they'll ultimately win when they appeal to the BIA?
This is beginning to get silly. I defy you to point out any BIA case where the board explicitly stated that preconceived intent cannot EVER be used to deny an adjustment of status to the spouse of a US citizen. There is simply no basis for your blanket statement.

An occassional post while viewing new content messages is a far cry from regularly visiting a forum. Once again you have missed the forest for the trees ... -1

First, I am my own evidence of departure to the upper threads--a long long time ago.
Second, what effort was extended to prove the "fact" of migration from VJ rather than a retreat from the OT forum?
You now have seen evidence of at least one departure to the upper threads vs. moving on from VJ.
However, if the demeanor from OT continues to spill over into the upper forums, I may depart. Can I then call it a "proven fact" that even departures are because of the loss of control from OT?

The sponsor assumes an obligation to ensure that the immigrant is supported at 125% of the poverty guidelines (minimum), and to ensure that the immigrant does not collect means tested benefits from the government. However, USCIS has no authority to enforce this. Only a court can order the petitioner to pay. If the immigrant collects means tested benefits, then the government could take the sponsor to court to seek reimbursement. If the immigrant is not being supported at 125% of the poverty guidelines (minimum) then the immigrant can take the sponsor to court. Until SOMEBODY takes the sponsor to court and gets an order for payments, nobody is going to collect anything from him.
Read the I-864 contract carefully. It says the government can sue the sponsor, and the immigrant can sue the sponsor. It does not say that the sponsor is automatically obligated to start writing checks as soon as either the government or the immigrant demand it. Only a court order can force him to begin making payments.
In addition, immigrants have had mixed results trying to get a court to enforce the I-864. Family courts in many states won't touch it because the state's often have strict guidelines the judge has to follow in ordering support, and there are no provisions in the state's family code for an affidavit of support. Civil courts in many states won't touch it because the the contract is between the sponsor and the US government, and the state's civil code won't allow a 3rd party to sue to enforce a contract. The odds of getting a judgment are better in a federal court.
To the OP, your husband is bound by this contract whether you remain married or get divorced. I have no idea why he's thinking that a divorce would somehow change this. Tell him to talk to a lawyer about it. You can still get a divorce without his cooperation, but it will probably take longer.
As far as alimony is concerned, most states rarely award it anymore. It has largely been replaced by spousal support, which is more equitable and gender neutral. Many states aren't compelled to order spousal support if the marriage is of short duration (5 years is typical). Who pays the support, and the amount that must be paid, depends on who is earning more money. It is not uncommon for a wife to be ordered to pay her husband spousal support.

Ultimately, it doesn't much matter what the OP's intent was when they crossed the border. It matters what USCIS thinks the OP's intent was at the time. USCIS doesn't read minds, but they do look at evidence.
The OP has a K1 visa application awaiting interview. The OP entered the US and married her USC fiance. Even a superficial investigation (one phone call to the venue would be enough) would reveal that the plans for the marriage were made well in advance of her entry, so she clearly intended to marry when she entered. So far, so good - no laws have been broken, but the K1 application is now void because she's no longer eligible for it.
USCIS will automatically presume that a preconceived intent existed when the applicant applies for adjustment of status within 30 days of entry with many non-immigrant visas or entry passes. They will strongly suspect preconceived intent if the applicant applies between 30 and 60 days of entry. However, USCIS is not supposed to make these automatic presumptions in the case of an immediate relative of a US citizen. They are, instead, supposed to look for actual evidence of preconceived intent. If that evidence is found, and if it is the only adverse factor in the case, then USCIS is supposed to use their discretion and grant the AOS. There is plenty of case law in the Board of Immigration Appeals to back this up, but that case law wouldn't exist if USCIS hadn't used their discretion to deny AOS in exactly these sort of cases in the past. In other words, if USCIS hadn't denied the AOS, there would have been no reason to appeal, and no resulting record of the case.
That said, USCIS generally follows this rule. They will probably look for evidence of preconceived intent. In this case, it wouldn't be difficult to find. If the OP has had no previous problems with immigration authorities in the US, and there are no other adverse factors affecting the case, their AOS will probably be approved. However, any negative history with US immigration, combined with the preconceived intent, would be enough to deny the AOS. For example, if the OP had ever been subjected to secondary inspection because of suspicion of intent to immigrate, that might be enough to tilt the scales on the side of denial.
Remember that AOS is discretionary. You have to prove not only that you are eligible, but that there is not sufficient compelling reason to deny it.

Kathryn, thank you for the post. I think it pretty much spells out what I feel is the matter with OT; to see it come from a mod is encouraging. I spend the bulk of my time in the UK forum for the very reasons you cite -- it's safe, I know the people there, they know my story and I know theirs. Our shared experience fosters a sense of community, and I have made several "real life" friends in there that I see on a regular basis, which in my case only strengthens the bond.
HB -- we get along very well in the UK sub-forum but I'm a little disappointed to see you pick out my point about the amount of racism -- whether overt or imputed. I was certainly employing hyperbole when I stated that it seemed every other thread was "I Hate Brown People." Perhaps it is my ancestry that makes me more sensitive to some of the attacks, even if I do not support illegal immigration, feel that the current impasse this country finds itself in is insupportable and that the sheer number of such people IS damaging this country. (Hell, I live in SoCal so it is up close and personal.) My own grandparents were illegal immigrants themselves, fleeing the Mexican Revolution as children; my grandmother and her little sister were put into saddlebags on a burro and brought over to Texas. And although my family completely assimilated (to the point that none of my generation can speak a word of Spanish beyond "donde esta la biblioteca" and "ay yi yi"), reading some of the things written in OT about Hispanic people are truly hurtful, even if I don't identify with being Hispanic at all, having been raised in New England amongst my mother's Irish/Scottish/Belgian/English family. I would feel the same way if people were hurling the same sort of invective at Belgians (an unlikely event, it's true).
And yes, it IS a hoary old chestnut to say VJ is worse than it ever has been (rebeccajo's riffs on this were epic) and it may be glib to toss that sort of sentiment around. But the amount of spammy nonsense that appears on there -- articles that are posted merely as red rags to the usual gelded bulls -- has undeniably risen. It's the work of a few people, and is such a turn off. It makes OT boring as f^ck and look like a boys' club. Pass.
This is turning into one of the more reasoned and interesting conversations I've seen on VJ for a while.

I presume one could say the exact same thing about men. If one were closed minded enough to believe such things.
*edited for typo*

If you want to get "professional advice", you will need to hire an actual professional. No way around that. Your friend has gotten herself into a situation that cannot be resolved via an internet message board.

Yes, in every case there was something else - the consular officer was looking for a valid excuse to deny the visa, and the wedding ceremony was all he needed. The simple fact is the consular officer is ALWAYS looking for a valid excuse to deny the visa. This is, after all, what they are REQUIRED to do. Why would you hand them a reason on a silver platter if you don't need to?
Regarding Vietnam, you're talking about a completely different country and culture. A pre-marriage ceremony is practically mandatory in Vietnam. There is, in fact, very little visible difference between a Dam Hoi and a Dam Cuoi. A CO would be hard pressed to look at pictures alone and know the difference between an engagement ceremony and a wedding ceremony. Heck, my own engagement ceremony was held in a Buddhist temple, and was overseen by a Su Thuc. Even Viet Kieu have looked at the pictures and thought it was a wedding ceremony. It was clear in the documents I provided that it was an engagement and not a marriage ceremony.
It matters little what you can prove at the interview. You know as well as anyone that you might not get the opportunity to prove squat, regardless of how many truckloads of evidence you bring with you. If a CO in Nicaragua sees a picture of a Catholic priest conducting what appears to be a wedding ceremony, there's a strong chance he's going to conclude that the couple are married. He isn't required to ask for any evidence beyond this, or give the beneficiary a chance to explain it. How many denial letters have we seen that contain the phrase "Based on the evidence provided..."?
If it's explained sufficiently in the petition package then the consular officer cannot claim there was no exculpatory evidence presented. This is Department of State policy, and not the opinion of one consular officer. Read paragraph 6:
Edit: Paragraph 7 states the policy even better.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegrams/telegrams_1388.html
Yes, some of the cases mentioned on this site involved the CO seeing photos of a wedding ceremony. Others involved the beneficiary mentioning a wedding ceremony. Every case I can recall involved the consular officer discovering the wedding during the interview, and not from reading about it in the petition package.

I'll chime in here too, even tho I'm no longer a 'part' of the UK forum, heh.
The man doesn't really do anything that annoys me. I'm serious! heh. It's kinda crazy. I think at a stretch, I'd have to say that as far as cell phones, we come from two diametrically opposed places. As I'm a realtor, my phone is practically glued to me. He will often forget his at home. I go to call him, and his phone starts ringing on the counter, hehehehe.
As to the Porche couple....thank you for the most entertainment in this forum for a while now. I think tho, what ppl take issue with is your manner, Julian. I'm sure, as a person of supposed privilege, your family taught you the art of subtlety and discretion? Bragging is not an attractive thing, and many times, to a mixed crowd, certainly one with strangers, your 'cheeky style' comes across as arrogance and sanctimony. I don't care how much money you have, that's great that you're a trust fund baby....but the manner in which you talk about your fiancee in most (not all) of your posts, how you talk to other posters here, and the US actually, comes across as quite condescending. I'm sure you'd like to feel maligned because we're all just plebs who are jealous of your riches, but I can assure you that you're missing the point. You may assume that, but you won't know for sure, because no one else has been so open with their personal situations as you have.
When you wrote 'key word being little money' in another thread as to what your fiancee had, my stomach churned.
I'm glad that you found someone who is happy with you and who can be bought off with trinkets and jewelry as means of apology. You are very lucky, because I'd hazard a guess that most women would tell you to stuff your baubles up your backside, if it meant belittling her so publicly with her faults. You talk about her as if she's a child needing to be controlled...and she accepts it as well.
Which makes me sad, but hey, if it works for the two of you, then that's great...seems like a match made in Heaven. Congrats you two!

It sounds like she's been denied a tourist visa 3 times - surely they gave you a reason for those denials, right? So - what is your question for us? I don't think there's anything we can pull out of our hats to help really - my guess is they suspect she has immigrant intent with her having a parent residing in the US. That'll be hard to overcome.

Ok, this is not an attempt to be judgmental, but just an attempt to summarize the situation and options based on the facts you've presented.
Your friend and his wife both made some mistakes. She didn't understand traditional Muslim men, and he didn't understand American women. There is very little chance he's going to learn to accept her habits, and very little chance she's going to drop those habits and become a good Muslima. This isn't just a minor misunderstanding, but a huge barrier in their relationship. Your friend and his wife should probably accept that there is no future in this relationship and end it.
They should be able to obtain a divorce in the state where they reside. There are usually minimum residency requirements. I believe the minimum residency in California is 1 year.
He can't adjust status and become an LPR without her sponsorship. The only way this could be done is if she had abused him, and he had substantial evidence of this. Her drinking and committing other acts of fitnah would not qualify as abuse under US immigration law. Neither would her disparaging remarks about Islam.
They could decide to remain married long enough to complete the AOS and then divorce. He'll have to apply to remove conditions before his green card expires, and he'll have to show evidence that he entered the marriage in good faith. If I were advising his wife, I'd tell her not to do it. Why would anybody sign an affidavit of support for somebody if they knew the marriage wasn't going to last?
There have been a couple of cases where K visa holders have successfully adjusted status after a divorce, but they involved immigrants who had divorced after filing jointly with their spouses, and required long and costly court battles to fight deportation. They also involved the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has a track record for judicial activism, and whose decisions are overthrown more than any other federal appeals court. I don't know of any case where someone divorced prior to filing for AOS and successfully managed to adjust status other than through VAWA (abuse).
Since he entered on a K3, he cannot adjust status based on a marriage to anyone other than the petitioner. He also cannot change to any other non-immigrant status. If he divorces and remarries then he should return to Egypt and wait out a spousal visa. Next time, he should apply for a CR1 instead of a K3 so he won't have to deal with the AOS. Expect the consulate to scrutinize the next visa application very closely.

Screech. Halt. Who goes there.
The petitioner of a K-1 visa does not submit the petition to the lockbox in Chicago -- in the case of the OP it will be sent to the Vermont Service Center.
If the OP's fiancée is definitely going to be in Hong Kong for the duration of the process, he can stipulate the Hong Kong embassy as the one in which she will be applying for the visa at in the I-129F (Part B, Line 20). No issues there, though I don't know the repercussions of applying in Hong Kong versus Manila -- i.e. if one poses more difficulty than the other.
You are on the right track, as educating yourself early on raises the chance of success exponentially. Use this forum and the guides, and you'll have a good shot at it.
Read the guide the PP linked to, and also refer to this PDF from the embassy in Manila should you end up having her apply for the visa there (http://manila.usembassy.gov/wwwfk1en.pdf).
Good luck.

Definately not aimed at you gina_raluca. Your post was selfless and completely helpful. Like you I emphathize and want to support the OP asking for help. I got the number from counselors at an abused womens shelter, when I was recently an inmate....I guess some one much like yourself. I agree with much of what you say, and hope and pray that some light will come to the end of this tunnel that giving_up is in.
Not sure if posters realize, but when someone is worn down and at the end of their road in life (Happy Bunny - so well written).....what you say can have some lasting effect. A forum of complete strangers much like this one gave me the courage, support and information I needed to scrape myself up and get out! It's not always important to be right, but please don't be negative just to be right, when someone obviously needs to know what positive can be done.

Then I have no advice to give. You won't get permanent residence--ever. Despite the suggestions from others to get a lawyer, it will not help. You have committed a crime that has a consequence that no lawyer can minimize for you. Even if immigration reform is passed, your situation will not find relief. I suggest you start looking at a life in NZ.

You have several problems.
You misrepresented yourself to get a Social Security number, and signed the application under penalty of perjury. You represented yourself as an American National in order to get a benefit from the US government (the SSN). You worked illegally in the US. You overstayed your entry pass by over 8 years.
Normally, the overstay could have been forgiven by virtue of your marriage to a US citizen, since you entered legally. The other problems are much more serious.
DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DO THIS WITHOUT AN ATTORNEY! YOU MAY FIND YOURSELF DEPORTED WITH A LIFETIME BAN FROM THE US!