Family

😂 Does you not seeing it mean I did not see it ? By “normal” I take you mean cases where the misrep worked and person is facing issue in the US and is cured w I-601…that indeed is common.

Complete the I-407 and contact the US embassy as well as the Rome CBP office. Make some calls and follow up e emails to each to create a record . There is no fee to file ..but you risk being denied entry otherwise .. . Not worth flying under the radar or facing secondary and a barrage of questions and peekaboos on how /why you got LPR in the 1st place https://www.uscis.gov/i-407 In very rare circumstances, a USCIS international field office or U.S. embassy or U.S. consulate without a USCIS international field office may allow you to submit a Form I-407 in person if you need immediate proof that you have abandoned your LPR status. The most common need for an expedited application is to apply for an A or G visa. You may also submit Form I-407 to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer at a U.S. port of entry. https://it.usembassy.gov/embassy-consulates/rome/sections-offices/dhs/cbp/#:~:text=The CBP office in Rome,the Mediterranean and Middle East. The CBP office in Rome serves Italy and the surrounding countries in the Mediterranean and Middle East

I give up trying to convince you… BUT , I encourage you to stay active on forum . Your fact pattern is very common and there are many threads Unfortunately the VJ search function is all balls 😂 Also scour through Jim Hacking YouTube podcast ..callers galore . Though he never cites law /statutes ..he is blunt on this issue . But he has 500 episodes and no search function at all…so hopefully someone can provide a link .

Unfortunately, on this trip your brain is playing tricks on you…

@appleblossomEt tu Brutus 😂..i would have pegged you for a Hacking fan..though he is neither a favorite of mine , nor my point of reference 😂..his podcast is abundant with callers w same fact pattern. If the issue ( saying one is married to increase chances for a non immigrant visa ) is discovered after the alien is already in the US..then USCIS will ask for I-601 ….with Consulate, it’s a NO GO. OP, my intention is not to antagonize you.. but for your sake , I hope you change course.

This thread has me scratching my head …as @appleblossom pointed out OP previously posted she was already “ married “ and asked very specific Adj and EAD questions.,,no direct response from OP.

It persists because it is a real and practical consideration 😂…a way to make the IO ‘a job easier w no pesky FDNS type of questions or strenuous evaluations.. The rule is not binding on USCIS…and IR are exempt from the “ presumption “ …but it’s good practice https://www.cliniclegal.org/resources/ground-inadmissibility-and-deportability/uscis-incorporates-state-departments-90-day-rule USCIS incorporates State Department’s ‘90-Day Rule’ Author Jennifer Riddle Last Updated June 4, 2018 Topics Ground of Inadmissibility and Deportability Misrepresentation and False Claim to Citizenship Last year the Department of State announced that it was replacing its “30/60-day rule” with a “90-day rule” as the standard applied by consular officers in evaluating inadmissibility for fraud pursuant to INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i). The 90-day rule subjects a nonimmigrant to a presumption of having made a willful material misrepresentation at the time of admission or application for a nonimmigrant visa when that nonimmigrant enters the United States and within 90 days engages in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status. The Foreign Affairs Manual at 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3) enumerates the following examples of inconsistent conduct: working without authorization enrolling in school when academic study is not authorized by one’s nonimmigrant status marrying a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident and taking up residence in the United States when one is in B or F status undertaking any other activity for which a change of status or adjustment of status would be required, without the benefit of such a change or adjustment. When someone engages in conduct that triggers the presumption of material misrepresentation, it is that person’s burden to rebut the presumption. USCIS updated Chapter 3 of Volume 8, Part J of the Policy Manual on May 15, 2018, which discusses adjudicating inadmissibility based on a misrepresentation. Specifically, the manual acknowledges that the State Department’s 90-day rule is an analytic tool for consular officers, not a binding principle or decision. Furthermore, the manual clarifies that the rule is not binding on USCIS. Those adjudicators “should continue to evaluate cases for potential fraud indicators and, when appropriate, refer cases to Fraud Detection and National Security according to existing procedures.” Despite this language, practitioners should be prepared for USCIS officers to ask questions about potential misrepresentation when a client has engaged in conduct inconsistent with nonimmigrant status within 90 days of entry. Such conduct could include entering as a tourist and then working without authorization or marrying a U.S. citizen and applying for adjustment of status. Clients should be prepared to show that they did not misrepresent their intentions when they entered or applied for a nonimmigrant visa. For example, they should be prepared to explain why the decision to work or marry arose only after they entered the country based on new circumstances. Share this page https://www.immigrationhelp.org/learning-center/90-day-rule# https://www.boundless.com/immigration-resources/90-day-rule-explained/ https://www.lawfirm4immigrants.com/the-90-day-rule-explained/ The Policy Manual that was changed in 2018 indicates that the 90-day rule is not binding on USCIS but it helps officers to evaluate cases and determine whether the green card applicant applying from within the U.S. misled government officers when granted a visa or admitted to the country

That is a faulty premise ..there is no magic wand by which a Rawanda marriage cures /invalides any previous marriage . ..their Family Law Codes /Acts tackle many country specific practices such as customary or informal -come we stay” cohabitation..but you are misinterpreting

Certainly seems so …since wife would have had to produce a Certificate of Celibacy in order to marry OP. .. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/can-foreigners-get-married-rwanda-innocent-muramira#:~:text=He%2Fshe must require the,without publication for justified reasons. He/she must require the following: Birth certificate of each of the intending spouses; Certificate of celibacy or extract of death certificate of the former spouse or extract of judicial decision of divorce or annulment of the former marriage; An authorization of marriage without publication for justified reasons.Feb 20, 2021 It should be noted that intending couples must present their certificate of celibacy from their home countries showing their status i.e single, widowed, divorced, failure to produce it marriage may not be allowed to proceed. The above helps one of the innocent couple from entering into marriage with the person who is already elsewhere hence committing bigamy which is a penal offence in several jurisdictions It is also vital for intending couples to first consult their legal advisors or relevant authorities to know what they are expected of before they find themselves on the wrong side of the Law since in many countries accept different marriages which may be against public order and morality in Rwanda.

Did your wife tell you upfront ( before you fell hopelessly in love and marriage ) about her shady agent and previous 2 denials ? …….you are in a tough spot , not of your making

You have no case and zero chances at appeal . DOS /consulate has played a hand you cannot beat , no matter what sophisticated arguments /stretchy case laws are put forth. THEY KNOW and they also banked that neither USCIS, BIA or Federal Courts can compel them to be nice . Nice , for example would have been a straight out inadmissibility finding of fraud /misrep. With such a decision , you could have already filed the I-601 and at least have a small chance . The decision to put her in 221 g and ask for a divorce she cannot produce is Quite Common in cases like yours. ..so is this particular scenario in many countries . You’re off track in your marriage jurisdiction thought..hope someone can shed light for you …I am sticking to the interesting bits 😂 The attorneys who told you to file a waiver without an inadmissibility finding in hand ..simply do not have hands on experience …KEEP LOOKING and ask the right questions …but if any of them suggest you put money , waste time and effort on this case..RUN. The only way I see to FORCE the Consulate to issue a fraud /inadmissibility finding is do a new I-130 admit the fraud and afile concurrent I-601 specifically for USCIS A lot of discretionary power in their hand , and your wife’s double dose of misrep is not sympathetic..but worth a shot. If you pass the new I-130 and I-601 , she has a shot at another consulate interview and they HAVE TO acknowledge the Fraud:misrep IN WRITING…and likely will be asked for another I-601.

Based on previous engagement on the subject ( a thread by the mighty @Mobius1) OP is aware of the nasty nuances of I-751 and divorce …and his original plan was to wait out the joint filed , pray for a speedy divorce and do a switch at the last minute. BUT …given he has a Vengeful EX , it’s not worth the risk . USCIS will definitely “ bite “ as you say and can create problems even here where there is a child born to the marriage.

The question about your job history comes up in a few of the forms and will be asked at the interview as well. Unauthorized employment is forgiven for spouse of USC…but they get cranky when they catch people in lies. Remember we leave digital footprints all over the place .. What other forms are you preparing ?

You have bigger problems . You need to write a request to amend I-751 from Joint to Divorce Waiver ..NOW. If your wife fabricated and filed stories w divorce court..I am pretty sure she reported the same to USCIS. So , file request to amend now , show divorce case pending. If divorce is not final by the time you get RFE , then file a new solo I-751

Good to see your spirits are lifted. Try to target picking an attorney as next step. There will be strategies you will need to trust in, once you find him/her. With respect to the signature , an expert witness ( handwriting) would blow the entire song and dance ( superbly and intentionally vague assertion by USCIS that the 1st Joint I-751 was deficient ).. So , I still recommend stepping back a bit and see your case through the eyes of another .

Hope you are having a few good zen days , in your new mindset . Here is a bit more ammunition, as you prepare to interview / consult the attorneys to hire . Form I-751 Denials and Immigration Court If the I-751 is denied by USCIS, the case will be referred to an immigration court for deportation proceedings. This occurs whether the I-751 is a joint petition or a waiver petition. In immigration court, the alien can ask the immigration judge to review the I-751 denial. If the I-751 was filed jointly by the married couple, the government's trial attorney has the burden of proving that the marriage was not entered into in good faith. INA 216(c)(2)(B). The government must prove the marriage is not bona fide by a preponderance of the evidence. The government attorney must provide the court and the alien with a copy of the administrative record including the I-751 petition, all supporting documents and the decision of the USCIS examiner. The government attorney may produce the USCIS examiner as a testifying witness, but is not required to do so unless the judge or alien insists. https://www.ocimmigrationattorney.com/form-i-751-denials-and-immigration-court.html

Police respond to bomb threat at home of judge overseeing Trump fraud case Authorities responded to a bomb threat at the home of the judge overseeing former President Trump’s New York civil fraud case Thursday, just hours closing arguments are expected in the trial. https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4402505-police-respond-bomb-threat-arthur-engoron-trump-fraud-case/

If I recall correctly you asked them How To , therefore their response. Would you be kind enough to post a photo of the automatic ASK NVC reply here?

The bit about not filing I-130 is not important cause I-129F acts as if..but it does not matter since the I-134 is not enforceable and the I-864 was withdrawn. ..so even if she gets a last minute attorney, nothing they can do with that. ..so put your mind at ease.

You mentioned you had to “ re-file”. ..what exactly? Back in Aug 2023, you were anticipating a 3rd hearing and were sent to mediation..if I read correctly. Did she retain counsel..? Odd that she would be advised to blow off mediation .. And has the I-134 come up in courtroom since ?

You wrote a heartwarming story on your profile, it was a pleasure to read. Kudos for being a hands on ( and primary custodian) of your three children from previous marriage. Am sure part of Michelle’s concern over the family name is her worry that her child be accepted /fit in and loved equally .. Your heart is in the right place and you will figure out best path for you after the child gets here. If you feel in your heart , that you want to adopt your stepson, then that is the way to go. Doing a name change only ..for the sake of appearances ( how it looks on paper) ..won’t really benefit the child …in the long run.

If I may chime in.. For IR ( spouse , child or parent of USC), it is sufficient to do an ASK NVC inquiry saying “ I need additional time due to unforeseen circumstances “. Do it every 11 months from the most recent contact This will generate an automatic confirmation email and serve as proof of yearly contact… For any preference categories ( ex F-2 A , F-2 B or ..) completing the DS-260 needs to be done to secure priority date . I realize they prefer log in only ..but since the system has historically been plagued with issues , the ASK NVC is an easy solution to create an instant record of contact

I am Good, thank you for asking 😂 What’s a little bedlam between friends .. Trump warns of ‘bedlam,’ declines to rule out violence after court hearing https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4398223-trump-team-argues-assassination-of-rivals-is-covered-by-presidential-immunity/amp/