GabiandVi

Just explain your reasons. It will actually probably work in your favor - the fact that you want a big ceremony in your home country. I think the most convincing thing from the interviewers perspective in our interview was when my husband explained his reasons for moving back to his country from China where we were living at the time he did so, and I said, "You never put it to me like that." It was such a real moment and the sort of thing a wife might say to a husband. I think they have already looked at your evidence and made a basic decision before the interview, and are just trying to get a feel for you in the interview itself.

We brought a photobook with us, but we almost had to thrust it on her at the end of the interview. She really wasn't that interested in it. She did ask if we had brought our daughter but I'm sure that is because the photos we had sent with the evidence revealed that she was a superstar and she was looking forward to meeting her in person.

I forgot to add that we had no ceremony and no photographs of the civil service. Actually, we had almost no photographs of the two of us together, but we did have photos of him with my family. Our evidence judged by a lot of people on this forum would have been woefully insufficient, but we had NO trouble.

I'm waiting for more responses to this question. We are currently dealing with this issue in our home. We have not yet reached a satisfactory solution.

1. My commute is kind of hard to calculate because it includes me going out of my way to drop my child at daycare and waiting in the parking lot at daycare for it to open, after which I have exactly 15 minutes to get to work, and that's exactly how long it takes.

2. In a car by myself (and my child.) Transit is not good here and it would involve me taking two transfers and two hours to get two blocks from work (8 miles from my home), if it could even get me there on time. I'd be 30 minutes late for work (at least) if I tried transit.

3. I chose farther away, bigger house. I'd really like to be able to walk to work, but if it came to walking to work vs space, comfort, and safety, I'd choose the latter.

In my case, living closer to work (walking distance) would mean having a fairly large house that's not as expensive as houses that are farther away. The neighborhood is in decline, though, so I'm not interested in buying there.

Hope you find that happy medium.

We got the greencard yesterday evening!

97 days from the day we sent the paperwork off. I have to say, that's pretty efficient for a bureaucracy.

However, we received several updates to the I-485 from approval on June 30 until receiving the GC, all saying the same thing. "On July 1, On July 5, On July 9, On July 12, On July 14 we sent a letter of approval for your application . . ." or something to that effect. Totally inefficient.

speak for yourself. i am a semi-rigid thinker and i have turned down very good offers that would have seperated me from family. most of us do, both rigid and flexible thinkers. it's just how we view "family".

Well, I'm sure that makes you better than people who find themselves in situations where the only other choice would be to accept unemployment insurance or other assistance, go into foreclosure or bankruptcy, or move your child in the middle of a significant school year from the frying pan (one income) to the fire (one income in an unknown area.) You are right. There's no reason why a person who values family might find themselves living apart for a few months to a few years. I wonder why K-3s, CR-1s, or IR-1s even exist. How can there be any "family" to petition for living apart from you?

I guess you'd never serve your country because you can't be a family man if you are deployed for a couple of years.

no way after 30 days you live your wife is consider fake . you guys need to have proof of mail addres , insurenses, properties, taxes, ,if you guys are gonna live apart and the end of the 2 years before your green card expire

like i said ,you need to have proof and then go to the interview with USCIS , or Homeland Security so i think you try to be smart and i n the end you gonna paid the consecuences beacouse to me that looks fake

It seems that USCIS looks at more than a checklist. Certainly eyebrows would be raised during ROC if a couple were bicoastal, and more proof would have to be offered, but real marriages that do not involve immigration are sometimes bicoastal, so I'm sure that USCIS has seen this before. A couple that is bicoastal and has lots of evidence of travel back and forth by both partners, holidays taken together, regular communication, joint bank accounts, other joint property, etc., could be more believable in the eyes of a USCIS officer than a lot of marriages where both partners are in the same apartment.

While it is not ideal for reasons that have nothing to do with USCIS and ROC, living apart for work reasons is sometimes unavoidable. In this economy, even the most rigid thinkers can recognize that a person goes where the work is, even if that means away from your wife and family.

In black and white, my marriage would look "fake" applying these criteria, but it is very real and USCIS seemed to recognize this. And we had almost no evidence other than a marriage of more than 5 years (half of that spent in different countries with no visitation,) a child, and a few pictures of each of us with one another's families including only 3 pictures of us together and none of our marriage. We had no emails, no phone records, no joint accounts, no joint property, no affidavits, etc. Of course, as I said above, we were doing AOS from a B1/2 and my husband has been approved for a 10 year greencard, so I've never done ROC, but I would imagine it would be the same.

I'm sorry, I can't help you. However, I think you need to give more information for anyone who possibly can.

Also, I'm guessing you aren't adjusting from a K-1. If not, you are in the wrong forum.

You'll want to give details about what your status was before you applied for adjustment, any RFEs you received, any overstays, any other negative factors, where you are from, how your spouse gained citizenship, etc.

And you'll DEFINITELY want to include details about the interviews such as which questions you were asked, which ones you got wrong, etc., and any responses you have received. They should explain exactly why you've been denied.

I hope someone comes along who can help you better than I can, but I seriously doubt anyone can tell you anything without more information.

I have a question for those who have been through the interview process. Did you bring a certified copy of your marriage certificate?

You're supposed to bring the originals, if you don't have originals, certified copies will do. (I.E. my original BC was lost years ago, so my BC is a certified copy. It's a print out of microfiche on the same paper my daughter's BC is on with all the same seals and holograms, etc.

However, I didn't have to show anything like that. The only thing they asked for was new proof of cohabitation (I gave her our latest lease,) and she seemed to be edging toward asking for emails for the time my husband and I spent apart, but she first asked how we communicated during that time, and I said mostly by phone, so she didn't ask for anything else with regard to that. She also asked for more pictures of our daughter, but I can't figure out why except that she is so beautiful.

Since you seem to know everything I was wondering if it is possible to live apart once you've gotten married, recieved your green card etc?

Let's assume that I was to get a job offer in California whilst my wife (the US citizen) continues to live and work in NYC. Can I then move to California and work there while she remains in NYC?

Thanks!

Yes, but you'll probably have some explaining to do during ROC. Just keep records of all your travels to see each other, means of communication, family trips together, etc. You should be fine.

Edited to add that 1.) I don't think you were referring to me when you suggested someone seemed to know everything 2.) I've never been through ROC, so maybe someone else can confirm what I've said, and 3.) my husband and I lived apart after marriage for work reasons and didn't even see each other for over two years BEFORE we went through AOS, and our AOS went smoothly.

In Greece can you be ID'd whilst walking down the street, having committed no crime? Many states including AZ allow this. I have been ID'd in such a manner twice in my life.

I also don't carry ID on a daily basis because I walk to work (I'm a USC).

Not that I'm aware of. AND, according to the law in question, you can't in AZ. I don't know of any pre-existing laws in AZ that allow this, but this particular law explicitly disallows this. People who claim otherwise are lying or are ignorant of the law.

I was always told, in every country that I've lived in, that I must carry my visa with me everywhere, leading me to believe that I could be stopped at any time and asked for it. I did for the first few months in the CR until I lost my purse. After that, I never carried my passport or "greencard" with me again as long as I lived abroad. However, I carry my DL with me almost everywhere here in the US. And I've always wondered how police cite jaywalkers since there is no law stating we have to carry ID.

Here's hoping!

Interestingly, it took longer for this to happen than for USCIS to complete my husband's AOS. Sort of puts things into a little perspective.

Now if only the Gulf Coast can recover.

OMG> of course my issues will never end. This sounded too good to be truth.

So the thing is - it kinda bothered me that my I-485 says "card production ordered", but the I-130 remained untouched since May 13.

So I called the military line and asked why it was like that. They wouldn't give me any info on the I-130 because I wasn't the petitioner (duh, my husband is at war right now!!!)

So they only agreed to talk about the 485 application. Which they told me show up as "still processing" in "their system". Which system? I thought they had had 1 system. Apparently, not.

I had received an email, a text, and the online USCIS stastus is "card production ordered". the customer service rep told me that it wasn't correct, as my case is still showing as "pending". ANd he said that it might have been a mistake (the status of my 485).

A MISTAKE???

How do you make a mistake like that - to send out an email, a text and update the status online???

Anyone has any idea? I'm deeeeeeeply confused, angry and ready to climb the walls...

You were talking to the military, right? I think their info, and any other org, such as the SSA, are a little behind the USCIS. Those case status updates we get aren't official, but I don't think they are mistaken.

My I-130 is still showing that it is in Initial Review, but I received an official approval notice, on paper, about 10 days ago.

Congrats, and good luck. And thanks for wanting to serve our country!!

You can already make calls on those phones in the back of the seats. Thankfully, the costs are so high in means that no one talks for long.

I voted NO because I want an obvious way to recognize these people without actually having to talk to them.

That's exactly why I voted no! Shame on us!

I have heard the rumor a few years ago as well, but it was under a different context than the current one. When I initially heard it, it was under the guise of fostering more interaction between their governments and their cintizenry.

When I first heard it, it was about them being able to blend in in the US.

I see a lot of Chinese tats, usually tramp stamps, on the hotties who go clubbing. Do you think these women might be hidden ChiCom agents too?

I heard this rumor that Chavez was offering classes to Middle-Easterners for how to fake a Hispanic accent several years ago. It was before I moved back to the US. I remember discussing it with my Venezuelan friends. They were sure it was true. Me, not so much. I wouldn't put it past Chavez, but it just seems to depend on too many variables to be a viable plan. But, who knows.

In Greece it is called a "Turkish Toilet." In China we always referred to them as squatters. I actually prefer them in a public setting, though I do want them to be in a stall with a door that closes, not a trench with a half wall that the neighbor can look over as I do my business, or an open alcove like they often were in China.

There is one thing I don't really enjoy doing in a squatter. I won't go into detail, but it is something a man would never have to do. And also, when you are 7 months pregnant and have been holding it for about an hour, squatting ensures a straight stream about 30 feet ahead, which is why I prefer the ones with the little grotto that sticks up at the front end, and it's hard to get back up in that condition without touching anything really disgusting.

In China I would often see an illustration in a Western-style toilet depicting a person squatting on the seat and a big line crossed through it - no squatting. I'd also often see the warning "no sh*tting."

I always found this sort of attitude amusing. Whenever I hear men complaining that some girl only wants a man with a big car, or a six-pack, or good hair, etc., I've always think, and why do you want her? Obviously it's not her endearing personality that attracts you to her.

Simple observations of complex issues doesn't equate to adequate analysis. Making the claim that taxes and spending are totally different without articulating how or why they are 'totally different' and assuming that it should be obvious to anyone else is meaningless.

I'm not remotely trying to analyze anything with my comments. I'm not really interested in getting into that on a Tuesday morning before I take my daughter to the free family film festival. I'm making a general observation about how language becomes twisted over the years. I find that interesting. JUST SAYING.

But as for the basics, if it isn't obvious to anyone else:

taxing = revenues

UI and other benefits = spending

Revenues are the opposite of spending in personal budgets as well as in national budgets, wouldn't you agree? I think that pointing out that they are related and affect one another (or should) is stating the obvious as well as pointing out that they are on opposite columns in the ledger. You haven't stated anything at all complex, as far as I'm concerned.

Simple observations of complex issues doesn't equate to adequate analysis. Making the claim that taxes and spending are totally different without articulating how or why they are 'totally different' and assuming that it should be obvious to anyone else is meaningless.

I'

I think you are creating a false argument. UI benefits and tax cuts for the rich both impact the budget in much the same way. If your employer gives you $100 a week raise but relocates you to a farther location and you now spend $100 a week more on gas, how are those two forces different from each other in terms of your personal budget?

I'm not creating an argument. I'm making an observation. I'm not talking about the economy, or forces, or personal budgets. I'm more interested in the 1984-like wording we have bought hook, line, and sinker. But, again, if you don't see that, then let's just let it drop.

Tax revenue is used to pay for the services and operational costs of government, when you decrease that revenue, that lost revenue must be be balanced by cutting spending or you create a deficit. The huge tax cuts that the Bush Administration gave to the wealthy, along with starting two wars and an increase in Medicare prescription benefits, all done without any budget cuts in government spending caused us to go from have a budget surplus to the largest deficit of any administration.

The modern Republican Party's only answer for economic policy is cutting taxes. Simply cutting taxes isn't being fiscally responsible. The question then becomes - what government services do we want to scale back on to compensate for lost revenue. Some want to cut defense spending, others want to cut Social Security. The Keynesian economic theory is that during an economic recession, government spending should increase. Unemployment benefits, according to many economists are one of the most surest ways of stimulating the economic, while tax cuts, particularly for the wealthiest in this country, do little to boost the economy.

The GOP has put itself in the precarious, and extreme position that government can do no good ("The government isn't the answer, it's the problem." ~ Reagan). Even though Reagan said that, he was quite pragmatic when it came to economic policy. He supported the EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit) for families with dependent children whose income was near poverty level. The EITC essentially gives money to families. It is one of the purest forms of redistribution of wealth and Reagan touted the EITC as one of the best programs to combat poverty. Was he smoking crack or being pragmatic in finding solutions to helping Americans who are struggling? I seriously doubt Reagan would be holding back on unemployment benefits if he were president with the unemployment hovering near 10 percent. That's the difference between Reagan's Republican Party and Boehner's/McConnell's Republican Party. Reagan looked past ideology for solutions while the modern GOP simply says 'no,'

I'm not getting in to all of that. Whether or not you believe cutting taxes is a good thing, taxes and spending are two totally different things, and I find it interesting that we have come full circle and consider people paying less of the money they've earned (tax cuts) to the government is the same thing as the government paying people money they haven't earned (ui and other entitlements). If you can't see the irony in that then let's just let it drop.

We do have to "pay for it", by cutting spending, or replace it with revenue from other sources.

Again, though, "paying for" tax cuts by cutting spending and "paying for" spending through taxes are opposites, not the same. Just saying.

I find it interesting that we have come to the point in our understanding where we think that a tax cut is something we have to "pay for", where we equate paying the government less of the money we've earned with the government paying us money we haven't earned, and where "fair share" means somebody pays more than somebody else. Just saying.

Thanks so much for the info...

How long did it take you to get the acceptance letter? The Officer said that the card should be mailed within 2 weeks, can't wait to see how it looks like!!

I'm pretty sure we got it on the 5th. I got mine for the I-130 and he got his for the I-485. Still no GC, but I see others have gotten them in about 2 weeks of approval, so hopefully any day now.