LIFE'SJOURNEY

If this is how you view responses that does not agree with your HIGH minded British attitude, then trust me to tell you this, that You do not want to live in the Good old narrow mined US.

Please tell me why we here in tthe US would care what a British official has to say about our policies and procedure in the visa process.

Things have changed, Bob. It used to be that an overstay was just as irrelevant for a VWP entrant as it was for someone adjusting from any other kind of visa if they were the immediate relative of a US citizen. Thanks to some fairly recent decisions in at least three federal appeals courts, that's no longer the case. One of the key outcomes of these court rulings is that a VWP entrant is considered immediately deportable when they overstay because of the "no contest" waiver they agreed to. According to several immigration attorneys, several USCIS field offices have been denying practically every VWP entrant with an overstay, and immediately starting removal proceedings. Some other USCIS field offices have been putting AOS cases on indefinite hold when the applicant was a VWP entrant with an overstay, which leads to the assumption that there may be guidance coming from the director's office regarding a uniform way to handle these cases. Given the court rulings, a uniform policy is probably going to mean an automatic denial for most if not all VWP entrants with an overstay.
A year ago, I would have agreed completely with your assessment. Today, I think it's a whole new ball game. The overstay has suddenly become a very significant factor.

Why would she have to wait? She's got a tourist visa. She can come and visit over the Christmas holidays.
Have a seat, son. Let me tell you a bedtime story...
Once upon a time there was a young lad who wanted his mom to come live with him in the United States. He looked at his options.
The young lad had just gotten his US citizenship, so he could sponsor his mom for an immigrant visa. The problem was that this process can take up to a year to complete. He didn't want to wait that long. Option #1 was too cold.
His mom had a tourist visa, so she could come and visit anytime. If she wanted, she could just stay in the US and never go back to her home country. After all, millions of other people have done it. The problem was that she'd be an illegal immigrant. She couldn't work, or collect Social Security. She couldn't even leave the US to visit her family back in her home country. Option #2 was too hot.
Now, his mom could come to the US with her tourist visa, but instead of staying illegally he could submit an I-130 and I-485 so that his mom could get a green card. She'd be able to work, and she'd be able to leave the US and visit her family back in her home country. Yes, option #3 was just right!
So, his mom packed her bags to come to the US. He told his mom what she was going to need to bring in order to file the papers with the US government so that she could get her green card, including her birth certificate and other evidence to prove her family relationship with her son. She also packed up all of her family heirlooms and photos, since she wasn't going to be coming back for a long time. Before she left, she went to the justice department and got a police certificate, since she heard she was going to need that document in order to get her green card.
Mom went the airport and checked in her bags, and boarded the airplane. When she got to America she left the plane and stood in line to be cleared by the immigration authorities. While she was waiting, the TSA inspectors were examining luggage being unloaded from the airplane. Her bag got special attention. The TSA agent wondered why someone visiting the United States for only a few months would bring a birth certificate, grade school records and photos of her son as a child, and a police report from her home country? These things aren't needed for a short visit to the US.
By the time Mom got to the front of the line, the TSA had already notified the CBP officers what they found. The CBP officer was suspicious. He asked Mom why she came to America. Mom said "To visit my son". The CBP officer asked if she intended to stay in the United States, or apply for a green card here. Mom said "No, of course not".
Six months later - Mom and son are being interviewed by a USCIS immigration officer for the green card application. The immigration officer showed Mom the record of what the TSA agent had found in her luggage - preconceived intent to immigrate. The immigration officer then showed Mom the record of her conversation with the CBP officer, and her denial that she intended to immigrate - material misrepresentation. The immigration officer then told Mom that she was going to be deported for material misrepresentation, and receive a lifetime ban from ever entering the United States again.
Mom and son cried for a very long time.
The end!

You really think that a call from your MP is going to make a bunch of American civil servants work faster? Not likely. As someone else pointed out, we aren't talking about a war here, we are talking about visa procedures that have been in place for quite a while. One call from one MP over one random UK citizen isn't going to make a difference to anyone in the embassy. And yes, I know FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE that files quite often "go missing" or end up at the bottom of a pile when someone wants them to. I really can't give specific evidence on a public forum. If you hadn't noticed, I was granted a diplomatic visa at one point. That pretty much indicates I have a pretty good idea how the DOS works as I have dealt with it often.
And the year long wait isn't the fault of the DOS procedures. You applied in April. You are still moving faster than many other people in the process.

You paid $147 to ship a 2.2lb package?

you got that right. an able bodied educated man from empowered family can't possibly win a support suit against you.
there are the legal issues that would prevent him from even filing one.
the immigrant has no "standing" to raise such a case, as they are not party to the 864 contract between you and USCIS, at all. they are, legally, only a bystander in the contract.
the fed.gov is not gonna rep this guy. any local county level judge hearing divorce actions is out of his jurisdiction of he tries to invoke 864.
i wish people would stop raising that remote possibility. it almost never happens, when it does it is bad law or misreported, and retelling the same few cases stirs the pot unnecessarily.
we have enough aliens and morons posting in this segment about "moral responsibility to the immigrant" and trying to guilt trip USC who have been duped by fraudsters.
we don't need to be told about million to one odds stuff every time.

I really don't understand why people give the K3 so much credit. If you really look at it in detail, almost anyone who had their petition approved by the USCIS in late June and followed the NVC shortcuts, or not, would've gotten a late August, early September interview. People tend to ignore the fact that by paying all NVC bills online and printing out the worksheets directly from their site, you fly through the process like nobody's business and end having an interview pretty much as if you had filed for a K3. And I'm not exaggerating.
Diana

It is slightly less ridiculous than carrying around your original NOA2. Pay the fee, get the document, you will need it. Keep it in a safe place. If you feel some need to carry it around...don't. Make a copy. NO ONE needs the original for anything in this process.
Why is it when people make irresponsible mistakes they think that what they must do to correct their error is "nonsense"?

Wow! In only two days you've gone from "everything was fine" to:
1. Abused.
2. Abandoned.
3. Think he's got mental issues.
4. Filing for divorce in a couple of days.
5. How can I stay in the US?
I can see you've been extremely busy in the last couple of days!
First, what sort of visa did you enter the US with? Did you and your husband ever submit a green card application? What sort of evidence do you have to prove he abused you?
You can adjust status on your own based on abuse using VAWA, but you need some serious evidence that the abuse occurred. Also, be careful about divorce. A VAWA self-petitioner can be divorced, but you have to be able to demonstrate that the abuse was the cause of the divorce. If you live in a no-fault divorce state that doesn't allow divorce "for cause" then you might be better off postponing the divorce until after you've dealt with the green card issues.
There are some additional things I'm thinking here, but I won't say them out of courtesy, and also out of the possibility that my gut instincts may be wrong.

You can be found inadmissible under section 213(A) of the INA if it's determined that you are likely to become a public charge, in spite of a properly filed I-864 affidavit of support.
In most states, you can receive emergency or prenatal medical care at no charge provided you can demonstrate that you don't have medical insurance, and you can't afford to pay for the medical care yourself. Because of the humanitarian nature of the benefit, they don't usually require proof of legal status in order to qualify. I don't know how this is handled in Texas, but in California it's usually handled by the county hospital system. Unfortunately, by accepting this medical care you have proven to the IO that you are an absolute risk to become a public charge because you are already receiving a means tested benefit. The IO can use his discretion to deny your AOS.
I don't know if the affidavit of support can be enforced retroactively. If it can, your husband is going to have to repay the cost of the medical services you received. I have no idea whether this would be enough to rectify the situation, and allow you to try another AOS application. I suggest you "lawyer up" pronto!

Your wife? If you have a wife and you are petitioning for a fiance(e) visa you have bigger problems than this
moving thread

You said twice before, quite clearly, that you do NOT live together. You said your marriage is "on the rocks" because you don't live together. You said he lives with his mother, and only comes to visit you. If you were living in the same house then the fact that his mother doesn't approve of the marriage would be a non-issue, and I doubt you would have started this topic. It sounds like you didn't like the answers you got before, so you're changing your story in hopes of getting better answers. It also sounds like I might have touched a raw nerve with the "family reunification" comment.
The bottom line is that there is a very real chance that you and your husband will be interviewed. The odds vary, depending on your local USCIS office, but the numbers I've heard kicked around are about 50%. You will be expected to provide some physical evidence that you actually live together - bank accounts, utility bills, lease or deed, insurance policies, whatever you've got. In addition to the required "Are you a terrorist or criminal" type of questions, you may be asked some personal questions about your relationship. If the IO determines you don't actually live together, and figures out that you are living with your mother and sister, then I seriously doubt your green card application will be approved.
If you actually ARE living together (which you previously said you were not) and your marriage is viable (which you previously said it was "on the rocks") then you need to be prepared to prove this to an immigration officer at your interview.

Your question does not pertain to a K-1 visa process. Topics are posted in the forums that are relevant to the information being requested - and not posted in multiple forums. Since your question is what to do about your fiancee who overstayed a visa waiver programme and is now in the process of being deported, it does not relate to an aspect of the K-1 visa which is how do I get my fiance who is outside of the US into the US so we can get married. With the circumstances as you described, in order for him to be allowed back into the US, he will require some sort of waiver from the deportation as he is now considered ineligible for entry to the US. Even if you applied for a K-1 visa, it would be denied and you would be required to file some sort of hardship waiver. This is the forum about waivers.
The purpose of VJ is to provide you with the most accurate information for your circumstances and that is best done when a post is filed in the appropriate forum. Other knowledgeable VJers recognized that your post was in the incorrect forum and reported it to us, which is why we noticed it and moved it to the correct forum. I am sorry you disagree, but you will get the best responses here. Quality is more important than quantity.
If and when you start a K-1 process, you will be able to post about it in the K-1 forum. When the K-1 is denied, once again you will be posting in the Waivers forum. If you married and petitioned for him to return to the US on a CR-1, you would also be denied because of the deportation and once again, require a waiver. You will find out what lies ahead of you in the forum better than in others.

So you start of by saying you do not know and then spend a lot of time proving it.
Weird.

Anyone who knows and understands the law is qualified to give legal advice. Someone who passes the bar exam is not necessarily competent to give legal advice, any more than someone who passes the GED is competent to teach High School. There are sufficient horror stories on this site alone regarding attorneys who have given horrendously bad advice. If it were not for attorneys such as those, this site would be unnecessary. Much of the advice the OP has been given in this thread is correct, and reflects the law, regardless of whether it was given by licensed attorneys...
...with the possible exception of...
You realize that many attorneys are also self educated, yes? The only difference between them and someone else who has studied the law is that the attorney passed a test and joined a club. Oh, and they also charge upwards of $100 per hour for their counsel.
No, we can also tell them what the LAW says. The law isn't a deep dark secret kept from the inquisitive eyes of mere mortals who don't belong to the Bar Association. It's posted on the internet for everyone to see and read. And, since the law is subject to interpretation, any advice anyone gives, including attorneys, is an opinion. However, an opinion based on an understanding of the law is far more credible than an opinion based on personal experience.
Is your opinion based on personal experience, or an understanding of the law?
Ok, so this is obviously based on personal experience. How does someone's experience with immigration authorities in France apply to their experience in any other country? Is immigration and customs law universal? Did you know that, in many countries, the carrier (i.e., the airline) is responsible for providing return passage back to the country of departure if the traveler is refused admission, and that airlines frequently demand proof that a traveler will be admitted before they'll issue a boarding pass? What would happen if someone were illegally present in country 'A', and the airline allowed them to board a plane to country 'B' without proof they would be admitted on arrival? Odds are that the traveler would be refused admission to country 'B', and the airline would be obligated to take the traveler back to country 'A'. However, the traveler wasn't present in country 'A' legally, so they will also be refused readmission there. Now the traveler is in limbo, and the airline is stuck trying to find some country that will accept them.
The OP was given good advice. His fiancee needs to contact the consulate of her country and get a passport or travel permit to ensure she won't be turned away when she arrives.

Oh I know, and that's why they went that route. AOS, according to their lawyer, could not take place because he was working illegally in the US.

It's a sad situation, definitely, but then again, I feel that much worse for the student who IS a LPR or USC...who got bumped out of Harvard because of this kid. I would be pissed as anything if that had happened to me or one of my loved ones.
I hope his parents get deported, because they really don't have any right to be here; the kid on the other hand was just a preschooler at the time.
All around, just a hard situation.

Eric does not post here.
He is just another lawbreaker, another criminal, among many. He is nothing more than that, his intellectual accomplishments notwithstanding. He deserves deportation, and for his efforts to thwart the law by getting Haaaahvahd bigwigs on his side, thereby expressing his disdain for the will of the American people, he deserves to be shot. It would send a message that would be heard all over the world. Don't mess with Americans.

I smell some 'documents' problem, as well.
Must have SSN to get any financial aid, even 'private scholarship'. Don't have to file FAFSA to get 'private scholarship', but the scholarship amount is reported on, yearly, using a SSN.
Also, application to Harvard, itself, requires a SSN.
IMO, his parents got him a SSN, somehow. Now he's guilty of identity theft, as well.

you can go together... find the crowd control officer and ask them... they will direct you

I agree that the Residency requirement isn't spelled out well in the books, which isn't surprising, as it was written by Government drones.
One can only hope the up-and-coming immigration reform will correct that. An easy solution would be to allow LPRs an absence up to 6 months, after that the Green Card is gone for good.
No resident should need a vacation longer than 6 months, and no resident should be working or going to school outside the US of A as well. In this case, an LPR joins her husband who is working out of the country. She should be allowed to stay there up to 6 months (total), after which she would lose her status.
Since it's not spelled out like this, it's up to the discretion of the CBP officer at the POE to determine whether or not the LPR has maintained residence. For me, having a home or a car or extra clothes, and paying taxes (which is required by law anyway) would not be sufficient.
Good that I'm not a CBP Officer, as I would weed any LPR out who isn't physically present in the US for most of the year.

it's called the "violence against women act". what part of that do you not understand?
there is a double standard in USA in regard to spousal violence. that being said, your story as told in the first post wouldn't convince me, and it's only your side.

Why does he have to stay in the US?
Sounds like he would be better going home?

I knew you would get pounced on by the "I-really-don't-care-about-anyone-but-me-but-internet-ink-is-free-so-why-not-act-like-it" crowd that thinks some greater purpose is served by pretending it is an outrage to have a 4 month delay in a lifelong process. They offer no advice to the OP but lots of internet "hugs". They are almost always flying a UK or Canadian flag. Mostly people that never did any work with the government (but want them to run their healthcare) and do not understand it can take one department of the government YEARS to approve a permit application for another part of the government.
These same people, if marrying a domestic mate without government approval, would think nothing of waiting 4 months to get the banquet hall date they want, or 4 months to have a wedding dress made, but because they are in love and can't stand to be apart the government should fly through the process so they aren't kept apart.
I was never apart from Alla for more than 6 weeks. Just get on a plane and GO, there are non-stops every day from New York, the government is NOT keeping you apart. The OP is free to go visit anytime she wants. She can wait outside the consulate with her fiancee for word.