S2N

I signed as interpreter (not as preparer; I wasn’t paid.) Asks the beneficiary to certify they can understand English and my husband can’t. We didn’t see any downside to it, but I suspect @OldUser is correct you could likely leave it out. We did it because it was fairly clear from our overall package that he doesn’t speak English.

Worth noting that given the current political situation, it might not be a good idea to have minimal evidence for a red flag marriage in a high fraud risk country. You can still apply, but “marriage certificate and pictures” is less than what many of us on our first marriages from low fraud countries submit.

Heh, sorry. Thought it was common knowledge. My bad. Because of the extensive information sharing between US/UK/AUS/NZ/CAN, most times the government has to vet foreign nationals from one of the other four, things go more smoothly. If a citizen of one of those countries was a threat, they’d be in one of the databases already.

NVC/London IV unit are unlikely to be an issue. USCIS could be, but the fact this is the UK means even if they’re confused it’d likely be easy to overcome. Citizens of five-eyes countries aren’t exactly subject to extreme amounts of scrutiny, even in the current climate.

Also with the current timeline, she’s likely going to have a CR-1 in hand before a B-2 or an expedite at NVC or the embassy would occur.

Argentina and Chile typically have equivalent dental and oral health standards and practices to the U.S. to the point where I’ve considered getting some work done down there. In the sense that the standards are pretty high. Your case might be very specific, but people familiar with the region are going to be skeptical that it’s really a need. B2 medical is the best bet here.

Please do. With the current state of politics in South America — Kast and Milei in the Southern Cone, crisis in the north on several fronts — I suspect your specific circumstances might become more common.

OP — my suggestion would be for your wife to file I-130 as quick as possible and if you haven’t file for your Argentine citizenship as quick as possible. If you’re still pending your Argentine passport in a year and it’s expected in a few months after I-130 approval, I’d hold on the DS-260 until you have the Argentine passport in hand. I know a lot of South Americans in the U.S. Argentines and Chileans almost universally have the easiest immigration experiences.

You fill out the DS-260. It’s your application. If a passport is renewed or changed after the I-130 typically it can be updated on the DS-260. I don’t think we’ve seen an example of someone getting naturalized during the process in a third country; but I presume it’d be the similar. @pushbrk: have you seen something like this? My assumption would be the best scenario would be: wife files I-130 using your Colombian passport. You naturalize in Argentina in the next 12 months, and then fill out the DS-260 as an Argentine national and interview in Buenos Aires. Colombia has historically had a decent relationship with the U.S., but it’s more strained now and there’s more fraud than in AR/with Milei and Trump being friends the U.S. and Argentina are on the best diplomatic terms they ever have been. I’m generally of the view that using the most friendly passport is always best in immigration.

If they live in AR and can naturalize if they don’t have Argentine citizenship already that might be the better option. Southern Cone is much lower fraud risk than northern LATAM so given all that’s currently going on, I’d personally prefer to apply from a lower fraud area. Northern LATAM isn’t Nigeria, but it’s still higher risk than Argentina/Brazil/Chile/Uruguay. Said another way: Trump isn’t likely to have issues with Milei anytime soon but there’s tensions with Colombia over the situation in the Caribbean, so having another option doesn’t hurt. The passport won’t really be needed for 11-14 months when they file the DS-260, so they have a year to do it. Colombia would also very likely work, just throwing out potential options and considerations.

Do you have an Argentine passport? It’s basically the easiest in LATAM to get because their naturalization law is so wonky vs their immigration law (i.e. it takes longer to get permanent residency than citizenship…) I’m friends with an Argentine/Venezuelan couple in the U.S. the Venezuelan is here on a research visa of some sort but under his Argentine passport. Government views him primarily as Argentine even though he’s Venezuelan by birth. I’m assuming it’d be the same with Colombia. Just mentioning Argentina as an example because I’m more familiar with Venezuelan-Argentines.

Agree with this, but also worth adding you need to pay the fee within the first year. Logging to the CEAC website also counts as an action, so doing that and sending an email should get it both automated and paper trail. I’d recommend setting a calendar reminder every 6 months to log-in and send the email on the off chance OP forgets it once a year.

It was created for frequent travelers who know the customs declarations rules to minimize time CBP officers have to spend asking questions — just like Nexus and Sentri, the focus has always been on customs. The information sharing it focuses on is also customs based — it’s why you have countries like Argentina, which has a top calibre customs enforcement agency, having GE but not ESTA. It’s a program to minimize customs screening, with security being a secondary focus — they primarily screen for security while you’re in the air, not at the airport, so a fast track on that doesn’t cut down on time spent with the officer. Its why people who travel to those high risk countries get sent to secondary but don’t have GE revoked, but people who order off-brand iPhone cases from Temu get it revoked. Same with my friend with a S clearance — he’s not a security risk at all, otherwise he wouldn’t be cleared, but he’s a customs risk. Obviously travel to non-friendly countries might slow it down, but unlike ESTA it’s not prohibited to have travelled there. You’ll pretty much always get an auto denial if you’ve ever had a customs violation, though.

Getting GE approved is mainly about customs and less about security. I know a guy with a secret clearance who gets denied GE every time he applies because he tried to bring back booze into the U.S. when he was 20. Security they do a decent job of vetting before arrival for everyone. I’m sure there’s some exceptions, but the main thing they care about is you’re not a customs risk.

He can go down to the courthouse he was convicted in and pull the records.

You can probably look up his name on any of the public sex offender registries and see what the specific charge was. Also, consult a lawyer regardless.

No.

Both, as they’ll have to scan them in anyway if you only show up with them in person. Makes their lives easier.

That tracks more than a CO denying, which I guess is possible, but the U.S. government is usually good with mistranscribed records in my experience…

You’re over 3x in liquid assets, which should in theory be fine. Counselor officer could interpret the Israeli job as either counting towards income or not counting towards liquid assets depending on how they view the continued availability of funds in the United States. Your situation is a bit different than most as you’ve been living between countries with the income. Honestly, I’d line up a joint sponsor to be safe as this is an edge case (only slightly above 3x income in assets and foreign job), and I’m usually one of the people who is more understanding of trying to avoid joint sponsorship. @pushbrk is the expert on the I-864 and is familiar with the IV consulate in China, so pinging him.

K-3 visas aren’t issued. At best the I-130 gets approved faster and they close out the I-129F. Current median processing time is 10 months for I-129F and decreasing. Current median processing time for I-130 is 13 months and decreasing. People who apply for I-130 today will most likely get approved in September or October 2026. I-129F for K-1 would probably be July or August. All based on current intake and processing (both are processing faster than they get applicants currently.) That’s to say: whatever benefit there might have been to K-3 is quickly being eliminated. Also, in terms of if it works, in the last year or so the only cases where there’s any evidence of K-3 helping had the I-130 originally at Texas when the I-129F was filed. There’s virtually no datapoints showing it helping people at other service centers recently.

Having been through multiple government background checks, and having served as a reference during TS/SCI investigations where they actually do come to your house and ask you about your friends, you’re vastly overestimating the scope of a government investigation below the TS level. This isn’t a clearance, I know, but the ordinary scope is going to be less than what you’d expect on an SF-86. Edit to add: I think they should be prepared to address this, but it’s not a dealbreaker and it’s certainly not something needing proactive disclosure. If the government asks, tell the truth and have a good explanation.

It’s a fairly normal situation for divorced fathers to pay for the housing of their children. I agree the ex living there is a bit odd, but given the context of the relationship (he owns a house and lives overseas; no reason to pay multiple housing payments in the U.S.) I don’t think it’s that out of the ordinary and is something I’ve seen within the US when one parent moves states and the kids and ex don’t. It would be a huge red flag if he was living with the ex, but she has custody and he’s supporting the children. It might even be within the terms of the custody agreement. These are all things we don’t know, and more to point, the government doesn’t know or have any real way of finding out without disclosure. Yes they can send agents, but in a consular case with both parties living overseas that’s extraordinarily unlikely; even more so than the already low odds of it for AOS. Discussing the unlikely worst case isn’t that helpful. There’s no proactive disclosure requirement on this, and it’s bad advice to tell someone to change their entire financial relationship for the upkeep and care of their children because a theoretical issue with the government in the future. They should be prepared to address the issue if it comes up with a good explanation (custody agreement, etc.) and it might make sense overall to change their entire financial arrangement with the ex-spouse, but I wouldn’t let immigration be the driving factor.

I’m aware they have people they can send. That’s not ordinary course of business. Should have stated that asterisk. People overestimate what the government knows and also overshare beyond what’s legally required. That’s not just an immigration thing, but it applies in this case as well. Unless OP gives the government a reason to investigate it, they won’t, and it’s not misrepresentation not to proactively disclose it.

The government wouldn’t have a way of knowing that. USCIS doesn’t physically go to former residences to see who is residing there and there’s no question on the forms asking about who resides in the various properties. Only way USCIS or the consulate would know is if it was proactively disclosed, which it isn’t required to be and shouldn’t be. I agree it would raise questions if the government became aware of it, but there’s really no reason they should. Even in the interview it’d be easy to discuss “we plan on living with his sister until we’re more established.” if the residence question comes up.