sjr09

It's clear you don't know anything about the Deferred Action Program. Go learn something since you will be waiting, waiting, waiting (like all the rest of us) you have time on your hands: http://www.dhs.gov/deferred-action-childhood-arrivals .
FYI wait times are long from a combination of factors, not just this new program. It is mostly because USCIS has laid off half their employees and dramatically cut funding in the last 2 years. That you can thank Congress for.

Front-loading isn't meant to help get the petition approved. Front-loading is meant to help at the visa interview. Getting the petition approved only requires that you provide sufficient evidence to prove you've met within the past two years.
Front-loading is meant to accomplish two things at the interview. First, it helps ensure that the consular officer sees your evidence since they aren't required to view any of the relationship evidence you bring to the interview. Second, and probably most important, front-loading is meant to address potential red flags in your case. Red flags are situations that are known to raise the consular officer's level of suspicion at a particular consulate. If any of those red flags exist in your case then the consular officer will probably give your case more scrutiny, and could potentially even deny the visa. If you front-load sufficient evidence to address those red flags, and explain them in a way that reduces or removes any suspicion, then it substantially lowers the ability of the consular officer to deny the visa based on those red flags.
When a consular officer denies a visa then they return the petition to USCIS with the recommendation that the approval of the petition be revoked. Basically, the consular officer is saying that USCIS would never have approved the petition if all the evidence were known. A consular officer doesn't have the authority to re-adjudicate a petition that was approved by USCIS. In other words, they can't return a petition just because they would have made a different decision than the USCIS adjudicator when reviewing the petition for approval. When they deny a visa and return a petition then they are either saying that the beneficiary is clearly ineligible and USCIS screwed up when they approved the petition, or that the evidence for revoking the approval of the petition was discovered after the petition was approved; e.g., at the consular interview. USCIS does occasionally screw up and approve a petition they shouldn't have approved, but most often a petition is returned because the consular officer is saying that the evidence wasn't known to USCIS at the time the petition was approved. Front-loading is a tool to counter this.
In other words, if being introduced by the beneficiary's uncle is considered an indicator of potential fraud at that particular consulate, and the evidence of how the couple were introduced was discovered at the interview, then the consular officer could use it as a basis for denying the visa. On the other hand, if the fact that the couple were introduced by the beneficiary's uncle were included in the front-loaded evidence, and explained that the introduction was 'innocent' and conformed with local social customs, then it would be difficult for the consular officer to use this as a reason to deny the visa. Clearly, if the evidence is included with the petition then the consular officer can't claim USCIS didn't know about it when they approved the petition.
What I'm getting at is don't waste your time packing your petition with piles of chat logs and emails. The CO won't look at it. Carefully choose your front-loaded evidence, and include evidence that either strongly supports the validity of your relationship and that you think it's important for the CO to see, or evidence that addresses specific red flags in your case.

sounds more like he's setting the record straight.

Out of the frying pan and into the fire. I would focus on getting your divorce completed, finding a job, and building your relationship.

We see this a lot, and as a matter of fact my wife's sister is running a Sari-Sari store with support from a foreign boyfriend right now. It isn't our business to interfere but this is the most likely outcome: letting people take things on credit and letting family or friends just take things without paying. At a minumum though what happens frequently is the family spends the sales revenue instead of buying new stock so the foreigner continually buys the stock and the family keeps the sales proceeds. In that case it isn't a business, just a money-laundering exercise. The business is operating at a net loss because of pilfering and bad credit, in which case it is less expensive to just send them money so you aren't subsidizing the whole neighborhood.
I'm not saying you are in this situation, but it is a good thing to be discussing on this subforum.

You have no legal obligations aside from whatever comes from the divorce.
You don't HAVE to buy her a ticket home, legally, but it would be nice of you to do so especially as her abandoning her status means the I-864 would be terminated.

Please stop posting on this topic,...your doing more harm than good even if you have good intentions..

No, you are wrong. The child of a marriage DOES NOT automatically assumes citizenship.
Automatic means NO PAPERWORK to submit to the US government to claim US citizenship.
Sending paperwork in MEANS IT IS NOT AUTOMATIC AND MUST BE APPLIED FOR.
A foreign born MUST FILE A CRBA TO CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP. There is no exception for the child of a marriage.
Let's contrast this with the Child Citizenship Act where citizenship is automatic. No need to file any paperwork.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/CCA_102504.pdf From the PDF: "Acquiring citizenship automatically means citizenship is acquired by operation of law, without the need to apply for citizenship."
Please show a citation where the statement you made is true. Please show me any law that distinguish that a child is automatically a US citizen and does not have to CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP because the parents are married.
This is from the US Embassy. Strange that the US Embassy would have a procedure for a foreign born child to claim US citizenship and requires providing a copy of the parents' marriage certificate if applicable. WHY HAVE A PROCEDURE FOR THE CHILD OF A MARRIAGE TO CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP IF IT IS AUTOMATIC?????????? IF IT WAS AUTOMATIC, THEN WHY MUST THE PARENT SUBMIT A CRBA TO CLAIM US CITIZENSHIP?????????
http://yemen.usembassy.gov/yemen/birth_abroad.html
http://yemen.usembassy.gov/cus/possible-derivative-claim-to-us-citizenship.html

Google can be your friend to search for flights.

These items are not necessary, not needed, and would make no difference for your mother in-law's visa application. Her visa application will be decided based on what her ties to the Philippines are.

third party signed affidavits (Keep original for later)
It's my understanding that you file originals , these affadavits, with the I-130.

It IS a requirement. It is stated in the I-864 instructions. See page 8 of the instructions. "If you were not required to file a Federal income tax return under U.S. law because your income was too low, attach a written explanation." $0 makes it too low.
Question #25 asks about income from the past 3 years of tax returns. They would need to put N/A in those 3 lines because they did not file and had no income. They need to provide a statement as to why they did not legally file the last 3 years. It is a simple thing to do, and follows the form instructions.
Better yet for #25 in their case is to put 'N/A-SEE ATTACHMENT' and add their statement as to why they did not legally need to file as the attachment.

okay so you moved back to PI and thus gave up your residency in the US correct? How long have you been living back there? When did you last visit the US?
if you want to divorce, divorce. Do not commit immigration fraud by trying to obtain citizenship based on a marriage you have stated you want to end. You aren't living together. He sends you money though. How do you think you'll pass the relationship requirements? You are aware they can revoke your citizenship if they find out you lied right?
Don't risk it. Either get him to file for divorce, or wait for the 5 year mark when your marriage doesn't matter.

It seems real coincidental and very convenient that the first 2 years you were married and STILL in the Philippines you were happy, yet at the beginning of the last 3 years of you marriage ie right when you entered the US & received your greencard your marriage started making you miserable. Smells fishy. As mentioned you could get yourself in trouble if someone decides to look twice at your case due to all your claims and demands. Don't be greedy. Cut and go, wait a few more years then apply for citizenship.

Tough question...on one hand if it's a legit emergency and you don't help out you're pretty much going to damage the relationship with your new extended family. On the other hand, you can't be expected to be their savior and families in the Philippines are usually very large - you can probably expect to always have an emergency somewhere on the horizon.
That said, I personally would decline. I have kids from a previous marriage I need to support and with college coming up in a few years I can't afford to give away that large of an amount. But, I would probably offer to help out, for example maybe send $1000-$2000.

They will go by your current income, so send copies of most recent pay stubs, and a letter from your employer.
funny this coming from someone who I have seen give the incorrect advice several times. His question was about a joint sponsor and I answered it.

Sorry not to be rude but your statement is a bit funny to me bolded above, as I had to correct a misleading answer you quoted regarding claiming a dependent on the i864 which was misleading to the OP as well in a different forum.

It's not mandatory to have a US joint bank account at this point since your spouse is still in the Philippines.
Are you sending her money in the Philippines? If yes, then she can bring the remittance slips/receipts as proof and present it at her interview.

Except you are wrong. Pornography is illegal in the Philippines under Art. 201 - Offenses Against Decency and Good Customs. Prostitution covers not just physical intercourse, but also any lascivious conduct under Art. 202. In addition it is illegal for 'The willful engagement, maintenance, control, or operation, directly or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system, for favor or consideration.' The punishment for doing so is 6 to 12 years in prison, a fine of between P200k and P1M, or both.
In addition the US can block immigration on the grounds of 'Good Moral Character' of which any commercialized vice may be considered by the CO in charge of the interview.

Tough question since nothing ever happens in Ohio.

Keep wondering

So she was engaged to an American, denied a fiance visa, did the boyfriend appeal? Why did he give up on her? Six months later she finds another American man and becomes serious with him. Forgets to tell him (for a while) that she was recently engaged and denied for prostitution. I'd say write the whole thing off now before you invest anymore time or money on her.

This is complete BS. A perfect model of Aryan beauty that works as a fully legal and tax paying prostitute or madam in Germany or the Netherlands is prevented from immigrating to the US just the same as a bar girl from Thailand or the Philippines. Just because you hold a different moral standard doesn't mean the US government should follow the same Devil down the primrose path. Prostitution is no more a valid method to avoid poverty than dealing drugs or running numbers. Our society, as a whole, considers all of these so called 'victimless crimes' as morally bankrupt activities and bars anyone guilty of them from entering the country.

This is a perfect example of why the law is so stupid. There isn't any logic here on how disallowing this marriage prevents "human trafficking". What it actually does is eliminate a means of impoverished women to escape prostitution by getting married and immigrating.
Look too how people are claiming pornography over the internet is prostitution. Hogwash. Playboy centerfolds are not prostitutes. They are not only highly paid in this country, but prized as "trophy" wives. Same thing for all the soft porn superstars like Victoria Secrets models, Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders and so on. Somehow that transparent micro-thin layer of cotton hiding nothing as a practical matter makes them angels whereas the poor Filipina doing the same thing is a filthy animal. What is really going on is bigotry. Poor brown colored people cannot do what the rich white girl can do.
Although it is a tragedy, this girl made a big mistake by not telling the OP until recently. You do not have the right to conceal such a major issue and get the person really deeply involved in the relationship before this little "Oh, by the way I was already denied entry" revelation. This is a lie by omission, and you were lied to by the other people who concealed this as well.
This is a pretty cruel way to treat people. Think about how you felt when you discovered this. All of them knew what it would put you through, but they did it anyway. Why? Because they wanted to get you hooked first so that you would feel guilty for leaving her. This guilt-trip was consciously thought through by all of them. It demonstrates they do not respect you. The stupid little dupe who is not in on the secret everyone else knows until... "surprise!" So let me guess - she cried and showed all kinds of emotion when discussing this with you, right? Crocodile tears. Part of the design to manipulate you emotionally. That is also cruel - make you feel bad for her lying to you!
But if she (and they) already did this to you now, then they have already proven what they are capable of in the future. I would prefer meeting a prostitute that was honest with me up front and proved she isn't going to lie to me. I'd say forget about this one, and explain to her why. She lied about something too important. Next guy she meets she's got to be honest from the beginning and let that guy enter into the relationship with a problem, but not a problem of dishonesty.