sjr09

Not that big of a deal, "if the CO ask me on my interview about when and how my fiance and I met and I told him the truth". Yes tell the truth! Mr. CO by the way, the lawyer left out this info, on #18 here are some phots, email, letters and blah blah from that timeline or
"The lawyer skipped the part on how and where my fiace and I met. He just started on when we actually started seeing each other... Fiance and I first met on 2005 but just actually started dating and seeing each other on 2007.. And the lawyer answered that no. 18 question with "we started seeing each other on january of 2007 blah blah..."

How exactly is anything he obtained done in an illegal manner? If he can view his wife's FB profile(s), then it's legal. FB is a public database. The point at which a subpoena is required would be when the FB profile is hidden or deactivated AND it is required for court. The only court matter would/could be divorce. You can by all means check the OP's state's statute, but the statute usually defines things for electronic media as video and voice recordings where both parties involved need to know a recording is being made. No I'm not a lawyer, however I have access to my particular state's statute and I have looked into the matter for using FB from a crazy ex posting about stalking me, for matters at which I will not discuss. And you can read the privacy part of the user agreements to FB, YM, skype accounts.
The OP should at least make an attempt. She can't really file for RoC without him (unless she tries to claim VAWA). It's better to try and fail than to just give in.

If you want to pursue thing with ICE, pick up the phone and call. Don't wander around VJ building up support. Take your shot with reporting it. That's the only way to know if what you have as evidence is going to make be sufficient. My understanding is that you have to present a strong case for ICE to expend energy.
Also, divorce and move on from the marriage. Trying to exact some sort of "payback" is ultimately a waste of good energy.

I think you have a case for ICE, but
Get to yer local USCIS Office via infopass, and talk with the ICE Shift Supervisor. Bring yer file, ask for input.

Poor and from the Philippines?
My advice: Don't waste time and money applying for a tourist visa because it's never going to happen.
More advice: This is a good idea because it's the only way they are going to visit you.

In theory, pigs can fly. Realty is what matters. And in the real world, you can't show a single instance where someone brought over a yaya.
Au pairs are not yayas. Totally different.

Well extraordinary skills have been mentioned by several posters.
I have no idea how the recognition system works, my knowledge is more along the Marry Poppins line.
And what other visa category would there be?

O visas are for those with extraordinary skills recognized in their profession. Usually for scientists, actors, etc.
Hard for me to imagine how a yaya is recognized by her peers. Do they give out awards for yaya work?
--------
For all those who insist this is possible, please point to any Webpage where someone has successfully brought over a yaya.
How can you be so sure it is possible without any evidence to back up your position?
I guess those of us with years of immigration experience don't know as much as those who join VJ recently.

1. Which visa? Give me something specific.
2. Ok.
3. How did I bash the OP? By telling why it's not possible? That's bashing?
If you haven't notice, the US government does not have a foreign policy to export jobs. Companies expert jobs and they don't conduct foreign policy.
Companies exporting jobs is not the same thing as letting in a foreign worker when a US resident is available.

It would take longer to fight it than go to it......... or get around it like some suggest......I mean really...half a day and less than $15....whats the big deal after all these other hoops you jump through...

The OP is not yet divorced. He is not able to file his ROC early unless he IS divorced. If his window arrives and his divorce is not yet final that's fine and he files anyway and then deals with the RFE. He will have 86 days to reply to the RFE. There is no point in stressing himself out about that when he's not legally able to file for ROC until: 1. His divorce is final or 2. His ROC window arrives. He has plenty of time to wait for his divorce to be final before his window so that he has the certificate and avoids what stress will occur when he's RFE'd for the divorce certificate.
There is a minute chance that she tells USCIS that he's in the process of divorce that he could face trouble, but I highly doubt it. Firstly he's not in breach of the conditions of his greencard until he IS divorced, and secondly they can't just take his card because he's going through a divorce. In the event he were to go before an immigration judge he would be given the chance to file for ROC with a waiver when the time is appropriate. Again, legally he can't file ROC early so they can't make him. He needs to wait until he is divorced or until his window, whichever is first.
As a side note - USCIS doesn't care that he's getting divorced so telling them now means nothing. When he files his paperwork they'll know. There are no requirements to the contrary.
Also, please provide a link from where you got your quote (which is customary when quoting so others can read further for context and not just blindly follow your analysis). I assume it's in the filing instructions for the I-751. The quote you posted applies to someone who has already filed.. note the words "If you filed.." at the start of each of those bullet points. The first bullet point pertains to someone who reaches the 90 days window but isn't yet divorced and who needs to file with a waiver without the divorce decree. The second bullet point pertains to someone who filed ROC jointly but during the joint process initiated divorce proceedings.

This is not about the law, or stricter implementation of the present laws but about greed and corruption. You have cockroaches like delfino, local police and more then likely immigration officials who see foreigners as a feed bag!

Always best to ask directly to the source.

In just two weeks Obama has illegally given amnesty to illegal aliens by instating part of the dream act that our constitutionally elected Legislative branch voted down.
Today he basically told the supreme court, even though you found Arizona law constitutional, guess what? I will not enforce it.
I don't care where you stand on immigration, if you are a liberty loving American you should be beyond angry that our President has shreeded the constuion and is refusing to enforce the laws of this nation, despite the states pleas for help.
Shame on you and shame on the American people to allow Obama to buy votes with our constitution.
Before the socialist crowd gets started. Yes I know Bush sucked also.

I am sorry about the situation but no woman/man is worth giving up your kids. That is selfish of her to ask.

Why move to the PI the wretched Master Race world empire will soon take over the Philippines and the world!

Time to take your Med’s

Why move to the PI the wretched Master Race world empire will soon take over the Philippines and the world!

Time to take your Med’s

Huge. Red. Flag.
If you are being asked for money on a debt and the instrument is concealed from you - RUN the other direction. The FIRST thing you do is look at the paperwork. If it isn't shown to you then all you know is that this is bad news way beyond just owing money.

Can avoid snow/cold/tornados without leaving the USA... no typhoons either. Safety... hmm

Time to take your Med’s

Why move to the PI the wretched Master Race world empire will soon take over the Philippines and the world!

Socialism is an economic concept that advocates public ownership of all resources. The production and distribution of resources with a society are then controlled by members of that society collectively or by the government that represents that society. Goods are produced and distributed based on need rather than on market forces such as profitability, price and consumers' purchasing power. In a socialist economy, workers contribute to society based on their ability and receive according to their needs, rather than being paid wages and using that money to purchase what they want. Private possessions are limited to personal-use items such as clothes, and there is no need or ability for individuals to accumulate wealth, so there is equality among the people.
I don't see it, 'socialist government' individuals do accumulate wealth and poverty is rampant. There is no equality among the people only the have and have not!

Time to take your Med’s