JimVaPhuong

I think you may be chasing a dead dog here. What are you hoping to do if you get the CO's notes? Are you hoping to petition to have your case reopened? It would be faster to just reapply. Are you hoping his/her notes will reveal some inside secrets about your case that they didn't tell you when they denied the visa? I doubt that will happen. They have to give a valid reason when they deny the visa application, and that reason has to be stated on the 221 notice they gave to your fiancee. Anything else that might have been going on inside the CO's head is probably still there in the CO's head, and not written down in your case file.
The most common reason they deny visas at the consulate in HCM is because they suspect the relationship is a sham for immigration purposes. The CO may have a myriad of reasons for believing this is true, but the reasons he states on the 221 notice must be backed up by evidence. In other words, the real reasons they suspect this might never be written down on any document because they are circumstantial, and the 'official' reasons written on the notice might just be whatever they were able to find evidence for. You can get a lot of clues as to what the CO was thinking by evaluating the entire circumstances of the interview. What sort of evidence did the CO ask to see? What questions did the CO ask?
I suggest you do as Anh Map recommends, and read up in the regional forums to see why people are denied in HCM, and then compare those reasons with your own case. The fact that your petition was allowed to expire is good news. If you'd had to respond to a NOID then you might have had to wait for years. Before you reapply, figure out what set off the CO and ultimately caused your visa to be denied. Consider addressing the issues with evidence in your next petition.

If your divorce is final (i.e., you have the divorce decree) by the time you have to file, then you can ask for a waiver of the joint filing requirements based on your divorce. Just tick box "d" in part 2 of the I-751. As long as you can provide the normal proof of "good faith" marriage, you should be able to remove conditions and get a 10 year green card.
Note that the divorce must be final - you can't ask for this waiver if you are separated or the divorce is still pending. If you can't get a final divorce in time, then you may be placed in removal proceedings, but you can always ask the immigration judge to postpone until you have your final divorce. These requests are almost always granted.

A friendly suggestion - spend a few moments researching your answers before posting responses that are neither helpful nor accurate. You can learn an amazing amount of information about the immigration laws and processes by researching answers to other people's questions. Besides, it's a lot of fun!

My viewpoint on this subject is somewhat jaded. I don't think the CO's in HCM believe that ANY relationship is sincere, no matter how much juicy evidence you pile on to the contrary. I think they approach every case with the presumption that the applicant is a fraud, and they're just looking for the evidence they need to deny the visa on that basis.
This doesn't mean I think it's pointless to frontload evidence of a genuine relationship. On the contrary, I think it's essential. At the same time, I think you need to be pragmatic, and view your case like a CO would. Knowing what you've read about other people's interviews, if you were a CO looking at your case for the first time, what sort of red flags would you be digging for? What would you suspect based on those red flags? What sort of evidence would convince you that those red flags were not enough reason to deny the visa? Moreover, what if you knew, as a CO, that you could not cite a specific thing as a reason for denial if that specific thing were already declared and explained in the petition package? What would stop you dead from being able to deny that visa?
The following paragraph is purely conjecture on my part...
I also believe the CO's in HCM are determined to deny a certain percentage of applications. Yes, that means I believe they have a quota system. I believe the visa section chief will put heavy pressure on a CO who isn't finding enough evidence to deny enough visas because I think the visa section chief believes the CO is probably letting some frauds get through, just looking at it statistically. If I were a CO, I'd go for the low hanging fruit first - the cases that have obvious red flags which were not previously addressed, and which have proven to be sufficient grounds for a visa denial. I'd be a lot more likely to give a pass to any case where I had to do some serious digging to find a scrap of evidence. As a petitioner, I want my fiancee's case to be one of the latter. I want the CO to have to work hard, dig deep, and even then not come up with any solid evidence that will stick.
Frankly, I didn't care if the CO believed we were really in love. I would have been perfectly content if the CO was absolutely convinced that our relationship was a sham, but couldn't come up with a shred of evidence he could use to deny the visa. As long as Phuong walked out with a pink slip, I didn't give a hoot about the CO's personal opinion. When I prepared my frontloaded evidence, my goal was to win. In telling our "love story", I focused on addressing every possible red flag from every possible angle. I used the opportunity provided by question 18 on the I-129F to provide much of the evidence needed for this. I also included a timeline that answered every question on the blue slip, specifically addressing a number of potential red flags. I also included a list of her relatives in the US, explained when and where I'd met each one (if ever), and even drafted a family tree showing three generations of her family, and which specific members were in the US.
I don't know if I left any holes the CO could have exploited. If I did, he either didn't find them, or couldn't be bothered to look for them. As I said, I didn't want to make it easy for him. I also can't say for sure if frontloading had anything to do with our getting the visas (3 of them) with a very short and painless interview. I do know that I've seen other people shot down in flames for some of the same red flags we had. Even if frontloading wasn't the reason, at least it gave me an opportunity to feel like I was doing something constructive.

Not in your case. The Social Security Administration doesn't grant immigration benefits. They issue numbers to people who are required to pay Social Security taxes, and they keep track of the Social Security taxes those people pay. That's it. You were apparently eligible to receive a Social Security number at one time. The only thing that will be easier is that you won't have to apply for a new number if you ever return to the US as an immigrant, since a Social Security number is issued for life.
A Social Security number, by itself, doesn't provide any immigration benefits nor permission to work in the United States. In order to come to the United States and work legally you either need someone to submit a petition for you, or find some other way to get an immigrant visa. From what I understand, Barbados is eligible for the diversity visa lottery. Maybe you could try that.

This varies greatly from one country to another, and from one case to another. In some cases, having a spousal visa in process has helped people get into the US using a visitor's visa. They can demonstrate to CBP that the person entering has no intention of overstaying since they are already in the process of immigrating legally.
In the case of Vietnam, it will not help your chances of getting a tourist visa in the first place, so she probably won't ever get a chance to stand in front of a CBP officer to make her case. Her immigrant intent has been established by the fact that there is an immigrant visa application in process for her. Since the granting of that immigrant visa is far from guaranteed in Vietnam, the consulate will probably just view the tourist visa application as another attempt to try to get into the US for immigration purposes.
Don't feel bad. I asked the same question here at one point, hoping my fiancee could at least visit my home and the town where I live before making the commitment to immigrate here. You'll probably have to accept, as most of us with SO's in Vietnam have accepted, that your girlfriend is not going to see the US before she get's a spousal or fiancee visa, and that you have a long tough road ahead to get her one of those visas. The good news is that a spousal or fiancee visa IS possible. A tourist visa is all but impossible.

Again, as strange as it sounds, getting married will actually make her chances of getting a tourist visa worse. In the mind of the consulate, it would no longer be simply likely that she intends to immigrate - it would be a virtual certainty.
DCF is definitely easier if you plan to marry abroad and get a CR1 visa. This comes with the bonus of an automatic green card. The downside, for your situation, is that the green card requires primary residency in the US. If she stays outside the US for more than a year without a re-entry permit, then she'll be considered to have abandoned her residency, and her green card will be null and void.
If you are committed to this lady, and want to spend your life with her, this is what I would suggest:
Marry her, and then apply for a CR1 with the consulate (DCF). When the visa is approved, go to the US, get her green card, and establish residency. You can return to her foreign country after this, but be prepared to spend at least half of your time in the US for the next 3 years. At the end of the 3 years, she can apply for US citizenship as long as she's still married to you. Once she gets her citizenship, she can leave the US whenever she wants, and stay gone as long as she likes. You'll both be free to come and go whenever you please. Problem solved forever.
As far as I know, the only kind of visas that would allow a business to sponsor her is a work visa (H1, H2, etc.). This would require her to work for the US company. These are strictly rationed, and often used up within weeks of becoming available each year. There are also various types of exchange and training visas, but I don't know if any of these would apply to her. If she's just coming to visit for business purposes then she'd need a B1, which has pretty much the same requirements as a B2 tourist visa, and is just as difficult to get in Vietnam.

A tourist visa doesn't require the applicant to have any connection whatever with a US citizen. The applicant has to qualify for the visa on their own merits. However, the consulate will take other factors into consideration if they believe the applicant intends to use the tourist visa to attempt to immigrate to the US, and they presume this in every case.
I think the problem in your case was that your girlfriend COULD use a tourist visa to legally immigrate to the US. If you and her married in the US then she could legally remain in the US and apply for a green card, provided she could satisfy USCIS that it wasn't her intention to immigrate when she entered the US. The consulate is going to suspect that this might be the intention of the applicant in every case - they are required by law to presume every applicant is an intending immigrant. The fact that you, her US citizen boyfriend, were going to be traveling to the US with her raises their level of suspicion. This is where your ties to Vietnam come into play - the fact that you don't have strong ties that would require you to return with your girlfriend before her visa expires raises their suspicion even more.
Both your girlfriend and my fiancee would have a better chance of getting a tourist visa if they didn't have a relationship with a US citizen. My fiancee would also have to address the fact that she has family living in the US - another strong motive to immigrate. Even without a US citizen fiance, she could still come to the US on a tourist visa, hook up with a US citizen and get married, and then remain in the US and apply for a green card.
As I said, the consulate is required by law to presume every applicant is an intending immigrant. However, they can't just deny a visa because they think it smells funny if all of the other requirements have been met. The long interview suggests they were having a hard time finding the evidence they needed to deny, and they ultimately decided that you would be that evidence. Even if you became a citizen of Vietnam, abandoned your US citizenship, bought a company in Vietnam, and even joined the Communist Party, the consulate would still try to find a reason to deny your girlfriend a tourist visa. In order to get a tourist visa your girlfriend is going to need to prove that she has a lot more to lose by abandoning her life in Vietnam than she has to gain by immigrating to the US.
As ridiculous as all of this sounds, keep in mind that this isn't about preventing immigration to the US. It's about preventing the use of a non-immigrant visa for immigration purposes. There are legal ways to immigrate to the US, but they take a lot longer, and except for fiancee and spousal visas, they are designed to manage the influx of immigrants into the US. It is the consulate's duty to see that people don't use the tourist visa as a fast track path to immigrate.

A very long interview in HCM is usually a bad sign. It means the consular officer is digging hard for a reason to deny the visa. A short interview is usually a slam dunk one way or the other.
I don't think my case is ridiculous, looking at the big picture. Fraud is huge in Vietnam. There are a lot of people with ties as strong as my fiancee's, who would gladly walk away from everything for a shot at coming to the US, even if it meant they'd be illegal after arriving and overstaying their visa. You have see it in perspective. Thousands of people died in rickety boats in the late 70's to mid 80's trying to escape that country. The ones who survived spent months or years in disease infested refugee camps. They did all this for the hope of being able to come to the US and start a new life. Many families were divided for years until the VN government started allowing Viet Kieu to return as visitors. Many Vietnamese today just want to be reunited with their families in the US, and they would do practically anything to achieve that.
I understand completely why the consulate would not be able to issue a visitor's visa to my fiancee, and I can't really blame them. I know my fiancee very very well. I know she wouldn't jeopardize her chances of coming and staying here legally by overstaying a visitor's visa. Besides, her life in Vietnam is the not the miserable existence that it is for some Vietnamese people. She could be contented and reasonably comfortable there for the rest of her life. However, because Vietnamese men are reluctant to marry older divorced women with children, she'd probably spend that life alone. She has a chance now to share the rest of her life with man who loves her deeply, and whom she loves just as deeply, and live in a country where you don't have to bribe every government official to get them to do their job. She wouldn't risk that over a visitor's visa.
I also have no doubt about my fiancee's sincerity and commitment to me. We chat for hours every day. Sometimes she wakes up in the middle of the night and wants to chat because she can't sleep. She even replaced her "bomb site" toilet with a western style toilet so that I'd feel more comfortable in her home, and paved her driveway so that I wouldn't have to feel around for the stones on dark rainy nights! When I told her that the pale blue paint made her home seem dark under the fluorescent lights that everyone in Vietnam uses, she repainted the entire house - pink!
On the other hand, the consulate in HCM doesn't know that's she's any different from the hundreds of other applicants they process every week, a good percentage of whom would clear customs in the US and disappear into the country.

Do not follow the instructions for the I-134. Those instructions were written by USCIS, and you're not submitting the I-134 to USCIS - you're submitting it to a US consulate. They're not even the same department of the government. The consulate will instruct you what sort of evidence they require in their packet 3 and packet 4 instructions. Follow those instructions.
Most consulates will insist on a copy of the most recent tax return. Some consulates, like the one in HCMC, specifically want an IRS transcript of that return, but may accept a copy of the return at the discretion of the consular officer. If you don't want to provide a copy of your tax return, and would prefer to provide bank statements instead, then feel free to take your copy of the I-134 form instructions into the consulate and argue with the consular officer. Let us know how it goes.
Seriously, this is one of the very rare cases where you should not follow the instructions that come with the form. Forms beginning with "I" are immigration forms used by Department of Homeland Security, while forms beginning with "DS" are use by Department of State. The I-134 is one of the few DHS forms used by US consulates, and they use it as little more than a cover sheet for the sponsor's financial documents. They'll reject it if you don't give them the evidence they want.

Not wanting to tell your fiance about a miscarriage means you're hiding something in your past other than the miscarriage. Does your fiance think you're a virgin? Did you get pregnant after meeting your fiance, and your fiance wasn't the father? Was the father another foreigner that you were previously dating?
Here's a scenario to ponder...
You come to the United States. You marry your fiance within 90 days. You file for your adjustment of status. You get selected for a green card interview. At the interview the IO is reading the results of your medical exam and says "So, you had a miscarriage on <date>?". You say yes. Your husband is dumfounded. The IO sees your husband's reaction, and realizes your husband didn't know anything about your previous pregnancy. The IO immediately separates you and your husband and calls another IO to assist. The two IO's now question you and your husband separately for more than two hours. The IO's switch places and repeat the questioning. In the end, you're told that you'll get a decision within 60 days. As you're leaving you realize the decision is probably not going to be good.
This is not how you want your green card interview to go. This is not how you want your fiance to find out about your previous pregnancy and miscarriage. This is not the sort of thing you keep secret from your future husband.

It's not a matter of how much they charge, or whether they charge anything at all. It's a matter of whether they specifically cater to US citizens or legal residents, and whether they charge the same rates (if any) to US citizens and LPR's as they charge to anyone else.
The IMBRA is intended to protect foreign beneficiaries from potentially hooking up with US citizens or LPR's who have a history of specific crimes. The IMBRA requires IMB's to collect information about those crimes and disclose that information to the foreign girl/boy before they release any contact information, allowing the foreigner to choose not to contact someone with a criminal history. It has nothing to do with porn or prostitution.
They ask the question on the I-129F because they want to ensure that an IMB (if one was used) complied with the information collection and disclosure requirements of the law.

It might not hurt to address the divorce with the initial petition. Let me explain...
A recent divorce by the beneficiary can be seen as a huge red flag at some consulates. This is a common tactic by some visa fraudsters who divorce, marry a US citizen, get's legal status, get's US citizenship in 3 years, divorces the US spouse, and then remarries and petitions for the original spouse in their home country. It's a way for a couple who are not otherwise qualified to BOTH come to the US with legal status in only a few years.
Whether the consulate will suspect this depends on the level of visa fraud in the foreign country, and how long it takes to immigrate from that country otherwise. Three years may seem like a long time to pull a scam like this, but in some country's the wait for any other type of visa can be decades.
Ok, the reason for addressing it in the initial petition - The consulate is not supposed to deny a visa for a reason that was known to USCIS at the time the petition was approved. In order to send a petition back to USCIS with a recommendation that the petition by revoked, the consulate is supposed to find a reason which USCIS was not aware of when the petition was initially approved, and which they believe would have resulted in USCIS not approving the petition the first time. Addressing your "red flags" in the petition is called "front loading", and many attorneys recommend it.
Be sure to include a copy of his divorce decree, as well as a certified translation into English. If you wish to explain the divorce in a letter, then whoever writes the letter (you or your fiance) should sign it and have their signature notarized. BE CAREFUL: Anything you submit with the petition will probably follow the petition to the consulate. The interviewing CO will SEE this information, and may ask detailed questions about it. If your fiance says anything at the interview to contradict what is written in the letter, then that's the ammunition the CO needs to deny the visa application, and send everything back to USCIS. The danger of front loading is that it gives the CO more information than they would otherwise have.

Ok, I'm going to see if I can offend everyone in one post...
All men everywhere will do stupid things for pretty girls. This character flaw isn't exclusive to American men. However, most American men are not as gullible as many Filipinas seem to think they are. In many cases, these guys know darn well that these girls don't really love them. He might only want a sex toy who will treat him like she loves him for a few years. Most of the time, they're just hoping she hangs around and plays nice until he either dies or gets tired of her. Many times these guys go into these relationships knowing that it isn't going to last more than a few years. The sad truth is that many East Asian and Pacific Island girls don't age very well. They're adorable when they're young, but start to deteriorate rapidly when they hit their mid 20's.
...Jim ducks while the Filipinas start throwing kitchen utensils at him...
This isn't really any different from rich old men in the US who marry young trophy wives. These guys know that these girls marry them for their money. As long as the girl acts like his wife then they're generally ok with that. If she does anything to humiliate him, like fooling around on the side, then the relationship is over.
A lot of the men who go to the Philippines are average looking older men with average incomes. These guys wouldn't have a prayer of getting a young trophy wife in the US, but it doesn't take nearly as much to get a young wife in a poor country. There are several reasons this happens a lot in the Philippines. For one thing, the country has a long and sordid history of sex tourism, like many Southeast Asian countries. For another, there's no strong cultural aversion in the Philippines to older men marrying younger women, especially when there's a financial advantage for the bride.
Obviously, the above doesn't apply to everyone. There are many many relationships which are genuine and sincere on both sides. I'm just saying that not all of the guys who are getting played are totally unaware of it. In many cases, they're playing each other.

Living in any democratic republic means accepting that there will always be people who don't agree with your point of view. Laws are often based on the prevailing views of the majority. Those views often change over time. Becoming a citizen should be based on whether you agree with the principles on which the system of government is founded, and not on whether everyone in the country has the same viewpoint you have.
You seem to be saying that you would prefer if the United States created the utopian society you want before you'll consider becoming a citizen. Maybe a better way to look at it is that if you become a citizen then you can participate in creating that utopian society yourself. An individual US citizen doesn't have much influence, but their vote counts as much as any other citizen's vote. It would seem to me to be worse if I had to spend my life in the US a lawful resident, and I was powerless to express my opinion except on internet forums.

If your divorce is final (i.e., you have the divorce decree) by the time you have to file, then you can ask for a waiver of the joint filing requirements based on your divorce. Just tick box "d" in part 2 of the I-751. As long as you can provide the normal proof of "good faith" marriage, you should be able to remove conditions and get a 10 year green card.
Note that the divorce must be final - you can't ask for this waiver if you are separated or the divorce is still pending. If you can't get a final divorce in time, then you may be placed in removal proceedings, but you can always ask the immigration judge to postpone until you have your final divorce. These requests are almost always granted.

A friendly suggestion - spend a few moments researching your answers before posting responses that are neither helpful nor accurate. You can learn an amazing amount of information about the immigration laws and processes by researching answers to other people's questions. Besides, it's a lot of fun!

It's relevant. The OP is basically asking if there's a humanitarian or hardship route to expedite the case for his sister. The consulate can deny the visa for the very same reasons the OP is seeking an expedite, concluding that the beneficiary has chronic medical problems, is unlikely to ever be self-supporting, and will undoubtedly require regular medical care in the US. The availability of medical care isn't an issue. The fact that medical care in the US is expensive is very much an issue. The consulate may require the petitioner, or joint sponsor, to virtually guarantee that the beneficiary's medical expenses in the US will be paid for with private funds, and that the beneficiary will never attempt to use taxpayer funded programs to pay for their medical care.

Charles, it might help to see things in perspective. There are hundreds of millions of people around the world who are in desperate need of assistance. There are nearly 4 million in Somalia who are starving to death right now. Very few of these people would have any basis for immigrating to the United States, and frankly, the majority of Americans wouldn't want them to come here. It wouldn't benefit the United States or it's citizens in any way to invite millions of uneducated and unskilled people into the country just so they could be supported by the taxpayers. US humanitarian policy is to provide assistance to people in the countries where they live rather than handing them an immigrant visa and a green card.
US immigration policy is to provide immigration benefits to people in certain narrow qualification classes. Family based immigration is provided for close relatives, by blood or marriage, of US citizens and permanent residents. This includes qualifying parents, children, spouses, and siblings - members of the same family unit. It doesn't include aunts, uncles, cousins, nieces, nephews, or anyone else further removed. The only way for these more distant relatives to immigrate is to first help a qualifying relative immigrate. For example, your fiancee could first become an LPR. When she's eligible she could become a US citizen. After that, she can petition for her sister. When her sister's priority date becomes current, her sister can come to the US and become an LPR. She can then file for her son. You see, it's possible, but because these visa categories have annual numerical limits it's going to take a very long time. Without those annual limits in place, the US would quickly be flooded with family based immigrants.
Your fiancee's family can try to get a B2 visa for her nephew. B2 visas are also available for people who need to come to the US for medical treatment, provided they have a financial sponsor. The stay is usually limited to six months, but an additional six month extension can be obtained if the treatment will require additional time. That's pretty much all her nephew might have a reasonable expectation of getting right now.

Be wary of anything they tell you. If it smells fishy then it probably is. There are a lot of people here in California who claim to have sponsored a relative to live in the US when I knew darn well there was no petitionable relationship between them. A friend of mine in Southern California told me years ago that he sponsored his cousin to come to the US for school. I didn't know much about immigration law then, but I knew that you couldn't petition for a cousin. His cousin was going to a public high school. I found out later that she entered with a B2 visa and overstayed, and that she was attending public school illegally under federal law, though it wasn't illegal under California law. Go figure. The point is that people will often tell you a fish story in order to make their situation appear above board and legal, when it actually is not. What really sucked for my friend was that his cousin's mom immigrated to the US legally just before his cousin graduated from high school. Unfortunately, his aunt wasn't eligible for US citizenship before his cousin turned 21, so there was nothing she could do to help her daughter become legal. She ended up having to go back to Mexico, along with a 10 year ban. As far as I know, she's still there. If she hadn't played the B2 overstay game then she'd have been in the US with a green card long ago.
The adoption doesn't just have to be legal according to the laws of the country where the adoption took place. It must be legal for immigration purposes. Nicaragua is NOT a Hague Adoption Convention country, so only an adopted orphan would be qualified for immigration.

Yep, it's covered by the IMBRA. You'll need to get all of the court and police records, as indicated in the I-129F form instructions.
The purpose of the IMBRA is not to deny petitioners with a criminal history, but to protect beneficiaries from unknowingly hooking up with US citizens who might abuse them. The bulk of the IMBRA law is about disclosure - informing the beneficiary about the criminal history of the petitioner so that they aren't entering a relationship with someone they don't know much about. It's also about requiring International Marriage Brokers (IMB's) to collect this information from Americans, and to disclose it to foreigners before initiating contact between them. That's why they ask if you met through an IMB. If so, they'll check to make sure the IMB complied with the law. In any case, Department of State will make sure your fiancee gets a copy of your criminal records before the interview.
The only time the IMBRA requirements are used to deny a petition is if the petitioner has a conviction which falls under the IMBRA, and they are also asking for a waiver of the multiple filing limitations. They may deny the petition, in that case. If this is your first I-129F petition then they won't deny it because you have a conviction which falls under the IMBRA. They just require the records so that they can be given to your fiancee.

I thought this thread was about hookers and strippers. I thought strippers used "poles" and not "polls".

I'm sorry, but this implies that her deceit should be forgiven because she comes from a poor country. This is wrong. This sort of thing certainly happens far too often in Vietnam, but it's the exception rather than the rule. Most women in Vietnam would not engage in fraud on this level in order to snare a visa to a first world country, just as most women wouldn't prostitute themselves regardless of how poor they were. Broadly speaking, they are decent and moral people, though there are bad apples, to be sure.
It's true that Vietnam is a poor country, but it's not the sort of miserable poverty you see on Child Fund commercials. Many houses may consist of little more than a concrete bunker with a tin roof, a wooden box for a family altar, and a woven bamboo mat for a bed. But it's rare to find people starving. Most people, even the most poor, wear relatively decent clean clothing. Nearly everyone has a cell phone. Most homes have at least one gas powered scooter. Families take responsibility for each other, and there is a strong sense of charity. Many people are poor, but most are relatively happy in spite of it. When someone is desperate to escape Vietnam it's usually because they have aspirations of achieving wealth, and not because they're strangling under the weight of poverty.
Can we judge her behavior in spite of the fact that we haven't experienced life in her country? Yes, absolutely. Her own people would judge her harshly.

I've read a lot about the immigration law, and I've read quite a few court transcripts, but I'm not real familiar with the order of events and procedures in removal proceedings. What I read are summaries of cases, how they turned out, and why they turned out that way. People rarely post a "blow by blow" account of their removal proceedings, from beginning to end.
In other words, I don't know if there are technical differences between an AOS filed with an immigration judge and one filed with USCIS, but apparently there are differences. From the contents of the denial letter you got, it sounds like a technicality. They apparently won't accept a concurrent filing from the immigration judge. If I understand that correctly, it should mean that they'll accept the I-765 if a copy of the receipt notice for the I-485 is included. I'm PRESUMING the category for the I-765 is "c9", which is pending AOS, since they specifically mentioned the I-485 in the denial letter. If so, then there should be no filing fee, even if it's not filed concurrently.
It sounds like your attorney is dancing around the daisies a bit. The approved I-130, by itself, doesn't stop the removal proceedings. What it DOES do is make your I-485 approvable, and that WILL stop the removal proceedings while the I-485 is adjudicated. If the I-130 is denied, then your I-485 cannot be approved, and the removal proceedings will continue. What the I-130 does is establish that an immigrant visa is immediately available to you, which is one of the three primary requirements to become a legal permanent resident in the US.
I don't know the laws in Minnesota. In California, you can walk into a county clerk's office with your fiancee and picture ID, and walk out a married couple 20 minutes later. The did away with things like blood tests and waiting periods here a long time ago.
Now, if USCIS never sent you any notice that you were in removal proceedings (doesn't matter if you ever received the notice - only matters if they ever sent it), and you can prove you got the marriage license before you knew anything about the removal proceedings, then that's pretty strong evidence in your favor. Same goes for the wedding reception, or ANY other plans you made for the wedding BEFORE the removal action began.
Your wife's pregnancy is not relevant. All it proves is that you were having sex before you were placed in removal proceedings, but it doesn't prove you planned to marry. This is America - EVERYONE has sex before they get married.
You have more than 180 days of unlawful presence. If you get the AP travel document and actually leave the US then you'll be hit with an automatic 3 year ban - you won't be allowed to return, and having an AP travel document won't change that. You don't need any travel document to actually LEAVE the US. You could leave anytime you like. You just wouldn't be able to come back. It doesn't hurt anything to apply for the AP, especially since it doesn't cost anything, but the document won't be useful for anything other than a souvenir.

Here's my bullet list:

The OP cannot stay in the US legally. Either marriage to the petitioner or a successful asylum claim are the only two options available. The K1 entry doesn't allow for any other route to immigrate.
The 90 day period is not intended to be a "trial period". It's intended only to provide enough time for the petitioner and beneficiary to get married - nothing more. That said, there are lots of people who discover that the relationship just isn't going to work within this 90 day period. Consider this a 'side benefit' of having 90 days to get married, and not specifically an intended use of this period of time. Be damned sure that both parties want to marry before you send the petition.
USCIS will not help the OP return to their home country unless they are deported. If they leave voluntarily then they must arrange their own transportation. They may be able to get help from the embassy of their home country in the US.
There is no cap on how many K1's a beneficiary can apply for. Plenty of people have been approved for a K1, but something came up and they couldn't move to the US before the visa expired. They subsequently applied and were approved for a second K1. It doesn't raise any suspicions if it's the same petitioner. If a subsequent K1 is filed by a different petitioner then it substantially raises the level of suspicion that the beneficiary's primary goal is immigration rather than a genuine relationship.

Precious80, you asked for "good advice". My advice is to go home and start putting your life back together. As difficult as you think it will be to return home, it will be far more difficult to remain in the US. You have no path to legal immigration without marrying your fiance. Being in the US as an illegal alien might be appealing to someone from a third world country, but living legally in any country in Europe would be better than being an illegal alien in the US.

This is some of the most insightful advice I've ever read on VJ, and it applies to everyone in every relationship. People are what they are. If they change then it will be on their own terms and in their own time. If you can't accept them just the way they are then look for someone else.
Brilliant!

I think you meant his BAC was 0.11%. It couldn't have been 1.1%. He'd be dead with half that much alcohol in his blood.
He may eventually outgrow his insecurity about you, but you will never regain the trust you've lost. If you hold on to this relationship then I predict things will get much worse long before they get better. He's jealous, insecure, controlling, manipulative, has a drinking problem, and he has a mean streak. He also has a disregard for the law. Your relationship will eventually become violent. Once that line has been crossed then the relationship has near zero chance of ever being normal.
You don't have to "send him back". His immigration status isn't your problem. But you should divorce him and move on with your life.