Brother Hesekiel

No disrepect intended, but whoever told you that has no idea what they are talking about. The 2nd ammendment was written at the time because the U.S. did not have a standing, professional army. The British had previously tried to ban the ownership of guns to prevent any rebellion. This was to combat that. Today, a lot of conservative and gun enthusiasts mistakenly interpret that to mean that the founding fathers of this nation wrote it in there to support rebellion against an overbearing government.

The whole attitude to health - not just the health care issue. I am used to seeking medical attention when I need it; here, most people resist going to the doctor until it is absolutely the last option, so instead of focusing on preventing an issue from getting bad, they are trying to deal with an issue that has gone from bad to worse due to lack of timely medical treatment. There is almost no focus at all on preventative health care.
Courtesy - the common 'please', 'thank you' and 'you're welcome' are not generally part of the daily conversation. I say 'thank you' to someone and I get an 'uh unh' . In the stores I hear people say 'gimme so and so' and when they get what they want they don't bother to say 'thanks'. It is either nothing or something like a 'grunt'.
The general American focus on 'me first' or 'my needs are more important than yours' or 'what I want is more important than what you want'. I really miss the Canadian 'we are in this together so we can work on this together' give and take. If someone is having a hard time here, well the general attitude is that they deserve it and no one is going to do anything to help them out. I much prefer the attitude that if I can do something to help someone going through a rough time then I will and I have no problem if we collectively help out as a society. This US attitude is at the heart of the healthcare objection, the education problem, racisim and many more situations in the US. No one wants to work together to bring about a situation that is for the collective good because they don't want to 'share' what they believe is their right to have it all for themselves. (That is not to tar all Americans with this brush but it is much more of a prevalent attitude in the US than otherwise)

Generally speaking, and I'm not sure that I did understand your case correctly, if a USC did petition another spouse before, the red light at USCIS's desk starts to flicker. In plain English: they suspected immigration fraud.
Now . . . first rule: don't ever let anybody into your house without a warrant, unless it's a relative or friend and you invited them to do so.
No matter if you do not have anything to hide or not, understand that those guys are not there to help you; they are there to collect evidence against you. You see the glass as half full, a bit more than half, perhaps; they see it a bit more than less empty. An almost empty glass, as observations are not really quantifiable. You know where they coming from simply by their utterance of a fake marriage to your in-laws about this case.
I assume you checked their IDs before you let them enter your house, and since you can't turn back the clock, you might want to call the USCIS office and check that they were legit.
By the way, it's lawyer time for you guys now.

Generally speaking, and I'm not sure that I did understand your case correctly, if a USC did petition another spouse before, the red light at USCIS's desk starts to flicker. In plain English: they suspected immigration fraud.
Now . . . first rule: don't ever let anybody into your house without a warrant, unless it's a relative or friend and you invited them to do so.
No matter if you do not have anything to hide or not, understand that those guys are not there to help you; they are there to collect evidence against you. You see the glass as half full, a bit more than half, perhaps; they see it a bit more than less empty. An almost empty glass, as observations are not really quantifiable. You know where they coming from simply by their utterance of a fake marriage to your in-laws about this case.
I assume you checked their IDs before you let them enter your house, and since you can't turn back the clock, you might want to call the USCIS office and check that they were legit.
By the way, it's lawyer time for you guys now.

Don't get me wrong. I also understand completely why someone would want to come to America, especially when they come from some desperately impoverished dung hole. I met a LOT of people just like that in Vietnam. If I were in their position, I'd want to come to America as well. What I wouldn't do is express my desire to live in the US by coming here on a tourist visa, break the law by overstaying, break the law again by working here, and then after getting caught and being put into deportation hearings, break the law a third time by entering into a sham marriage.
Heck, most of us would like to have a million dollars, but most of us wouldn't point a gun at a bank teller to get it, and then ask that we be allowed to have the money anyway because we come from a dirt poor country. People who are willing to break multiple laws in order to immigrate to the US are the LAST people we want to allow to stay here. They have a serious lack of morals, and I don't understand why the OP has any sympathy for them.

No, if you follow through with what you suggest your wife would no longer be eligible for citizenship. She would not meet both her residency requirement and may not meet her physical presence requirements in the US. Any disruption of residency for more than 6 months at a time restarts the clock on when she is eligible to apply for citizenship, so she would start all over again from the beginning when she returned to the US, and have to get 3 more years of continued residence in the US before she would be eligible to apply for citizenship.
As well, leaving the US to go and live in another country will very likely compromise her whole permanent resident status because part of keeping a green card valid is living in the US. If she takes up residence in another country, then she is generally deemed by USCIS to have abandoned her permanent residency and you would have to start the immigration process all over again from the beginning when you wanted to return to the US. If you expect to be out of the US for no more than 2 years then she can apply for a re-entry permit/returning resident document that indicates to USCIS that she is still residing in the US and her absence from the US is only temporary. You should realize, though, that any length of absence - especially where you take up residence outside of the US - can be interpreted by USCIS officials as abandoning her green card.

Hello everybody, my friend, this is my comment. I'm sorry that your husband lost his wallet with the green card. Now, the paperwork and the process is expensive. Now, In my humble experience, that is the reason, the alien NEVER cannot be with the green card on him/her. Why? the ID or the State Driver's License has everything data and information in the system; now, in case of a loss like your case, it comes up problems. I've read that is law that the alien has to have the green card on him/her always, I think is true; however, it is better to carry a copy, it is more suitable in case of something. Thanks and bye,

Hope you can avoid paying for a replacement card. We're sure you have better plans for $310. In the future, consider making a clear copy of the GC, and then put the original in a safe place. Carry the copy for casual use, then carry the original for official use, when you know it is needed. Some VJ'rs will tell you to carry the original always, even when going to toilet in your own house. But the reality is, most of us are more practical, and find realistic compromises in daily life that keep us sane. Good Luck!

While it is possible for a divorced immigrant to get the conditions of his residence removed and to receive an unrestricted, 10-year Green Card with a waiver, I do understand your concern regarding the age difference.
The general assumption is that age doesn't matter when it comes to love and partnership, yet it might carry some weight when it comes to a woman in her Fifties who married an immigrant in his Twenties and the marriage failed prematurely. This rather large age gap might not be a formal factor for the Immigration Officer when trying to judge whether it's a bona fide marriage or not, but it might be an underlying and influential factor nonetheless when figuring out whether or not to approve the applicant's petition.
Is it fair to even bring age into the equation? I don't really know, in most cases probably not. Generally speaking, people of different ages might very well be madly in love and live together in harmony until death takes them apart. Yet in real life, every case is different and has unique factors to consider, so in your husband's case it's important that he can firmly establish that your marriage was entered in good faith, and not in order to gain immigration benefits.
Playing devil's advocate, assuming an Immigration Officer is suspicious of fraudulent activity between the US citizen and the immigrant. Would you think that if one party, the US citizen, wrote a letter stating that their marriage was real, would carry much weight? What would carry more weight is an affidavit from a person outside your relationship, someone who can attest that he or she has experienced both of you as a loving couple.

It is not necessarily 'jointly-filed taxes' that they need to see. What they need to see primarily is that you have filed taxes since this is an obligation of both Permanent Residents and citizens and you need to be current on your taxes to be eligible for citizenship. You file your taxes in a way that makes the best legal financial sense to your personal financial situation and for some people, that means filing individually. Your marriage status is still recorded on the tax return, and if required,you can always provide tax transcripts of both partners who have filed as married, filing independently showing they have both filed as married and listing the other as their spouse. The reason most people who file this way do so is because it is in their financial best interest to do so - they end up paying less taxes than if they filed jointly or they protect the other/family from certain tax liabilities, etc.
So, provide copies of your transcripts and have copies of your wife's at hand if requested to show them at the interview. I suspect they won't request to see them, but you can always be prepared. Good luck at the interview!

You'll need a valid passport to get a boarding pass on any international flight. You also need a passport to enter most countries, including the US. Even US citizens now need a passport to enter the US (or a boarder crossing card, at some border checkpoints). Contact the consulate or embassy for your country to see about getting your passport renewed. You won't be traveling outside the US until you get this done. Your green card AND valid passport will permit you to reenter the US on your return, provided you don't leave for too long. If you're gone for more than 6 months then CBP can screen you for inadmissibilities, just like they did when you originally applied for your visa to come here. If you're gone for more than a year without having first gotten a reentry permit, they can presume you've abandoned your residency and revoke your green card. If you're gone for more than two years, even with a reentry permit, you'll probably lose your green card and be denied entry. Your green card is a permit to LIVE in the US, and you are obligated to actually LIVE here in order to keep it.
Your green card allows you to petition for immediate family members to come to the US as immigrants. However, unlike a US citizen whose spouse, children, and parents are immediately eligible to apply for a visa (after an approved petition), your family members will have to take a ticket and wait in line, probably for years. As an LPR, you can only petition for your spouse and unmarried children. You cannot petition for your parents or siblings. Only a US citizen can petition for their mother or brother.
If you are married to a US citizen, then you can apply for citizenship in 3 years. Otherwise, you can apply in 5 years. There are continuous residence requirements, and you have to declare information about every trip you've taken outside the US, so keep track of this information. Generally, you cannot have spent more than half the time (3 years or 5 years) outside of the US. If you spend more than a year outside the US then the continuous residence clock is reset, and you start over. In some cases, it can be reset after an absence of 6 months.

Simply put, the green card allows you permanent residence in the United States. This means, as long as you maintain the permanent residency rules (continuous residence), you will have no problem and you will be able to always live in the US. You will also be able to work in the US without any restrictions (except for jobs that require US Citizenship). This normally doesn't affect your family but I am a bit rusty on the rules on whom you can apply AOS for...
Traveling to international destinations will still require a VALID passport. You need a valid passport to travel but entering back to the US will only require the GC. For other countries, you are a citizen of the country you show your passport from. So if let's say for example you are from France originally, anywhere you go you will be considered as a French citizen. The US Green card means nothing to other countries...
As for your US citizenship, you can apply based on a marriage to a USC after 3 years of becoming a LPR minus 90 days (eligibility rule). If you were married of obtained LPR through some other venue, then you will be able to apply after 5 years of becoming a LPR (minus 90 days).

You are asking for good advice. Fair enough. I ask you: HOW long do you know this woman, the woman you consider to marry? A few days? A few weeks?
Wouldn't you agree that it might make a lot of sense if you got to know somebody from a different continent and a different society a tiny bit better before you pledge to spend the rest of your life and money with her and jump into the cold water of a long, expensive, and painful immigration procedure?
It can't help but feeling a bit weird about such a hasty decision. Getting married is not like buying a new car which, if you find out it's not as good as you thought, just sell again or trade in for another one. Why don't you have her visit you again, or you visit her first and experience life in Russia with her, at least for a week or so?

When SSA clerks get confused, it seems like they tend to start making up regulations off the tops of their heads.
One piece of logic that could possibly, in a confused mind, generate the conclusion that marrying a USC kills the immigrant's eligibility for a SSN is this:
1 ) The only reason K1 holders are allowed to get SSNs is because some states [used to] require a SSN to get a marriage license, which is required to fulfill the conditions of the K1 visa.
2 ) Since the newly married K1 holder has, of necessity, already obtained a marriage license, they by definition no longer need to obtain a marriage license.
3 ) They no longer, then, require a SSN at this particular moment.
4 ) This causes the default criterion for SSN issuance - that an EAD or GC is required to be eligible for a SSN -to therefore become the relevant criteria.
Conclusion: the newly married K1 holder does not have an EAD or a GC, and is therefore not eligible to receive a SSN.
I don't believe this argument is legally correct, but it may very well be an easy and common misinterpretation resulting from the way the clerks are trained in the regulations, and may therefore be what is running through the SSA clerk's head, if they have a deeper reasoning behind their intransigence at all.

This is a source of great debate in the AOS forum. I've read tons of threads over there where this simple question turns into a huge argument between a bunch of know it all senior members. Basically, the general consensus is that there is really no legal consequences of filling AOS after the I-94 is expired, and technically there is no time frame you need to file AOS in. You can do it in 3 days, 3 weeks, 3 months, 3 years, 30 years, you still met the requirements of the visa- which was marriage within the 90 days. The problem is that until he files AOS, there is no evidence he is in the US legally. As far as getting a license, getting a job, and really starting his life in the US- the sooner he has evidence of status the better for him.

This is usually true, with some exceptions. If you choose to represent yourself, and if the court accepts this, then the attorney has no choice - they must negotiate with you.
I got the Cruella De Ville laugh from my ex-wife's attorney a few times. In the end, I also got the last laugh.
In this case, I think the most important reason for contacting the court is because the plaintiff (her husband) probably has claimed "whereabouts unknown" in lieu of serving the respondent (his wife) with papers. Contacting the court will make it clear that the respondent's whereabouts are NOT unknown, and her testimony (in the letter) will establish that the plaintiff always knew where she was because he sent her there. Whether the judge accepts the testimony or not is anybody's guess. Under the circumstances, unless the judge is barred from the accepting the testimony by law, I think they would allow the testimony to be admitted.
Zainab, if you don't know the name of the judge then just address your letter to the "Clerk of Courts". Include a cover letter asking the clerk to forward your testimony to the judge presiding over your case. You might also ask the clerk what the procedure would be for obtaining copies of all documents filed in the case so far. They'll probably tell you that you need to provide some identification and pay a fee for this.

Hi Zainab.
Back in January you were trying to find out how you could obtain a divorce without having to return to the US. It sounds like that problem has been resolved now. As mentioned above, in most states you can proceed with a divorce if you can show the courts that you've made a serious effort to locate your spouse so that they can be served with papers.
You can probably get your statement entered into the court record without hiring an attorney. Write a letter explaining everything that's happened. Have your signature notarized. Send it to the judge who is assigned to your divorce case. Be sure to write your case number on the letter, and be sure to explain how you were tricked into going back to Pakistan. If nothing else, this might case doubt on your husband's claim (or his attorney's, if he hired one) that he tried to locate you to serve you papers. Most family courts are somewhat informal, so there's a pretty good chance the judge will accept your letter in lieu of personal testimony, especially given the fact that you can't return to the US.
It's highly unlikely you'll get any of your things back, at this point. But, at least you'll have the divorce and be able to move on with your life.

You are right in that you do need to have your US passport in order for your future wife to sponsor you to become a Permanent Resident in Canada after you are married. http://www.cic.gc.ca...pouse-faq03.asp . Since you have never had a passport, you are supposed to apply for your passport in person instead of renewing it through the mail at one of the Passport facilities - however, due to the WHTI you are required to show your US passport in order to return to the US.
You are a US citizen in a foreign country. You need to request the Consular Services of the US consulate closest to you. They can assist you in getting the temporary documentation that you need to go to the US so you can then go to a passport facility location (a Post Office is usually sufficient) and apply in person for your US passport. There really is no way around this.
You may have a problem trying to return to Canada if the border authorities think you are living in Canada - which you are - without documentation. If you are able to return to Canada then don't leave until you get your Permanent Resident documentation at which time you will again need to leave Cananda - although you don't actually have to enter the US, you can just turn around and come back through the border - and activate your PR status. You are technically supposed to have legal status while in Canada and applying for PR status, however, as the spouse of a Canadian citizen you have some leeway from Canadian immigration. http://www.cic.gc.ca...pouse-faq02.asp . You will probably need to make your status legal at that time by applying for a temporary resident status while your application for permanent resident status is processing. There does not seem to be anything other than lack of status that would impact your application. http://www.cic.gc.ca...pouse-faq04.asp . http://www.cic.gc.ca...e-apply-how.asp
If you are not successful in returning to Canada, then your wife will have to sponsor you through the Out of Country sponsorship of a Spouse while you remain in the US until the processsing is complete.
The first step, however, is contacting the US Consulate and requesting their assistance as a US citizen. http://www.consular....ates_canada.asp . Good luck.
I just thought - you will need to send off your birth certificate with your passport application, thus you will have no documentation to prove your US citizenship status when you go to return to the US. So, before you do anything else, apply for another copy of your birth certificate so you will have one in our possession to return to Canada. You should be able to obtain a copy of your US birth certificate online from the State repository of vital statistic records. It varies from State to State. That is one thing you can do now.

If you marry that wonderful man for love, and your marriage lasts as long as you hope for (as long as death do you part), the prenuptual has no meaning. It's like its never existed and nothing to worry about.
You have to see it as an insurance policy. Only under the conditions outlined in the prenup (which we don't know), when you get a divorce, he is protecting everything he worked for his entire life before he even knew you. You would be still entitled to some alimony, again, depending on your State's law.
Imagine a multi-millionaire marrying a gold digger. Shortly after the marriage, she divorces him, then wants half of his fortune. To prevent that, it's rather common today to set up a pre-nup, especially if one partner has a lot of assets, and the other one has very little.
The bottom line, right to the point, is this: you sign the pre-nup, or you do not get married. If I wanted a pre-nup, and my wife-to-be refuses to sign it, it would tell me that she's in it for the money, exactly what I would be afraid of and wanted myself to protect from. So I wouldn't marry her.

It's not required, we didn't send one in. Kind of pointless if you have substantial evidence. Good luck!

If you marry that wonderful man for love, and your marriage lasts as long as you hope for (as long as death do you part), the prenuptual has no meaning. It's like its never existed and nothing to worry about.
You have to see it as an insurance policy. Only under the conditions outlined in the prenup (which we don't know), when you get a divorce, he is protecting everything he worked for his entire life before he even knew you. You would be still entitled to some alimony, again, depending on your State's law.
Imagine a multi-millionaire marrying a gold digger. Shortly after the marriage, she divorces him, then wants half of his fortune. To prevent that, it's rather common today to set up a pre-nup, especially if one partner has a lot of assets, and the other one has very little.
The bottom line, right to the point, is this: you sign the pre-nup, or you do not get married. If I wanted a pre-nup, and my wife-to-be refuses to sign it, it would tell me that she's in it for the money, exactly what I would be afraid of and wanted myself to protect from. So I wouldn't marry her.

On further reflection:
Being gone for 11 months to study, starting from just before RoC approval, would probably not, by itself, be taken by a CBP officer as abandonment of residence. [Over 12 months would be another matter entirely]. Provided he states clearly, and, if necessary, repeatedly, that he NEVER had any intention of abandoning his US permanent residence, he will very likely be let back in (though he can expect a stern talking to about abandonment of residence). "Intention" is the key word here. This entire area of law is defined around the applicant's stated intention and the CBP officer's interpretation of the sincerity of that stated intention. A clearly and unambiguously stated intention to preserve residence carries a certain amount of weight, and requires the CBP officer to document clearly the proof and reasons he is using to disregard that statement.
Now if he leaves for another 11 months, without a reentry permit, that will virtually certainly be seen as abandonment. Frankly, even with an approved reentry permit, it's dicey. I don't know precisely how much a reentry permit insulates you from the presumption of abandonment if you had also been away for an extended period before the reentry permit was issued. The problem is that there is no clear minimum legal threshold beyond which abandonment is deemed to have occurred. As I wrote above, it's all up to the individual discretion of the particular CBP officer. As was posted above by someone else, they can deem abandonment to have occurred even for shorter periods of absence than 1 year, particularly if that absence is part of an ongoing larger pattern of absences. It's all very fuzzy, and that's not good.

I don't think you have to read too many PoE reviews here for it to become obvious that the more experienced posters here understand the law a LOT better than many PoE officers, AND that many PoE officers do not do their jobs.
And lets not even start talking about SSA clerks.
I'm just sayin'...
Legally, this guy may be in a heap of trouble. By the strict wording of the law, he has almost certainly abandoned his residency. The only thing working in his favor is the enormous latitude for interpretation the law grants to PoE officers. It's a total roll of the dice for him at the PoE. If luck holds, he'll just be one more face in a huge lineup of faces coming off the airplane, the officer will be about to go on break, and he'll get through without a second thought. Or he could get a cranky disgruntled veteran who is behind on his rejection quota (note: CBP officially denies that rejection quotas exist ) and who decides to assume abandonment and throw the book at him. There's simply no way to know in advance which he'll get.
For us computer geeks and wannabe lawyers, this is the most frustrating part of anything immigration-law related: that there is almost no such thing as a cut-and-dried application of the law to a particular circumstance. All US immigration law is structured to funnel enormous discretionary power through the persons of a very small number of USCIS, DoS, and BP front-line officers, all of whom are perfectly capable of either ignoring (or at least strongly bending) the law (if they're having a good day) or dropping it on us like a thousand tons of mountain avalanche (if they're having a bad day). Once they make a decision, appeals, where they are possible, are long, drawn out, and ridiculously expensive.
That's really the best reason to study these things carefully and to do things right: doing so insulates you from the vast amounts of potential capriciousness embedded in the system. Playing fast and loose with the rules is very possible, and people do get away with it all the time, but by doing so, they render themselves extremely vulnerable to the arbitrary, and basically unpredictable individual discretion of the individual officers they will deal with.

You are speculating. You actually "know" nothing; you are assuming. If this person is indeed trying to enter into a fraudulent marriage, you'll need proof, which could be as little as an utterance from her. Until then you should observe, perhaps inquire, but not interfere . . .

You are speculating. You actually "know" nothing; you are assuming. If this person is indeed trying to enter into a fraudulent marriage, you'll need proof, which could be as little as an utterance from her. Until then you should observe, perhaps inquire, but not interfere . . .