olle

Maybe, but the issue is really not whether SHE is in love.  It isn't about love at all, actually.  Arranged marriage folks have bona fide marriage relationships.  It's about whether one or more of the parties is in it for the immigration benefit.  Really about a judgment call on that question.  If it walks and quacks like a duck, they are probably going to think it's a duck, even if it isn't.  

My opinion is a little different but not so much.  I don't see a problem with  marrying on the first visit, in and of itself.  A combination of reverse age difference, marrying on the first visit, AND filing before any MORE visits is a recipe for failure though.
 
Let's know some more?   What IS the age difference? (actual ages)  How long will she stay on the first visit?  When can she visit again and for how long.  It's not how MANY visits.  It's how much time together in person.
 
On the other hand, I think many responders are assuming a short first visit, a huge age difference, and an immediate filing.  THAT is definitely where I would advise the OP to rethink her plans drastically, or forget about this relationship altogether.  Only something like losing a child could I imagine to be worse than going through a failed visa process and having a spouse half way around the world that you can never be with.

Listen to pushbrk.

While I do believe there is an element of chance involved since no 2 COs are identical - let alone across days - it fundamentally is not a lottery. There are many things in common among those who are likely to get approved, and many things in common among those who are denied. That by no means guarantees that if person B gets a visa then person A - with (prima facia) stronger ties back home - will also get a visa.
 
But is one individual has no stable job, a USC spouse, no money, etc., then they would be a poor candidate for a visa. They may still get one, but the odds are stacked against them.
If another individual has a long term job, been married for decades, is in retirement, has no US-based family, has decent funds, etc., there's usually a much better chance of approval (all else being equal).

From what I do know, there's not a lot they do with the report initially.  Unless your husband attempts to go through a US consulate for another type of visa in the future, there would be nothing to spark any sort of investigation into your claims since he is already out of the country.
 
You will not be updated in any way as to the outcome of an investigation, or if a formal investigation will have even taken place after filing your initial report (based on the level of evidence you sent). 
 
Presumably there will be no further investigation after receiving your report once USCIS becomes aware he has already left the country ( again, unless he applies for some type of visa in the future, and it's relevant to investigate the supposed fraud).
 
 
 

USCIS is under no obligation to give you a confirmation of withdrawal of your 864. Since you say you went to the 485 interview and withdrew the 864 in person in front of the Officer I have no idea why you are still looking for confirmation it was withdrawn??? Seriously- you did the withdrawal in front of an Officer in person- so 100% they did the withdrawal. ALSO you said the 485 was denied- the 864 is only good for the 485. VAWA does not need an 864 from you.
 
Your ex can file for VAWA by herself and claim abuse- there is nothing you can do about this. VAWA Officers will not look at or consider ANYTHING you or your other ex writes. Do not even bother sending stuff to prevent her VAWA. 
 
IF you have proof of her 'scamming you'- you can send that to USCIS however it has to be concrete proof she committed fraud. 
 
Also as others have stated you mention her asking for spousal support and child support. IF you have NO children together why is child support even being mentioned?? Do you have a divorce attny? 

The key difference here is the OP is self-employed. As such, their current income is from their tax return. Money earned mid-year is considered revenue, not income, until claimed as such on the tax return. This differs from an employee, which has income immediately.
 
Current income is still king. Sometimes they want to see that the income is stable, which a tax return can help substantiate (even if it was from another income source in the past).

B) is untrue. 
Even essential employees have been furloughed.  If not then the FAA wouldnt have had shutdowns causing a huge ruckus. They ended up working with the idea they may or may not be paid. 
While certain homeland security is essential, most of the USCIS is not.  However since they are self funded they normally continue. 
 

Perhaps HR are not familiar with immigration being a qualifying event, not something they have come across before?

People go overboard thinking if they make a beautiful packet the teacher (USCIS) will give them an A+ and smiley face sticker. This isn't grade school and nobody gets to be teacher's pet. The fact is,  your packet will be opened by contractors who will organize it in a standard folder and their preferred order. By the time a real USCIS person who makes a decision sees it, all things like binders, tabs, plastic page covers, tables of contents, hearts and unicorns will have been thrown out. 
 
Clip it all together with what I call a bulldog clip because a paper clip will be too small. Place a cover sheet on top if you make one. It is not actually needed. Paper clip the check to the top page (whatever it is) so they see it first. If you want to be notified that your packet arrived you can do the G-1145 and let it be the top sheet with the check paper clipped to it. Place everything in a Priority Mail thing from the post office. It will have tracking so you will know it arrived.  We are minimalist as you can tell, but I have successfully done from K1 petition to become a US citizen using that mentality.  My theory is doing it up like the dog's dinner and sending extra stuff just detracts from the real stuff they need to find. No to chat logs, Facebook status "in a relationship", tweets, etc. 
 
The reason for the suggestion of a plastic bag for the photos is so they wont fall out and get lost. Mine was a blank page of printer paper. My fiancé placed an open zip-lock sandwich bag on the page and stuck the stapler in the open bag enough to attach the back of the ziplock to the page. Then she dropped in the photo and pressed the zip closed.  Didn't label the bag, but wrote on the page "Photo of Petitioner Mary Jane Jones".  The contractors who put the files together will retrieve the pics from the ziplocks and staple them on the folder they are assembling for you. Then they throw away the bag page.  The name of the person should be written lightly in pencil on the back of the photo in case it somehow ends up on the floor and they don't know which packet it came from. 
 
 
 
 

That's the edition date not expiration date 

K-3 is obsolete. It would be a CR-1 visa. ETA: ~12-16 months.
K-1: ~8-12 months right now.
 
CR-1 is superior in virtually every way (cheaper, faster to get a green card, more protections if initially denied, can work right away,. can travel right away, etc.). The key drawback is it takes a few months longer to receive.

Give it a few more visits before you file anything.

I haven't; you young whippersnappers

Because anyone can write anything.  It's not a sworn statement from in front of a judge.  So it counts for very little compared to authorized users on credit cards or beneficiaries of accounts or joint leases.  

Terrible advice.   Her attorney protects her interests alone and not his.  It would be wise for him to hire someone to protect him and his interests.  

Remaining unauthorized in the US of course means they cannot adjust status even when the PD becomes current, and may have a long ban to deal with depending on how long they were in unauthorized stay. Not only illegal,  but also a totally impractical/just plain stupid course of action for someone who has a legal option for immigration albeit one they need to wait for.

Just start a DS-160 and don't submit it. https://ceac.state.gov/genniv/
 
They aren't too concerned about why somebody will come to the US...they want to know why they will leave. Having lots of relatives in the US is a tie to the US, not a tie to go home. But they need to be listed anyway.
 

A letter to verify what exactly? That you work freelance? As noted above, line 22 of the tax return will show your self employed income. They don't really care how you earn it, just that you earn it and can support the beneficiary to avoid them becoming a public charge.

US does not have isolated transit areas the same as other countries, so a “normal traveller” (non crew) transit has basically the same requirements as a B visa. So unfortunately you may have to bite the bullet and take the more expensive route there.

Lots of “stories” out there 
entering the lottery is just entering the lottery. It has no implications for anything.

USCIS explicitly says that a parent-child relationship must still exist for a child to petition a parent, and that an adoption terminates such a relationship and therefore an adopted child cannot petition the biological parent.

hi
 
nope, once your biological mom gave up her rights for your adoption, she isn't legally your mom.
 
you were legally adopted and your biological family isn't your family anymore
 
 

Best to file before his I-94 expires. It's okay if you file a tad after but be aware that any out-of-status time makes him technically deportable. Unlikely to happen and overstay is forgiven for immediate relatives of US citizens but still, file ASAP. His intent when he crossed the border is a non-issue. I just finished the process after entering as a B2 visitor and my intent never came up. Since he (and I) were originally planning to leave but our circumstances changed while in the US, he is fine to stay and adjust status.
 
Nope not true. He was admitted by CBP and it is clear the marriage was spontaneous. This is not visa fraud and USCIS will simply interview to determine they are a genuine couple, not question the husband's intentions. His intentions were genuine and originally in line with his tourist visa regulations.
Also not true.

Actually it’s got nothing to do with Schengen. The U.K. is not part of the Schengen Agreement. Poles living in the U.K. are “exercising their right to free movement” which is an EU right, not a Schengen provision.