HeatDeath

No problem.
A ) You'll get more, better, and faster answers if you make a new top-level thread for your question.
B ) In answer to your question, yes. The receipt notice (NOA1) you receive in the mail after you file your I-751 DOES allow you to work and travel. Just keep it on your person with your green card, and show it with your expired green card anytime you would normally show your green card to somebody.
And yes, the I-751 process takes much longer than 90 days. Much, MUCH longer if you have to file at the Vermont Service Center. So you're going to be carrying that receipt notice around for quite a while.

Definitely do NOT try to alter the I-94 yourself. You will need to include a copy of it with your AOS packet, and it will need to be accurate and unaltered or it will badly complicate your AOS. You need a new one, and the Deferred Inspection office at your nearest international airport is the place to get it.

Get married and, if you don't hear otherwise, file AOS. Just make sure to be very thorough in your documentation for AOS, both in regards to what you send and in keeping copies.

It does seem odd your husband had a feeling something like this could happen. Seriously - call me first and don't let them in if they show? That's an immediate huger red flag before they even enter.
When they do a home visit of that type they are looking for proof of you living together. You said clothes in the wrong size were there... he had not slept there at least the night before, you didn't file for 3 years, and so on. There are enough odd things you have given us here to see why they would want to see proof with their own eyes. When they got there you have to admit it still did not all look normal. Especially when you wouldn't let them right in.
As for going through underwear - yes I would think is a bit overboard

Current fees are always found in the form instructions on the USCIS website, and (and this is true for any USCIS form but ESPECIALLY for the N-400) you have no business trying to file that form without having read the instructions in full at least a dozen times.

Someone on this site.... at some point in time.... erroneously used the word "activated" to describe the endorsement of the visa at the POE and the error has continued to this day. Saying you are entering the US to have your visa "activated" is like taking a cheque/check to the bank and telling them you are there to "activate" it. You don't activate a cheque/check... you endorse it. Likewise, a visa is "active" (valid) once it has been entered into your passport, and it remains valid until it expires. When you use your visa to enter the US you have it endorsed at Immigration. At that point it gets cancelled.
Don't tell the CBP Officer you are there to "activate" your visa. You will just sound silly and they will look at you funny. You are there to have your visa endorsed.
Okay, I've had my say. Carry on.

Yes it can it also will cause issues for you with IRS. You need to file amended returns.

Manitoba and continuing West, goto Van for the k1 interview.

Both quotes in that graphic have technical errors and gross oversimplifications, but the bottom one is so wrong it's probably fake. Nuclear professionals wouldn't make the mistakes that quote does. Centrifuges are not spun "to make fission occur". That's ridiculous bs. Nuclear reactors don't work that way, and even if they did, that would have nothing whatsoever to do with the manufacturing of nuclear weapons.
There are several different kinds of uranium that occur in nature. They are all uranium, but some kinds have more neutrons in their atomic nuclei than others. When you want to make a nuclear bomb, you need large amounts of extremely pure uranium of a very specific kind, with a very specific number of neutrons. If you have uranium atoms mixed in with the wrong number of neutrons, your nuke won't explode. So it is very important to separate your uranium into the different kinds, so you only use the right kind in your bomb. Centrifuges are used to purify the uranium and sort it into the different kinds, so you can make sure that you're using only the right kind in your bomb, and that there isn't any other kind mixed in there. a single centrifuge can only sort a very tiny quantity or uranium, and needs to run for months or years continuously to do so, which is why uranium purification facilities run literally thousands of centrifuges.
So the bottom quote is silly. I don't know what they think Iran is using centrifuges for, and it's pretty obvious they don't know what centrifuges are for.
Now Ryan's quote is also, at the very least, badly oversimplified on the technical points. It is true that running a centrifuge faster will purify the uranium faster, and get you the necessary quantity of pure uranium to build a bomb that much quicker. However, the bottom quote is correct, at least in this area - centrifuges are designed to run at a specific speed, and you can't overdrive them by very much without causing damage to them. In the worst case scenario, a centrifuge running too fast would suffer a structural integrity failure and explode, making an enormously toxic mess over a radius of a few dozen feet on the factory floor.
A reasonable interpretation of Ryan's quote is that Iran is actively attempting to reengineer and retool their centrifuges to run as fast as possible, and are making every attempt to purchase and use as many centrifuges as possible that are as fast as possible.

Both quotes in that graphic have technical errors and gross oversimplifications, but the bottom one is so wrong it's probably fake. Nuclear professionals wouldn't make the mistakes that quote does. Centrifuges are not spun "to make fission occur". That's ridiculous bs. Nuclear reactors don't work that way, and even if they did, that would have nothing whatsoever to do with the manufacturing of nuclear weapons.
There are several different kinds of uranium that occur in nature. They are all uranium, but some kinds have more neutrons in their atomic nuclei than others. When you want to make a nuclear bomb, you need large amounts of extremely pure uranium of a very specific kind, with a very specific number of neutrons. If you have uranium atoms mixed in with the wrong number of neutrons, your nuke won't explode. So it is very important to separate your uranium into the different kinds, so you only use the right kind in your bomb. Centrifuges are used to purify the uranium and sort it into the different kinds, so you can make sure that you're using only the right kind in your bomb, and that there isn't any other kind mixed in there. a single centrifuge can only sort a very tiny quantity or uranium, and needs to run for months or years continuously to do so, which is why uranium purification facilities run literally thousands of centrifuges.
So the bottom quote is silly. I don't know what they think Iran is using centrifuges for, and it's pretty obvious they don't know what centrifuges are for.
Now Ryan's quote is also, at the very least, badly oversimplified on the technical points. It is true that running a centrifuge faster will purify the uranium faster, and get you the necessary quantity of pure uranium to build a bomb that much quicker. However, the bottom quote is correct, at least in this area - centrifuges are designed to run at a specific speed, and you can't overdrive them by very much without causing damage to them. In the worst case scenario, a centrifuge running too fast would suffer a structural integrity failure and explode, making an enormously toxic mess over a radius of a few dozen feet on the factory floor.
A reasonable interpretation of Ryan's quote is that Iran is actively attempting to reengineer and retool their centrifuges to run as fast as possible, and are making every attempt to purchase and use as many centrifuges as possible that are as fast as possible.

Both quotes in that graphic have technical errors and gross oversimplifications, but the bottom one is so wrong it's probably fake. Nuclear professionals wouldn't make the mistakes that quote does. Centrifuges are not spun "to make fission occur". That's ridiculous bs. Nuclear reactors don't work that way, and even if they did, that would have nothing whatsoever to do with the manufacturing of nuclear weapons.
There are several different kinds of uranium that occur in nature. They are all uranium, but some kinds have more neutrons in their atomic nuclei than others. When you want to make a nuclear bomb, you need large amounts of extremely pure uranium of a very specific kind, with a very specific number of neutrons. If you have uranium atoms mixed in with the wrong number of neutrons, your nuke won't explode. So it is very important to separate your uranium into the different kinds, so you only use the right kind in your bomb. Centrifuges are used to purify the uranium and sort it into the different kinds, so you can make sure that you're using only the right kind in your bomb, and that there isn't any other kind mixed in there. a single centrifuge can only sort a very tiny quantity or uranium, and needs to run for months or years continuously to do so, which is why uranium purification facilities run literally thousands of centrifuges.
So the bottom quote is silly. I don't know what they think Iran is using centrifuges for, and it's pretty obvious they don't know what centrifuges are for.
Now Ryan's quote is also, at the very least, badly oversimplified on the technical points. It is true that running a centrifuge faster will purify the uranium faster, and get you the necessary quantity of pure uranium to build a bomb that much quicker. However, the bottom quote is correct, at least in this area - centrifuges are designed to run at a specific speed, and you can't overdrive them by very much without causing damage to them. In the worst case scenario, a centrifuge running too fast would suffer a structural integrity failure and explode, making an enormously toxic mess over a radius of a few dozen feet on the factory floor.
A reasonable interpretation of Ryan's quote is that Iran is actively attempting to reengineer and retool their centrifuges to run as fast as possible, and are making every attempt to purchase and use as many centrifuges as possible that are as fast as possible.

Both quotes in that graphic have technical errors and gross oversimplifications, but the bottom one is so wrong it's probably fake. Nuclear professionals wouldn't make the mistakes that quote does. Centrifuges are not spun "to make fission occur". That's ridiculous bs. Nuclear reactors don't work that way, and even if they did, that would have nothing whatsoever to do with the manufacturing of nuclear weapons.
There are several different kinds of uranium that occur in nature. They are all uranium, but some kinds have more neutrons in their atomic nuclei than others. When you want to make a nuclear bomb, you need large amounts of extremely pure uranium of a very specific kind, with a very specific number of neutrons. If you have uranium atoms mixed in with the wrong number of neutrons, your nuke won't explode. So it is very important to separate your uranium into the different kinds, so you only use the right kind in your bomb. Centrifuges are used to purify the uranium and sort it into the different kinds, so you can make sure that you're using only the right kind in your bomb, and that there isn't any other kind mixed in there. a single centrifuge can only sort a very tiny quantity or uranium, and needs to run for months or years continuously to do so, which is why uranium purification facilities run literally thousands of centrifuges.
So the bottom quote is silly. I don't know what they think Iran is using centrifuges for, and it's pretty obvious they don't know what centrifuges are for.
Now Ryan's quote is also, at the very least, badly oversimplified on the technical points. It is true that running a centrifuge faster will purify the uranium faster, and get you the necessary quantity of pure uranium to build a bomb that much quicker. However, the bottom quote is correct, at least in this area - centrifuges are designed to run at a specific speed, and you can't overdrive them by very much without causing damage to them. In the worst case scenario, a centrifuge running too fast would suffer a structural integrity failure and explode, making an enormously toxic mess over a radius of a few dozen feet on the factory floor.
A reasonable interpretation of Ryan's quote is that Iran is actively attempting to reengineer and retool their centrifuges to run as fast as possible, and are making every attempt to purchase and use as many centrifuges as possible that are as fast as possible.

Both quotes in that graphic have technical errors and gross oversimplifications, but the bottom one is so wrong it's probably fake. Nuclear professionals wouldn't make the mistakes that quote does. Centrifuges are not spun "to make fission occur". That's ridiculous bs. Nuclear reactors don't work that way, and even if they did, that would have nothing whatsoever to do with the manufacturing of nuclear weapons.
There are several different kinds of uranium that occur in nature. They are all uranium, but some kinds have more neutrons in their atomic nuclei than others. When you want to make a nuclear bomb, you need large amounts of extremely pure uranium of a very specific kind, with a very specific number of neutrons. If you have uranium atoms mixed in with the wrong number of neutrons, your nuke won't explode. So it is very important to separate your uranium into the different kinds, so you only use the right kind in your bomb. Centrifuges are used to purify the uranium and sort it into the different kinds, so you can make sure that you're using only the right kind in your bomb, and that there isn't any other kind mixed in there. a single centrifuge can only sort a very tiny quantity or uranium, and needs to run for months or years continuously to do so, which is why uranium purification facilities run literally thousands of centrifuges.
So the bottom quote is silly. I don't know what they think Iran is using centrifuges for, and it's pretty obvious they don't know what centrifuges are for.
Now Ryan's quote is also, at the very least, badly oversimplified on the technical points. It is true that running a centrifuge faster will purify the uranium faster, and get you the necessary quantity of pure uranium to build a bomb that much quicker. However, the bottom quote is correct, at least in this area - centrifuges are designed to run at a specific speed, and you can't overdrive them by very much without causing damage to them. In the worst case scenario, a centrifuge running too fast would suffer a structural integrity failure and explode, making an enormously toxic mess over a radius of a few dozen feet on the factory floor.
A reasonable interpretation of Ryan's quote is that Iran is actively attempting to reengineer and retool their centrifuges to run as fast as possible, and are making every attempt to purchase and use as many centrifuges as possible that are as fast as possible.

PRE PAID BABY!
I am way too cheap to get a real cell phone. You can't beat $15 every 3 months.

Your new Green Card will be delivered by regular USPS and dropped in your mailbox with no signing required and for anyone to take if you don't have a lock or get your mail right away. They ask us to send our documents return reciept requested and insured to make us spend more and then take the cheap unreliable route to give the card. Assbackwards IMOP.

The vast majority of Roman slaves were agricultural workers (like those in the American South, only with significantly more civil protections against abuse [which is to say, any]) or personal servants (who had even more civil protections). While some gladiators (but not all) were slaves, the vast vast majority of Roman slaves never got within 10 miles of an arena unless they were carrying their master's personal effects. The poor souls dropped into no-win situations against predatory animals in the arena were virtually always political prisoners [i.e. Christians or captured foreign soldiers], not slaves. Slaves were private property, and a good slave was worth a non-trivial amount of money. Even the maddest emperors wouldn't waste slaves willy-nilly unless they had committed some crime or there was something else wrong with them [like publicaly disbelieving in the divinity of the Emperors, for example].
Seriously, read some history. It turns out watching the Bugs Bunny cartoon with Yosemite Sam as a Roman centurion does not give you a balanced picture of life in the Roman empire.

The vast majority of Roman slaves were agricultural workers (like those in the American South, only with significantly more civil protections against abuse [which is to say, any]) or personal servants (who had even more civil protections). While some gladiators (but not all) were slaves, the vast vast majority of Roman slaves never got within 10 miles of an arena unless they were carrying their master's personal effects. The poor souls dropped into no-win situations against predatory animals in the arena were virtually always political prisoners [i.e. Christians or captured foreign soldiers], not slaves. Slaves were private property, and a good slave was worth a non-trivial amount of money. Even the maddest emperors wouldn't waste slaves willy-nilly unless they had committed some crime or there was something else wrong with them [like publicaly disbelieving in the divinity of the Emperors, for example].
Seriously, read some history. It turns out watching the Bugs Bunny cartoon with Yosemite Sam as a Roman centurion does not give you a balanced picture of life in the Roman empire.

Here's the straight dope - the US has no laws that addresses dual citizenship. The law does not prohibit it. If the law does not prohibit it, then you can do it. You can have dual citizenship. You can have as many citizenships as you want.
Read the great post about the US State Dept memo on dual citizenship; http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html
"U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another."
A US citizen can voluntarily apply for another citizenship without losing US citizenship. Lots of my friends in San Diego, California, who are US citizens of Mexican heritage have successfully applied for and granted Mexican citizenship without losing their US citizenship.
Read the memo - it says a US citizen MAY lose his US citizenship when he voluntarily applies for another citizenship AND HAS THE INTENTION OF GIVING UP US CITIZENSHIP. If a person doesn't have the intention of giving up US citizenship, then that law does not apply. "In order to lose U.S. citizenship, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign citizenship voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. citizenship."
-----------
Other countries have their own rules on multiple citizenship.
China and Vietnam does not allow multiple citizenship.
Philippines requires those who acquire another citizenship to apply to reacquire Philippines citizenship; http://immigration.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=163&Itemid=83

I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV but my spider-sense tells me that if you try to re-enter the US on an expired Green Card, you're going to have problems. Border patrol/whomever doesn't "know" you have an application pending, all they will see is an expired Green Card.
If it was me, I'd make sure to be IN the USA before it expires.

Ugh. That link Darnell gave needs to be revamped. There is absolutely no reason why you cannot stay and adjust status. Check out the Adjustment of Status from other visas forum. (Link below.) You will learn a lot in there. Also be aware that Canadians have a special relationship and status with the US, so take advice from non-Canadians with a grain of salt. Their situations and abilities are completely different than ours.
http://www.visajourney.com/forums/forum/130-adjustment-of-status-from-work-student-tourist-visas/
Welcome to VJ.

This is an interesting choice of wording.
You are unlikely to encounter serious problems after only a single trip. You may very well, as others have posted, encounter a stern talking-to upon attempted reentry, but they will very probably let you back in after a single trip of less than a year.
You are far more likely to encounter serious problems on your second attempted reentry. CBP can and do notice and respond to patterns in travel. If they see that a green card holder spent most of a year outside of the US, returned for a week, then left for almost a whole 'nother year, it is virtually certain that you will encounter serious resistance from CBP upon attempted reentry. Revocation of the green card is a very realistic possibility in such a circumstance, A third such trip, with very little time spent in the US in the meantime renders green card revocation a virtual certainty.
You are very well advised to use reentry permits to minimize attempted re-entries. If you return after almost 2 years with a reentry permit you will encounter almost no resistance. A second reentry attempt, 2 years later, with a second reentry permit is significantly riskier, but still not the virtually guaranteed failure of the 3rd attempt in three years with no reentry permits described above.
Use of a reentry permit will buy you two virtually risk-free years abroad. I would use those two years to reorganize your lives so that the green card you have paid a lot of time and money for will be usable. Or you may very well find yourselves having to go through this whole process again with a spousal visa again in a few years.

There are two kinds of men: the ones who will be a good provider for you and your children, and the ones who will take from you what they can. I think you know which kind he is, and which kind you want.

What I want to see in this election is both candidates go on a talk show together, talk about the many many basic issues they must both agree on, acknowledge each other [and their respective opponent's political parties] as well intentioned, decent human beings, and admit that if the other gets elected, it would end up being a reasonably ok outcome.
Can we do that?

It is obvious at this point that Congress couldn't care less, so let's fire them all.

You can start by not reelecting any incumbent member of Congress.