Ryan H

If you are filing for cr1/ir1 your application should not take more than 8-9 months overall, unless you got some complication in your case.
Your case would not be expedited just coz you are missing your kid, that is not a valid reason for your case to be expedited.
If USCIS would start accepting that as the valid case to expedite, pretty much all the application would have to be expedited as most couples who go thru this process are apart and missing out on family life.
The only reason the case is expedited is either you (USC) is on active military duty, medical emergency, or a humanitarian cause, such as some hardship in the host country which is life threatening.

Actually, this thread was highjacked as I was the original poster as I posted about my legal problems 30 years ago. But thats okay as I understand that she must be stressing as well. With that being said, as well as the fact that I have learned alot in this process, the young lady with the fiancee with the legal problen involving the 11 year old, the best advise I have for her is to seek attorney representation. There are many attorneys that will at least give an initial consultation at no cost. Good luck to us all.
Now, back to my topic... do you guys think at as the US petitioner, my 30 year old arrest, with adjudication withheld, probation and retitution, cause denial of my petition?

CSC processes 15,000 - 20,000 I-130 petitions every month, so why all this focus on the small number of us here on VJ. Yes, we are lucky to have found this site, and our demographic may be the same or it may be different, but this is clear--we are a tiny, tiny fraction of the total !!!
And Immigration Race--you sure you aren't related to another un-named member here ??

My dear friend don't blindly assume that everyone is on VJ. Be realistic...you stating that EVERY person who's applied for a CR1 visa knows about Visa Journey is rediculous. Everyday someone posts about having just found this site. The reality of it is you are probably going to wait 5 months. No sense in getting your knickers in a twist over something that is outside your control. You can't control USCIS, you can't control other memebers reporting their information in a timely manner, you can only control yourself. There's nothing fishing about them processing K1's instead of CR1's...they go in cycles. Next month the K1 people could be saying it's not fair they are processing so many CR1's! You wouldn't be complaining then I'm sure.

exactly. also, timelines are all based on what people report, not what may actually be happening. the # of applicants is huge; VJers represent only a tiny portion!

there were 3 approved yesterday....gotta keep in mind the people that are on vj are only a small number of the people who actually apply

I would disagree with the poster who said they don't have to be nice. Maybe so, but they do have to be professional and offering their "opinion" on your relationship is not part of their job. It's too late now, but I think you should have asked for a supervisor. They make try to make some BS excuse about needing to know your fiance's name for security purposes, but the person already demonstrated their bias and prejudice. Not sure how to go about it, but I would make an effort to find out what they put in your file, and also look in to how you report their behavior.

wow...this is one thread I don't think I expected.
AL- all the same, none of us know either of your situations. Although I haven't always agreed with your posts, you and everyone on here deserve happy lives full of love, kindness and respect. I hope you find that in your future.
There is something to be said about keeping your relationship in real life private and off the message boards... I hope we can appreciate respecting people's privacy and not getting involved or judgmental about things we aren't directly involved in.

I actually wouldn't say this if asked...the K1 is not supposed to be a "get to know you" visa, it's a visa for those who are going to get married. I know what you are saying here, and I know that in reality a lot of people get the visa for this very purpose, but I would NOT say this to a CO. I think this could easily lead to denial because it comes across as you aren't sure if you want to get married.
For us, this would have been simple (husband has very little family in Kenya, I am very close to my family here in the US and it would be impossible for some of them to travel to Kenya for a wedding) but for others they choose K1 for varying reasons. I think what Blob18 said is appropriate - that you don't want to start married life apart and would rather be separated from fiancee than wife. I think this question would be pretty rare though...I wouldn't worry about it too awful much.
For what it's worth, lots of people on here (including me) went to our fiance(e)s interview and were granted the visa. I think the CO actually saw me being there as a major plus in our interview. Maybe check with other Romanian couples to see if fiances are allowed in, how it is viewed if they go to the interview w/beneficiary, etc?

There are 17 US states where a notary public is not authorized to certify copies of documents, and 14 other states that impose severe restrictions on what sort of documents a notary may certify as a true copy. It would be ludicrous for USCIS to require copies of unofficial documents, like boarding passes, to be certified when a substantial number of customers would have to go to another state to find a notary authorized to make the certification.
In California, the state where I live, a notary can only certify copies of power of attorney statements, and notarial journal pages. They could not certify a copy of a boarding pass, or any other non-official document. The state does not grant them that authority.
The level of proof required by USCIS is "preponderance of evidence", e.g., more likely than not. You don't have to prove anything to them "beyond a shadow of a doubt".

excellent ....I agree 100 percent!....to some it's like the world is ending because they been apart for 5 months now!!...sheeesh!

If you want to call me self-righteous then sure. I don't mind. But I would prefer to read about topics that actually helps people. Not every third subject that is about how long it's now been. I guess I'm just different who doesn't love to read the exact same thing over and over and over. We all know this takes time but no one seems to accept it.

I do not get how you all are supposed to be adults. Everyday I read a new topic about someone who is waiting. Most are whining like little babies about how long you have to wait and it is your right to get processed right away etc etc. Some people even start crying after only 2-3 months.
I don't think the staff at the service centers are working slow on purpose. Most likely there have been a lot of applications coming in and we have the the straight up fact that Americas economy is very bad right now. So I don't think they are putting their last bucks on hiring more staff to help our love lives.
It's a few months of your lives and then you will hopefully spend the rest of your lives together. Relax and just remember what you are fighting for.
God doesn't reward the impatient!

Why Is Prejudice Prevalent Among Social Conservatives?
Italian researchers find social conservatives tend to attribute more negative qualities to members of a minority group.
By Tom Jacobs
A fascinating new study from Italy suggests at least part of the answer can be traced to the way we process information and form political attitudes. Psychologists Luigi Castelli and Luciana Carraro of the University of Padua present evidence that our perception of minority groups is often distorted due to inaccurate recall of information.
This phenomenon, they add, is more pronounced among social conservatives.
Presented with a series of facts about members of two groups, "Conservatives developed more negative impressions towards the minority group," which were reinforced by "consistent memory biases," they report in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
Strikingly, the researchers found this effect without making reference to race, religion or sexual orientation. All it needs to be activated, it seems, is the presence of a larger group and a smaller one.
In their first experiment, 234 students read a series of 39 sentences, each of which described an action of some sort. The person engaging in this behavior was identified as either a member of Group A or Group B.
Twenty-seven of the sentences described positive behavior (Jim gives up his seat on the bus to an elderly woman), while 12 described negative behavior (James often tells many lies).
Twenty-six of the sentences referred to someone from Group A, while only 13 referred to a member of Group B. The ratio between positive and negative behavior was the same for each group: 18 positive and 8 negative for Group A, 9 positive and 4 negative for Group B.
After reading the sentences, participants evaluated the two groups, rating the applicability of such adjectives as "intelligent," "sociable" and "lazy." They were then provided with all the sentences and asked to estimate how many of the described actions were performed by members of each group, and how many of each group's actions were negative.
Finally, the students' level of social conservativism was measured by having them give their views on five hot-button topics, including immigration and gay marriage.
The researchers found "an illusory association between Group B and negative behaviors." Specifically, "the perceived proportion of negative behaviors" was significantly higher for Group B, although in fact the two groups were identical in this regard.
"Increased levels of social conservativism were associated with more negative evaluations of Group B as compared to Group A," the researchers add. "The illusory correlation between Group B and negativity was accentuated among conservatives."
The researchers then performed the experiment a second time, with one change: The proportions were reversed, so that there were more negative than positive behaviors. In a mirror image of the first test, the perceived results were once again skewed, with participants this time attributing more positive behaviors to members of Group B.
So in both cases, the minority group was linked in people's minds with the less-frequently mentioned behavior. But in the second experiment, social conservatives were no more likely than anyone else to misremember who did what.
To summarize: Social conservatives were more likely than others to misattribute responsibility for specific behaviors, but only when doing so resulted in a negative view of the minority group. This memory trick apparently resulted in false evidence building up in their minds, reinforcing their hostility.
As Castelli and Carraro note, these results most likely reflect the fact conservatives are more highly attuned to possible threats (a phenomenon described in earlier research). While this on-one's-guard attitude clearly plays a valuable societal function, their study suggests it sometimes manifests in destructive ways, hardening into prejudice against minority group members.
This sort of brain wiring may be impossible to unravel, but at the very least, we can be aware of this tendency and guard against it. It's a dangerous world, but this study strongly suggests some of those perceived threats exist only in our own minds.
http://www.miller-mc...rvatives-30040/

Back in July, federal district court judge Susan Bolton imposed a preliminary injunction on parts of the controversial immigration law passed by Arizona last year, SB-1070. She enjoined provisions relating to warrantless arrests of suspected undocumented immigrants and document requirements, and also struck down the requirement that police check the immigration status of anyone they stop, detain, or arrest if they reasonably suspect the person is in the country illegally.
Today, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Bolton’s preliminary injunction on several major provisions of SB-1070. In their stinging legal critiques, 9th Circuit Judges Richard Paez and John Noonan wrote that each of the provisions blocked by Bolton are outright “unconstitutional” and that SB-1070 is preempted by federal law and foreign policy:


By imposing mandatory obligations on state and local officers, Arizona interferes with the federal government’s authority to implement its priorities and strategies in law enforcement, turning Arizona officers into state-directed DHS agents. [...]
[T]he record unmistakably demonstrates that S.B. 1070 has had a deleterious effect on the United States’ foreign relations, which weighs in favor of preemption. [...]
Finally, the threat of 50 states layering their own immigration enforcement rules on top of the INA [immigration and Nationality Act] also weighs in favor of preemption.
The 9th Circuit Court probably won’t have the final say on the issue. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer ® has pledged to take her case all the way to the Supreme Court. SB-1070′s sponsor, state Senate President Russell Pearce ®, has entered the legal challenge now following a recent decision by the U.S. District Court to allow the Arizona State Legislature to intervene as a defendant in the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Brewer and her state.
In his opinion, Noonan recognized that SB-1070 has “become a symbol.” Noonan noted that, “For those sympathetic to immigrants to the United States, it is a challenge and a chilling foretaste of what other states might attempt.” The 9th Circuit’s decision comes as several states around the country are in the final stages of approving similar “copycat” pieces of legislation. For more background information on the Circuit Court’s decision, check out the Wonk Room.
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/556140/u.s._appeals_court_rules_against_arizona%27s_immigration_law/

It is possible to have a ceremony so long as you are not legally married at the conclusion of said ceremony. Couples often have traditional ceremonies in the home country of the person who is leaving and then use the term "Engagement Ceremony."
Also, if you wish to have a ceremony in a church before your departure to the US, you can as long as you would not be legally married at the conclusion of the ceremony. I would check to see what the laws on that are.
When you use a K1 visa at a US POE, you must not be legally married.

It is possible to have a ceremony so long as you are not legally married at the conclusion of said ceremony. Couples often have traditional ceremonies in the home country of the person who is leaving and then use the term "Engagement Ceremony."
Also, if you wish to have a ceremony in a church before your departure to the US, you can as long as you would not be legally married at the conclusion of the ceremony. I would check to see what the laws on that are.
When you use a K1 visa at a US POE, you must not be legally married.

It continues to amaze me that people come on a site that's for getting visa's and doing everything the correct way no matter how long it takes and asking questions about how to get around the rules. People are always on here looking for ways to cheat the system and how to get their spouse/significant other here without putting in the work and time it requires. I'm seriously annoyed by the fact that people are constantly doing this. NONE of us want to be apart from our partner and part of the reason all these rules and regulations are in place is because of the people trying to be sly. I've been apart from my husband for 2 years now...visits in between but not living the life we are envisioned because we are doing all of this immigration the correct way. This is my second time going through this...yes it was a choice but it doesn't making the time apart any easier. I would love for those people searching this site for a short cut to ####### off (to put it kindly). I'm sure plenty others feel the same way Discuss lol

Then you have to decide who to trust. I advise you to trust me and don't send the I-129F for spouse. They NEVER hold the I-130 waiting for an I-129F, even if you were to ask them to or indicate in some way that K3 was your intention. The firs thing that happens to the I-130 after intake and receipt notice is it goes on a shelf with all the other I-130 petitions from US Citizens filed that day. Then, it waits it's turn. Period.

A few major down-sides to K-3.

Added expense of adjustment of status. No green-card until AOS approved (4-6 months) Not work authorized until receiving EAD or the Green-card. (4-6 months) Not able to get SSN until first getting EAD or Green-card. Most states will not issue a DL until having SSN and (green-card or EAD) What few K-3's I have seen over the past year or so have indicated a 90 day expiration on the K-3, this complicates travel while AOS pending.
None of these are problems for CR-1, it gets green-card the moment they arrive in the states, so can get SSN, Work, and easily travel.

Since Feb 2010 NVC closes I-129F when receiving I-130 and I-129F from USCIS at same time. USCIS has been tying the two petitions together and approving them at same time for about 2 years now.
Sending I-129F will only delay things causing USCIS to pull the I-130 to match it up with the I-129F, only to have NVC close the I-129F anyway.
Forget the K-3, improved processing at USCIS and NVC have eliminated it.
USCIS WILL pull the I-130 from the queue and then tie the I-130 and I-129F together and approve on same date, then NVC WILL close the I-129F and proceed on with the CR-1.
Filing an I-129F will only slow the process down when they pull the I-130 out of the queue to combine the two petitions.
K-3 served only one function, it was derived at a time when I-130 was taking years to get approved, however now since I-130 is approved at same time as I-129F the function of K-3 (Entry to USA and WAITING for I-130 approval) no longer exists, so NVC kills the K-3 in favor of the superior CR-1 or IR-1 visa.
NVC WILL CANCEL the K-3 if they receive the two petitions from USCIS together.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/ty...pes_2993.html#4
If anticipating a K-4 for an accompanying step child and did not file an I-130 for the step child, you will have a problem when NVC kills the K-3, if this is the case, it would be best to file an I-130 for step child now with a cover letter explaining the parent's case along with a copy of parent's I-130 NOA1 receipt letter attached.

Sine you have been living in Spain for 4 years, you may qualify for DCF (Direct Consular Filing). I don't know if the Spanish Government not recognizing your marriage for two years will have any affect on your ability to qualify for DCF. Strictly speaking, the Embassy is in Madrid, a Consulate is in Barcelona. If you can't DCF, then you will have to file the I-130 from overseas. I would look to see if you for sure qualify for DCF.
Regardless of DCF or filing from overseas, you will need to establish domicile in the USA. You do not need to live in the same household or State as your father in order for him to co-sponsor your wife.
If you have filed a Certificate of Birth Abroad (CBRA) for your kids, they can get US Passports and use those.
DO NOT go the route of trying to obtain tourist visa's and then try to adjust status. Tourist visa's are non-immigrant visa's and entering on them with the intent to immigrate is FRAUD. Same goes for the VWP.

Hello dear friends,
Today I had my interview and I want share with details with you and hope it will help you with something if even little bit
So I arrived to the US Embsayy in Ankara at 06.00 morning so it was very early because my interview time is at 8.30 So when I go to have breakfast in caffe and when I get out then I saw many people already there LOL how fast they came there
So, there ofcourse were people with different visas and every visa had different waiting place. So the police officer will come out and call which visa kind can come in.So he will bring your passport then check then let you go in,do not forget pay visa fee and bring receipt with you.So when yu come in the greater person will ask from you:
1.Your passport
2.Passport Photos (do not forget that they except photos only in special place)http://turkey.usembassy.gov/visa_forms.html it is link for all you can find info.
3.K1-Visa Fee Receipt
4.Medical Exam (do not bring with you X-ray)
5.Proof of relationship between youand your Fiancé
So these all things you will need hold on hand and give her when she ask.
Then she will give you waiting number by what you will be called to the window for finger print, then will go sit and wait and wait when your number will be shown again on screen and will go for interview.My interview took only 10-15 minutes,I think because my package was perfect and have everything what they asked.So the consular ask me several questions like:
-How did you met with your fiancé?
-What he is doing for living?
-Did you meet in person, when?
-And he asked about my family and me.
So after ths he smile and said your are approved please go to the UPS window and fill for shipment
Most important prepare everything how they ask it,and it will go smoothly.
Good luck to everyone.

Were you denied by USCIS or at the Embassy/Consulate after an interview?
What country is the fiance(e) from?
Need more information.

There is no need for the pregnancy statement what-so-ever. Kind of sounds like your only intent to marry her is because shes pregnant! You talk more about the pregnancy than intent to marry.
I would remove the pregnancy statement and just leave it as an intent to marry.