Just Jenney

Fine, FB, you win. If you honestly think that I was directing any sort of rudeness or spitefulness towards Lavender when I clearly wasn't, then there is nothing I can say to change your mind.

Next time I'll simply follow Manc's suggestion -- provide a yes/no question with a yes/no answer. In this case, the answer to Lavender's question is NO since she is not yet married, so of course she can no adjust status. Happy now?

~ Jenney

ian-mstm

Brilliant response! I wish I'd thought of it!

Ian

ian-mstm

Had she not invoked my name, I might have stayed out of this thread!


Hmm... I must remember to try harder next time!

Ian

fatbrit

Thanks.
I will respect you for it.

Manc

sure, but I bet we hear wedding bells before Sept 11th though

meauxna

I call 'BS' on that, Jenney. Your replies in this thread (and otherwise) were on target and accurate.

I see no reason that just because this has recently become fb's cause du jour that you, or anyone else, should have to change the way they give an accurate/truthful response. If fb or others want to monitor the group to champion VWP AOSers, they are welcome to it. I did the same for DCF cases when I started posting since that was my area of personal experience.

Rete

It has always been FB's cause de jour. Nothing new there. He is a prig and only shows his arse around here when he can start a rant. I'm had enough already.

scrubbedexpat099

I can here them too, and I am in Mexico.

From reading this board you would think that K's etc are the main route.

From what I have gathered most people adjust in country from a non marriage type visa.

If you have issues, are uncomfortable with the paperworks, by all means see a Lawyer, but can not see that you would need one any more than say from a K1.

Why the big sweat? USCIS do not seem to have issues, only Marriage Immigration boards.

Speaking as one whose K took a week or so shorter than a year.

Stina

Just as a matter of interest, what do those who are opposed to AOS from VWP think about people who come on an F-1 and adjust? Or a J-1? Or in fact, any other kind of visa which is issued for a specific purpose other than getting married? Is that not also a violation of the basis on which they were given a visa and reduces their credability, as someone mentioned earlier?

Just curious.

scrubbedexpat099

aka - The Majority

nettlebed

Or indeed the H-1B, which is a dual-intent visa. If anybody wants to have a go at me, I came in on an H-1B and adjusted though marriage to a USC from there...

meauxna

"Dual intent" pretty much explains the non-issue, doesn't it?

Not only is the VWP not dual-intent, it is a class that specifically calls for lack of imigrant intent at entry.

iniaki

Excellent point.
Seems to me, from what I have read in this other posts on this board that only those adjusting from VW are the "bad" ones. Unbelievable.

And so the drama continues.

meauxna

Again, I call BS. If someone applies for/receives an F-1 *with the preconceived intent of marrying and adjusting* they are doing the same thing (worse maybe, as it would involve a lie on the application or to the ConOff).

I don't know if those terms also apply to a J.

The VWP discussion issue is intent at entry. Period.

nettlebed

Well, does it? (I was actually angling for a comment of the sort you made ) Is the immigration intent nominally applicable to AOS through employment, or does it apply to immigration intent through marriage to a USC? Is intent considered by USCIS to be "separable" in that way? My attorney couldn't say for sure. I actually entered on the H-1B intending to adjust through later marriage to a USC, and my attorney was happy that that wasn't an abuse of the system. Of course, and if intent can be established, you are potentially in a world of hurt since by using the VWP, as several people pointed out, you waive all rights to appeal...