Rete

Forget about it

lostlove

I concur, the statements are amibigious. Maybe again a grey area of law whose outcome depends on luck. May or may not happen kind of scenario. But if it was me, I would not take that risk.
Many times lawyers lose valuable clients because of such barren equivocal statements. Maybe clients just want to hear what they desire!

meauxna

Right.

Can we please move on from the thread-jack and stick to the original topic?
thanks.

snowbunny

Back to the original poster.... how does the USC feel about all this?
S/he is within their rights to write USCIS and state the circumstances, and this may bring scrutiny to the case immediately, or down the road at renewal time or if the OP applies for citizenship.

Remember that it takes two to tango up to this point.

lostlove

Snow:

Its in her best interest to inform the USCIS and then refile a waiver. Thats the best cushion for her green card. Any future acrimonious complaint/letter by the scorned spouse explaining the events of the divorce may trigger a sudden termination of the benefit. I see these as actions of jealousy, hurt and vendetta.
The original poster Haley has not been around for almost a month. I request the moderators to shut this thread as its opened to unsavory ranting and foolish bantering as usual, and that's no help to the original poster or anyone.

snowbunny

LL,

A bit judgmental - if it was the OP who caused the marital breakup, then would it still be an act of vendetta - or of self-preservation?

I agree with the act of refiling.

Haley-751

Lostlove, U made me sad .............. why should my thread be closed? I still keep my ears up. Its just because theres nothing new beside what was discussed on the first few days of the post, I have not raised my voice.

Dont worry, I still get every email notifying me that there is somebody replying my thread.

ian-mstm

Wow! Email updates that work... now there's a concept USCIS should consider!

Ian

jeffreyhy

H,

"nothing new" sounds like a pretty good reason for closing the thread to me.

Regards, JEff

Matthew Udall

Hi 1234,
When it comes to the undermining of the group’s accuracy, I suppose it would not be that hard to imagine a day when the law changes. Then someone finds an old archived thread and relies on that legal advice to their detriment. Sure, it might not happen or might not happen that often, but it certainly could and is one drawback of posts being archived forever. And please note that I’m referring to archived postings containing legal advice “in general”, not really this thread in particular.

In before the lock :-).

Rete

I can see no reason why this thread should be closed. A discussion occurs when two or more people interact on a particular topic/subject matter.

The issue here is a very serious one and one that needs a definitive answer and should not become a thread where inuendos or dislikes undermine the nature of the discussion.

The forum has enjoyed a long period devoid of distraction caused by personal agendas. It is hoped that this can once more be achieved and that all can benefit from the discussions between newbies, middle-agers, oldies, or professional(s) when they wish to reply to a question with a direct answer. For example, Jonathan is a much welcomed member of the forums with a concise and informative manner when addressing questions.


If the poster 1234 has an issue with this thread or any thread, they need only press the report button and a joint administrative response will be forthcoming.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

Of course, there is often no "definitive" answer.

Also, one should remember that Murphys Law, the Finagle Corollary, and Hanlon's Razor are all it work in the administration of the immigration laws.

Also, I think that Joseph Heller's work should always be kept in mind.

jeffreyhy

http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedoc...ion_3apr09.pdf

Regards, JEff

Rete

And on this issue there is a definitive answer. Regardless of your thoughts that a cliche or a mention of a fiction writer's name is an answer, it is not.

The USCIS is quite clear on what one needs to do if one files a joint waiver for removal of conditions and a divorce occurs before the final adjudication of said petition.

jeffreyhy

Agreed that CIS has a clear policy, but the current policy is a recent change from past policy and as a practical matter it often takes some time to get all of the thousands of people who have a role in implementing the policy fully on board.

Applies to all organizations and all policies.

Regards, JEff