meauxna

He'll probably be done freakin' faster than me, too. :curse:

fatbrit

Life's a.......and then you.....!

ian-mstm

You've watched Road House once too often!

Ian

LoveConquorsAll

Ok guys i understand, i wont file for it.

fatbrit

Why not?

Bluegrass Lass

I don't think anyone here is telling you not to file for AOS while here. What we are trying to tell you is that there are inherent risks in this method, and that you should weigh them carefully.

Please, go have a one-time consult with an attorney. Yes, there are no guarantees with this method, but there aren't any guarantees with life at all, is there?

Songbird

personally if I was in your position I WOULD file for it! IMO the likelihood of there being anything to upset the applecart is minimal given the situation you have outlined. Its PERFECTLY LEGIT for you to proceed with your marriage plans and file for AOS in the USA. I did it with a much more complicated case having some criminal convictions and without much more than two consults with a brief - both of which were free. Obviously its your choice but please make that FOLLOWING at least an initial consult ( you can get one free) with a immigration brief.

fatbrit

You anecdotes barely make it, though! -- all IMVHO, of course.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

I'm actually in full agreement with the above statement as it is worded. I'm actually having a pissing match with CIS on a non-marriage case where they are REFUSING to take a filing on the basis that the person does not qualify. The last submission included the magic words "If this submission is requested again, we will consider that we have exhausted all our administrative remedies."

I find it strange that CIS refuses to take our money, cuts off the further fee for an administrative appeal and wants us to go to District Court FIRST.

LoveConquorsAll

This is way above my head, how did the person not quality for AOS? And if they are denied, i didnt think they could appeal?

Folinskyinla

Hi:

There is a GENERAL regulation for CIS which states that an application needs only the proper form, that the form be signed, and that it be accompanied by the correct filing fee. Period, the end.

You do make a valid point though for section 245 Adjustment -- there is no appeal from a denial. However, you have the right to renew it in subsequent removal proceedings, which VWP entrants do not get.

Look, all I am saying, that the case is not 100% clean. Nothing more, nothing less. Also, what has worked in the past does not necessarily mean it will continue to work now or in the future -- it is not unknown for DHS to change its interpretation. And if you say "it ain't fair, you did it that way in the past!" their reaction is "we do not have to perpetuate our mistakes."

It is not uncommon to submit identical applications for various family members -- one gets approved and the other denied. The reaction of the clients often is "We should tell them about the other approval and get them to be consistent!" A good attorney will respond "No way -- that will just get the approval withdrawn."

You are free to do whatever you want. I may be a lawyer, but I am not YOUR lawyer. No individual advice is intended.

Songbird

Don't worry if this whole thing seems complicated to you - there are people here that help you as much as they can. The important thing for you to do now is book a one-off consultation with an immigration brief ( and don't pay silly money - you can get it either free or for a reasonable cost) and get their advice. IMO truly this needn't be at all complicated based upon what you have told us, and a competent brief will guide you towards the path best suited for your situation.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

Just to add -- the rules of what can be discussed for legal persons like myself depending on whether it is a personal and "privileged" consultation in my office as opposed to a very PUBLIC discussion in this forum.

Ray

Translated means what the Lawyer tells you in the comfort of his expensive leather bound office should be kept to yourself..not blurted all over the internet

Tracym

And that the lawyer may have something to say in private, that Mr. F cannot in public.