How to explain the I-134 to a potential co-sponsor

[endoftheroad 1]

What's the best way?

I have read this explanation here, is it correct? "The I-134 is used to show that the Non-Immigrant K-1, or K-3 visa holder won't become a charge of the state, between the time they enter the country and adjust status and become a legal permanent resident."

This is what the I-134 says:

I AM READY AND WILLING TO DEPOSIT A BOND, IF NECESSARY, TO GUARANTEE THAT SUCH PERSON(S) WILL NOT BECOME A PUBLIC CHARGE DURING HIS OR HER STAY IN THE UNITED STATES, OR TO GUARANTEE THAT THE ABOVE NAMED PERSON(S) WILL MAINTAIN HIS OR HER NONIMMIGRANT STATUS, IF ADMITTED TEMPORARILY, AND WILL DEPART PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS OR HER AUTHORIZED STAY IN THE UNITED STATES.

6. I UNDERSTAND THAT:

A. FORM I-134 IS AN “UNDERTAKING” UNDER SECTION 213 OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AND I MAY BE SUED IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 BECOMES A PUBLIC CHARGE AFTER ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES;

AND

B. FORM I-134 MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ANY FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCY THAT MAY RECEIVE AN APPLICATION FROM THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES;

C. IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 DOES APPLY FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES, MY OWN INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN DECIDING THE PERSON'S APPLICATION. HOW LONG MY INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 IS DETERMINED UNDER THE STATUTES AND RULES GOVERNING EACH SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have? Here are my first draft at answers but I'd like to get some feedback.

1. Will the beneficiary remain in the USA as non-immigrants?

With the applied for K-1 visa the beneficiary will have 90 days after entering the USA to marry the petitioner or have to return to their country. The beneficiary has submitted a registered legal letter stating the intention to marry the petitioner. Once married, the benificiary is no longer a non-immigrant and this provision will have been met.

2. How does the government prevent the beneficiary from becoming public charges?

The government prevents non-immigrants from becoming public charges by requiring the petitioner to file the I-134 form. There are income guidelines for the sponsors. The I-134 form says that as the sponsor, the petitioner, and co-sponsor in this case, agree that if the beneficiary applies to become a public charge then the sponsor's information will be used to determine their eligibility. Therefore the beneficiary can only become a public charge if the sponsors combined are below the poverty level, allowing the beneficiary to become a public charge.

3. How could the sponsor and/or co-sponsor be sued?

The sponsors may be sued if they are below the poverty level, the beneficiary is still a legal charge (married) of the primary sponsor (petitioner), and the beneficiary is accepted as a public charge. The sponsors may be sued for the amount of services the beneficiary receives.

Thanks in advance!

[pushbrk 12,186]

What's the best way?

I have read this explanation here, is it correct? "The I-134 is used to show that the Non-Immigrant K-1, or K-3 visa holder won't become a charge of the state, between the time they enter the country and adjust status and become a legal permanent resident."

This is what the I-134 says:

I AM READY AND WILLING TO DEPOSIT A BOND, IF NECESSARY, TO GUARANTEE THAT SUCH PERSON(S) WILL NOT BECOME A PUBLIC CHARGE DURING HIS OR HER STAY IN THE UNITED STATES, OR TO GUARANTEE THAT THE ABOVE NAMED PERSON(S) WILL MAINTAIN HIS OR HER NONIMMIGRANT STATUS, IF ADMITTED TEMPORARILY, AND WILL DEPART PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS OR HER AUTHORIZED STAY IN THE UNITED STATES.

6. I UNDERSTAND THAT:

A. FORM I-134 IS AN “UNDERTAKING” UNDER SECTION 213 OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AND I MAY BE SUED IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 BECOMES A PUBLIC CHARGE AFTER ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES;

AND

B. FORM I-134 MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ANY FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCY THAT MAY RECEIVE AN APPLICATION FROM THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES;

C. IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 DOES APPLY FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES, MY OWN INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN DECIDING THE PERSON'S APPLICATION. HOW LONG MY INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 IS DETERMINED UNDER THE STATUTES AND RULES GOVERNING EACH SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have? Here are my first draft at answers but I'd like to get some feedback.

1. Will the beneficiary remain in the USA as non-immigrants?

With the applied for K-1 visa the beneficiary will have 90 days after entering the USA to marry the petitioner or have to return to their country. The beneficiary has submitted a registered legal letter stating the intention to marry the petitioner. Once married, the benificiary is no longer a non-immigrant and this provision will have been met.

2. How does the government prevent the beneficiary from becoming public charges?

The government prevents non-immigrants from becoming public charges by requiring the petitioner to file the I-134 form. There are income guidelines for the sponsors. The I-134 form says that as the sponsor, the petitioner, and co-sponsor in this case, agree that if the beneficiary applies to become a public charge then the sponsor's information will be used to determine their eligibility. Therefore the beneficiary can only become a public charge if the sponsors combined are below the poverty level, allowing the beneficiary to become a public charge.

3. How could the sponsor and/or co-sponsor be sued?

The sponsors may be sued if they are below the poverty level, the beneficiary is still a legal charge (married) of the primary sponsor (petitioner), and the beneficiary is accepted as a public charge. The sponsors may be sued for the amount of services the beneficiary receives.

Thanks in advance!

Please provide the source for the material you are questioning.

1. In K visa cases the visa holder eventually adjusts status(immigrates), leaves the US or becomes illegal. The I-134 is not binding.

2. The I-134 is used to demonstrate that the sponsor or sponsors is currently financially qualified to convince a Consular officer the visa applicant is not likely to become a public charge but it "prevents" absolutely nothing. The sponsor could become destitute at any moment.

3. An I-134 sponsor can't be sued to provide support because the affidavit isn't a binding contract. However, the I-864 used later IS binding. The government can collect reimbursement for any covered disbursement of means tested benefits to the sponsored immigrant. Additionally, some sponsored immigrants have successfully sued their spouses in divorce court and been awarded at least temporary support at the 125% of poverty level.

[endoftheroad 1]

What's the best way?

I have read this explanation here, is it correct? "The I-134 is used to show that the Non-Immigrant K-1, or K-3 visa holder won't become a charge of the state, between the time they enter the country and adjust status and become a legal permanent resident."

This is what the I-134 says:

I AM READY AND WILLING TO DEPOSIT A BOND, IF NECESSARY, TO GUARANTEE THAT SUCH PERSON(S) WILL NOT BECOME A PUBLIC CHARGE DURING HIS OR HER STAY IN THE UNITED STATES, OR TO GUARANTEE THAT THE ABOVE NAMED PERSON(S) WILL MAINTAIN HIS OR HER NONIMMIGRANT STATUS, IF ADMITTED TEMPORARILY, AND WILL DEPART PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS OR HER AUTHORIZED STAY IN THE UNITED STATES.

6. I UNDERSTAND THAT:

A. FORM I-134 IS AN “UNDERTAKING” UNDER SECTION 213 OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AND I MAY BE SUED IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 BECOMES A PUBLIC CHARGE AFTER ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES;

AND

B. FORM I-134 MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ANY FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCY THAT MAY RECEIVE AN APPLICATION FROM THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES;

C. IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 DOES APPLY FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES, MY OWN INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN DECIDING THE PERSON'S APPLICATION. HOW LONG MY INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 IS DETERMINED UNDER THE STATUTES AND RULES GOVERNING EACH SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have? Here are my first draft at answers but I'd like to get some feedback.

1. Will the beneficiary remain in the USA as non-immigrants?

With the applied for K-1 visa the beneficiary will have 90 days after entering the USA to marry the petitioner or have to return to their country. The beneficiary has submitted a registered legal letter stating the intention to marry the petitioner. Once married, the benificiary is no longer a non-immigrant and this provision will have been met.

2. How does the government prevent the beneficiary from becoming public charges?

The government prevents non-immigrants from becoming public charges by requiring the petitioner to file the I-134 form. There are income guidelines for the sponsors. The I-134 form says that as the sponsor, the petitioner, and co-sponsor in this case, agree that if the beneficiary applies to become a public charge then the sponsor's information will be used to determine their eligibility. Therefore the beneficiary can only become a public charge if the sponsors combined are below the poverty level, allowing the beneficiary to become a public charge.

3. How could the sponsor and/or co-sponsor be sued?

The sponsors may be sued if they are below the poverty level, the beneficiary is still a legal charge (married) of the primary sponsor (petitioner), and the beneficiary is accepted as a public charge. The sponsors may be sued for the amount of services the beneficiary receives.

Thanks in advance!

Please provide the source for the material you are questioning.

1. In K visa cases the visa holder eventually adjusts status(immigrates), leaves the US or becomes illegal. The I-134 is not binding.

2. The I-134 is used to demonstrate that the sponsor or sponsors is currently financially qualified to convince a Consular officer the visa applicant is not likely to become a public charge but it "prevents" absolutely nothing. The sponsor could become destitute at any moment.

3. An I-134 sponsor can't be sued to provide support because the affidavit isn't a binding contract. However, the I-864 used later IS binding. The government can collect reimbursement for any covered disbursement of means tested benefits to the sponsored immigrant. Additionally, some sponsored immigrants have successfully sued their spouses in divorce court and been awarded at least temporary support at the 125% of poverty level.

1. I don't understand what part of what I wrote is vague or incorrect.

2. Doesn't it prevent the government from being on the hook? I don't understand what part of what I wrote is vague or incorrect or is it the question?

3. I understand that and will add it to the explanation.

Edited September 2, 2009 by endoftheroad

[pushbrk 12,186]

What's the best way?

I have read this explanation here, is it correct? "The I-134 is used to show that the Non-Immigrant K-1, or K-3 visa holder won't become a charge of the state, between the time they enter the country and adjust status and become a legal permanent resident."

This is what the I-134 says:

I AM READY AND WILLING TO DEPOSIT A BOND, IF NECESSARY, TO GUARANTEE THAT SUCH PERSON(S) WILL NOT BECOME A PUBLIC CHARGE DURING HIS OR HER STAY IN THE UNITED STATES, OR TO GUARANTEE THAT THE ABOVE NAMED PERSON(S) WILL MAINTAIN HIS OR HER NONIMMIGRANT STATUS, IF ADMITTED TEMPORARILY, AND WILL DEPART PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS OR HER AUTHORIZED STAY IN THE UNITED STATES.

6. I UNDERSTAND THAT:

A. FORM I-134 IS AN “UNDERTAKING” UNDER SECTION 213 OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AND I MAY BE SUED IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 BECOMES A PUBLIC CHARGE AFTER ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES;

AND

B. FORM I-134 MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ANY FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCY THAT MAY RECEIVE AN APPLICATION FROM THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES;

C. IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 DOES APPLY FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES, MY OWN INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN DECIDING THE PERSON'S APPLICATION. HOW LONG MY INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 IS DETERMINED UNDER THE STATUTES AND RULES GOVERNING EACH SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have? Here are my first draft at answers but I'd like to get some feedback.

1. Will the beneficiary remain in the USA as non-immigrants?

With the applied for K-1 visa the beneficiary will have 90 days after entering the USA to marry the petitioner or have to return to their country. The beneficiary has submitted a registered legal letter stating the intention to marry the petitioner. Once married, the benificiary is no longer a non-immigrant and this provision will have been met.

2. How does the government prevent the beneficiary from becoming public charges?

The government prevents non-immigrants from becoming public charges by requiring the petitioner to file the I-134 form. There are income guidelines for the sponsors. The I-134 form says that as the sponsor, the petitioner, and co-sponsor in this case, agree that if the beneficiary applies to become a public charge then the sponsor's information will be used to determine their eligibility. Therefore the beneficiary can only become a public charge if the sponsors combined are below the poverty level, allowing the beneficiary to become a public charge.

3. How could the sponsor and/or co-sponsor be sued?

The sponsors may be sued if they are below the poverty level, the beneficiary is still a legal charge (married) of the primary sponsor (petitioner), and the beneficiary is accepted as a public charge. The sponsors may be sued for the amount of services the beneficiary receives.

Thanks in advance!

Please provide the source for the material you are questioning.

1. In K visa cases the visa holder eventually adjusts status(immigrates), leaves the US or becomes illegal. The I-134 is not binding.

2. The I-134 is used to demonstrate that the sponsor or sponsors is currently financially qualified to convince a Consular officer the visa applicant is not likely to become a public charge but it "prevents" absolutely nothing. The sponsor could become destitute at any moment.

3. An I-134 sponsor can't be sued to provide support because the affidavit isn't a binding contract. However, the I-864 used later IS binding. The government can collect reimbursement for any covered disbursement of means tested benefits to the sponsored immigrant. Additionally, some sponsored immigrants have successfully sued their spouses in divorce court and been awarded at least temporary support at the 125% of poverty level.

1. I don't understand what part of what I wrote is vague or incorrect.

2. Doesn't it prevent the government from being on the hook? I don't understand what part of what I wrote is vague or incorrect or is it the question?

3. I understand that and will add it to the explanation.

1. It's not the marriage that changes the non-immigrant to an immigrant. It's the adjustment of status.

2. The I-134 is not binding, so no, it doesn't prevent the government from being on the hook in any way whatsoever. It does what I said it does.

3. If this is your explanation, why not simply scrap it and use mine. Your's is full of errors. It doesn't need additions. It needs corrections, as in it's completely wrong. For instance whether a sponsor is below the poverty line or not has nothing to do with whether they can be sued.

So what is the purpose of this exercise? I don't see much use for the questions or the answers. What's up?

Edited September 3, 2009 by pushbrk

[endoftheroad 1]

So what is the purpose of this exercise? I don't see much use for the questions or the answers.

I think I was very clear in what this is about. "How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have?"

If you see no need to provide answers to people that have potential co-sponsors with questions, then so be it.

You have pointed out one thing, that the I-134 is not a legally binding document. Thanks, I left that out. I was mixing it up with the AOS financials.

Edited September 3, 2009 by endoftheroad

[pushbrk 12,186]

So what is the purpose of this exercise? I don't see much use for the questions or the answers.

I think I was very clear in what this is about. "How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have?"

If you see no need to provide answers to people that have potential co-sponsors with questions, then so be it.

You have pointed out one thing, that the I-134 is not a legally binding document. Thanks, I left that out. I was mixing it up with the AOS financials.

You have not come up with a meaningful way to explain the I-134 to a co-sponsor. What they need to know is that the affidavit is not binding and the other things I already explained. The later I-864 is binding and can be for the life of the immigrant or sponsor. If they are going to sign one of those, the answers are quite different indeed.

[endoftheroad 1]

... What they need to know is that the affidavit is not binding ...

Seems like you did not read everything I wrote like this:

"You have pointed out one thing, that the I-134 is not a legally binding document. Thanks, I left that out."

Have a nice day.

[pushbrk 12,186]

... What they need to know is that the affidavit is not binding ...

Seems like you did not read everything I wrote like this:

"You have pointed out one thing, that the I-134 is not a legally binding document. Thanks, I left that out."

Have a nice day.

I read it carefully. Some of it is just plain wrong and most of the rest makes no sense. I don't know who you're trying to explain this to but with your explanation, they won't get the information they need.

[Otto 83]

endoftheroad -

Just from an 'outside-looking-in' point of view it seems you're getting good advice from pushbrk - you might not agree-with or like it, but I think he's right in his view of your posted explanation.

A layman would probably not really end up understanding it and someone familiar with the process would have issues with some of its accuracy.

Pushbrk doesn't pull any punches so the truth can sting sometimes, but he's trying to help you.

~My 2 Cents

[D&R 0]

What's the best way?

I have read this explanation here, is it correct? "The I-134 is used to show that the Non-Immigrant K-1, or K-3 visa holder won't become a charge of the state, between the time they enter the country and adjust status and become a legal permanent resident."

This is what the I-134 says:

I AM READY AND WILLING TO DEPOSIT A BOND, IF NECESSARY, TO GUARANTEE THAT SUCH PERSON(S) WILL NOT BECOME A PUBLIC CHARGE DURING HIS OR HER STAY IN THE UNITED STATES, OR TO GUARANTEE THAT THE ABOVE NAMED PERSON(S) WILL MAINTAIN HIS OR HER NONIMMIGRANT STATUS, IF ADMITTED TEMPORARILY, AND WILL DEPART PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS OR HER AUTHORIZED STAY IN THE UNITED STATES.

6. I UNDERSTAND THAT:

A. FORM I-134 IS AN “UNDERTAKING” UNDER SECTION 213 OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AND I MAY BE SUED IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 BECOMES A PUBLIC CHARGE AFTER ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES;

AND

B. FORM I-134 MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ANY FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCY THAT MAY RECEIVE AN APPLICATION FROM THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES;

C. IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 DOES APPLY FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES, MY OWN INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN DECIDING THE PERSON'S APPLICATION. HOW LONG MY INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 IS DETERMINED UNDER THE STATUTES AND RULES GOVERNING EACH SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have? Here are my first draft at answers but I'd like to get some feedback.

1. Will the beneficiary remain in the USA as non-immigrants?

With the applied for K-1 visa the beneficiary will have 90 days after entering the USA to marry the petitioner or have to return to their country. The beneficiary has submitted a registered legal letter stating the intention to marry the petitioner. Once married, the benificiary is no longer a non-immigrant and this provision will have been met.

2. How does the government prevent the beneficiary from becoming public charges?

The government prevents non-immigrants from becoming public charges by requiring the petitioner to file the I-134 form. There are income guidelines for the sponsors. The I-134 form says that as the sponsor, the petitioner, and co-sponsor in this case, agree that if the beneficiary applies to become a public charge then the sponsor's information will be used to determine their eligibility. Therefore the beneficiary can only become a public charge if the sponsors combined are below the poverty level, allowing the beneficiary to become a public charge.

3. How could the sponsor and/or co-sponsor be sued?

The sponsors may be sued if they are below the poverty level, the beneficiary is still a legal charge (married) of the primary sponsor (petitioner), and the beneficiary is accepted as a public charge. The sponsors may be sued for the amount of services the beneficiary receives.

Thanks in advance!

Personally, if I was being asked to co-sponsor someone, I'd be doing my OWN research into whatever it is I'm signing, and wouldn't rely on what the person benefiting from it was telling me.

[aaron2020 11,651]

What's the best way?

I have read this explanation here, is it correct? "The I-134 is used to show that the Non-Immigrant K-1, or K-3 visa holder won't become a charge of the state, between the time they enter the country and adjust status and become a legal permanent resident."

This is what the I-134 says:

I AM READY AND WILLING TO DEPOSIT A BOND, IF NECESSARY, TO GUARANTEE THAT SUCH PERSON(S) WILL NOT BECOME A PUBLIC CHARGE DURING HIS OR HER STAY IN THE UNITED STATES, OR TO GUARANTEE THAT THE ABOVE NAMED PERSON(S) WILL MAINTAIN HIS OR HER NONIMMIGRANT STATUS, IF ADMITTED TEMPORARILY, AND WILL DEPART PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS OR HER AUTHORIZED STAY IN THE UNITED STATES.

6. I UNDERSTAND THAT:

A. FORM I-134 IS AN “UNDERTAKING” UNDER SECTION 213 OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AND I MAY BE SUED IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 BECOMES A PUBLIC CHARGE AFTER ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES;

AND

B. FORM I-134 MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ANY FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCY THAT MAY RECEIVE AN APPLICATION FROM THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES;

C. IF THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 DOES APPLY FOR FOOD STAMPS, SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME, OR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES, MY OWN INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN DECIDING THE PERSON'S APPLICATION. HOW LONG MY INCOME AND ASSETS MAY BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE PERSON NAMED IN ITEM 3 IS DETERMINED UNDER THE STATUTES AND RULES GOVERNING EACH SPECIFIC PROGRAM.

How do you answer these questions that a potential co-sponsor might have? Here are my first draft at answers but I'd like to get some feedback.

1. Will the beneficiary remain in the USA as non-immigrants?

With the applied for K-1 visa the beneficiary will have 90 days after entering the USA to marry the petitioner or have to return to their country. The beneficiary has submitted a registered legal letter stating the intention to marry the petitioner. Once married, the benificiary is no longer a non-immigrant and this provision will have been met.

2. How does the government prevent the beneficiary from becoming public charges?

The government prevents non-immigrants from becoming public charges by requiring the petitioner to file the I-134 form. There are income guidelines for the sponsors. The I-134 form says that as the sponsor, the petitioner, and co-sponsor in this case, agree that if the beneficiary applies to become a public charge then the sponsor's information will be used to determine their eligibility. Therefore the beneficiary can only become a public charge if the sponsors combined are below the poverty level, allowing the beneficiary to become a public charge.

3. How could the sponsor and/or co-sponsor be sued?

The sponsors may be sued if they are below the poverty level, the beneficiary is still a legal charge (married) of the primary sponsor (petitioner), and the beneficiary is accepted as a public charge. The sponsors may be sued for the amount of services the beneficiary receives.

Thanks in advance!

Please provide the source for the material you are questioning.

1. In K visa cases the visa holder eventually adjusts status(immigrates), leaves the US or becomes illegal. The I-134 is not binding.

2. The I-134 is used to demonstrate that the sponsor or sponsors is currently financially qualified to convince a Consular officer the visa applicant is not likely to become a public charge but it "prevents" absolutely nothing. The sponsor could become destitute at any moment.

3. An I-134 sponsor can't be sued to provide support because the affidavit isn't a binding contract. However, the I-864 used later IS binding. The government can collect reimbursement for any covered disbursement of means tested benefits to the sponsored immigrant. Additionally, some sponsored immigrants have successfully sued their spouses in divorce court and been awarded at least temporary support at the 125% of poverty level.

Why would the US government asked someone to sign a contract that is not binding on the Signatory? The sponsor guarantees that the non-immigrant will becomes a public charge, and the sponsor guarantees that the non-immigrant would maintain the non-immigrant status and depart the US. The sponsor also acknowledges that he/she can be sue so the government can recover any benefits that the non-immigrant may enjoy as a public charge. So explain to me what would happen if the non-immigrant does not get marry, illegally stays in the US and receives public benefits? Wouldn't the sponsor be liable? Wouldn't the government go after the sponsor.

The I-864 only supercede the I-134 if the non-immigrant adjust his/her status to a legal permanent resident. If there is no I-854, the I-134 is legally binding.

The analogy that I will draw is this. The first contract states that you will buy a car for $10,000. Later, the second contracts states that you will buy the car for $5,000. This does not make the first contract invalid or not binding. The second contract supercede the first contract. If the second contract fails for some reason (like it was procure by fraud), the first contract would still be valid and binding on the parties.

If you disagree with me, please point out from a reliable source where the I-134 is not binding.

[aaron2020 11,651]

There is no freakin' way would I be a joint sponsor on an I-134 for someone's fiancee. If the sponsor does not make enough money or have enough assets to be the sole sponsor on his/her fiancee's K1 visa, how the heck is the sponsor going to show enough money or assets for the I-864? Duh on a very practical question. My feelings is that the sponsor would likely go back to the joint sponsor to ask for help with the I-864. If there is no I-864, the I-134 joint sponsor may get screwed.

Edited September 4, 2009 by aaron2020

[aaron2020 11,651]

See Gary and Alla's post on this issue; http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=180699

[pushbrk 12,186]

Why would the US government asked someone to sign a contract that is not binding on the Signatory? The sponsor guarantees that the non-immigrant will becomes a public charge, and the sponsor guarantees that the non-immigrant would maintain the non-immigrant status and depart the US. The sponsor also acknowledges that he/she can be sue so the government can recover any benefits that the non-immigrant may enjoy as a public charge. So explain to me what would happen if the non-immigrant does not get marry, illegally stays in the US and receives public benefits? Wouldn't the sponsor be liable? Wouldn't the government go after the sponsor.

The I-864 only supercede the I-134 if the non-immigrant adjust his/her status to a legal permanent resident. If there is no I-854, the I-134 is legally binding.

The analogy that I will draw is this. The first contract states that you will buy a car for $10,000. Later, the second contracts states that you will buy the car for $5,000. This does not make the first contract invalid or not binding. The second contract supercede the first contract. If the second contract fails for some reason (like it was procure by fraud), the first contract would still be valid and binding on the parties.

If you disagree with me, please point out from a reliable source where the I-134 is not binding.

No, I-134 sponsors are never sued or billed for benefits collected but I-864 sponsors are.

Google "I-134 not binding".

Edited September 4, 2009 by pushbrk

[pushbrk 12,186]

Why would the US government asked someone to sign a contract that is not binding on the Signatory? The sponsor guarantees that the non-immigrant will becomes a public charge, and the sponsor guarantees that the non-immigrant would maintain the non-immigrant status and depart the US. The sponsor also acknowledges that he/she can be sue so the government can recover any benefits that the non-immigrant may enjoy as a public charge. So explain to me what would happen if the non-immigrant does not get marry, illegally stays in the US and receives public benefits? Wouldn't the sponsor be liable? Wouldn't the government go after the sponsor.

The I-864 only supercede the I-134 if the non-immigrant adjust his/her status to a legal permanent resident. If there is no I-854, the I-134 is legally binding.

The analogy that I will draw is this. The first contract states that you will buy a car for $10,000. Later, the second contracts states that you will buy the car for $5,000. This does not make the first contract invalid or not binding. The second contract supercede the first contract. If the second contract fails for some reason (like it was procure by fraud), the first contract would still be valid and binding on the parties.

If you disagree with me, please point out from a reliable source where the I-134 is not binding.

No, I-134 sponsors are never sued or billed for benefits collected but I-864 sponsors are.

Google "I-134 not binding".

This is the relevant section.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86988.pdf

9 FAM 40.41 N4.6-3 Use of Form I-134, Affidavit of

Support

(CT:VISA-911; 11-02-2007)

a. Because INA 212(a)(4)© and INA 213A require the use of Form I-864,

Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the Act, for so many classes of

immigrants, the use of Form I-134, Affidavit of Support, has been

reduced considerably. Nevertheless, there still are circumstances when

Form I-134 will be beneficial. This affidavit, submitted by the applicant at

your request, is not legally binding on the sponsor and should not be

accorded the same weight as Form I-864. Form I-134 should be given

consideration as one form of evidence, however, in conjunction with the

other forms of evidence mentioned below.