Jump to content
guyfromky

Question about joint sponsor for fiance visa

7 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I found out I can't combine income with family member for I-134 but I may have found a joint sponsor.

 

My question is, if the joint sponsor signs the I-134 for the fiance visa but doesn't sign the I-864 for the adjustment of status, how long would the I-134 obligation for that person last? Until filing for adjustment of status? Or until my fiance gets a green card? Or?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The I-134 is not enforceable. So none/never.

The I-864 is enforceable, which lasts until they become a USC, lose LPR status, earn 40 quarters of SS work credits, or die.

Edited by geowrian

Timelines:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago

9/27/17: received by USCIS

10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received

10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received

10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update)

1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed

1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received

1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice

10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice

10/25/18: Formal approval

10/31/18: Green card received

 

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/17: sent

12/14/17: NOA1 hard copy received

3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification)

3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved!

3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received

4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy

4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy

4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never seen an I 134 enforced, I have read articles that the general legal view is that it is unenforceable. I assume that to the extent it can be said to have any validity that would expire after 90 days.

 

I have not seen a definite legal case on the issue.


“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sourcing, see

https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-12693/0-0-0-13496.html

"Such affidavits, although helpful in judging financial ability, are not legally binding "

 

 


Timelines:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago

9/27/17: received by USCIS

10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received

10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received

10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update)

1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed

1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received

1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice

10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice

10/25/18: Formal approval

10/31/18: Green card received

 

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/17: sent

12/14/17: NOA1 hard copy received

3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification)

3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved!

3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received

4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy

4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy

4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate USCIS do not consider it is legally binding, begs the question why they use it, just wondered what a Court view could be, would they take note of a comment like this?


“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting a fully executed I-864 enforced is hard enough. 😆

 

Moody v. Sorokina 40 A.D.2d 14, 19 (N.Y.S. 2007) :

"Before the enactment of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) (Pub L 104-208, 110 US Stat 3009-546), which amended Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 213A, the affidavit of support was Form I-134. That affidavit was held not to constitute a legally enforceable contract against a sponsor by a sponsored immigrant (see Cheshire, 2006 WL 1208010, *2, 2006 US Dist LEXIS 26602, *6; Tornheim v Kohn, 2002 WL 482534, *3-5, 2002 US Dist LEXIS 27914, *7-15 [ED NY]). The IIRIRA, however, "instituted a legally enforceable affidavit of support for most family[-]based immigrant visa applications" (Notkin, 30th Annual Immigration and Naturalization Institute, The New Affidavit of Support, Practising Law Institute, Oct. 1997, 1021 PLI/Corp 309, 311). The new affidavit of support is Form I-864 (see Sheridan, The New Affidavit of Support and Other 1996 Amendments to Immigration and Welfare Provisions Designed to Prevent Aliens from Becoming Public Charges, 31 Creighton L Rev 741, 752). Pursuant to 8 USC § 1183a (a) (1), "

 

And Vavilova v. Rimoczi, 2012

"In her Complaint, Plaintiff seeks to enforce an affidavit of support (Form I-134) that Defendant signed. Doc. No. 1. A Form I-134 affidavit of support "is not a legally enforceable contract against a sponsor by a sponsored immigrant." Cheshire v. Cheshire, No. 3:05-cv-00453-TJC-MCR, 2006 WL 1208010 at *2 (M.D. Fla. May 4, 2006). This conclusion is shared by district courts throughout the country. See Tornheim v. Kohn, No. 00 CV 5084(SJ), 2002 WL 482534 at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2002) (finding that a Form I-134 affidavit of support is not a legally binding contract); Zirintusa v. Whitaker, No. 05-1738 (EGS), 2007 WL 30603 at *5 (D.D.C. Jan. 3, 2007) (agreeing that a Form I-134 affidavit of support is not a binding contract); and Rojas-Martinez v. Acevedo-Rivera, No. 09-2048 (PG), 2010 WL 2404437 at *2 (D.P.R. June 8, 2010) (citing cases finding that a Form I-134 affidavit is not a legally enforceable contract).

 

Cheshire, Tornehim, Zirintusa and Rojas-Martinez unequivocally indicate that Plaintiff cannot prevail on the claim she asserts in her Complaint. Plaintiff's theory of legal recovery is "indisputably meritless" and Section 1915 authorizes the dismissal of "claims of infringement of a legal interest which clearly does not exist." See Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327, 329. Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the Motion be DENIED and Plaintiff's Complaint be DISMISSED with Prejudice."

 

The above case was actually found to have been frivolous as well, and was dismissed with prejudice.


Timelines:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago

9/27/17: received by USCIS

10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received

10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received

10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update)

1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed

1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received

1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice

10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice

10/25/18: Formal approval

10/31/18: Green card received

 

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/17: sent

12/14/17: NOA1 hard copy received

3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification)

3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved!

3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received

4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy

4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy

4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Getting a fully executed I-864 enforced is hard enough. 😆

 

Moody v. Sorokina 40 A.D.2d 14, 19 (N.Y.S. 2007) :

"Before the enactment of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) (Pub L 104-208, 110 US Stat 3009-546), which amended Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 213A, the affidavit of support was Form I-134. That affidavit was held not to constitute a legally enforceable contract against a sponsor by a sponsored immigrant (see Cheshire, 2006 WL 1208010, *2, 2006 US Dist LEXIS 26602, *6; Tornheim v Kohn, 2002 WL 482534, *3-5, 2002 US Dist LEXIS 27914, *7-15 [ED NY]). The IIRIRA, however, "instituted a legally enforceable affidavit of support for most family[-]based immigrant visa applications" (Notkin, 30th Annual Immigration and Naturalization Institute, The New Affidavit of Support, Practising Law Institute, Oct. 1997, 1021 PLI/Corp 309, 311). The new affidavit of support is Form I-864 (see Sheridan, The New Affidavit of Support and Other 1996 Amendments to Immigration and Welfare Provisions Designed to Prevent Aliens from Becoming Public Charges, 31 Creighton L Rev 741, 752). Pursuant to 8 USC § 1183a (a) (1), "

 

And Vavilova v. Rimoczi, 2012

"In her Complaint, Plaintiff seeks to enforce an affidavit of support (Form I-134) that Defendant signed. Doc. No. 1. A Form I-134 affidavit of support "is not a legally enforceable contract against a sponsor by a sponsored immigrant." Cheshire v. Cheshire, No. 3:05-cv-00453-TJC-MCR, 2006 WL 1208010 at *2 (M.D. Fla. May 4, 2006). This conclusion is shared by district courts throughout the country. See Tornheim v. Kohn, No. 00 CV 5084(SJ), 2002 WL 482534 at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2002) (finding that a Form I-134 affidavit of support is not a legally binding contract); Zirintusa v. Whitaker, No. 05-1738 (EGS), 2007 WL 30603 at *5 (D.D.C. Jan. 3, 2007) (agreeing that a Form I-134 affidavit of support is not a binding contract); and Rojas-Martinez v. Acevedo-Rivera, No. 09-2048 (PG), 2010 WL 2404437 at *2 (D.P.R. June 8, 2010) (citing cases finding that a Form I-134 affidavit is not a legally enforceable contract).

 

Cheshire, Tornehim, Zirintusa and Rojas-Martinez unequivocally indicate that Plaintiff cannot prevail on the claim she asserts in her Complaint. Plaintiff's theory of legal recovery is "indisputably meritless" and Section 1915 authorizes the dismissal of "claims of infringement of a legal interest which clearly does not exist." See Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327, 329. Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the Motion be DENIED and Plaintiff's Complaint be DISMISSED with Prejudice."

 

The above case was actually found to have been frivolous as well, and was dismissed with prejudice.

You have access to sources I have not seen or mentioned!

 

That would have been very useful in a thread last year. Pretty much kills it.


“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Didn't find the answer you were looking for? Ask our VJ Immigration Lawyers.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×