K3 and Divorce

[Killer_Clown_2009 0]

Actually Mermaid in your quest to make push look stupid, you did confuse the few who bothered to read your wordy and ill explained post. You said that an I-864 could NOT be withdrawn (no way, no how) and you neglected to mention that you were not referring to a pending case (that's what this thread is about right?), but rather to one where the AOS had been adjudicated. I'm sorry, you can't claim clearness in your post. Slanted and biased towards making someone else appear stupid would be a more apt description.

Go back and reread your comment when you told push that he was incorrect about being able to wothdraw an I-864. If you can get past your arrogance, you will see that you did not explain yourself well and in fact that your statement was incorrect as yes an I-864 can be withdrawn.

Edited August 30, 2007 by jane2005

[pushbrk 12,115]

Actually Mermaid in your quest to make push look stupid, you did confuse the few who bothered to read your wordy and ill explained post. You said that an I-864 could NOT be withdrawn (no way, no how) and you neglected to mention that you were not referring to a pending case (that's what this thread is about right?), but rather to one where the AOS had been adjudicated. I'm sorry, you can't claim clearness in your post. Slanted and biased towards making someone else appear stupid would be a more apt description.

Go back and reread your comment when you told push that he was incorrect about being able to wothdraw an I-864. If you can get past your arrogance, you will see that you did not explain yourself well and in fact that your statement was incorrect as yes an I-864 can be withdrawn.

Without belaboring the whole thing with a lot of quoting.

I said the USC can't withdraw a petition for AOS. First, it's not a petition. It's an application and the USC didn't submit it.

I did not say the USC "has no part in it". I said their part was related to corroborating that there is a bona fide ongoing relationship. I always agreed that without the USC's corroboration, AOS would fail on the basis of marriage. The "no part in it" was, from the best I can tell, manufactured to aid in the failed attempt to make somebody else look stupid. (No, I never used the word "corroboration". I'm condensing for brevity.) If the USC doesn't show up to the interview or shows up and claims the couple is divorcing, the effect is the USC doesn't corroborate the bona fide marriage basis for AOS.

Mermaid also asserted that AOS success required the USC's support and there was no other way for success.

In fact, the form's instructions spell out the other possibilities including the one I continue to caution the OP about. That is that his wife can attempt to adjust status without him, by claiming he abused her. There is no gaurantee of success, but there isn't with any other basis either.

Can we please keep our focus on the immigration issues instead of personal issues between posters. It's a bad energy, wasted.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Actually Mermaid in your quest to make push look stupid, you did confuse the few who bothered to read your wordy and ill explained post. You said that an I-864 could NOT be withdrawn (no way, no how) and you neglected to mention that you were not referring to a pending case (that's what this thread is about right?), but rather to one where the AOS had been adjudicated. I'm sorry, you can't claim clearness in your post. Slanted and biased towards making someone else appear stupid would be a more apt description.

Go back and reread your comment when you told push that he was incorrect about being able to wothdraw an I-864. If you can get past your arrogance, you will see that you did not explain yourself well and in fact that your statement was incorrect as yes an I-864 can be withdrawn.

Without belaboring the whole thing with a lot of quoting.

I said the USC can't withdraw a petition for AOS. First, it's not a petition. It's an application and the USC didn't submit it.

I did not say the USC "has no part in it". I said their part was related to corroborating that there is a bona fide ongoing relationship. I always agreed that without the USC's corroboration, AOS would fail on the basis of marriage. The "no part in it" was, from the best I can tell, manufactured to aid in the failed attempt to make somebody else look stupid. (No, I never used the word "corroboration". I'm condensing for brevity.) If the USC doesn't show up to the interview or shows up and claims the couple is divorcing, the effect is the USC doesn't corroborate the bona fide marriage basis for AOS.

Mermaid also asserted that AOS success required the USC's support and there was no other way for success.

In fact, the form's instructions spell out the other possibilities including the one I continue to caution the OP about. That is that his wife can attempt to adjust status without him, by claiming he abused her. There is no gaurantee of success, but there isn't with any other basis either.

I'll do likewise and say, without being lengthy, that the essential difference between my assertion and yours, is that while the alien is the "applicant" in the adjustment of status, just because the alien signs the form, this does not preclude the USC from withdrawing from the process. Many here have referred to the USC as unable to withdraw from the AOS at this stage, since the application belongs to the alien. I choose to disagree.

There are a number of ways in which to register a USC's lack of endorsement at this stage. Where we differ is right here in this quote from you...

I said the USC can't withdraw a petition for AOS. First, it's not a petition. It's an application and the USC didn't submit it.

8 CFR 205.1 Automatic Revocation

a. Reasons for automatic revocation. The approval of a petition or selfpetition

made under section 204 of the Act and in accordance with part

204 of this chapter is revoked as of the date of approval:

(3) If any of the following circumstances occur before the beneficiary's

or self-petitioner's journey to the United States commences or, if

the beneficiary or self-petitioner is an applicant for adjustment of

status to that of a permanent resident, before the decision on his or

her adjustment application becomes final:

(i) Immediate relative and family-sponsored petitions, other than

Amerasian petitions.

(A) Upon written notice of withdrawal filed by the

petitioner or self-petitioner with any officer of the

Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.

Edited August 31, 2007 by diadromous mermaid

[Ladylethal 12]

I am under the impression that if the AOS is not yet approved the USC can withdraw his sponsorship, and by doing so her AOS will be processed as if a I-864 was never filed, which in turn will lead to a denial. So in a practical way, he can prevent her from adjusting. And he should do so right away if he wants to get divorced 'cus if while he's deciding all this her petition gets approved, then it will too late to withdraw his sponsorship and he'll have the obligation to support her even after the divorce.

So first thing I'd do is write to USCIS, call, do an INFOPASS, whatever it took to withdraw the sponsorship, cancel that I-864, and then I'd worry about finding a family lawyer and get divorced. Even in Mississipi there's got to be a way to get a divorce when she doesn't want one.

Edited August 31, 2007 by Luis&Laura

[jula 0]

OK people, one Affidavit has been withdrawn. What about the one that was submitted for K3? How long it is good for (3 years)?

[pushbrk 12,115]

Actually Mermaid in your quest to make push look stupid, you did confuse the few who bothered to read your wordy and ill explained post. You said that an I-864 could NOT be withdrawn (no way, no how) and you neglected to mention that you were not referring to a pending case (that's what this thread is about right?), but rather to one where the AOS had been adjudicated. I'm sorry, you can't claim clearness in your post. Slanted and biased towards making someone else appear stupid would be a more apt description.

Go back and reread your comment when you told push that he was incorrect about being able to wothdraw an I-864. If you can get past your arrogance, you will see that you did not explain yourself well and in fact that your statement was incorrect as yes an I-864 can be withdrawn.

Without belaboring the whole thing with a lot of quoting.

I said the USC can't withdraw a petition for AOS. First, it's not a petition. It's an application and the USC didn't submit it.

I did not say the USC "has no part in it". I said their part was related to corroborating that there is a bona fide ongoing relationship. I always agreed that without the USC's corroboration, AOS would fail on the basis of marriage. The "no part in it" was, from the best I can tell, manufactured to aid in the failed attempt to make somebody else look stupid. (No, I never used the word "corroboration". I'm condensing for brevity.) If the USC doesn't show up to the interview or shows up and claims the couple is divorcing, the effect is the USC doesn't corroborate the bona fide marriage basis for AOS.

Mermaid also asserted that AOS success required the USC's support and there was no other way for success.

In fact, the form's instructions spell out the other possibilities including the one I continue to caution the OP about. That is that his wife can attempt to adjust status without him, by claiming he abused her. There is no gaurantee of success, but there isn't with any other basis either.

I'll do likewise and say, without being lengthy, that the essential difference between my assertion and yours, is that while the alien is the "applicant" in the adjustment of status, just because the alien signs the form, this does not preclude the USC from withdrawing from the process. Many here have referred to the USC as unable to withdraw from the AOS at this stage, since the application belongs to the alien. I choose to disagree.

There are a number of ways in which to register a USC's lack of endorsement at this stage. Where we differ is right here in this quote from you...

I said the USC can't withdraw a petition for AOS. First, it's not a petition. It's an application and the USC didn't submit it.

8 CFR 205.1 Automatic Revocation

a. Reasons for automatic revocation. The approval of a petition or selfpetition

made under section 204 of the Act and in accordance with part

204 of this chapter is revoked as of the date of approval:

(3) If any of the following circumstances occur before the beneficiary's

or self-petitioner's journey to the United States commences or, if

the beneficiary or self-petitioner is an applicant for adjustment of

status to that of a permanent resident, before the decision on his or

her adjustment application becomes final:

(i) Immediate relative and family-sponsored petitions, other than

Amerasian petitions.

(A) Upon written notice of withdrawal filed by the

petitioner or self-petitioner with any officer of the

Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.

Nice try at spinning but it doesn't hold water. Nobody asserted the USC could not withdraw from the process. I said the USC couldn't withdraw the AOS application. The two are not the same.

Further, for AOS, any "petitioner" or "self petitioner" is not the USC. It's the Alien.

We were never in any disagreement on the idea of the USC no longer supporting the AOS process, just that there was no "petition" to withdraw at this point and that the application could not be withdrawn by the USC because it wasn't the USC's application. There is no argument about whether the applicant will be successful adjusting status based on a marriage if the USC spouse says the marriage is no longer viable, valid etc.

Really, it's clear to everybody what your agenda was. Please just drop it.

Edited August 31, 2007 by pushbrk

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Nice try at spinning but it doesn't hold water. Nobody asserted the USC could not withdraw from the process. I said the USC couldn't withdraw the AOS application. The two are not the same.

Further, for AOS, any "petitioner" or "self petitioner" is not the USC. It's the Alien.

We were never in any disagreement on the idea of the USC no longer supporting the AOS process, just that there was no "petition" to withdraw at this point and that the application could not be withdrawn by the USC because it wasn't the USC's application. There is no argument about whether the applicant will be successful adjusting status based on a marriage if the USC spouse says the marriage is no longer viable, valid etc.

Really, it's clear to everybody what your agenda was. Please just drop it.

You don't know what you are talking about! I'm done dealing with such a bull-headed, arrogant, condescending know-it-all individual like you. You're all-experienced, right?

Folks, VJ has deteriorated so vastly in the last 6 months, that I question why I continue to be here. I've principally concentrated my posting in this forum, one that I took a personal interest in and spent a great deal of time and effort to develop (for reasons that do not need to be disclosed, but could shed light on why I've been a member at VJ for years) because there are people in this forum that are in need of some help, that for the most part is out of the realm of typical case. However, people like pushbrk whose only agenda, it appears to me, is to try to place himself on a pedestal and claim that all others are wrong, has no personal experience with that stage in the process.

I wish you all well...unless pushbrk starts to commit his "energies" to something more productive, I'll definitely be off to greener pastures.

[Ban Hammer 12,841]

Folks, VJ has deteriorated so vastly in the last 6 months, that I question why I continue to be here. I've principally concentrated my posting in this forum, one that I took a personal interest in and spent a great deal of time and effort to develop (for reasons that do not need to be disclosed, but could shed light on why I've been a member at VJ for years) because there are people in this forum that are in need of some help, that for the most part is out of the realm of typical case. However, people like pushbrk whose only agenda, it appears to me, is to try to place himself on a pedestal and claim that all others are wrong, has no personal experience with that stage in the process.

I wish you all well...unless pushbrk starts to commit his "energies" to something more productive, I'll definitely be off to greener pastures.

i for one prefer to see you stay. you're a great help to people in this forum.

don't make me start a "save the mermaid poll"

[rebeccajo 14]

A great disservice is done on VJ whenever those with anecdotal experience under their belt are belittled and trodden upon by those who think they can interpret the complex, murky waters of immigration law by virtue of their superior knowledge of the english language. No one told them - I presume - that that is what case law is for.

"Straight talk" and the foregone conclusion that lawbooks are written with same cannot replace one of the foundations this site was built upon - anecdotal experience of members and the education they gained from that via their experience.

Pity really. Especially when there is arrogance involved in the equation as well.

[TracyTN 237]

Nice try at spinning but it doesn't hold water. Nobody asserted the USC could not withdraw from the process. I said the USC couldn't withdraw the AOS application. The two are not the same.

Further, for AOS, any "petitioner" or "self petitioner" is not the USC. It's the Alien.

We were never in any disagreement on the idea of the USC no longer supporting the AOS process, just that there was no "petition" to withdraw at this point and that the application could not be withdrawn by the USC because it wasn't the USC's application. There is no argument about whether the applicant will be successful adjusting status based on a marriage if the USC spouse says the marriage is no longer viable, valid etc.

Really, it's clear to everybody what your agenda was. Please just drop it.

Of all the people on this board, DM is about the last one I can think of who has an 'agenda' with posting the immigration information she posts.

Get over yourself.

[no name 1]

Nice try at spinning but it doesn't hold water. Nobody asserted the USC could not withdraw from the process. I said the USC couldn't withdraw the AOS application. The two are not the same.

Further, for AOS, any "petitioner" or "self petitioner" is not the USC. It's the Alien.

We were never in any disagreement on the idea of the USC no longer supporting the AOS process, just that there was no "petition" to withdraw at this point and that the application could not be withdrawn by the USC because it wasn't the USC's application. There is no argument about whether the applicant will be successful adjusting status based on a marriage if the USC spouse says the marriage is no longer viable, valid etc.

Really, it's clear to everybody what your agenda was. Please just drop it.

Of all the people on this board, DM is about the last one I can think of who has an 'agenda' with posting the immigration information she posts.

Get over yourself.

DM is an incredible asset to VJ & it would be a huge loss to see her go.

[Mags 112]

Closed due to TOS infraction.