greencardgamesucker

Here's my work-around for the open mail issue. She didn't leave me with her forwarding address or number. I have no other way to reach her except for email. Even so, I don't believe I have a duty to convey her mail to her. It's just not reasonable. The only real duty people to take action (aside from paying taxes) is is to help their spouse if they are in danger. So, is the risk of being deported amount to danger? Negative - danger in this case is defined as physical danger!

I think I'll pay a visit to the AOS supervisor who I've befriended and return the letter in that fashion - in addition to other incriminating information.

I think the USC's attorney was unprepared because he either did not expect the court to adhere strictly to contract law or is simply not a good attorney. The latter is probably most accurate given the nature of a lawsuit.

You are correct in that the court simply looked into whether the contract was valid. Since it was and the defense forwarded no contract defenses (void for fraudulent enducement, i.e. marriage fraud), it appears that the court had no other choice other than turning to damages.

Again, this is a radically new interpretation of the affidavit. We will, very soon, see the courts illuminate some of the grey area that we've been discussing. My case would definitely flush out a lot of these issues. However, I do not want to see my name in the case books yet!

john and marlene: it would be a defense to enforcement: fraudulent enducement. You would only use this in the case you were sued. Yes, I believe it is an extemely viable defense!

Re the envelope - your idea is the best one yet. To answer, it was addressed only to her. And yes, I did open it inadvertently. I believe a copy was likely sent to an immigration attorney she might have retained...although I am not certain.

I still am not sure whether I should let her know about the interview...leaning towards no. If she doesn't attend, I believe the case is abandoned. However, I think it can be revived upon a showing of good faith - something that'd be hard to prove if she neglected to change her address. Then again, USIC could've overlooked the change notice, which seems to happen regularly. Many possibilities.

You are right - my issue with Stump is that the alien can leave the day after filing the affidavit and be in the clear - if the case is expedited. No family court would ever provide alimony for a day marriage. However, Stump paves the way for support.

As far as I can tell, AOS cases have been subject to expedited processing ("rubber stamping") since Fall 2005.

I didn't read the background of wendy's thread, but I do know this. From Stump (which is only persuasive law at this point/not binding), the court makes it clear that they are intent on protecting the government in that they don't want to risk an alien becoming a public ward. The case is full of holes, as indicated by this analysis:

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2006,0110-wheeler.shtm

A court is only to look within the 4 corners of a contract and not read anything into it. While the Stump court desperately tried to accomplish this, the fact is that the affidavit is poorly written leaving many issues unaddressed. I believe the aff is fatally flawed when it comes to enforcement. Most significantly, the wording (as debated on BE) says nothing about payments but only refers to "reimbursement" - and only reimbursement to the government. Secondly, the aff is between the govt and the sponsor. 3rd parties typically don't have standing to sue in order to enforce a contract they aren't party to.

I should note that when I gave my ex the GC, I was able to obtain a few things including a notarized property settlement agreement where I attempted to insulate myself from enforcement of the affidavit. However, very few things in the law are black and white. Even that agreement may have holes... It's still clearly in my best interest to see the case denied.

Congrats on your anniversary. Pretty funny re the garden!

Meauxna: Thank you so much for your help!

I read the expat thread and my thought are these:

It is my understanding that the waiving the AOS interview is a new course of action taken to relieve the backlog. I consider it an undue taking by the govt in that it destroys one of the safeguards (whether we want it or not) put in place to protect the USC and ultimately the US. Notably, during the interim period (between applying for AOS and issuance of GC), the sponsor can withdrawal the affidavit of support at anytime, which abandons the case. Again, while the majority of couples prefer expedited processing, it really is a valuable safeguard to ferret out the wolves! Besides, there are really no rights afforded by expediting other than the luxury of certainty. The alien can still travel (AP) and work (EAD).

That being said, since this is a new process, it is possible that (1) an AOS interview can be reinstated upon reasonable doubt as to the merits of the case, e.g. my letters; (2) an interview is going to be a regular process for those marriage cases that were approved without an interview (we'll see more and more of these situations reported here); or (3) one hand of USCIS isn't communicating with the other hand and the whole thing is a mistake. However, I think 3 is less likely now that you've informed me that others are being called in after the fact.

I came upon the Stump case while researching my options...I'm an attorney. That side of me is fascinated by all of this - while the human side is petrified! The Stump case is remarkably similar to mine except that my wife left within 2 months as opposed to the 13 months of Stump. (page 4-5)

Stump v Stump:

http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/cases/2005,1107-stump.pdf

You are correct in that I gave her the GC in order to facilitate her starting work, thus detering her from becoming a public ward wherein I would have to provide support. At this point, I was under the impression that I was screwed and that her status in the US was secure - for at least 2 years until the removal of conditional status proceeding.

The AOS Supervisor told me that the GC was legally hers and that if she became aware the GC had been approved and she didn't receive it, she could simply request another. I determined it was in my best interest to start working with her...or at least provide the appearance.

Another thing - I'm not really even supposed to know about the interview. The letter was addressed to her. That's the "can of worms" someone mentioned... Also, should I even tell her about the interview? It appears that she failed to change her address - which is a felony for aliens. I don't think I have a duty. What happens then? I would like to expedite the process.

Retribution: Yes, I agree that it's counterproductive to destroy. I think that if someone is happy with their life, then they won't go out of their way to screw someone else's. HOWEVER, I'm on the hook financially for 10 years! If she ever accesses means-tested benefits, e.g. medicare, I am 100% liable. Also, according to recent case law, I am contractually obligated to maintain her at 125% of the poverty level. (Pay attention sponsors!) This is brand new case law stating that regardless of the merits of the marriage, an affidavit of support is a contract to basically pay the alien monthly support. see Stump v Stump. The alien can sue for breach of contract AND recover attorneys fees - because it's a blatant breach!

Evidence: My evidence included recordings of her stating (1) that she would hurt me if I did not attend the AOS interview with her; (2) that she would hurt me if I divorced her; (3) that she would pay me if I helped her get her greencard. Since this time, I've got evidence that she began a relationship with a guy within 1 month of our marriage and is now living with him (phone calls, emails, etc.). While it's circumstantial evidence, it's strong.

Mistake: the letter has her name on it. I'll look into the possibility of it being a fraud investigation.

How do you know she actually received the green card? Unless you saw it, she could have lied. Did you go to an AOS interview, and what was the timeline for this?

I handed her the greencard -- after meeting with an AOS supervisor who informed me I was basically screwed and that after 2 years, she would have to remove the conditional status alone - which is possible upon satisfying the burden of proof of bona fide marriage - a small hurdle at this stage.

The AOS interview was waived. As some may have noticed via other threads, a number of AOS applications have been transfered to Cali for expedited processing. These cases are approved without an interview within a month. This was our case. The greencard was originally approved without an interview. However, now an AOS interview is scheduled....perhaps due to my letters???

I should also add that I reported this to ICE. This alien is the very reason some of you are having so many problems with your own interviews. She is the reason you must submit the excessive amount of evidence, etc. Obviously, I have taken this extremely serious.

Without going into detail, I, the USC, married a K1 and within 2 months, she moved out. Before I could withdrawal my affidavit of support, the AOS application was transferred to Cali where it was rubber stamped. My letter of withdrawal along with a ton of evidence indicating marriage fraud crossed the approved AOS in the mail. Shortly thereafter, the alien's greencard arrived. Needless to say, I was devasted. She beat the system and me.

However, just today, 3 months after the card arrived, a notice of AOS interview was received. I'm not sure why it came to me because she moved out and I thought had changed her address....

Has anyone heard of somone getting an AOS interview AFTER it's been approved?

Does anyone else know of anything I can do to seal the deal? Should I agree to attend and then drop the ball? She doesn't even know I tried to withdrawal.

Thanks.