Questions about sponsoring for I-134 and I-864

[pushbrk 12,898]

I never said anything about a "co-sponsor for the I-134" whatever that means. I, in fact, said the co-sponosr also has to fill out the I-134 and I still hate lawyers.

Good grief.

What in the world is the matter with you? What is up with this crusade? And why would you rather keep going and going and going with it in various threads? Did you not like the discussion we were having in the other thread - the one wherein you asked a question and I responded?

And - there is no such thing as a co-sponsor for the I134.

Then why do Consular officers keep sending K visa applicants away with 221g requests for co-sponsors, in exactly those words? Since we use the term here every day tens if not hundreds of times, if you don't like it, please suggest a replacement and make your suggestion to Captain Ewok, so the guides can be changed to reflect your superior knowledge in the matter. See below...

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...mp;page=support

The US fiance is ALWAYS the primary sponsor, but may have a co-sponsor. If there is a co-sponsor, both the

US fiance and the co-sponsor will EACH have to fill out the affidavit I-134 or I-864 and EACH will have to provide

supporting documentation.

While there are no specific income requirements listed in the I-134 form directions, you will be judged by the

same criteria as the I-864 form requirements when they are issueing the visa at the foreign US consulate, so

provide financial information for the I-134 with those guidelines in mind.

[rebeccajo 14]

I never said anything about a "co-sponsor for the I-134" whatever that means. I, in fact, said the co-sponosr also has to fill out the I-134 and I still hate lawyers.

Good grief.

What in the world is the matter with you? What is up with this crusade? And why would you rather keep going and going and going with it in various threads? Did you not like the discussion we were having in the other thread - the one wherein you asked a question and I responded?

And - there is no such thing as a co-sponsor for the I134.

Then why do Consular officers keep sending K visa applicants away with 221g requests for co-sponsors, in exactly those words? Since we use the term here every day tens if not hundreds of times, if you don't like it, please suggest a replacement and make your suggestion to Captain Ewok, so the guides can be changed to reflect your superior knowledge in the matter. See below...

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...mp;page=support

The US fiance is ALWAYS the primary sponsor, but may have a co-sponsor. If there is a co-sponsor, both the

US fiance and the co-sponsor will EACH have to fill out the affidavit I-134 or I-864 and EACH will have to provide

supporting documentation.

While there are no specific income requirements listed in the I-134 form directions, you will be judged by the

same criteria as the I-864 form requirements when they are issueing the visa at the foreign US consulate, so

provide financial information for the I-134 with those guidelines in mind.

The guides are wrong.

And if the last poster in the thread below were still around here, he'd support what I have told you. Since he's not, I'll just let you read his words.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43552

[Bobby+Umit 161]

Here you go.

USCIS Affidavit of support

This page infers that both the I-864 and the I-134 use the same income level of the I-864P. Most of the posts from consulates/embassy seem to indicate they use this same document for level of income.

Bobby -

I don't see any inference of the sort.

I use this part for my 'inferring":

Other types of aliens, including parolees, students, and diversity immigrants, are not sponsored using Form I-864. A different affidavit of support (USCIS Form I-134) is used for these aliens if an immigration or consular officer requires it.

Now, when you go look at that form (I-134), it says that you have to show you make "sufficient" income. It doesn't state exactly what level you need. Nor does it give any reference to where to go for the level.

So you can rightly deduce that the level would be the same as the I-864, since that shows the level of income which is "sufficient" not to go on public assistance.

If you can match the 125% level, you, of course, meet the 100% level the State department talks about. (thanks for the link)

And by looking at other posts by people who went through the process, they talk of this 125% level most of the times, and rejections mention this 125% level.

So, in conclusion, if you take all the information presented, you can infer that the level of income for the I-134 can be the same level as the I-864. In fact, once you try to AOS, you must match the I-864 level, so why not show this in the beginning?

Remember, this is just my take on the information, everyone is free to do their own thinking

[GJen 9]

Like Gary I've heard that some embassies/consulates require 125% for the I-134.

The Dept. of State website states 100% for the I-134. See this link: http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/ty...types_2994.html

I don't think the I-134 allows for a co-sponsor. The I-864 does allow for co-sponsor.

With the short time period between required marriage and AOS with the K1 if the petitioner doesn't meet the 100% might as well have the same sponsor for both as the 134 "obligation" stops with the AOS (which does require the I-864 with income requirement of 125%).

EXACTLY!

And since it's the Department of State that uses the form, that's why their guidance is the guidance that matters.

*USCIS and DOS are NOT one and the same*

Brownie points for understanding that there is no such thing as a co-sponsor with the I134.

No co-sponsor allowed for the I-134? Does that mean the co-sponsor would be the person sponsoring and not me? Ahh.. help

[pushbrk 12,898]

I never said anything about a "co-sponsor for the I-134" whatever that means. I, in fact, said the co-sponosr also has to fill out the I-134 and I still hate lawyers.

Good grief.

What in the world is the matter with you? What is up with this crusade? And why would you rather keep going and going and going with it in various threads? Did you not like the discussion we were having in the other thread - the one wherein you asked a question and I responded?

And - there is no such thing as a co-sponsor for the I134.

Then why do Consular officers keep sending K visa applicants away with 221g requests for co-sponsors, in exactly those words? Since we use the term here every day tens if not hundreds of times, if you don't like it, please suggest a replacement and make your suggestion to Captain Ewok, so the guides can be changed to reflect your superior knowledge in the matter. See below...

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...mp;page=support

The US fiance is ALWAYS the primary sponsor, but may have a co-sponsor. If there is a co-sponsor, both the

US fiance and the co-sponsor will EACH have to fill out the affidavit I-134 or I-864 and EACH will have to provide

supporting documentation.

While there are no specific income requirements listed in the I-134 form directions, you will be judged by the

same criteria as the I-864 form requirements when they are issueing the visa at the foreign US consulate, so

provide financial information for the I-134 with those guidelines in mind.

The guides are wrong.

And if the last poster in the thread below were still around here, he'd support what I have told you. Since he's not, I'll just let you read his words.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43552

If the guides and the Consular officers who use the term regularly are wrong, then please go fight the battle with the Captain and the US Department of State instead of arguing your case with members in threads where people are asking about what they need to do to actually get their loved ones adequately "sponsored" you know, in real life.

Still waiting for your suggestion as to a replacement term for "co-sponsor" in K visa cases. Do you have one?

Do you have a recommendation for the OP as to what to provide his fiance(e) in the way of financial documentation and/or qualifications or do you just want to nit-pik the term we use here every day, Consulates use every day and for a long long time?

Edited March 10, 2009 by pushbrk

[rebeccajo 14]

Like Gary I've heard that some embassies/consulates require 125% for the I-134.

The Dept. of State website states 100% for the I-134. See this link: http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/ty...types_2994.html

I don't think the I-134 allows for a co-sponsor. The I-864 does allow for co-sponsor.

With the short time period between required marriage and AOS with the K1 if the petitioner doesn't meet the 100% might as well have the same sponsor for both as the 134 "obligation" stops with the AOS (which does require the I-864 with income requirement of 125%).

EXACTLY!

And since it's the Department of State that uses the form, that's why their guidance is the guidance that matters.

*USCIS and DOS are NOT one and the same*

Brownie points for understanding that there is no such thing as a co-sponsor with the I134.

No co-sponsor allowed for the I-134? Does that mean the co-sponsor would be the person sponsoring and not me? Ahh.. help

Yes. That is what it means.

[rebeccajo 14]

I never said anything about a "co-sponsor for the I-134" whatever that means. I, in fact, said the co-sponosr also has to fill out the I-134 and I still hate lawyers.

Good grief.

What in the world is the matter with you? What is up with this crusade? And why would you rather keep going and going and going with it in various threads? Did you not like the discussion we were having in the other thread - the one wherein you asked a question and I responded?

And - there is no such thing as a co-sponsor for the I134.

Then why do Consular officers keep sending K visa applicants away with 221g requests for co-sponsors, in exactly those words? Since we use the term here every day tens if not hundreds of times, if you don't like it, please suggest a replacement and make your suggestion to Captain Ewok, so the guides can be changed to reflect your superior knowledge in the matter. See below...

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...mp;page=support

The US fiance is ALWAYS the primary sponsor, but may have a co-sponsor. If there is a co-sponsor, both the

US fiance and the co-sponsor will EACH have to fill out the affidavit I-134 or I-864 and EACH will have to provide

supporting documentation.

While there are no specific income requirements listed in the I-134 form directions, you will be judged by the

same criteria as the I-864 form requirements when they are issueing the visa at the foreign US consulate, so

provide financial information for the I-134 with those guidelines in mind.

The guides are wrong.

And if the last poster in the thread below were still around here, he'd support what I have told you. Since he's not, I'll just let you read his words.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43552

If the guides and the Consular officers who use the term regularly are wrong, then please go fight the battle with the Captain and the US Department of State instead of arguing your case with members in threads where people are asking about what they need to do to actually get their loved ones adequately "sponsored" you know, in real life.

Still waiting for your suggestion as to a replacement term for "co-sponsor" in K visa cases. Do you have one?

Do you have a recommendation for the OP as to what to provide his fiance(e) in the way of financial documentation and/or qualifications or do you just want to nit-pik the term we use here every day, Consulates use every day and for a long long time?

The term is 'sponsor'.

The financial documentation for that person is the same as it would be if the petitioner were the sponsor.

Pushbrk - you often say that the correct terminology matters. Does that only apply if you are the one doing the correcting?

[pushbrk 12,898]

I never said anything about a "co-sponsor for the I-134" whatever that means. I, in fact, said the co-sponosr also has to fill out the I-134 and I still hate lawyers.

Good grief.

What in the world is the matter with you? What is up with this crusade? And why would you rather keep going and going and going with it in various threads? Did you not like the discussion we were having in the other thread - the one wherein you asked a question and I responded?

And - there is no such thing as a co-sponsor for the I134.

Then why do Consular officers keep sending K visa applicants away with 221g requests for co-sponsors, in exactly those words? Since we use the term here every day tens if not hundreds of times, if you don't like it, please suggest a replacement and make your suggestion to Captain Ewok, so the guides can be changed to reflect your superior knowledge in the matter. See below...

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...mp;page=support

The US fiance is ALWAYS the primary sponsor, but may have a co-sponsor. If there is a co-sponsor, both the

US fiance and the co-sponsor will EACH have to fill out the affidavit I-134 or I-864 and EACH will have to provide

supporting documentation.

While there are no specific income requirements listed in the I-134 form directions, you will be judged by the

same criteria as the I-864 form requirements when they are issueing the visa at the foreign US consulate, so

provide financial information for the I-134 with those guidelines in mind.

The guides are wrong.

And if the last poster in the thread below were still around here, he'd support what I have told you. Since he's not, I'll just let you read his words.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43552

If the guides and the Consular officers who use the term regularly are wrong, then please go fight the battle with the Captain and the US Department of State instead of arguing your case with members in threads where people are asking about what they need to do to actually get their loved ones adequately "sponsored" you know, in real life.

Still waiting for your suggestion as to a replacement term for "co-sponsor" in K visa cases. Do you have one?

Do you have a recommendation for the OP as to what to provide his fiance(e) in the way of financial documentation and/or qualifications or do you just want to nit-pik the term we use here every day, Consulates use every day and for a long long time?

The term is 'sponsor'.

The financial documentation for that person is the same as it would be if the petitioner were the sponsor.

Pushbrk - you often say that the correct terminology matters. Does that only apply if you are the one doing the correcting?

No, it doesn't only matter when I'm doing the correcting. Are you correcting the Consular officers?

So, what is your recommendation for the petitioner who doesn't qualify to sponsor? Do you recommend only one I-134 from the qualified sponsor, or two I-134 forms (when the consulate uses the I-134) one from the petitioner and one from the "sponsor"? Let's not fail to help the member asking the question, just to make a technical point.

We (and that's a huge "we" that includes a wide range of individuals, government agencies and service providers) refer to the petitioner as the sponsor and the additional "sponsor" as "co-sponsor" for clarity. We do it whether technically correct or not because in the vast majority of K visa cases, where the petitioner is not a qualified sponsor, two people provide affidavits of support and we need a way to conveniently and effectively differentiate between those two people.

If you have a problem with this, you have a much bigger fight on your hands than picking nits here will do anything to resolve.

[rebeccajo 14]

I've always suggested the beneficiary go to interview with as many affidavits as they need.

The particular consulate may decide to take just one from the person with the most sufficient resources. Or they may elect to take one from a party with sufficient resources and another from the petitioner. Who knows what they then do with those two affidavits? For all we know, they could bin the one with from the petitioner. But if they want to make the beneficiary hand it over, a visa won't be issued without it.

So as usual, it's a consulate specific issue.

You can call it nit-picking if you like. That's your prerogative. I'm certainly not picking a fight. I'm merely giving you the straight talk.

[payxibka 10,045]

supplementary or auxillary sponsor

[Anh map 2,098]

Like Gary I've heard that some embassies/consulates require 125% for the I-134.

The Dept. of State website states 100% for the I-134. See this link: http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/ty...types_2994.html

I don't think the I-134 allows for a co-sponsor. The I-864 does allow for co-sponsor.

With the short time period between required marriage and AOS with the K1 if the petitioner doesn't meet the 100% might as well have the same sponsor for both as the 134 "obligation" stops with the AOS (which does require the I-864 with income requirement of 125%).

EXACTLY!

And since it's the Department of State that uses the form, that's why their guidance is the guidance that matters.

*USCIS and DOS are NOT one and the same*

Brownie points for understanding that there is no such thing as a co-sponsor with the I134.

No co-sponsor allowed for the I-134? Does that mean the co-sponsor would be the person sponsoring and not me? Ahh.. help

Jen, regardless of the term (co-sponsor, additional sponsor, supplementary, etc.) you need to find someone willing to sponsor G that meets the 100% income mark for the K1 visa process. Then you will need to find someone for the AOS that will meet the 125% income requirement or supplement your income to get over that mark.

The suggestions from VJ'ers regarding your case have been to find the same person that can meet the requirements for 125% to save you and G the stress of lining up 2 sponsors.

Keep working as you have been to address the income requirements.

[pushbrk 12,898]

I've always suggested the beneficiary go to interview with as many affidavits as they need.

The particular consulate may decide to take just one from the person with the most sufficient resources. Or they may elect to take one from a party with sufficient resources and another from the petitioner. Who knows what they then do with those two affidavits? For all we know, they could bin the one with from the petitioner. But if they want to make the beneficiary hand it over, a visa won't be issued without it.

So as usual, it's a consulate specific issue.

You can call it nit-picking if you like. That's your prerogative. I'm certainly not picking a fight. I'm merely giving you the straight talk.

So then posts one and two of this thread covered things quite nicely.

[rebeccajo 14]

I've always suggested the beneficiary go to interview with as many affidavits as they need.

The particular consulate may decide to take just one from the person with the most sufficient resources. Or they may elect to take one from a party with sufficient resources and another from the petitioner. Who knows what they then do with those two affidavits? For all we know, they could bin the one with from the petitioner. But if they want to make the beneficiary hand it over, a visa won't be issued without it.

So as usual, it's a consulate specific issue.

You can call it nit-picking if you like. That's your prerogative. I'm certainly not picking a fight. I'm merely giving you the straight talk.

So then posts one and two of this thread covered things quite nicely.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I've always suggested the beneficiary go to interview with as many affidavits as they need.

The particular consulate may decide to take just one from the person with the most sufficient resources. Or they may elect to take one from a party with sufficient resources and another from the petitioner. Who knows what they then do with those two affidavits? For all we know, they could bin the one with from the petitioner. But if they want to make the beneficiary hand it over, a visa won't be issued without it.

So as usual, it's a consulate specific issue.

You can call it nit-picking if you like. That's your prerogative. I'm certainly not picking a fight. I'm merely giving you the straight talk.

So then posts one and two of this thread covered things quite nicely.

Yeah, I thought so.

[rebeccajo 14]

Yeah, I thought so.

Gary -

You do a lot of good work around here.

You have great potential to learn if you're willing to expand your mind.