What are my responsibilities ..,.,., NOW???

[raven52 233]

I personally have a great marriage to my wife from Cebu, Philippines. But, my friend Bob, who took me to the Phils. has not been as lucky as me. (raven 52)

Bob, was married, June 2012. He was divorced, due to adultery admissions from his now ex wife, and the divorce is final. He is asking me questions, that I "think" I know the answers to but not sure and he just says, "what I am telling him cannot be true!"

What is his obligations to his ex wife, for the next 10 years? I told Bob that if she asked for any government assistance (food stamps, etc.) he would be responsible for her. I think this is for the next 10 years.

If he ever applied for another K-1 the I-864 would have to show his ex wife, the new woman, and himself.,,.,.,and have income and assets of about 24,000 dollars.

His ex wife has year GC, and is now back here in the USA staying with relatives. Can she apply for her own ROC? What can she do, what can she NOT do?

Any other relevant information, would be appreciated. I ""OWE this man for helping me find a great wife, he was just not as lucky.,.,.,.,please help a fellow member..,.,.,so I can help him!

[brownbella 13]

He theroetically would have to pay the government back if his ex obtained government assistance either for (1) 10 years (total...the clock started when his ex immigrated, so not 10 years AFTER they divorce) or (2) until she naturalizes (meaning, if she naturalizes before 10 years is up). She can file ROC without him. If they are divorced, he doesn't need to do anything about her ROC. Its on her now. After divorce, she will be eligible to naturalize in 3 more years (5 years total, if not married to a US citizen). Also true that if he sponsors or co-sponsors anyone else, he would need to include his ex when calculating his family size. But maybe your buddy should slow down? He's just getting divorced...I hope he takes time to heal instead of thinking about jumping back into a relationship and bringing someone else over.

Edited October 11, 2014 by brownbella

[raven52 233]

Thank you brownbella, as I was close.,.,.so she entered the USA 6-20-12.,.,. that day she got her I-94. I know.,.,.,.,.,I brought her back to Bob, as a favor, as I had been visiting my now wife, Joy. Matter of fact I filed our K-1 the next day, to USCIS Texas, lock box. Remember this all so vividly.

As exactly one year later my wife and I were married! Bob, and hiss ex was at the wedding.

It is mere conjecture of him bringing another K-1 from the Phils..,..,.,.,but maybe in a year or two, I think he will try again, as he really loved her..,.,his ex..,.,.,.,I agree with you, he needs time to himself.,..,.to recover from the shock, of what happened, with his first marriage.

SHOULD HE INFORM USCIS.,.,.,.in some way of the divorce? If so, where should he send his letter?

[KayDeeCee 4,895]

~ Moved from AOS from Family Based Visas to Effects of Major Family Changes on Immigration Benefits - topic not about AOS process ~

[VOL 425]

SHOULD HE INFORM USCIS.,.,.,.in some way of the divorce? If so, where should he send his letter?

If he ever did another k1 or like visa then he more than likely would only need to file a simple Multi Filer Waiver with his package

[tuckin14 58]

He doesn't need to inform USCIS of the divorce, but he can.

She can't (legally anyway) file ROC as married. She'd be crazy to try.

The more tricky thing is for people who file ROC together and then separate while it's pending. (Which was my situation.) There it's possible it could get approved without even in inquiry as to the circumstances of the separation.

[Villanelle 4,122]

He theroetically would have to pay the government back if his ex obtained government assistance either for (1) 10 years (total...the clock started when his ex immigrated, so not 10 years AFTER they divorce) or (2) until she naturalizes (meaning, if she naturalizes before 10 years is up). She can file ROC without him. If they are divorced, he doesn't need to do anything about her ROC. Its on her now. After divorce, she will be eligible to naturalize in 3 more years (5 years total, if not married to a US citizen). Also true that if he sponsors or co-sponsors anyone else, he would need to include his ex when calculating his family size. But maybe your buddy should slow down? He's just getting divorced...I hope he takes time to heal instead of thinking about jumping back into a relationship and bringing someone else over.

Oh my gosh no.

There is no 10 year clock. Nothing is ticking. You (the immigrant) need to earn 40 credits of work with the SSA. Typically if you work full time it will take you 10 years. (which is why people quote the 10 year timeframe) But if you do not work, or work part time jobs or work sporadically it can take you longer then 10 years.

The post mentions the woman just came back to the US from a trip abroad so we can assume she has not been working full time with out interruption since the divorce, plus it can take time from your arrival to get an actual EAD (6 months on avg) So she did not start working the second she arrived in the US.

There is no clock, just credits with the SSA.

SO his aff of support stands. YES, if he attempts to fill out another aff of support he must include the previous immigrant and it will count her in his total. He may have to seek a co-sponsor for the new aff if he can not meet the requirements. The income requirements adjust every year with the cost of living (not by much but the adjust) so no one can give you an exact amount of what the future numbers will be. They always go up slightly though.

---

She will file ROC by herself since they are divorced. This has nothing to do with him. She may ask him for an aff to help with her packet but due to the infidelity its unlikely. She is eligible to naturalize in 5 years based on that marriage, if she does his aff of support is gone.The 3 yrs is gone. If or when she marries some one else she does not apply for ANY benefits under that marriage, she already has benefits.

---

Your friend can inform USCIS of the divorce but really what for? If theres something in the divorce papers he feels she may try to omit then he should send them. Adultery is not a ground to deny a ROC.

Unless he has some type of evidence that would show she did not enter the marriage legitimately- sending a letter explaining he is broken hearted is just going get stamped as trash.

Edited October 11, 2014 by capri

[NikLR 13,231]

He is on the hook for the I-864 until she either leaves the USA permanently, works 40 work quarters (approx 10 years of full time work), becomes a citizen, or dies. (In her case, the earliest she can apply for citizenship is at the 5 year mark provided she qualifies.)

After the divorce she needs to ROC by herself.

It's also possible that a judge can determine that he owes alimony to keep her above the 125% poverty guidelines.

He needs to inform the USCIS whenever he moves with an I-865 until he's no longer liable. He will need to count her on any other I-864 until such a time as he knows he no longer has to. (So keeping in touch, as much as exes do not want to do keep in touch, in this case, it's beneficial.)

[Caryh 5,206]

One other way out of the I-864, is if she looses her green card then re-obtains one through another path. An example might be if she gets denied her ROC, but marries another USC and gets a green card again. The new spouse would be on a new I-864 required to get the new green card. But odds are probably pretty good she can successfully remove conditions without him, happens all the time.

If he brought her to the USA on a K-1, he's got one more shot at using a K-1 visa before he would be required to request a waiver. You're allowed up to two approved I-129F petitions, and one approval per two years. Anything more than that, and he would have to apply for a waiver. This law was put into effect to limit possible trafficking of foreign women.

[Joyce and Chris 1]

Raven52, you only have received a partial answer to your question. The I-864 states that not only the government can sue you but the immigrant can sue you for support as well. You are obligated to keep her at or above the 125% poverty level. That means if she is not working it could be around $18,000 per year, more if she has kids. You better hope she has a job and keeps it or doesn't know about the 125% clause in the I-864. It is also outlined in the little booklet that PI brides get at their required exit class when they are about to leave PI. You should go back and read the 864 again. You should also read I-864 Affidavit of Support from Greg McLawson on this subject. I have personally sat down and talked to him and have lots of emails from him as well. The I-864 is a powerful document and should not be ignored.

[Caryh 5,206]

Raven52, you only have received a partial answer to your question. The I-864 states that not only the government can sue you but the immigrant can sue you for support as well. You are obligated to keep her at or above the 125% poverty level. That means if she is not working it could be around $18,000 per year, more if she has kids. You better hope she has a job and keeps it or doesn't know about the 125% clause in the I-864. It is also outlined in the little booklet that PI brides get at their required exit class when they are about to leave PI. You should go back and read the 864 again. You should also read I-864 Affidavit of Support from Greg McLawson on this subject. I have personally sat down and talked to him and have lots of emails from him as well. The I-864 is a powerful document and should not be ignored.

This is entirely dependent on the jurisdiction of where they lived at the time of the divorce. It has been used successfully in some jurisdictions to get exactly what you state. It has also been shot down in others, as a contract between the government and the petitioner. Greg McLawson is lawyer looking to make money off this document. His web page even says he'll assist those who are sponsors to write prenuptial agreements to shield them from the I-864. In other words, he'll tell anyone exactly what they want to hear so he can hopefully get a case he can make money from. Because one lawyer says something related to his own jurisdiction, does not make this the law of the land in the entire USA, and to represent it as such is deceptive, even if the CFO seems to think this is the case. The CFO's knowledge of the USA and its laws has long been known to be highly flawed and inaccurate.

[Joyce and Chris 1]

Cary you are so dead wrong it is not even funny. Read the I-864 and then read all the test cases that are THROUGHOUT the country. Of course he is going to assist that is his job. But he also assists for both sides of the I-864. And he is not the only immigration lawyer to tell me this. My divorce lawyer also confided with several other immigration lawyers which ALL confirmed the same thing.

Get for facts right before posting on here. Half of your posts have incorrect information. I have talked to legal professionals in regards to these matters. YOU should try and do the same!!

[Caryh 5,206]

Cary you are so dead wrong it is not even funny. Read the I-864 and then read all the test cases that are THROUGHOUT the country. Of course he is going to assist that is his job. But he also assists for both sides of the I-864. And he is not the only immigration lawyer to tell me this. My divorce lawyer also confided with several other immigration lawyers which ALL confirmed the same thing.

Get for facts right before posting on here. Half of your posts have incorrect information. I have talked to legal professionals in regards to these matters. YOU should try and do the same!!

You should probably dig up the thread on this issue. As you're only reading about the positive cases, and not the losses in jurisdictions where the I-864 will not work to get the support you're saying is everywhere.

http://i-864.net/

Today an appeals court in Washington State held that an I-864 beneficiary is not entitled to receive spousal maintenance (i.e., alimony) on account of the I-864, Affidavit of Support.

I'll note this was only in state court where you cannot get alimony. Nothing prevents the party from bring the case to federal court. But it shut down further attempts to get alimony in family courts in the state of Washington.

In another case Vavilova v. Rimoczi in Florida, the federal court refused to hear an I-864 case and threw it out of federal court. Rather interesting actually, when one of the wins for alimony based on the I-864 was also in a Florida federal court.

This is hardly a settled issue. Case law is still being made and will continue to be made. You seem to think it has been settled everywhere, and that is just not how the legal system works in this country.

And its laughable that someone with a reputation of 1 in telling someone with a reputation of over 3000 on this site, that half my posts are incorrect information. In particular when you're using to defend yourself being correct and me being wrong, when you have no attribution of facts to back you up, just your claims of having talked to a lawyer. There are federal courts refusing to hear I-864 cases, they tell them to take it state court where alimony is settled. There are states saying this is federal law, and you have to bring it to federal court and the provisions do not apply to state laws. Eventually this will all be pretty cut and dry as to if and where the I-864 may be used to obtain alimony. That is true in a few places, but its hardly a settled matter and it is going to be many years before it is. And once it does finally reach the US supreme court, my personal opinion it will likely be stated that alimony issues, like marriage and divorce, are provisions of state law and not under federal purview.

If you wish to discuss this, then bring on the facts and maybe we can both learn something. I've got no horse in this race, I just like real facts and no the statement I know because I talked with a lawyer, is not real facts. Its an opinion one person got from one lawyer, working in one jurisdiction.

[d3adc0d3 186]

One other way out of the I-864, is if she looses her green card then re-obtains one through another path. An example might be if she gets denied her ROC, but marries another USC and gets a green card again. The new spouse would be on a new I-864 required to get the new green card. But odds are probably pretty good she can successfully remove conditions without him, happens all the time.

If he brought her to the USA on a K-1, he's got one more shot at using a K-1 visa before he would be required to request a waiver. You're allowed up to two approved I-129F petitions, and one approval per two years. Anything more than that, and he would have to apply for a waiver. This law was put into effect to limit possible trafficking of foreign women.

This is related, and more of a curiosity question.

If she gets a 10 year GC, and is a LPR, decides to get married to a non-citizen, and proceeds to immigrate them to the US, is the OP still responsible for her, or once she's married again he can wipe his hands of her?

[Caryh 5,206]

This is related, and more of a curiosity question.

If she gets a 10 year GC, and is a LPR, decides to get married to a non-citizen, and proceeds to immigrate them to the US, is the OP still responsible for her, or once she's married again he can wipe his hands of her?

Actually he is still responsible. But to sponsor someone to immigrate into the USA, they need to also file an I-864, which means they have income to qualify, and although the signer of the I-864 is still responsible for them, they are not using support from that person if they're over the 125% mark.