AOS / K1 / Coronavirus

[Crazy Cat 42,413]

1 hour ago, Poseidon1212 said:

Also, wasn't aware that moderating happened on a request basis, could've sworn I've seen some pro-active moderating around here… but sure, I'll do my part in keeping this place consistent 

It's a combination of what the Mods, themselves,  see and what good posters who want to keep our community clean (like you and me) report......😃

[SalishSea 18,169]

OP,  in our experience at my husband's AOS interview in January, the officer absolutely wanted to know and see evidence of us living together.  Not living together is common in fraudulent marriages.

Edited March 23, 2020 by Jorgedig

[DELETEME1234 208]

1 hour ago, arken said:

 

 

I kinda disagree in the sense that it is against VJ’s ToS. There are some people in some culture who don’t wanna stay together formally married via traditional ceremony. Marrying via court/city hall is legal. So if they did that, petitioning via that marriage is legal whether they live in the same house or not. Will the IO suspect that? May be. That’s another issue but not the ToS violation.

The main difference though, however, is that those ceremonies typically happen on the same day as the legal marriage or within a short timeframe from each other and more importantly (the actual argument) filing for immigration benefits happens after both have commenced. 

 

1 hour ago, arken said:

petitioning via that marriage

It is not. The term that is key here is 'bonafide marriage' and by all accounts USCIS considers a marriage that has taken place for the sole purpose of gaining an immigration benefit (and arguably according to some precedent and definitions even the ones with the main purpose). If you read the opening post, you'll read that OP married to be able to stay here while living apart with the intention of having a ceremony later this year (what  presume is what OP considers the 'real' commencement of their marital union). That makes the legal marriage a marriage of convenience even in the future OP seeks to cure that, because the immigrant benefit sought is one for spouses not one of fiancés. 

 

If they don't start their married life, in particular so because they consider themselves not married (yet), then legally speaking it's not different from people marrying purely to get the non-USC a green card with the thought that in the future, surely they will grow to love each other and become legit. 

 

1 hour ago, Lucky Cat said:

Personally, I don't think it really matters which address or addresses is used when filing.

I personally don't see any issues with filling in one address instead of the two, however this is not a matter of opinion though.

 

The form asks you to sign under penalty of perjury that the information is true, complete and correct. Filling in one address wouldn't be true, complete and correct and arguably fraudulent. More so, since it would be fuelled by a fear by OP that reflecting the truth on the form would cause issues in the future, irregardless of the legitimacy of these fears. That wouldn't make it untrue and incorrect, it would be an active attempt at misrepresenting the situation, and as such most assuredly fraudulent. And because of that it is in clear violation of the ToS. 

 

1 hour ago, Lucky Cat said:

They are legally married and have valid evidence proving that....i.e. "In the meantime, I am already on his lease, we have a joint bank account and I have proof of joining him on his health insurance.".

This is irrelevant for the question if instructing/condoning a misrepresentation of their living arrangements is against ToS. As for the marriage being legit, for that we'd need more information from OP. But making the assumption that OP doesn't considers herself to be married against whatever standard she upholds, then it is questionable if they are considered to be in a bonafide marriage by USCIS. In fact one could argue that OPs statement that they married to not be apart now in these insecure times goes against INA 204(c) because they try to evade immigration laws. 

 

Also, are you not seeing an issue with being on a lease for an address that they don't live? And yeah sure, plenty of people cosign, but they're not indicated as resident or rather they shouldn't. Worse yet, something isn't proof if the very thing it tries to prove isn't true. At that point it's a fraudulent document or at the very least a misrepresentation of facts (to gain an immigration benefit…). 

 

 

Look, here's the deal. 

 

First and foremost there's a likelihood OP can't even do an AOS because of the home residency requirement of the J1. If that's the case then OP needs to fulfil that requirement first or get a waiver, otherwise OP will face a denial. 

 

Until OP can confirm that they have taken into account this fact, there's not much useful information to give on the matter. 

 

 

As for the ToS. I personally don't think OP (if they're eligible to adjust status) would face any practical issues and for the record I also don't agree with the ToS (in this instance). Doesn't change the fact that I'd like to see consistency. If we're removing AOS information that could potentially be used to commit immigration fraud, we should definitely be removing messages that directly condone or instruct fraudulent or illegal immigration activities.

Telling someone to marry to file CR/IR1 instead of filing for K1 is borderline in breach with INA 204(c) and might warrant a legal debate on the matter, telling someone to fill in something contrary to the truth is not up for debate, it is fraudulent.  

 

Selective moderating based on what collides with the personal/political opinion of moderators is would be to the detriment of VJ in my humble opinion.

 

It's staggering how selective some are in this topic in regards to what they are willing to condone. Falsifying documents is apparently a-ok, but changing one's intent once they've been admitted to the country invites severe scrutiny (from the same people in some cases). 

 

[arken 4,197]

7 minutes ago, Poseidon1212 said:

The main difference though, however, is that those ceremonies typically happen on the same day as the legal marriage or within a short timeframe from each other and more importantly (the actual argument) filing for immigration benefits happens after both have commenced. 

 

There is no such requirement.

 

 

Quote

It is not. The term that is key here is 'bonafide marriage' and by all accounts USCIS considers a marriage that has taken place for the sole purpose of gaining an immigration benefit (and arguably according to some precedent and definitions even the ones with the main purpose). If you read the opening post, you'll read that OP married to be able to stay here while living apart with the intention of having a ceremony later this year (what  presume is what OP considers the 'real' commencement of their marital union). That makes the legal marriage a marriage of convenience even in the future OP seeks to cure that, because the immigrant benefit sought is one for spouses not one of fiancés. 

what i see here is that they are trying to deceive their parents/families by marrying secretly and starting the process. If they don’t live together until they have the ceremony, they may face issues proving bonafide marital relationship but not illegal for sure, so no violation.

Edited March 23, 2020 by arken

[DELETEME1234 208]

6 minutes ago, arken said:

There is no such requirement.

True, there is no such requirement in a general sense. If however OP doesn't consider themselves to be married, which is an assumption made based on their comment in regards to living together, until they had the religious ceremony, then in their specific circumstance it is required. After all, if you consider yourself not married in all but legal marital status, USCIS doesn't consider that a bonafide marriage. 

 

8 minutes ago, arken said:

what i see here is that they are trying to deceive their parents/families by marrying secretly and starting the process.

That's an interesting interpretation… You could be right, honestly we won't know until/unless OP is willing to shed light upon specifics. 

 

9 minutes ago, arken said:

If they don’t live together until they have the ceremony, they may face issues proving bonafide marital relationship but not illegal for sure, so no violation.

That depends on their intention. But I agree in practice worst thing that'll happen is a denial, I doubt USCIS would ever think to undertake more severe actions in this case. 

 

 

In a general sense, it seems that many have forgotten that the evidence isn't the goal, it's a means to prove a bonafide marriage. A marriage that only exists on paper, but not in intention and daily life, for which a rental agreement, joint bank statement and joint health care coverage is, from a legal perspective, still just a marriage that exists on paper. The only difference is that there are documents available that are used to give the impression it is more than just that, it doesn't make it more bonafide. That's just reverse reasoning. The marriage makes the evidence bonafide, not the other way around. USCIS just uses those pieces of evidence to lower the risk that the marriage that they scrutinise is not bonafide. But there's nothing stopping people in a non-bonafide green card marriage from jumping through the same hoops to produce the same evidence, that doesn't make it a bonafide marriage. 

 

That is not to say that OP is attempting to commit anything uncouth here, I have no reason to believe to think that they are attempting to commit fraud. But that's not something I've argued. 

 

Besides, like I stated before, assuming OP is eligible for AOS (depending on the situation with their J1), I don't foresee many practical issues if they have their interview by the time they live together.  

 

 

[Nat&Amy 623]

If the form asks for the address where you live, you enter the address where you live. Mailing address is a different beast, so if you want to get all your mail sent to your spouse's address, great.

 

But claiming to live in an address where you don't live is not okay. If your marriage only "starts" after you have a celebration with your family, then it is an issue that you are sending your AoS now, claiming to be living in marital union when you actually aren't. Be prepared to provide very good explanations.

[retheem 568]

11 hours ago, ChimpNL said:

Hi everyone,

 

I'm from the Netherlands but have been in the States on J1 status for the last 1.5 years. I will be out of status this upcoming Thursday.

 

We all know about all the current travel restrictions and the Coronavirus. This made my US fiance and I decide to get married and file AOS, instead of I travelling back to Europe in hopes of returning on a currently pending K1 and having to be seperate from him for an unknown amount of time. We got married over the weekend. However, we are not yet living together. We want to wait until we can have a proper, not rushed, religious ceremony that my parents will hopefully be able to attend, so the travel ban needs to lift for that to happen. We are willing to wait with a ceremony until October at the very latest. If the world is still shut down at that time, then we'll just have to have ceremony without them and move in together, but for now I think we feel it's better to wait to see what happens. 

 

I am absolutely not trying to marry just to get a green card. We have made this decision in an attempt to navigate the current, unprecedented circumstances.  

 

In the meantime, I am already on his lease, we have a joint bank account and I have proof of joining him on his health insurance. We have an affidavit sworn by a third party that our marriage is legitimate. I also have proof that we filed for K1 previously, which to me adds to the legitimacy of our intentions. We will definitely be living together by the time we have our interview and would be able to show pictures of the actual ceremony. 

My idea was to write a cover letter that I attach to my petition, to explain the circumstances. We are just worried that not living together is going to make USCIS think we are committing visa fraud, and deny our application instantaneously without us having a chance to explain ourselves. 

 

What do you guys think? Is a cover letter could enough? Any tips? 

 

Thanks!

"My idea was to write a cover letter that i attach to my petition, to explain the circumstances.."  TMI (Too Much Information). Be smart here; you are married, whether you did it using the courthouse or church.  Merge your accounts, have a joint lease, life insurance. Rule of thumb: When dealing with these guys, your marriage is the best, you have never fought, you live together and you enjoy each other's company. Period. Anything less than that is fodder that could work against you.

Edited March 24, 2020 by retheem

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

11 hours ago, Lucky Cat said:

Personally, I don't think it really matters which address or addresses is used when filing.  They are legally married and have valid evidence proving that....i.e. "In the meantime, I am already on his lease, we have a joint bank account and I have proof of joining him on his health insurance.".  In addition, the couple plans to be living in the same home location soon.  If the IO questions it  at the interview, they can explain it then as a religious concern........and as I said, I, personally, see no reason to live apart.

I think they should file nothing but the truth.. 

 

if they are married and indeed physically living separately then the addresses listed on their petition should reflect this irrespective of her name being on his lease agreement...

 

I’ve had my name on a whole bunch of hubbies stuff including leases for property and vehicles it just means I have some form of financial responsibility... my physical address has always up until now been back home in Australia. 

 

But yeah, I don’t understand the whole point of living separately if your married and both within the US unless your job/Uni takes you interstate 

Edited March 24, 2020 by Duke & Marie

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

15 hours ago, ChimpNL said:

Hi everyone,

 

I'm from the Netherlands but have been in the States on J1 status for the last 1.5 years. I will be out of status this upcoming Thursday.

 

We all know about all the current travel restrictions and the Coronavirus. This made my US fiance and I decide to get married and file AOS, instead of I travelling back to Europe in hopes of returning on a currently pending K1 and having to be seperate from him for an unknown amount of time. We got married over the weekend. However, we are not yet living together. We want to wait until we can have a proper, not rushed, religious ceremony.

 

I am absolutely not trying to marry just to get a green card. We have made this decision in an attempt to navigate the current, unprecedented circumstances.  

My concern is while you say you didn’t get married just for a green card... everything you wrote above contradicts that statement..

 

- j1 will be out of status this week

- current travel restrictions made you decide to get rush and get married over the weekend so you could file AOS

- as you said, y’all did it in an attempt to navigate around current circumstances associated with coronavirus and travel restrictions 

 

i dont want to sound harsh, but this very much sounds like you did get married so you could adjust and stay within the US.. 

Edited March 24, 2020 by Duke & Marie

[DELETEME1234 208]

18 hours ago, Lucky Cat said:

I have never, knowingly,  advised anyone to commit perjury...ever...

Missed your edit there. 

 

I haven't said you advised anyone to commit perjury. I was talking about advising and condoning it respectively. 

The advising was done by @Shipmaster, the condoning is done by you here:

 

21 hours ago, Lucky Cat said:

I agree......no reason to explain at this point, imo.....just file the package.....

At a certain point I figured, perhaps there was a chance you didn't agree with the part in @Shipmaster's comment about using one address. 

 

So I asked you to clarify and as a result you essentially double down with:

 

18 hours ago, Lucky Cat said:

Personally, I don't think it really matters which address or addresses is used when filing.

Which falls within the scope of the 'in any way, shape, manner or method' part of the no condoning clause of the ToS as I've seen it been applied regularly. 

 

At this point it might just be worth asking @Penguin_ie to take a gander since I have yet to see any attempt of any mods to uphold that part of the ToS, nor any argument on how putting down false information to misrepresent a situation doesn't fall within the scope of that clause.

Since to my understanding there's no exception for condoning fraudulent acts when a mod personally has no issues with it, I had expected some self-reflection and course correction instead of inaction. 

 

Selectively applying the ToS, especially when it sometimes gives the impression that it's used to silence stuff that goes against their own agenda, but even being selective in a general sense, impugns the credibility of VJ as a whole. It does nothing but hurts the community. 

 

In any case, speaking of self-reflection, this is getting too much off-topic and 'hijack-y' so I'll stop harping on it in this topic. 

 

As for the actual topic at hand, as has been said multiple times; OP can't adjust if her J1 came with the home residency requirement. It's not necessarily an insurmountable requirement, but we'll have to wait for OP to inform us before we can advise further. Until then, there's no use in further litigating the matter.