(1) Extreme Hardship .
The waiver applicant must establish that extreme hardship would result if he or she is removed from the U.S.
• whether the alien has already suffered hardship during or prior to his or her status as a conditional resident is irrelevant. Only extreme hardship which would result from deportation (presumably to the alien’s home country) is pertinent. The statute is prospective, not retrospective, in this regard. However, in some situations hardship already experienced can have a bearing on hardship which an alien might expect to experience if he or she is removed. For example, in some countries, a woman who has been divorced may suffer extreme isolation ("shunning") in her home country or culture which rises to the level of persecution.
• Because the adjudication of a waiver application is a matter of discretion, factors which are not directly related to the marriage fraud provisions may be taken into account. As with any adjudication proceeding, the applicant bears the burden of proof to establish eligibility for the benefit sought.
(2) Good Faith, Not at Fault .
Despite the best intentions, marriages do not always work out, and sometimes even bona fide marriages fall apart in less than 2 years. IMFA was not meant to be a tool to be used against unlucky or unlikely marriages; it was meant to be a tool against fraud. Accordingly, IMFA provides for a waiver if the alien can establish that he or she entered the marriage in good faith and he or she was not at fault in failing to meet the IMFA requirements.
• It does not matter if the conditional resident’s spouse entered the marriage in good faith, only the intent of the conditional resident him or herself is relevant. Interviewing the conditional resident’s former spouse may provide relevant and valuable information on the alien’s intent, or it may only result in a spiteful information
Back to Top
• In determining good faith, it is usually helpful to look at the actions of the parties following immigration to the U.S.or grant of adjustment of status . The same clues which can be useful in an ongoing marriage (i.e did they intend to establish a life together, was there commingling of asset and resources )
• The statute requires that the alien establish that he or she "was not at fault in failing to meet the requirements" for filing a joint petition for removal of conditions. This should not be read as requiring that the alien’s divorce decree finds his or her spouse to have been at fault, nor does it require that the divorce was obtained on a no-fault basis. . Likewise, a divorce decree stating that the alien was "at fault" (with regards to the breakup of the marriage) does not preclude USCIS from independently determining that he or she was not at fault, at least with regard to the requirements of the immigration law.
USCIS will make its own determination on this issue. While the language of the divorce decree may provide useful information on the reasons why the marriage was terminated (and therefore why a joint petition was not possible), and may even significantly increase the alien’s burden of proof, the decision on whether to grant the waiver belongs to USCIS, not to the divorce court judge.
• The statute uses the phrase "has been terminated" when talking about the marriage. As such, an alien whose conditional resident status is approaching the 2-year anniversary of the grant of such status, but who is unable to file a joint petition to remove the conditions because divorce or annulment proceedings have commenced, may not apply for a waiver of the joint filing requirement based on the "good faith" exception. If an alien’s conditional resident status is terminated because he or she could not timely file a Form I-751, and he or she is placed in removal proceedings, then he or she may request a continuance from the immigration judge to allow for the finalization of the divorce or annulment proceedings.
(3) Battering or Extreme Cruelty .
The original IMFA (as enacted in 1986) did not contain a separate waiver provision for victims of battering or extreme cruelty. Although in most cases, such victims could easily qualify for either of the two waiver provisions, Congress found that there was a need to spell out that victims of such treatment are entitled to special consideration under the law. As a result, section 216 of the Act was amended by section 701 of the Immigration Act of 1990 to add this waiver. It is important that in adjudicatin g such waiver applications INS officers are aware of and in accord with the views of Congress in passing this legislation. :
• Police reports and hospital records can be key documents in establishing that battering or extreme cruelty existed, but not all cases of abuse contain these items. USCIS Officers will accept and evaluate other, less traditional, forms of documentation. Conversely, in the worst marriage fraud cases it is not unheard of for evidence of abuse or battering to be fabricated (someone who is willing to commit marriage fraud would not be unwilling to file a false police report).
Back to Top
(i) Interview at the Local Office .
Unless waived, an interview shall be conducted by an immigration adjudicator or other officer at the district office, files control office or sub office having jurisdiction over the joint petitioners’ residence.
(1) Joint Petition .
An interview based on a joint petition is used to determine the bona fides of the marriage. As such, it is quite similar to an interview conducted in relation to a (marriage-based) adjustment application.
There is no discretionary authority to be exercised when adjudicating a joint petition,
(2) Waiver of Joint Petitioning Requirement .
Only under the rarest of circumstances will the interview requirement be waived in the case of an alien seeking a waiver of the filing requirement under section 216(c)(4) of the Act.
Unlike joint petition proceedings, the statute on IMFA waiver proceedings grants the Attorney General discretionary authority. Accordingly, if significant negative factors are discovered during the waiver interview (such as the alien having a criminal record) which outweighs the positive factors, they can be used to deny the waiver application.
(j) Denial..
There is no appeal from the denial of a Form I-751 filed as either a joint petition or a waiver application. Instead, the alien is placed in removal proceedings where he or she may renew the petition or application before the immigration judge. An approval of a Form I-751 joint petition or waiver application also applies to any conditional resident children who are included on the form and are eligible for removal of conditions. (But not to a child who has not acquired at least 21 months of residence; that child would have to file a separate I-751 at a later date under the regulatory waiver provision
(k) Naturalization Issues Relating to Conditional Residence .
Time spent as a conditional resident counts towards the three years/five years requirement for Naturalization.
Note: If the naturalized citizen is the parent of a child who was admitted as a conditional resident based on the parent’s marriage, and that child did not also become a citizen, the child is required to file Form I-751 for removal of conditions.
Back to Top
***********************************************************************************************************************