Immigration Law Questions? Ask an Immigration Lawyer.
I married wife 1 in 1995 in Nigeria. She divorced me in 2000. I married wife 2 (US Citizen) in 2002. Adjusted status based on marriage in 2003. I got NTA in 2007 that divorce from Wife 1 was fake. I remarried Wife 2 in 2008, I-130 approved and IJ terminated case. USCIS reopened fraud case and rejected I-485 (married during removal proceedings). Government agrees bigamy was unintentional but it voids 2003 green card. IJ ruled bigamous applicant not eligible for 237a1h waiver to retain 2003 Green Card. I reserved right to Appeal. How do I beat the bigamous charge by USCIS at BIA? Now divorced from Wife 2 and I have 4 US citizen children from another woman.
Wife 1 was the plaintiff in both her divorces. The refiled 130 was approved in 2009 but I mentioned the refiled 485 was rejected (in 2010). USCIS raised a new NTA one day before the rejection decision. Government Attorney would have conceeded if the new I-485 was approved. The fraud document case started with Wife 1's application and she insisted USCIS open the initial fraud case against me. Children born in 2009 and 2010 by 1 woman.
Well, as you can well imagine, legal research is expensive, and it is not something that we can do for you here. The way to win an appeal is to find cases in Federal courts or the BIA that support the position that a person in a non-intentional bigamous marriage, is eligible for a waiver under INA 237(a)(i)(h). What I can do is start you off in the right direction. The law can be found here:
The main case one can start to look at is here:
You can find additional cases to read under the EOIR commentary which can be found here:
Unfortunately, since I cannot do extensive research for you, I have not been able to find much that supports your case, however, I did find one case that I find interesting that may establish that you are at least eligible for Cancellation of Removal. Take a look at this link at the note all the way at the bottom:
Please let me know if you have any additional questions. I would be happy to answer them for you without additional charge. If there is a delay in getting back to you it is either because I am answering other questions or I had to log off, but I will be back with you as soon as possible. It is VERY important that if you are not satisfied, please ask additional questions. DO NOT use the "Poor Service" or "Bad Service" ratings. Please do not rate me on bad news. Bad news is not my fault as I have no control over the law. But my goal is to provide you with top-notch service. Please ask additional questions until you are satisfied so that you give me a positive rating. Just give me a chance to try and help you because I am on your side. If you do rate me positively, a bonus is always appreciated. If you would like to request me in the future, just go to http://www.justanswer.com/law/expert-guillermosenmartin/. Thank you!
The rating section is asking me to rate Franklin and I don't want to give you unfavorable rating by error. Could you have system admin correct that.
Thanks for the time and research. I'm sure if there are so many good news out there, you'll find it.
Your first link has nothing on bigamy, although the section of "Immigration or BIA should not base denial on the original fraud" is helpful but not sure if it's an acceptable arguement in unintentional bigamy. Casem remarried thesame man.
I'm worried about statutory eligibility in para 6 of youe 2nd link.In the 3rd link, what was the decision on his intentional bigamy? Was he eligible for 237a1h waiver? Was he eligible but denied based on his other negative point? And where can I find the decison on his 237a1h waiver for bigamy allegation?
How can I arrange for you to do more research for me?
Hmm. You should be able to rate the answer that I gave you. There should be a drop down menu by my answer. Let me know if that works for you and if not, let me know if it is ok for the administrators to rate me for you and what you would like that rating to be.
As to part 6 in my second link, here is the case:
Here is what that means:
The provisions of this paragraph relating to the deportation of aliens within the United
States on the ground that they were excludable at the time of entry as aliens described
in section 212(a)(6)(C)(i), whether willful or innocent, may, in the discretion of the
Attorney General, be waived for any alien (other than an alien described in paragraph
(i) is the spouse, parent, son, or daughter of a citizen of the United States or
of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence; and
(ii) was in possession of an immigrant visa or equivalent document and was
otherwise admissible to the United States at the time of such entry except for
those grounds of inadmissibility specified under paragraphs (5)(A) and (7)(A) of
section 212(a) which were a direct result of that fraud or misrepresentation.
A waiver of deportation for fraud or misrepresentation granted under this subparagraph
shall also operate to waive deportation based on the grounds of inadmissibility
at entry directly resulting from such fraud or misrepresentation.
So basically, I think the judge in your case is saying that you fail in (ii) because you were not in possession of an immigrant visa meaning that you could not have been approved for that since your 2nd marriage was void. So you would have to find cases that support that the waiver under 237(a)(1)(H) is meant for situations such as that. They are using a chicken before the egg or egg before the chicken argument, so to speak. Again, I can't really do that legal research for you and I don't think you would be able to easily do it online. An attorney that you hire would probably have access to Lexis/Nexis or Westlaw that they pay for in order to do that research which is what they charge clients for. The only other link that I can give you is this one:
And as to the 3rd link, here is the conclusion:
II. CONCLUSION We find that the respondent is ineligible for cancellation of removal under section 240A(a) of the Act because he was never lawfully admitted for permanent residence. We will therefore dismiss his appeal in regard to his eligibility for that relief. However, the respondent, who has a United States citizen child, would appear to be eligible to apply for a waiver under section 237(a)(1)(H) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H) (2000). Despite doubts expressed by the Immigration Judge relating to the respondent 's good moral character, he may also be eligible for cancellation of removal under section 240A(b).6 We will therefore sustain the appeal in part and remand the record to the Immigration Judge.
So it seems that he would be ineligible for Cancellation of Removal for Certain Permanent Residents which the application can be found here:
But it seems that they said that he looked like he was eligible for relief under INA 237(a)(1)(H). And also may have been eligible for Cancellation of Removal for Certain NONpermanent Residents which the application can be found here:
Please let me know if you have additional questions and please do not forget to rate my service to you (not the state of the law) as that is the only way that I can get credit for my assistance. Even after you rate the service, I can still answer additional questions for you without additional charge. Thank you.
All your insights and links are very helpful. I rated you excellent. I prefer to be told what is rather than what I want to hear. I was elated to see the Board's affirmation that he is eligible for 237a1h waiver but I'll like to know the final decision on his 237a1h waiver application.You've been very helpful but how can I hire you for further reseach?
How about further research?
The best I can do are some cases that reference that case:
That should at least get you started in the right direction. I know you want to save money and maybe do this on your own, but remember that this is your status in the U.S. at stake. Good luck to you.
I'm not planning on pursuing the appeal on my own. I'll retain the services of a well informed attorney. Meanwhile, you havent answered my questions on retaining your services.
How about further reseach? Would there be a fee for that and how much?
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).