U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

MATTER OF 0-0-A-

APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION

Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office

DATE: MAR. 8, 2017

PETITION: FORM I-360, PETITION FOR AMERASIAN, WIDOW(ER), OR SPECIAL IMMIGRANT

The Petitioner seeks immigrant classification as an abused spouse of aU .S. citizen. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 204(a)( 1 )(A)(iii), 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(l )(A)(iii). Under the Violence Against Women Act (VA WA), an abused spouse may self-petition as an immediate relative rather than remain with or rely upon an abuser to secure immigration benefits.

The Director denied the Form I-360, Petition tor Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (VA WA petition), concluding that the Petitioner did not establish that he had a qualifying relationship as the spouse of a U.S. citizen and is eligible for immediate relative classification based upon that relationship, as required by sections 204(a)(l)(A)(iii)(II)(aa)(AA) and 204(a)(l)(A)(iii)(II)(cc) ofthe Act, respectively.

The matter is now before us on appeal. With this appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and additional evidence. The Petitioner claims that he established that he has a qualifying relationship with a U.S. citizen spouse.

Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal.

I. LAW

Section 204(a)(l )(A)(iii)(I) of the Act provides that a petitioner who is the spouse of a United States citizen may self-petition for immigrant classification if the petitioner demonstrates that he or she entered into the marriage with the United States citizen spouse in good faith and that during the marriage, the petitioner or his or her child was battered or subjected to extreme cruelty perpetrated by the petitioner's spouse. In addition, a petitioner must show that he or she is eligible to be classified as an immediate relative under section 20l(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, resided with the abusive spouse, and is a person of good moral character. Section 204(a)(l)(A)(iii)(II) ofthe Act.

The eligibility requirements are explicated in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 2Q4.2(c)(l), which states, in pertinent part:

(b)(6)

Matter of0-0-A-

(i) Basic eligibility requirements. A spouse may file a self-petition under section 204(a)(l)(A)(iii).,. of the Act for his or her classification as an immediate relative ... if he or she:

(A) Is the spouse of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States;

(B) Is eligible for immigrant classification under section 201 (b )(2)(A)(i) ... ofthe Act based on that relationship [to the U.S. citizen spouse].

The evidentiary guidelines are further explained in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(c)(2), which states, in pertinent part:

(ii) Relationship. A self-petition filed by a spouse must be accompanied by evidence of citizenship of the United States citizen . . . . It must also be accompanied by evidence of the relationship. Primary evidence of a marital relationship is a maniage certificate issued by civil authorities, and proof of the termination of all prior maniages, if any, of ... the self-petitioner ....

The burden of proof is on a petitioner to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter o.fChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369 (AAO 2010). A petitioner may submit any evidence for us to consider, however, we determine the credibility of and the weight to give that evidence. Section 204(a)(l)(J) ofthe Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(c)(2)(i).

II. ANAL YSJS

The Petitioner married D-C-, 1 a U.S. citizen, in 2013. The Petitioner subsequently tiled a VA W A petition based on his marriage to D-C- and submitted with the VA W A petition a death certificate for his first spouse, T-A-, indicating that she died on 2013. Director issued a request for evidence (RFE), notifying the Petitioner that an overseas verification request (OVR) performed by staff from the U.S. Consulate in Nigeria indicated that local authorities in Nigeria were not able to confirm that the death certificate was properly issued, and requesting the original death certificate issued by the National Population Commission (NPC) in Nigeria.

In response to the RFE, the Petitioner submitted a copy of the death certificate with a stamp and seal from the NPC in Nigeria, as well as a letter from the NPC, which the Director found to be insufficient, and, accordingly, denied the VA W A petition. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a letter from the Nigerian consulate in as well as additional copies of the death certificate and the letter from the NPC, and statements from two individuals. We have reviewed all of the evidence in the record of proceedings.

1 Initials are used in this decision to protect the identities of the individuals.

2

(b)(6)

Matter of 0-0-A-

A. Qualifying Relationship and Corresponding Immigrant Classification

The death certificate and the other documents submitted by the Petitioner are not sufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner has a qualifying relationship with a U.S . citizen.

The death certificate reflects that it was issued in and bears the name and signature of a registrar. In the RFE, the Director advised the Petitioner that the OVR generated a response indicating that local authorities could not confirm that the death certificate was issued by the registrar listed on the death certificate, and the Director further explained that the OVR indicated that a civil records registrar is not available in the locality where the death certificate was issued. As noted above, the Director directed the Petitioner to submit the original death certificate forT -A-.

The Petitioner resubmitted the same death certificate in response to the RFE, but bearing stamps and a seal from the NPC for One of the stamps is labelled "Certified True Copy," and indicates that it is signed by the director of the NPC for The accompanying letter is signed by the state director of the NPC for and indicates that the death certificate was "duly issued, well documented and correctly archived by the Registrar at the National Population Commission Office, m Local Government Area of of Nigeria."

The U.S. Department of State's Visa Reciprocity Schedule for Nigeria indicates that "the National Population Commission issues ... certificates for ... deaths .... [and] [a]pplicants can obtain certified true copies of certificates directly from the local government." There is no indication in the record of proceedings that the Petitioner availed himself of this process. The copy of the death certificate the Petitioner submitted in response to the RFE does not comport with the Visa Reciprocity Schedule because it was issued by the NPC for rather than the local government in The letter from the NPC in is subject to the same defect, and, further, the attestation in the letter regarding how the death certificate was issued cont1icts with the information provided by the OVR, which diminishes the evidentiary weight we accord this letter.

The letter from the Nigerian consulate, which the Petitioner submits on appeal, indicates that the consulate "completed its verification process," and confirms that the death certificate and the letter from the NPC in are genuine documents, duly issued by the NPC, and "signed by appropriate authority." The letter from the consulate does not explain its verification process and, accordingly, does not overcome the information obtained by the OVR, which revealed that a civil records registrar is not available in the locality where the death certificate was issued.

The Petitioner also submits with this appeal a statement from 0-K-, who reports that T-A-was her cousin, T-A- died on 2013, and the death certificate was issued by the NPC office in the

Local Government Area. In her statement, D-K- does not explain the basis for her knowledge of the information contained in her statement, including whether she was present when T-A- died and when the death certificate was issued by the NPC office. The other statement the Petitioner submits with this appeal is from J-A-, who asserts that the Petitioner was the husband of T-A- and T-A- died on 2013. J-A- does not, however, indicate in his statement the basis

3

Matter of 0-0-A-

for his knowledge of these asserted facts. Accordingly, the statements from D-K- and J-A- do not establish that the Petitioner's marriage toT-A- terminated prior to his marriage to D-C-.

The Petitioner did not to comply with the RFE and it is the Petitioner who bears the burden in these proceedings to demonstrate his eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe. supra. We exercise sole discretion to detetmine what evidence is credible and the weight to accord such evidence. Section 204(a)(a)(J) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(c)(2)(i). Under this evidentiary standard, the death certificate and the other documents submitted by the Petitioner are not sufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner's marriage to T-A- was terminated prior to his subsequent marriage to a U.S. citizen, as required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(c)(2)(ii). Accordingly, the Petitioner does not demonstrate a qualifying relationship with a U.S. citizen pursuant to subsection 204(a)(l)(A)(iii)(II)(aa) ofthe Act.

B. Eligibility for Immediate Relative Classification

The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(c)(l)(i)(B) requires that the Petitioner be eligible for immediate relative classification under section 201 (b )(2)(A)(i) of the Act based on his qualifying relationship to an abusive U.S. citizen., As discussed in the preceding section, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he had a qualifying relationship with his U.S. citizen spouse. He consequently has not established that he is eligible for immediate relative classification based on such a relationship, as required by section 204(a)(1)(A)(iii)(II)(cc) ofthe Act.

III. CONCLUSION

The Petitioner does not present sufficient probative evidence to establish that he has a qualifying relationship as the spouse of a U.S. citizen and is eligible for immediate relative classification based upon that relationship. Accordingly, the VA WA petition must remain denied.

ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.

Cite as Matter of0-0-A-, ID# 167894 (AAO Mar. 8, 2017)

4