Matter of Peterson

The case comes forward upon certification from the decision of the District Director, San Francisco, dated. January 11, 1968 con- cluding that the petitioner has not met the burden of proof required to establiA that there exists a bona Me marriage for the purpose of according the beneficiary immediate relative status as contemplated by the Tnimigratian and Nationality Ant, and denying the visa petition. The petitioner, a native-born-citizen of the 'United States, 60 years old, seeks immediate relative status on behalf of the beneficiary as his wife. The beneficiary is a native and citizen of Iran, 53 years old. The parties were married at Carson City, Nevada on February 27, 1966. Each party was married previously and evidence of the termina- tion of the prior marriages has been submitted. The case previously was before us on June 22, 1967 on appeal from the order of the District Director, San Francisco District, dated March 0, 1967 denying the visa petition for the reason that it was not the intent of the petitioner and the beneficiary to enter into a valid state of wedlock and as a result the petitioner had failed to show that a bona fide marriage existed for immigration purposes.

本案因旧金山地区主任1968年1月11日的决定而提交认证，该决定认定申请人未能满足举证责任，以证明存在真实婚姻，从而按照《移民与国籍法》的设想给予受益人直系亲属身份，并拒绝了签证申请。 申请人是美国本土出生的公民，60岁，寻求以受益人丈夫的身份为受益人申请直系亲属身份。受益人是伊朗本土出生公民，53岁。双方于1966年2月27日在内华达州卡森城结婚。双方此前均曾结婚，并已提交先前婚姻终止的证据。 本案此前于1967年6月22日因对旧金山地区主任1967年3月0日命令的上诉而提交本院，该命令拒绝签证申请，理由是申请人和受益人并无缔结有效婚姻状态的意图，因此申请人未能证明就移民目的而言存在真实婚姻。

Interim Decision #1845

临时决定 #1845

The petitioner has been unmarried since his divorce in 1936. He has been retired for the past five years due to poor health and is sup- ported by social security and welfare assistance. The petitioner met the beneficiary about a year and a i alf before their marriage through a mutual friend. He needed a housekeeper and she needed a place to live. Apparently, it was understood between the petitioner, the beneficiary and her married daughter before the marriage that there would be no consummation and that they would reside in separate rooms. The petitioner does not.pay the beneficiary a salary as a house- keeper, but buys the groceries and his wife obtains spending money from her daughter and from her own funds. The petitioner denied that he was paid or promised any money to marry the beneficiary and that he did not marry her to assist her to adjust her immigra- tion status but he married her for the purpose of obtaining a house- keeper. However, he regards her as his wife but understandably dif- ferentiates his present relationship with the beneficiary from the relationship with his first wife. We disposed of the appeal on June 22, 1967 by remanding the ease for questioning of the beneficiary regard- ing the relationship, whether it was intended to be a permanent one, and to examine all other matters which would assist in a determina- tion as to whether this relationship, despite its peculiarities, was a sufficient one to warrant an exemption from the quota requirements and constituted a genuine, bona fide husband and wife relationship. A,sworn statement was taken from the beneficiary on September 14, 1967. She testified that her husband had not had any employment since their marriage because he becomes. short of breath which she thought was pneumonia. (Counsel stated this illness was actually emphysema.) She knew him about a year and a half before they were married, and while she was not in love with him, she liked him and he liked her; lie had nobody, he was sick and she felt sorry for him; she derided to marry him and take care of him (p. 7). The beneficiary agreed that the first time they used to live together normally but he was sick so he suggested that she go to her own room because he was coughing and she would be comfortable; and that since, they have shared the same house but have lived in separated rooms. She acknowledged that he was too sick to engage in normal marital relations. The beneficiary denied that any kind of agreement was entered into in which it was specified that her marriage would not include normal marital relations between husband and wife. Her husband asked her to be his wife and take care of him and his house. The beneficiary denied that she entered in this marriage as a basis for remaining in the United States or to facilitate her stay in the United States. She stated that when they became married she decided to stay with him for as long as she lived.

申请人自1936年离婚以来一直未婚。过去五年因健康不佳而退休，依靠社会保障和福利援助生活。申请人在结婚前约一年半通过共同朋友结识受益人。他需要一名管家，而她需要一个住处。显然，在结婚前，申请人、受益人及其已婚女儿之间已达成理解，即不会有夫妻之实，且他们将分住不同房间。申请人并不向受益人支付管家工资，但购买食品杂货，其妻子从女儿处及自己的资金中获得零花钱。申请人否认曾因与受益人结婚而获得或承诺获得任何金钱，也否认结婚是为了帮助她调整移民身份，而是为了获得管家而与她结婚。然而，他视她为妻子，但可以理解的是，他将目前与受益人的关系与第一任妻子的关系加以区分。我们于1967年6月22日处理了上诉，将案件发回以就关系问题询问受益人，即该关系是否意图为永久关系，并审查所有其他有助于确定该关系尽管有其特殊性，是否足以构成豁免配额要求的充分关系，并构成真正的、真实的夫妻关系。 1967年9月14日对受益人进行了宣誓陈述。她作证称，其丈夫自结婚以来没有任何工作，因为他会气短，她认为那是肺炎。（律师称该疾病实际上是肺气肿。）她在结婚前约一年半认识他，虽然她并不爱他，但她喜欢他，他也喜欢她；他无人依靠，他生病了，她为他感到难过；她决定嫁给他并照顾他（第7页）。受益人同意，他们最初正常地住在一起，但他生病了，所以他建议她回自己的房间，因为他咳嗽，她会更舒服；此后，他们同住一屋但分住不同房间。她承认他病得太重，无法进行正常婚姻关系。受益人否认曾达成任何类型的协议，其中规定她的婚姻不包括夫妻之间的正常婚姻关系。她丈夫请求她做他的妻子并照顾他和他的家。受益人否认她进入这段婚姻是为了留在美国或便利她在美国停留。她表示，当他们结婚时，她决定只要她活着就与他在一起。

The petitioner has the burden of establishing eligibility for the benefit he seeks under the immigration laws on behalf of the bene- ficiary as his wife. Where a marriage has been duly solemnized in accordance with the laws of the place where it is performed, the mar- riage comes into existence at that moment regardless of whether it is followed by sexual intercourse' We believe that the Service has failed to take into account the cir- cumstances of the marriage. The 'parties herein are mature people. The husband has been unable to work for the past five years due to illness. He has been unmarried since 1936 and in view of his illness and age needed a wife who also would be a housekeeper. The wife agreed to become his wife and housekeeper. The petitioner buys the food, otherwise the wife spends her own funds. We regard the fact that the parties sleep in separate rooms and have not had sexual inter- course insignificant in view of the' evidence showing that there was intended a valid and lasting marital relationship which has continued for over two years. The reasons for the marriage appear to be far sounder than exist for most marriages. There is not a single iota of evidence that this was a sham marriage. Where it is found that there does exist a lama fide marriage, that the marriage relationship is intended to be a valid and lasting one, and the parties have continued to reside together for a number of years, the motive or purpose in entering into the marriage is not a primary concern. Under the facts in this case, it was proper to conduct an investigation to establish whether or not a bona fide marital relationship existed. However, once it has been established that the marital relationship was bona. Me, that a valid and lasting husband and wife relationship was intended and was in existence, the marriage will be recognized for immigration purposes. On the basis of the record, we conclude that the bona fides of the ina,rital relationship are fully established. The visa petition will be approved. ORDER: It is ordered, that the visa petition be approved for im- mediate relative status.

申请人负有举证责任，以确立其根据移民法为受益人作为其妻子寻求利益的资格。凡婚姻已按照举行地法律正式举行，婚姻即在那一刻存在，无论其后是否有性交。 我们认为，移民局未能考虑该婚姻的具体情况。本案双方均为成熟人士。丈夫过去五年因疾病无法工作。他自1936年以来一直未婚，鉴于其疾病和年龄，他需要一位同时也是管家的妻子。妻子同意成为他的妻子和管家。申请人购买食物，除此之外妻子花费自己的资金。鉴于证据显示双方意图建立有效且持久的婚姻关系，且该关系已持续两年以上，我们认为双方分住不同房间且未有性交这一事实无关紧要。 结婚的理由似乎比大多数婚姻存在的理由更为可靠。没有一丝一毫证据表明这是虚假婚姻。凡认定确实存在真实婚姻、婚姻关系意图为有效且持久，且双方已持续共同居住多年，则缔结婚姻的动机或目的并非首要关注事项。根据本案事实，进行调查以确定是否存在真实婚姻关系是适当的。然而，一旦确立婚姻关系是真实的、意图建立并存在有效且持久的夫妻关系，该婚姻就移民目的而言应予承认。基于记录，我们认定婚姻关系的真实性已完全确立。签证申请将予批准。 命令：兹命令，该签证申请因直系亲属身份而予批准。