AAO (Published) on 204(c) - Matter of Christo's, Inc.

Official Headnotes:

(1) An alien who submits false documents representing a nonexistent or fictitious marriage, but who never either entered into or attempted or conspired to enter into a marriage, may intend to evade the immigration laws but is not, by such act alone, considered to have “entered into” or “attempted or conspired to enter into” a marriage for purposes of section 204(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154(c) (2012). Matter of Concepcion, 16 I&N Dec. 10 (BIA 1976), followed.
(2) Misrepresentations relating to a nonexistent marriage may render the beneficiary inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) (2012), when the Director adjudicates the application for adjustment of status.

"The Vermont Service Center Director (“VSC Director”) determined that the beneficiary lacked the requisite employment qualifications and thus revoked a previously approved Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140).  In its decision to dismiss the petitioner’s appeal of the revocation, the Administrative Appeals Office (“AAO”) affirmed the VSC Director’s determination with respect to the beneficiary’s qualifications and further identified the marriage fraud bar at section 204(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154(c) (2012), as an additional ground of ineligibility.

The AAO subsequently reopened the matter and permitted the petitioner to submit a supplemental brief and additional evidence pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(5)(ii) (2014).  Upon review, the AAO will sustain the appeal and reinstate approval of the petition. ...

In this case, the record contains a fictitious marriage certificate filed with the Form I-130 petition.  Nonetheless, the AAO concludes that the beneficiary credibly established that the purported marriage never occurred and that he did not otherwise enter into, or conspire or attempt to enter into, a marriage for the purpose of evading the immigration laws of the United States.  Thus, section 204(c) is inapplicable. ...  The appeal is sustained." - Matter of Christo's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537 (AAO 2015).

[Hats off to Annelise M. Araujo!]