RECORD IMPOUNDED NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NOS. A-2233-18 A-3932-18 A-1982-19 A.K.S.,1 Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M.V.M., Defendant-Respondent. ________________________ Agued January 26, 2021 – Decided March 3, 2021 Before Judges Yannotti, Haas, and Mawla. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Hudson County, Docket No. FM-09-0124-17. Matheu D. Nunn argued the cause for appellant in A- 2233-18 and Jessie M. Mills argued the cause for appellant in A-3932-18 (Einhorn, Harris, Ascher, Barbarito & Frost, PC, attorneys; Matheu D. Nunn and Jessie M. Mills, on the briefs). 1 We utilize the parties' initials to protect the child's privacy. R. 1:38-3(d). A.K.S., appellant, argued the cause pro se in A-1982- 19. M.V.M., respondent, argued the cause pro se. PER CURIAM In three back-to-back appeals, plaintiff A.K.S. challenges custody, parenting time, and other provisions of a January 24, 2019 Dual Final Judgment of Divorce (FJOD) and companion orders dated January 25 and April 26, 2019, entered following a trial. Plaintiff also appeals from December 6, 2019 and January 15, 2020 orders adjudicating the parties' post-judgment motions. Plaintiff and defendant M.V.M. are Indian citizens. Plaintiff moved to the United States in August 2005 to pursue his graduate degree, and has been employed under an H-1B work visa sponsored by his employer. The parties married in India in December 2011, and defendant moved to the United States under an H-4 dependent-spouse visa; defendant's visa did not permit her to work. A.S. was born in 2013. Defendant's mother traveled to the United States one month before the child's birth and remained with the parties for five months to assist defendant during this time. After A.S.'s birth, the parties traveled to India frequently with the child between 2013 and 2015. In October 2014, the parties traveled to India, with A.S., for defendant's brother's wedding. There, defendant told plaintiff she wanted a divorce and sole custody of A.S. On A-2233-18 2 November 18, 2014, during their stay in India, defendant claimed plaintiff assaulted her and her father. Defendant, and plaintiff's and defendant's families attended the wedding without plaintiff. Plaintiff left India alone on December 1, 2014, without informing defendant, taking A.S.'s passport. Once in the United States, plaintiff sent defendant an email apologizing for his conduct on November 18, and for hacking into and changing her email and Facebook account passwords without her consent. Defendant told plaintiff she was would not return to the United States because of his repeated acts of domestic violence. Unbeknownst to defendant, plaintiff had filed a request with the United States Department of State on January 26, 2015, to enter A.S.'s passport into the Department's Child Passport Issuance Alert Program on grounds defendant had absconded with …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals