Blue Slip

[J & Q 0]

After waiting for almost 4 hours, my fiance finally had her interview. She received a blue slip however because the Vietnamese employee told her that she didn't have my supporting statement. She showed them the copy of the notarized original but they said that is not acceptable, that they need the original.

We don't know what to do at this poiut as we sent the original supporting statement to Vermont when we filed for the I-129f. I would therefore assume that the consulate in Ho chi Minh City should have it, right? If they do not have what should I do?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Teacher Mark 53]

I would try to contact Vermont and see if they have it. I, like you, would have assumed that HCMC would have it.

I would go get another one notarized ,along with an explanation that the original was sent to Vermont. I would also be on the phone to ALL of the Representatives from my State.

If that is all that they gave the blue slip for then you should be good. Hopefully you could resubmit and get back in within a few months.

This is just another example of a seriously flawed process. Keep your head up, you two will get through it!

Edited May 14, 2008 by WideAwakeInTheUSA

[PeterFB 0]

Sorry to hear about getting the blue.

The Consulate has your original statement but the problem is they don't know that because they don't bother to look at your I-129f from USCIS. The instructions for your interview says to have the originals of all requested documents. The Vietnamese woman at the window is just following her procedures. You should have included another original statement even if it was copied from the copy. Seeing a copy of any document that the Consulate requires will get you a blue slip.

It might be possible to get the Consulate to look at your I-129f but I think they will wait until you submit another one. Write one ASAP and sent it FEDEX, DHL or UPS to her. If that is the only thing wrong, then you will get your pink. However, it's government standard procedure to return/reject at the first error. Once the error is corrected, they then start over again. If there's another error or something the Consulate feels they need more info about (ie, birth certificates of parents), then they will hand out another blue. It seems silly but several people on VJ have that problem of submitting one piece of evidence only to be asked for more. Now would be a good time to look again at your evidence, docs etc to make sure you don't have another blue coming, send any additional evidence, etc asap to avoid waiting for months.

Another possible idea is to contact Marc Ellis, He might be able to resolve this quickly if you can afford to hire him.

Good Luck, We hope you get this resolved quickly and are together soon.

Peter and Thi

I-129F Sent : 2007-05-26

I-129F NOA1 : 2007-06-11

I-129F RFE(s) :

RFE Reply(s) :

I-129F NOA2 : 2007-10-26

Touched: 2007-11-02

NVC Recieved: 2007-11-16

Consulate recieved ??????

Packet 3 sent 2007-12-11

Packet 3 received 2007-12-24

Packet 3 returned 2007-12-28

Packet 4 sent 2008-1-14

Email Reply with Interview Date 2008-1-23

Interview Date 2008-2-27

Passed Interview 2008-02-27

Visa Pick Up Date 2008-3-05

Received Visa 2008-2-29 (called to pick up earlier)

POE 2008-3-05 Los Angeles

Wedding 2008-4-26

Edited May 14, 2008 by PeterFB

[Rob & Jin 0]

what "supporting statement" ? do you mean your I-134 ? or intent to marry ?

[J & Q 0]

what "supporting statement" ? do you mean your I-134 ? or intent to marry ?

The supporting statement that I sent to Vermont for the petition. They needed it to validate our relationship.

[J & Q 0]

Sorry to hear about getting the blue.

The Consulate has your original statement but the problem is they don't know that because they don't bother to look at your I-129f from USCIS. The instructions for your interview says to have the originals of all requested documents. The Vietnamese woman at the window is just following her procedures. You should have included another original statement even if it was copied from the copy. Seeing a copy of any document that the Consulate requires will get you a blue slip.

It might be possible to get the Consulate to look at your I-129f but I think they will wait until you submit another one. Write one ASAP and sent it FEDEX, DHL or UPS to her. If that is the only thing wrong, then you will get your pink. However, it's government standard procedure to return/reject at the first error. Once the error is corrected, they then start over again. If there's another error or something the Consulate feels they need more info about (ie, birth certificates of parents), then they will hand out another blue. It seems silly but several people on VJ have that problem of submitting one piece of evidence only to be asked for more. Now would be a good time to look again at your evidence, docs etc to make sure you don't have another blue coming, send any additional evidence, etc asap to avoid waiting for months.

Another possible idea is to contact , He might be able to resolve this quickly if you can afford to hire him.

Good Luck, We hope you get this resolved quickly and are together soon.

Peter and Thi

I-129F Sent : 2007-05-26

I-129F NOA1 : 2007-06-11

I-129F RFE(s) :

RFE Reply(s) :

I-129F NOA2 : 2007-10-26

Touched: 2007-11-02

NVC Recieved: 2007-11-16

Consulate recieved ??????

Packet 3 sent 2007-12-11

Packet 3 received 2007-12-24

Packet 3 returned 2007-12-28

Packet 4 sent 2008-1-14

Email Reply with Interview Date 2008-1-23

Interview Date 2008-2-27

Passed Interview 2008-02-27

Visa Pick Up Date 2008-3-05

Received Visa 2008-2-29 (called to pick up earlier)

POE 2008-3-05 Los Angeles

Wedding 2008-4-26

Peter,

I greatly appreciate you taking the time to provide me with some direction as to what to do. Should I have it notarized as well as authenticated by the Secretary of State or will just a notarzed statemebt be enough?

Who is Marc Ellis?

Thanks again,

Jeff

[J & Q 0]

I would try to contact Vermont and see if they have it. I, like you, would have assumed that HCMC would have it.

I would go get another one notarized ,along with an explanation that the original was sent to Vermont. I would also be on the phone to ALL of the Representatives from my State.

If that is all that they gave the blue slip for then you should be good. Hopefully you could resubmit and get back in within a few months.

This is just another example of a seriously flawed process. Keep your head up, you two will get through it!

I am going to make a bunch of calls tomorrow. I contacted the Immigration Attorney that I hired to handle the petition. She too is at a loss. She did however suggest that I compose another supporting statement, have it notarized, and send it to my fiancee ASAP.

They also said that the bank statements for my 2 trips to Vietnam are not acceptable, that they need an acknowledgment receipt. I gave my fiancée the statements, cancelled checks, and boarding passes. I don't know what they are looking for and have no idea what an acknowledgment receipt is.

Thanks,

Jeff

[PeterFB 0]

J&Q

Any Public Notary will do. The Consulate wants to make sure you are the one who signed the statement and know what it contains. A Notary will verify that you signed the staement, and by signing your name, the Consulate will assume you know what the statement says. By notarizing, the Consulate makes the statement a legal document which could be used in Immigration Court.

Marc Ellis is a lawyer who has helped many VJs and others with their cases at HCMC Consulate. He lives in HCMC. If you do a search of his name you can find out more about him.

Your attorney is correct, get the supporting statement to your fiancee ASAP.

I'm assuming you mean the bank statements showed your checks that you used for your trip to Vietnam. Your checks are secondary evidence. The receipt (acknowledgement receipt) from the travel agency or online site where you purchased the tickets is what they want to support your bank statement, cancelled checks and boarding passes. That way everything is verified by a third party. IE, the travel agency, bank and airline of your trip to Vietnam. Did you submit your hotel bill or temporary residency book (if you stayed with the family or friends) with your I-129f? If not you should also have that evidence available as they may ask for it once you submit what they currently have asked for. As I said before, now is the time to prepare for anything else they may want you to submit.

Hopefully you can get this resolved quickly and get the pink.

Good luck.

Peter and Thi

I-129F Sent : 2007-05-26

I-129F NOA1 : 2007-06-11

I-129F RFE(s) :

RFE Reply(s) :

I-129F NOA2 : 2007-10-26

Touched: 2007-11-02

NVC Recieved: 2007-11-16

Consulate recieved ??????

Packet 3 sent 2007-12-11

Packet 3 received 2007-12-24

Packet 3 returned 2007-12-28

Packet 4 sent 2008-1-14

Email Reply with Interview Date 2008-1-23

Interview Date 2008-2-27

Passed Interview 2008-02-27

Visa Pick Up Date 2008-3-05

Received Visa 2008-2-29 (called to pick up earlier)

POE 2008-3-05 Los Angeles

Wedding 2008-4-26

[hope2018 25]

So you need the I-134 fed ex it tomarrow what else do they need it sounds like it is very simple make a new I-134 if that is what you are saying they need or do they need some thing else. Good luck Marc is a great Lawyer with Mr. Nam and his staff FYI.

Edited May 15, 2008 by Eric and An Thuy

[BigCityDave 0]

So you need the I-134 fed ex it tomarrow what else do they need it sounds like it is very simple make a new I-134 if that is what you are saying they need or do they need some thing else. Good luck Marc is a great Lawyer with Mr. Nam and his staff FYI.

I am still confused as to what original document is needed.

[Teacher Mark 53]

Sorry to hear about getting the blue.

The Consulate has your original statement but the problem is they don't know that because they don't bother to look at your I-129f from USCIS. The instructions for your interview says to have the originals of all requested documents. The Vietnamese woman at the window is just following her procedures. You should have included another original statement even if it was copied from the copy. Seeing a copy of any document that the Consulate requires will get you a blue slip.

It might be possible to get the Consulate to look at your I-129f but I think they will wait until you submit another one. Write one ASAP and sent it FEDEX, DHL or UPS to her. If that is the only thing wrong, then you will get your pink. However, it's government standard procedure to return/reject at the first error. Once the error is corrected, they then start over again. If there's another error or something the Consulate feels they need more info about (ie, birth certificates of parents), then they will hand out another blue. It seems silly but several people on VJ have that problem of submitting one piece of evidence only to be asked for more. Now would be a good time to look again at your evidence, docs etc to make sure you don't have another blue coming, send any additional evidence, etc asap to avoid waiting for months.

Another possible idea is to contact , He might be able to resolve this quickly if you can afford to hire him.

Good Luck, We hope you get this resolved quickly and are together soon.

Peter and Thi

I-129F Sent : 2007-05-26

I-129F NOA1 : 2007-06-11

I-129F RFE(s) :

RFE Reply(s) :

I-129F NOA2 : 2007-10-26

Touched: 2007-11-02

NVC Recieved: 2007-11-16

Consulate recieved ??????

Packet 3 sent 2007-12-11

Packet 3 received 2007-12-24

Packet 3 returned 2007-12-28

Packet 4 sent 2008-1-14

Email Reply with Interview Date 2008-1-23

Interview Date 2008-2-27

Passed Interview 2008-02-27

Visa Pick Up Date 2008-3-05

Received Visa 2008-2-29 (called to pick up earlier)

POE 2008-3-05 Los Angeles

Wedding 2008-4-26

Peter,

I greatly appreciate you taking the time to provide me with some direction as to what to do. Should I have it notarized as well as authenticated by the Secretary of State or will just a notarzed statemebt be enough?

Who is Marc Ellis?

Thanks again,

Jeff

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showuser=6473

marcellislaw@gmail.com

713.893.7091

[J & Q 0]

Sorry to hear about getting the blue.

The Consulate has your original statement but the problem is they don't know that because they don't bother to look at your I-129f from USCIS. The instructions for your interview says to have the originals of all requested documents. The Vietnamese woman at the window is just following her procedures. You should have included another original statement even if it was copied from the copy. Seeing a copy of any document that the Consulate requires will get you a blue slip.

It might be possible to get the Consulate to look at your I-129f but I think they will wait until you submit another one. Write one ASAP and sent it FEDEX, DHL or UPS to her. If that is the only thing wrong, then you will get your pink. However, it's government standard procedure to return/reject at the first error. Once the error is corrected, they then start over again. If there's another error or something the Consulate feels they need more info about (ie, birth certificates of parents), then they will hand out another blue. It seems silly but several people on VJ have that problem of submitting one piece of evidence only to be asked for more. Now would be a good time to look again at your evidence, docs etc to make sure you don't have another blue coming, send any additional evidence, etc asap to avoid waiting for months.

Another possible idea is to contact , He might be able to resolve this quickly if you can afford to hire him.

Good Luck, We hope you get this resolved quickly and are together soon.

Peter and Thi

I-129F Sent : 2007-05-26

I-129F NOA1 : 2007-06-11

I-129F RFE(s) :

RFE Reply(s) :

I-129F NOA2 : 2007-10-26

Touched: 2007-11-02

NVC Recieved: 2007-11-16

Consulate recieved ??????

Packet 3 sent 2007-12-11

Packet 3 received 2007-12-24

Packet 3 returned 2007-12-28

Packet 4 sent 2008-1-14

Email Reply with Interview Date 2008-1-23

Interview Date 2008-2-27

Passed Interview 2008-02-27

Visa Pick Up Date 2008-3-05

Received Visa 2008-2-29 (called to pick up earlier)

POE 2008-3-05 Los Angeles

Wedding 2008-4-26

Peter,

I greatly appreciate you taking the time to provide me with some direction as to what to do. Should I have it notarized as well as authenticated by the Secretary of State or will just a notarzed statemebt be enough?

Who is Marc Ellis?

Thanks again,

Jeff

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showuser=6473

marcellislaw@gmail.com

713.893.7091

Interesting topic. Thanks for sharing.

[Teacher Mark 53]

That's an article by Marc Ellis. The link is his user profile. I would contact him if I were you. Just my personal opinion. This is a HCMC specific article that is posted on his website:

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2004,0108-ellis.shtm

http://www.marcellislaw.com/

Forget It Jake.... It's The US Consulate In Ho Chi Minh City

by Marc Ellis

In the classic movie "Chinatown", Jack Nicholson plays a private detective named "Jake Gittes". He takes a case that seems routine at first, but quickly turns into an impossible swamp of treachery and deadly double-dealing. Nothing is ever as it seems. And Jake can never quite figure out who is the boss. The climax of the movie occurs in LA's Chinatown. The bad guys win and Jake is left with only a nasty knife cut across his nose to show for his efforts to help his client. He is humiliated and filled with rage. Then a cop standing near him says,

"Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown."

I know the feeling. I get it almost every time I deal with the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon). Fortunately none of the consular staff there have attacked my nose with a knife. But I think one or two of them would probably like to, if they had the opportunity.

But fortunately, I'm safe for the time-being. The staff at the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City work behind secure plexiglass barriers designed to protect attorneys and members of the public from being attacked by consular employees. If you think I have that backwards, visit this consulate and you may understand my point.

The Consulate General is at 4 Le Duan Street, in District One, close to downtown. It is directly next door to the residence of the Consulate of France. The communist city planners of Ho Chi Minh City had an ironic sense of humor in deciding to place the Americans and French next door to each other. There is a small monument to the communist soldiers killed by Americans at the Battle of Hue, January 31, 1968. But to my knowledge, there is no monument to those killed at Dien Bien Phu on the French grounds.

Applicants for visas line up on the sidewalk to have their applications examined by two Vietnamese intake clerks who work behind thick, dark plexiglass. Although I have encountered different clerks inside these windows, most of them radiate the same attitude of hostility and contempt. So for the sake of this article, I have nicknamed these employees, Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler and her twin sister.

Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler and her sister do not like lawyers very much.

Here is how it works:

On December 1, 2003, I came to the window to submit a V visa application. The conversation proceeded as follows: Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler: "Why are you here?" Ellis: (Hands her G-28.) Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler: (Without looking at it, growls) "I know you're a lawyer. Why are you here?"

From this exchange, a practicing immigration attorney might conclude that the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City is not a place that welcomes the participation of lawyers in the immigration process. I don't blame them. We're supposed to protect people from having their rights trampled. That sometimes happens at consulates. A Vietnamese national employee with a softer voice showed up to rescue me. Perhaps she was the trainer of the Rottweiler girls. She took the documents and asked politely,

"Where is approval notice?"

Any lawyer experienced with V Visas will know two things:

* An I-797 is secondary evidence of eligibility with DOS. The Department of State has made the determination not to accept I-797' s as primary evidence of V Visa eligibility. It is not a pre-requisite. [1]

* V Visas are for beneficiaries of petitions which have not yet been approved. So there is no approval notice. For entire cable see [2]

In my case, my client had the original letter from the National Visa Center, but had lost her I-797 Notice of Receipt. I pointed out to the two staffers that DOS had assured us that the CLASS computer data base was supposed to make the I-797's unnecessary by now.

The nice woman then told me, "Yes. We hope in two months that will be the case." I remember being told the same thing at an AILA Conference in San Francisco two years ago. My heart began to sink. But the nice lady accepted my client's V Visa application.

Thinking about I-797's and V visas, my mind turned from "Chinatown" to an old song by Louis Jordan and the Tympani Five, "Is You Is or Is You Ain't My Baby?". If the I-797 is not important enough to be primary evidence of eligibility, why do the consulates demand that they be included in the V visa application?

Practice Tips for submitting V Visa Applications at the HCM Consulate

Practice Tip No. 1 -- Have an I-797 Notice of Receipt with you.

If your client has lost it, replace it with a photo copy of the DOS cable (included in this article), that says I-797's are only secondary evidence of eligibility and that staffers do not have the authority to "...examine secondary evidence such as I-797 notices and determine eligibility to apply for a V based solely on that secondary evidence....". (Paragraph 15 DOS Cable 9/01 on V Visas). But since a lengthy DOS Cable is not likely to get you past Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler and her twin sister, enlist the help of a congressional representative or US Senator well-ahead of time, pointing out that consulates refuse to accept original I-797's as evidence of eligibility and yet demand I-797's be attached to the applications before they will be accepted. As a policy matter, I think it is wise to enlist congressional assistance even in routine consular cases. If Congress receives enough complaints about the way consulates process immigrant visas, perhaps one day we will see hearings on Capital Hill that lead to reform.

Go ahead, call me an optimist. "Is you is or is you ain't my baby?" "Forget it Jake, It's the US Consulate in Ho Chi Minh City."

Part II. "Waiting for Godot"

Visa applicants who manage to survive Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler are allowed to proceed inside to a long waiting room where they can submit their documents, answer questions, or obtain their approval stamps in their passports.

The waiting room of the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City, is a cross between a maximum security Federal Penitentiary and the lobby of an Econo-Lodge. The protruding wall sections by each processing window alternate between prison grey and eggshell white. There are at least fifteen windows. I stopped counting at that number. But most of the windows are un-staffed. Visa applicants and attorneys sit on long, steel benches.

During my first trip to the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City, I was submitting a response to a 221(g) letter. After informing the intake person inside, I was told to go to Window 11.

Practice Tip No. 2 -- In the Waiting Room of the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City - when you are told to go to a window DO NOT go to that window!. Sit down and wait for a staffer from that particular window to call you up. If you make the mistake of going to the window as your were instructed, you will likely encounter a cousin of Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler, who will tell you very sharply to sit down and wait until your name is called.

Practice Tip No. 3 -- If you have more than one application to submit - inform the screener. If he or she tells you to sit down, ask to speak to his supervisor. On one occasion, I told the intake person I had three separate applications. He told me to sit down. I waited two hours. After I was finished with the first application, I went back up to his window to submit the other two. Fortunately, a higher-level consular employee was present. She was very nice and told me that in the future, if I had multiple applications, I would be allowed to submit them at once, rather than going through the absurd, pointless routine of submitting one at a time and waiting separately for each one.

A Note on Client Representation & G-28's

On one occasion, Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler would not allow me to submit documents on behalf of a client on a Friday afternoon. I had a G-28 signed by both the petitioner and the beneficiary. But she told me erroneously, that a different attorney had previously enrolled and the Consulate had not yet received a letter from the petitioner asking to replace that attorney with me. Therefore, she could not allow me to submit any documents on behalf of my client.

Practice Tip No. 4 -- Always remember that there is a difference between a lawyer submitting documents on a client's behalf, and an attorney being authorized to obtain information about the client's case.

Where there is a previously-enrolled attorney, the FAM is clear that the consular staff are not allowed to release information to the new attorney without the previous one being removed. However, on request, the consulate can correspond directly with the petitioner or applicant and allow a subsequently enrolled attorney to submit documents on the clients' behalf.

However, even if there is a previous attorney who has not been removed, a signed G-28, coupled with the two letters mentioned in the FAM , is enough to satisfy the law and allow the new attorney to submit documents on his or her client's behalf, and for the consulate to correspond directly with the applicant, at least until the previous attorney can be replaced as representative of record. I have included the pertinent parts of the FAM below. I have added emphasis where pertinent.

9 FAM 40.4 N12 Working with Attorneys: Establishing Relationships

(TL:VISA-599; 11-24-2003) When a letter is received from an attorney in the United States and the consular officer is reasonably satisfied that an attorney-client relationship exists, correspondence between the post and the attorney may be treated with the same courtesy as provided to the visa applicant. Reasonable evidence establishing the attorney-client relationship may include:

1. Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative, required for practicing before DHS;

2. A printed letterhead stationary showing membership in the legal profession (member of a U.S. State or District of Columbia bar association practicing in the United States) and stating that such an attorney has been retained or employed to represent the applicant; and

3. A letter from the applicant that identifies the attorney or representative with whom the applicant established such relationship.

9 FAM 40.4 N12.1 Corresponding with Representative of Record

(TL:VISA-30; 01-31-1990) The consular officer shall correspond directly with the applicant's representative of record,[3] even in cases where the applicant is physically present in the United States, unless the applicant requests otherwise. However, the fact that there is a representative of record does not preclude the post from corresponding with the applicant, provided the post sends a copy of the communication simultaneously to the applicant's representative. If the representative inquires about the reasons for refusal of a visa, the delay in issuing the visa, or any other aspects of a visa case, the reply shall contain only pertinent facts which are unclassified. [see 9 FAM 40.4 N5.2 above.]

Part III: "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

The US Citizen Services Section is available to provide certain notarial services, such as the Affidavit of Single Status. And this is an area where the consulate could be of great assistance. The Government of Vietnam has some very specific and unusual requirements relating to marrying one of its citizens. (One of the most interesting requirements, is the need for the sponsor to consult a physician and obtain a written letter stating that he or she is not mentally ill!) I don't know if this precaution is based on the government's dim view of foreigners or a dim view of its own citizens as marriage candidates. But it's certainly interesting*.

The "Affidavit of Single Status" is well-known to practitioners who assist with family-based immigration among the Vietnamese in America. It is required by the Government of Vietnam. It is not a requirement of the CIS or DOS. The instructions for affidavits of single status and the forms can be found at the Vietnam Consulate of San Francisco website at: http://www.vietnamconsulate-sf.org/frontpage.html Click on the links "Consular Section" and "Instructions for Marriage with Vietnamese Citizens".

The US Consulate will assist in preparing affidavits of single status for US citizens. I was told by an officer that the sponsor must have his or her fiance(e) present as well as all the documents listed at the above website. The Consulate will not prepare affidavits of single status for lawful permanent residents. And unfortunately, even if you are a US citizen, there is a four-to seven week waiting period before they will schedule you.

Practice Tip Number 5 -- Advise your clients to complete the affidavits of single status in the USA, if possible. If they must make them at the consulate, the US Citizen and his or her intended spouse, should be prepared to undergo a harrowing consular interview about the bona fides of their upcoming marriage. In this respect, the US Consular Officers Ho Chi Minh City are rather like Monty Python's "Spanish Inquisition".

"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

Warn your clients in advance, if they complete the affidavit of single status at this consulate, they should expect the Spanish Inquisition. I watched one poor naturalized Viet Khieu grilled mercilessly by a consular officer about the names of his intended's family members. He appeared to me at least, shocked that he would be treated like this in an office of his own government. I wanted to say,

"Forget it Jake...", but I didn't know if he had seen the movie.

At the stage of the Affidavit of Single Status, no petition has been filed with either the consulate or CIS. This document is not required by any agency of the US Government. It is merely an affidavit by a US citizen. It's a notarial act. The truth of the affidavit is at issue, not the wisdom or validity of a marriage he or she may enter into at some date in the future. The name of this office is US Citizen Services, (emphasis added).

Was this an attempt to gather information about a petition that may be submitted in the future, or was it an effort to discourage US citizens from entering into a fraudulent marriage? Or was it an attempt to discourage US citizens from using the consular notarial services at all?

If it is the former, it is arguably an abuse of the process. What should be at issue is the identity of the affiant and the contents of his or her affidavit. The bona fides of his or her upcoming marriage are not even relevant at this stage.

If it is the latter, it's more understandable. This office is under-staffed. The consular officers I spoke with were polite and professional to me. In fact, I was more impressed with the staff in this office than with any other at the consulate. But I was shocked at how they treated a US citizen who was merely trying to have an affidavit notarized.

Part IV: "We're not re-adjudicating! But we demand more evidence."

In July 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell sent a cable to the consular posts immigrant visa processing offices. I have included the entire post in this article. The paragraph headings of the post are indicative of the problems Secretary Powell was trying to address: "No Deep-Sixing", "Don't Sit On Cases", "Be Judicious In Returning Petitions", and ominously, "Use 221(g) for IV Cases".[4]

The memo reminds consular posts of what should have always been their procedure. A case should not be returned to CIS merely because the officer has certain suspicions about it. The evidence justifying revocation must be "clear". If more evidence is required, the consulate has the power to request it, using a 221(g) letter.

The cable points out that a petition approved by CIS creates a presumption in favor of eligibility for the visa. The only time revocation is called for is when the Consular Officer "knows or has reason to believe" that the petition approval was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation or other unlawful means, or where there is clear evidence that the beneficiary is not entitled to the visa status granted by the petition. Such cases should be rare and would arise from new information that was not known to CIS at the time it approved the petition. In such rare cases, the Consular Officer needs to present "solid factual evidence" as a basis for revocation.

Unfortunately, there is a fine line between requesting additional evidence under 221(g) and re- adjudicating the merits of the entire petition. And that is what is happening today. Post 9/11 and post Colin Powell's July 2001 cable. 221(g) letters are being used to re-adjudicate the merits of petitions approved by CIS. They are also being used as an excuse to sit on cases where the consulate does not have enough evidence to send the petition back to CIS.

I have actually had this Consulate request a US citizen petitioner provide proof of a residence in the US from 1991! Another attorney has told me about a case where CIS refused to revoke an approval sent back by the HCM consulate and the consulate still refuses to issue the visa!

Part V: "Forget it Jake. It's the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City"

There are unique problems of marriage fraud in Vietnam. Part of this problem stems from a refugee policy administered by the US government in the years following April 29, 30, 1975. Many people who were officially persecuted and had good reason for wanting to leave Vietnam were denied refugee status because a father or brother had spent less than three years in communist prison camps.

The identity of the all-knowing bureaucrat at DOS or INS who drew this line is a mystery. And it's not a statutory requirement.

So in the past, a lot of persecuted people who had enough evidence to qualify for a grant of asylum in immigration court would be denied refugee status by refugee processing officers at the Bangkok Thailand Consulate.

No doubt some would-be refugees tried to use phony marriages or other fraudulent avenues of family sponsorship to escape persecution. But most of the population of Vietnam today was not even alive on April 29 and 30, 1975. Still, I concede, the tradition of wanting to escape Vietnam via a phony family-preference visa is still alive and well.

I cannot blame the consular officers for being aggressive in rooting out fraud. But something is terribly wrong with a system which grants Saudis a presumption of eligibility, even post-9/11, granting them a fast-track "Visa Express", that allowed travel agents to be involved in the process, and yet focuses considerable resources on protecting America from Vietnamese spouses and fiancees.

Something is wrong when an unsuspecting US citizen merely trying to have an affidavit notarized is put through an interrogation that would frighten any law-abiding citizen.

But I'm just a lawyer. When I begin to think thoughts like that, I just tell myself,

"Forget it Jake, it's the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City".

Edited May 15, 2008 by WideAwakeInTheUSA

[J & Q 0]

Wow what an article. Thanks for sharing. There are certainly a lot of interesting points especially about marrying a Vietnamese citizen.

I actually went that approach and hit nothing but road blocks. It was certainly a very costly and timely mistake but I certainly learned a lot from it, not that it will be useful in any way. Even the Vietnam Consulate in DC is extremely difficult to deal with. They want things that are impossible to obtain. For instance, the Vietnam Consulate required all and every document to be notarized, authenticated by the County Clerk, and sealed by the Secretary of State. Well, they kept denying the forms saying that it wasn't properly authenticated. This went on for about a month until I finally got fed up and drove from NY to DC to meet the consulate in person. The person who I had ongoing dealings with who said it was incorrect stamped all of the papers right then and there. I wasn’t there for more than 10 minutes. I asked him why we denied the papers if everything was correct to begin with. He of course couldn’t answer my questions. He just replying “oh I see.” I don’t know what the hell he saw. I think that he was surprised that I actually went to the extent to come there in person. Dealing with the Department of Justice in Vietnam is a totally different story. I could write a book about my experiences as I am sure that anyone who has been through it can.

That's an article by Marc Ellis. The link is his user profile. I would contact him if I were you. Just my personal opinion. This is a HCMC specific article that is posted on his website:

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2004,0108-ellis.shtm

http://www.marcellislaw.com/

Forget It Jake.... It's The US Consulate In Ho Chi Minh City

by Marc Ellis

In the classic movie "Chinatown", Jack Nicholson plays a private detective named "Jake Gittes". He takes a case that seems routine at first, but quickly turns into an impossible swamp of treachery and deadly double-dealing. Nothing is ever as it seems. And Jake can never quite figure out who is the boss. The climax of the movie occurs in LA's Chinatown. The bad guys win and Jake is left with only a nasty knife cut across his nose to show for his efforts to help his client. He is humiliated and filled with rage. Then a cop standing near him says,

"Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown."

I know the feeling. I get it almost every time I deal with the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon). Fortunately none of the consular staff there have attacked my nose with a knife. But I think one or two of them would probably like to, if they had the opportunity.

But fortunately, I'm safe for the time-being. The staff at the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City work behind secure plexiglass barriers designed to protect attorneys and members of the public from being attacked by consular employees. If you think I have that backwards, visit this consulate and you may understand my point.

The Consulate General is at 4 Le Duan Street, in District One, close to downtown. It is directly next door to the residence of the Consulate of France. The communist city planners of Ho Chi Minh City had an ironic sense of humor in deciding to place the Americans and French next door to each other. There is a small monument to the communist soldiers killed by Americans at the Battle of Hue, January 31, 1968. But to my knowledge, there is no monument to those killed at Dien Bien Phu on the French grounds.

Applicants for visas line up on the sidewalk to have their applications examined by two Vietnamese intake clerks who work behind thick, dark plexiglass. Although I have encountered different clerks inside these windows, most of them radiate the same attitude of hostility and contempt. So for the sake of this article, I have nicknamed these employees, Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler and her twin sister.

Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler and her sister do not like lawyers very much.

Here is how it works:

On December 1, 2003, I came to the window to submit a V visa application. The conversation proceeded as follows: Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler: "Why are you here?" Ellis: (Hands her G-28.) Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler: (Without looking at it, growls) "I know you're a lawyer. Why are you here?"

From this exchange, a practicing immigration attorney might conclude that the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City is not a place that welcomes the participation of lawyers in the immigration process. I don't blame them. We're supposed to protect people from having their rights trampled. That sometimes happens at consulates. A Vietnamese national employee with a softer voice showed up to rescue me. Perhaps she was the trainer of the Rottweiler girls. She took the documents and asked politely,

"Where is approval notice?"

Any lawyer experienced with V Visas will know two things:

* An I-797 is secondary evidence of eligibility with DOS. The Department of State has made the determination not to accept I-797' s as primary evidence of V Visa eligibility. It is not a pre-requisite. [1]

* V Visas are for beneficiaries of petitions which have not yet been approved. So there is no approval notice. For entire cable see [2]

In my case, my client had the original letter from the National Visa Center, but had lost her I-797 Notice of Receipt. I pointed out to the two staffers that DOS had assured us that the CLASS computer data base was supposed to make the I-797's unnecessary by now.

The nice woman then told me, "Yes. We hope in two months that will be the case." I remember being told the same thing at an AILA Conference in San Francisco two years ago. My heart began to sink. But the nice lady accepted my client's V Visa application.

Thinking about I-797's and V visas, my mind turned from "Chinatown" to an old song by Louis Jordan and the Tympani Five, "Is You Is or Is You Ain't My Baby?". If the I-797 is not important enough to be primary evidence of eligibility, why do the consulates demand that they be included in the V visa application?

Practice Tips for submitting V Visa Applications at the HCM Consulate

Practice Tip No. 1 -- Have an I-797 Notice of Receipt with you.

If your client has lost it, replace it with a photo copy of the DOS cable (included in this article), that says I-797's are only secondary evidence of eligibility and that staffers do not have the authority to "...examine secondary evidence such as I-797 notices and determine eligibility to apply for a V based solely on that secondary evidence....". (Paragraph 15 DOS Cable 9/01 on V Visas). But since a lengthy DOS Cable is not likely to get you past Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler and her twin sister, enlist the help of a congressional representative or US Senator well-ahead of time, pointing out that consulates refuse to accept original I-797's as evidence of eligibility and yet demand I-797's be attached to the applications before they will be accepted. As a policy matter, I think it is wise to enlist congressional assistance even in routine consular cases. If Congress receives enough complaints about the way consulates process immigrant visas, perhaps one day we will see hearings on Capital Hill that lead to reform.

Go ahead, call me an optimist. "Is you is or is you ain't my baby?" "Forget it Jake, It's the US Consulate in Ho Chi Minh City."

Part II. "Waiting for Godot"

Visa applicants who manage to survive Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler are allowed to proceed inside to a long waiting room where they can submit their documents, answer questions, or obtain their approval stamps in their passports.

The waiting room of the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City, is a cross between a maximum security Federal Penitentiary and the lobby of an Econo-Lodge. The protruding wall sections by each processing window alternate between prison grey and eggshell white. There are at least fifteen windows. I stopped counting at that number. But most of the windows are un-staffed. Visa applicants and attorneys sit on long, steel benches.

During my first trip to the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City, I was submitting a response to a 221(g) letter. After informing the intake person inside, I was told to go to Window 11.

Practice Tip No. 2 -- In the Waiting Room of the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City - when you are told to go to a window DO NOT go to that window!. Sit down and wait for a staffer from that particular window to call you up. If you make the mistake of going to the window as your were instructed, you will likely encounter a cousin of Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler, who will tell you very sharply to sit down and wait until your name is called.

Practice Tip No. 3 -- If you have more than one application to submit - inform the screener. If he or she tells you to sit down, ask to speak to his supervisor. On one occasion, I told the intake person I had three separate applications. He told me to sit down. I waited two hours. After I was finished with the first application, I went back up to his window to submit the other two. Fortunately, a higher-level consular employee was present. She was very nice and told me that in the future, if I had multiple applications, I would be allowed to submit them at once, rather than going through the absurd, pointless routine of submitting one at a time and waiting separately for each one.

A Note on Client Representation & G-28's

On one occasion, Ms. Nguyen Thi Rottweiler would not allow me to submit documents on behalf of a client on a Friday afternoon. I had a G-28 signed by both the petitioner and the beneficiary. But she told me erroneously, that a different attorney had previously enrolled and the Consulate had not yet received a letter from the petitioner asking to replace that attorney with me. Therefore, she could not allow me to submit any documents on behalf of my client.

Practice Tip No. 4 -- Always remember that there is a difference between a lawyer submitting documents on a client's behalf, and an attorney being authorized to obtain information about the client's case.

Where there is a previously-enrolled attorney, the FAM is clear that the consular staff are not allowed to release information to the new attorney without the previous one being removed. However, on request, the consulate can correspond directly with the petitioner or applicant and allow a subsequently enrolled attorney to submit documents on the clients' behalf.

However, even if there is a previous attorney who has not been removed, a signed G-28, coupled with the two letters mentioned in the FAM , is enough to satisfy the law and allow the new attorney to submit documents on his or her client's behalf, and for the consulate to correspond directly with the applicant, at least until the previous attorney can be replaced as representative of record. I have included the pertinent parts of the FAM below. I have added emphasis where pertinent.

9 FAM 40.4 N12 Working with Attorneys: Establishing Relationships

(TL:VISA-599; 11-24-2003) When a letter is received from an attorney in the United States and the consular officer is reasonably satisfied that an attorney-client relationship exists, correspondence between the post and the attorney may be treated with the same courtesy as provided to the visa applicant. Reasonable evidence establishing the attorney-client relationship may include:

1. Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative, required for practicing before DHS;

2. A printed letterhead stationary showing membership in the legal profession (member of a U.S. State or District of Columbia bar association practicing in the United States) and stating that such an attorney has been retained or employed to represent the applicant; and

3. A letter from the applicant that identifies the attorney or representative with whom the applicant established such relationship.

9 FAM 40.4 N12.1 Corresponding with Representative of Record

(TL:VISA-30; 01-31-1990) The consular officer shall correspond directly with the applicant's representative of record,[3] even in cases where the applicant is physically present in the United States, unless the applicant requests otherwise. However, the fact that there is a representative of record does not preclude the post from corresponding with the applicant, provided the post sends a copy of the communication simultaneously to the applicant's representative. If the representative inquires about the reasons for refusal of a visa, the delay in issuing the visa, or any other aspects of a visa case, the reply shall contain only pertinent facts which are unclassified. [see 9 FAM 40.4 N5.2 above.]

Part III: "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

The US Citizen Services Section is available to provide certain notarial services, such as the Affidavit of Single Status. And this is an area where the consulate could be of great assistance. The Government of Vietnam has some very specific and unusual requirements relating to marrying one of its citizens. (One of the most interesting requirements, is the need for the sponsor to consult a physician and obtain a written letter stating that he or she is not mentally ill!) I don't know if this precaution is based on the government's dim view of foreigners or a dim view of its own citizens as marriage candidates. But it's certainly interesting*.

The "Affidavit of Single Status" is well-known to practitioners who assist with family-based immigration among the Vietnamese in America. It is required by the Government of Vietnam. It is not a requirement of the CIS or DOS. The instructions for affidavits of single status and the forms can be found at the Vietnam Consulate of San Francisco website at: http://www.vietnamconsulate-sf.org/frontpage.html Click on the links "Consular Section" and "Instructions for Marriage with Vietnamese Citizens".

The US Consulate will assist in preparing affidavits of single status for US citizens. I was told by an officer that the sponsor must have his or her fiance(e) present as well as all the documents listed at the above website. The Consulate will not prepare affidavits of single status for lawful permanent residents. And unfortunately, even if you are a US citizen, there is a four-to seven week waiting period before they will schedule you.

Practice Tip Number 5 -- Advise your clients to complete the affidavits of single status in the USA, if possible. If they must make them at the consulate, the US Citizen and his or her intended spouse, should be prepared to undergo a harrowing consular interview about the bona fides of their upcoming marriage. In this respect, the US Consular Officers Ho Chi Minh City are rather like Monty Python's "Spanish Inquisition".

"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

Warn your clients in advance, if they complete the affidavit of single status at this consulate, they should expect the Spanish Inquisition. I watched one poor naturalized Viet Khieu grilled mercilessly by a consular officer about the names of his intended's family members. He appeared to me at least, shocked that he would be treated like this in an office of his own government. I wanted to say,

"Forget it Jake...", but I didn't know if he had seen the movie.

At the stage of the Affidavit of Single Status, no petition has been filed with either the consulate or CIS. This document is not required by any agency of the US Government. It is merely an affidavit by a US citizen. It's a notarial act. The truth of the affidavit is at issue, not the wisdom or validity of a marriage he or she may enter into at some date in the future. The name of this office is US Citizen Services, (emphasis added).

Was this an attempt to gather information about a petition that may be submitted in the future, or was it an effort to discourage US citizens from entering into a fraudulent marriage? Or was it an attempt to discourage US citizens from using the consular notarial services at all?

If it is the former, it is arguably an abuse of the process. What should be at issue is the identity of the affiant and the contents of his or her affidavit. The bona fides of his or her upcoming marriage are not even relevant at this stage.

If it is the latter, it's more understandable. This office is under-staffed. The consular officers I spoke with were polite and professional to me. In fact, I was more impressed with the staff in this office than with any other at the consulate. But I was shocked at how they treated a US citizen who was merely trying to have an affidavit notarized.

Part IV: "We're not re-adjudicating! But we demand more evidence."

In July 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell sent a cable to the consular posts immigrant visa processing offices. I have included the entire post in this article. The paragraph headings of the post are indicative of the problems Secretary Powell was trying to address: "No Deep-Sixing", "Don't Sit On Cases", "Be Judicious In Returning Petitions", and ominously, "Use 221(g) for IV Cases".[4]

The memo reminds consular posts of what should have always been their procedure. A case should not be returned to CIS merely because the officer has certain suspicions about it. The evidence justifying revocation must be "clear". If more evidence is required, the consulate has the power to request it, using a 221(g) letter.

The cable points out that a petition approved by CIS creates a presumption in favor of eligibility for the visa. The only time revocation is called for is when the Consular Officer "knows or has reason to believe" that the petition approval was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation or other unlawful means, or where there is clear evidence that the beneficiary is not entitled to the visa status granted by the petition. Such cases should be rare and would arise from new information that was not known to CIS at the time it approved the petition. In such rare cases, the Consular Officer needs to present "solid factual evidence" as a basis for revocation.

Unfortunately, there is a fine line between requesting additional evidence under 221(g) and re- adjudicating the merits of the entire petition. And that is what is happening today. Post 9/11 and post Colin Powell's July 2001 cable. 221(g) letters are being used to re-adjudicate the merits of petitions approved by CIS. They are also being used as an excuse to sit on cases where the consulate does not have enough evidence to send the petition back to CIS.

I have actually had this Consulate request a US citizen petitioner provide proof of a residence in the US from 1991! Another attorney has told me about a case where CIS refused to revoke an approval sent back by the HCM consulate and the consulate still refuses to issue the visa!

Part V: "Forget it Jake. It's the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City"

There are unique problems of marriage fraud in Vietnam. Part of this problem stems from a refugee policy administered by the US government in the years following April 29, 30, 1975. Many people who were officially persecuted and had good reason for wanting to leave Vietnam were denied refugee status because a father or brother had spent less than three years in communist prison camps.

The identity of the all-knowing bureaucrat at DOS or INS who drew this line is a mystery. And it's not a statutory requirement.

So in the past, a lot of persecuted people who had enough evidence to qualify for a grant of asylum in immigration court would be denied refugee status by refugee processing officers at the Bangkok Thailand Consulate.

No doubt some would-be refugees tried to use phony marriages or other fraudulent avenues of family sponsorship to escape persecution. But most of the population of Vietnam today was not even alive on April 29 and 30, 1975. Still, I concede, the tradition of wanting to escape Vietnam via a phony family-preference visa is still alive and well.

I cannot blame the consular officers for being aggressive in rooting out fraud. But something is terribly wrong with a system which grants Saudis a presumption of eligibility, even post-9/11, granting them a fast-track "Visa Express", that allowed travel agents to be involved in the process, and yet focuses considerable resources on protecting America from Vietnamese spouses and fiancees.

Something is wrong when an unsuspecting US citizen merely trying to have an affidavit notarized is put through an interrogation that would frighten any law-abiding citizen.

But I'm just a lawyer. When I begin to think thoughts like that, I just tell myself,

"Forget it Jake, it's the US Consulate General in Ho Chi Minh City".

[PeterFB 0]

J & Q

I understand now why you asked about the SOS stamp. I have a little problem with the Vietnamese Consulate in SFO in calling them on the phone about the visa fee. They don't like to answer the phone..... And depending on who finally answers, you get brief answer sometimes "friendly" and sometimes not.

It seems the person you originally sent your documents to at the Vietamese Embassy is thinking you're from the US government.......

Peter and Thi

I-129F Sent : 2007-05-26

I-129F NOA1 : 2007-06-11

I-129F RFE(s) :

RFE Reply(s) :

I-129F NOA2 : 2007-10-26

Touched: 2007-11-02

NVC Recieved: 2007-11-16

Consulate recieved ??????

Packet 3 sent 2007-12-11

Packet 3 received 2007-12-24

Packet 3 returned 2007-12-28

Packet 4 sent 2008-1-14

Email Reply with Interview Date 2008-1-23

Interview Date 2008-2-27

Passed Interview 2008-02-27

Visa Pick Up Date 2008-3-05

Received Visa 2008-2-29 (called to pick up earlier)

POE 2008-3-05 Los Angeles

Wedding 2008-4-26