Ongoing Evidence of Relationship after filing I-129F?

[payxibka 10,045]

I'm not the one questioning his theory! Either write a law professor, or write Marc Ellis. To refresh our memories:

Maybe so, but I am also not the one who is promoting it as the all new magic formula that if followed will take away all problems... the basis of which has not be proved either.

[KimandRuss 0]

Nobody can be certain about anything..especially with this process. But I think you would agree most people with a previous marriage or without the ability to travel to see each other do not include statements as you suggest, numerous letters from relatives and lawyers and such ...and they are usually approved.

I understand you've had some issues in the past and really do respect the fact that you are trying to forewarn others but anyone reading this thread is going to be sent into a panic by what you're saying. As is the OP now. More often than not it simply doesn't create a problem.

[TBoneTX 44,672]

I am also not the one who is promoting it as the all new magic formula that if followed will take away all problems...

By cutting and pasting my comments, cite for me where I state what you claim.

[TBoneTX 44,672]

Nobody can be certain about anything..especially with this process. But I think you would agree most people with a previous marriage or without the ability to travel to see each other do not include statements as you suggest, numerous letters from relatives and lawyers and such ...and they are usually approved.

I understand you've had some issues in the past and really do respect the fact that you are trying to forewarn others but anyone reading this thread is going to be sent into a panic by what you're saying. As is the OP now. More often than not it simply doesn't create a problem.

Thank you for your reasoned response. You're not wrong about "most" people, yet the OP has some potential flags that can be minimized with a few (vs. numerous) letters. No one need panic; just be prudent -- anticipate, ask, act. A key consideration is that "USUALLY approved" does not equate "AUTOMATICALLY approved"... and there are different stages of "ease of approval." My hope is purely that the OP and all others will encounter a straightforward approval, which means that no red flags raise their heads at the consular level.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

I'm not the one questioning his theory! Either write a law professor, or write Marc Ellis. To refresh our memories:

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2006,0323-ellis.shtm

No readjudication of petitions

7. In general, an approved petition will be considered by consular officers as prima facie evidence that the requirements for classification - which are examined in the petition process - have been met. Where Congress has placed responsibility and authority with DHS to determine whether the requirements for status which are examined in the petition process have been met, consular officers do not have the authority to question the approval of petitions without specific evidence, generally unavailable to DHS at the time of petition approval, that the beneficiary may not be entitled to status (see 9 FAM 41.53, Note 2, 41.54 Note 3.2-2, 41.55 Note 8, 41.56 Note 10, 41.57 Note 6, and 42.43 Note 2) due to fraud, changes in circumstances or clear error on the part of DHS in approving the petition. Conoffs should not assume that a petition should be revoked simply because they would have reached a different decision if adjudicating the petition. …”

What does that language mean? It means an approved petition is prima facie evidence of eligibility for an immigrant visa, unless a consular officer finds substantial evidence of ineligibility. More importantly, this evidence must have been unknown and unavailable to DHS at the time it approved the petition. That is the nearly the whole game for your client right there, in a few words.

(end excerpt)

Ask Ellis what this really means, if you're doubtful. I don't question it, so no sense arguing with me about it. He could even answer you for free, whereas a law professor might charge you, if he'd even answer at all.

This may be the case, but you can file an I-129F for someone who has overstayed and is subject to the 3/10 year bar and it will be will be approved, even with full disclosure about the overstay. When the beneficiary goes for the interview, they will be denied due to the overstay and given information about the waiver. Eligibility for the visa is determined at the consulate, not at the service center where the application was filed.

[TBoneTX 44,672]

This may be the case, but you can file an I-129F for someone who has overstayed and is subject to the 3/10 year bar and it will be will be approved, even with full disclosure about the overstay. When the beneficiary goes for the interview, they will be denied due to the overstay and given information about the waiver. Eligibility for the visa is determined at the consulate, not at the service center where the application was filed.

The crux is that the consul would have a harder time (in theory or actuality) booting the fiance(e) from the interview on the basis of perceived red flags IF information to help dispel those red flags was already in front of him, because the information was included in the I-129f package forwarded from USCIS.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

[The crux is that the consul would have a harder time (in theory or actuality) booting the fiance(e) from the interview on the basis of perceived red flags IF information to help dispel those red flags was already in front of him, because the information was included in the I-129f package forwarded from USCIS.

I personally agree to send plenty of evidence of relationship with the initial filing. I sent a lot of information with my initial filing. Most here suggest to only send proof of meeting, intent to marry statements, etc with the I-129F and not to include evidence or proof of realtionship. They advise to save that for the interview. In the end, all that matters is that whatever you chose to do is successful. The ultimate decision to issue the visa is still at the consulate.

[TBoneTX 44,672]

In the end, all that matters is that whatever you chose to do is successful. The ultimate decision to issue the visa is still at the consulate.

Yes -- and their decisions are at least 99.44% final!

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Yes -- and their decisions are at least 99.44% final!

Just like ivory soap It is possible to get a negative consulate decision overturned if you are truly right and they have mis-applied or misinterpreted the law. Not easy to do, but it has been done.

[TBoneTX 44,672]

Just like ivory soap It is possible to get a negative consulate decision overturned if you are truly right and they have mis-applied or misinterpreted the law. Not easy to do, but it has been done.

Not easy, and not often either, si man!

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Just like ivory soap It is possible to get a negative consulate decision overturned if you are truly right and they have mis-applied or misinterpreted the law. Not easy to do, but it has been done.

Not easy, and not often either, si man!

Quite true. You have to prove that they were wrong in a very clear, indisputable manner. Their mistake, you suffer. Normally you are innocent until proven gullty, but with immigration and the IRS, you are gullty and must prove your innocence But when it happens to you, it is not funny.

Edited August 15, 2008 by spookyturtle

[TBoneTX 44,672]

Quite true. You have to prove that they were wrong in a very clear, indisputable manner. Their mistake, you suffer. Normally you are innocent until proven gullty, but with immigration and the IRS, you are gullty and must prove your innocence But when it happens to you, it is not funny.

And, getting the embassy to cough up the details behind the denial, or even the true reason, can be nearly impossible!

[Nich-Nick 3,354]

This thread has gotten to be quite the debate.

Back to you Mrs SDP. I would like to say.

We were both married before and some of our meeting proofs were while we were married. We weren't in love and a couple then, but we MET IN PERSON, which is the requirement. We met the other spouse even. But marriages fall apart and spouses die of cancer and life changes and people move on.

We filed probably a month after the decree absolute, but like you said marriages are over way before UK divorces are final.

London is an easy Embassy. They aren't judging your morals...."did they sleep together while one was still married??? OH MY! TSK TSK! Let's punish them." It's just not going to happen. I've been in the London Embassy. The dude who dealt with Equador probably hasn't.

Don't let all this rhetoric scare you. You will be fine. Remember that all countries and consulates are different. Get your info from UK people for the best comparison for your case.

[TBoneTX 44,672]

It's just not going to happen.

How can this be stated with 100% surety?

You will be fine.

We all certainly hope so, but how can this be stated with 100% surety?

Remember that all countries and consulates are different.

This is 100% correct. It is also true that conditions, personnel, policies, and attitudes can change overnight, without warning. The Guayaquil (Ecuador) consulate was "easy" until things changed without warning. Let's hope that London remains "easy" while, at the same time, we avoid the counting of any chickens (in this case, visa approvals) before they've hatched.

[Gemmie 142]

What do you suggest they do, then? They can't change when they met or how long they've been communicating.

London isn't going to deny based on moral issues. There aren't even any moral issues involved as she explained the situation and they have no reason to think she's lying or deny her based on that.

Most people going through London aren't even asked for evidence of an ongoing relationship (though she should definitely have this with you for security in case you are asked!), they're more concerned with finances and whatnot. You are asked questions about your relationship but even if it comes up, the question about conflicting times and such, just be honest and tell them what you've said here... you shouldn't have any problems.