Visa Denials

[JR2008 0]

Fiance(e) visas account for 69% of all returned petitions. Only 23% of the petitions returned are actually revoked by the CIS. Only at the United State Department of State could you remain employed if 77% of what you did was a miss.

Common non-legal reasons for fiance(e) visa denails:

1) Petitioner doesn't appear at visa interview with beneficiary => Some petitioners can be naieve enough to trust conoffs with their relationships.

2) Couple doesn't share a common language => AKA it's none of your business.

3) Significant differences in age, socio-cultural background and religious beliefs => Again, it's none of your business.

4) Petitioner divorced three or more times => In the US, two-thirds of the divorces are filed by women.

5) Beneficiary unaware of petitioner's divorces or general reasons for them => Do conoffs fully disclose their backgrounds to the DOS?

6) Petitioner having filed two or more fiancee petitions before => This was finally legalized in 2005 under the IMBRA.

7) Any of petitioner's previous fiance(e)'s violated the terms of their visas => Why should the petitioner be held accountable for fiance(e)'s actions?

8) Any of petitioner's previous wives left at the two year mark with their green card permanent residency => Blame the no fault divorce laws.

9) Petitioner with a history of criminal, family court or restraining order background, especially concerning domestic violence, sexual abuse or molestation => Lack of a partner will really improve these social ills.

[KarenCee 3]

.....and your question (or point) is??????

[william_wallace 8]

.....and your question (or point) is??????

I presume to set his point of view on visa denials.

[MrsCat 6]

I'm missing something . . . . .

[Zee Bee 61]

Is this from an official source?

[JeroenAndMichelle 28]

Nice of this person to sign up just to post this

[*JG* 2]

All this post did was confuse me.

Where these OP's points or someone elses?

BTW....these may be reasons for denial; but not across the board. Seen plenty of people with someo f these issues skirt through just fine.

[chris4gretchen 1]

Fiance(e) visas account for 69% of all returned petitions. Only 23% of the petitions returned are actually revoked by the CIS. Only at the United State Department of State could you remain employed if 77% of what you did was a miss.

Common non-legal reasons for fiance(e) visa denails:

1) Petitioner doesn't appear at visa interview with beneficiary => Some petitioners can be naieve enough to trust conoffs with their relationships.

2) Couple doesn't share a common language => AKA it's none of your business.

3) Significant differences in age, socio-cultural background and religious beliefs => Again, it's none of your business.

4) Petitioner divorced three or more times => In the US, two-thirds of the divorces are filed by women.

5) Beneficiary unaware of petitioner's divorces or general reasons for them => Do conoffs fully disclose their backgrounds to the DOS?

6) Petitioner having filed two or more fiancee petitions before => This was finally legalized in 2005 under the IMBRA.

7) Any of petitioner's previous fiance(e)'s violated the terms of their visas => Why should the petitioner be held accountable for fiance(e)'s actions?

8) Any of petitioner's previous wives left at the two year mark with their green card permanent residency => Blame the no fault divorce laws.

9) Petitioner with a history of criminal, family court or restraining order background, especially concerning domestic violence, sexual abuse or molestation => Lack of a partner will really improve these social ills.

Percentage of Troll posts from members who have no profile, and no post history and no experience but give statistics in first post 100 %

percentage of troll posts that know what they are talking about 0%

percentage of trolls who fill out a profile with real info 0%

percentage of time and space wasted on troll posts 100%

Chris

Edited September 1, 2008 by chris4gretchen

[JR2008 0]

Whatever!

The reasons listed above are the 'ethical' reasons CO's or conoffs use to justify visa denials to Congressional offices. However, real reasons for visa denials have nothing to do with the 'ethics'. Instead, they can be squeezed into 3 catagories:

1. Women in, men out - This is harder for a female petitioner to bring in a male beneficiary than it is for a male petitioner to bring in a female beneficiary, especially when CO is a male.

2. Racial reasons:

a. To strive to maintain white majority demographics in the US,

b. Avoid mixing white girls,

c. Give hard time to minority petitioners and minority couples.

3. Feminist reasons - A male petitioner married 2 or more times, or significantly older than beneficiary, or failed to disclose prior marriages, etc., especially when CO is a female.

Of course, CO's cannot state these reasons for visa denial, so what they do is, they falsify 'no proof of relationship' on papers. Proof of relationship had become such an abused basis for visa denials that in 2004, the DOS came up with the following regulations to try and put a stop to the abuse - guess they never figured out what was really going on.

The approval of a petition under INA 204 is considered to establish prima facie entitlement to status. The validitity of relationship between petitioner and the alien beneficiary is presumed to exist. Unless the consul has specific, substantial evidence, the consular officer would have no reason to return petition to DHS. 9 FAM § 42.41 N1 - Establishing Relationship between Petitioner & Alien Beneficiary.

[Otto 83]

[ErikaAndHamit 73]

I THINK YOU CRITICAL PEOPLE ARE MORE ANNOYING THAN ANY TRUE "TROLL" SO KEEP YOUR STUPID OPINIONS AND QUIT ACTING LIKE ONE TROLLING AROUND HERE INTERRUPTING THE THREAD WITH YOUR HUGE PHOTOS AND DUUUUHHS AND RETARDED COMMENTS AS YOU AREN'T THE ONLY PEOPLE HERE AND ARE HARASSING ONES WHO ACTUALLY WANT TO BE INFORMED OR FIND THIS INTERESTING. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE TOPIC... GO AWAY!!

I'M SURE THIS PERSON IS ANGERED AT THIS INJUSTICE AND MAYBE FEELS POWERLESS TO DO ANYTHING BUT CAME HERE AND WANTS TO SPREAD THE TRUTH. MAYBE SHE WORKED AS A CONSULAR OFFICER OR A USCIS ADJUDICATOR NEEDS TO BE ANONYMOUS IF YOU ALL OPEN YOUR EYES AND ACTUALLY READ THIS STUFF YOU WOULD NOTICE THAT THIS OBVIOUSLY A PERSON WHO IS TRYING GIVE US INSIDE INFORMATION THAT IS EYE OPENING.

ANYWAY WHY ARE YOU SO UPSET WITH A VALID TOPIC? WHY DO YOU ALL ACT LIKE THIS ISN'T FACTUAL AND COMMON? THIS DOES HAPPEN.. JUST READ THE FORUMS! HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU READ ABOUT DENIALS BASED ON BIZARRE AND SEEMINGLY IRRELEVANT REASONS AND THEY GET AWAY WITH IT.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

I THINK YOU CRITICAL PEOPLE ARE MORE ANNOYING THAN ANY TRUE "TROLL" SO KEEP YOUR STUPID OPINIONS AND QUIT ACTING LIKE ONE TROLLING AROUND HERE INTERRUPTING THE THREAD WITH YOUR HUGE PHOTOS AND DUUUUHHS AND RETARDED COMMENTS AS YOU AREN'T THE ONLY PEOPLE HERE AND ARE HARASSING ONES WHO ACTUALLY WANT TO BE INFORMED OR FIND THIS INTERESTING. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE TOPIC... GO AWAY!!

I'M SURE THIS PERSON IS ANGERED AT THIS INJUSTICE AND MAYBE FEELS POWERLESS TO DO ANYTHING BUT CAME HERE AND WANTS TO SPREAD THE TRUTH. MAYBE SHE WORKED AS A CONSULAR OFFICER OR A USCIS ADJUDICATOR NEEDS TO BE ANONYMOUS IF YOU ALL OPEN YOUR EYES AND ACTUALLY READ THIS STUFF YOU WOULD NOTICE THAT THIS OBVIOUSLY A PERSON WHO IS TRYING GIVE US INSIDE INFORMATION THAT IS EYE OPENING.

ANYWAY WHY ARE YOU SO UPSET WITH A VALID TOPIC? WHY DO YOU ALL ACT LIKE THIS ISN'T FACTUAL AND COMMON? THIS DOES HAPPEN.. JUST READ THE FORUMS! HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU READ ABOUT DENIALS BASED ON BIZARRE AND SEEMINGLY IRRELEVANT REASONS AND THEY GET AWAY WITH IT.

[sweet_wifey22 0]

I THINK YOU CRITICAL PEOPLE ARE MORE ANNOYING THAN ANY TRUE "TROLL" SO KEEP YOUR STUPID OPINIONS AND QUIT ACTING LIKE ONE TROLLING AROUND HERE INTERRUPTING THE THREAD WITH YOUR HUGE PHOTOS AND DUUUUHHS AND RETARDED COMMENTS AS YOU AREN'T THE ONLY PEOPLE HERE AND ARE HARASSING ONES WHO ACTUALLY WANT TO BE INFORMED OR FIND THIS INTERESTING. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE TOPIC... GO AWAY!!

I'M SURE THIS PERSON IS ANGERED AT THIS INJUSTICE AND MAYBE FEELS POWERLESS TO DO ANYTHING BUT CAME HERE AND WANTS TO SPREAD THE TRUTH. MAYBE SHE WORKED AS A CONSULAR OFFICER OR A USCIS ADJUDICATOR NEEDS TO BE ANONYMOUS IF YOU ALL OPEN YOUR EYES AND ACTUALLY READ THIS STUFF YOU WOULD NOTICE THAT THIS OBVIOUSLY A PERSON WHO IS TRYING GIVE US INSIDE INFORMATION THAT IS EYE OPENING.

ANYWAY WHY ARE YOU SO UPSET WITH A VALID TOPIC? WHY DO YOU ALL ACT LIKE THIS ISN'T FACTUAL AND COMMON? THIS DOES HAPPEN.. JUST READ THE FORUMS! HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU READ ABOUT DENIALS BASED ON BIZARRE AND SEEMINGLY IRRELEVANT REASONS AND THEY GET AWAY WITH IT.

[geezer 1]

I believe this list comes from an artiicle writen by one of the of the immigration Attorney's out there that has a large website it may be Cyrus Mehta but I dont recall for sure. The list also includes snippets from the adjudicators field manual concerning the "red flags" that should alert the CO to potential visa fraud.

It seems to me that people on this board should always keep in mind the fact that they represent a very very small minority of the visa applications out there. It this was not true then the processing times would only be a few days

Most people here (90% plus) go through the process and are eventually approved. Because of this its natural to assume its slow but no big deal and in the majority of cases they are correct also some because of their good fortune assume they are experts on the process.

However, if just 10% of the petitioners on a national basis have their petitions returned for suspicion of visa fraud that is a enormous number.

I suspect the OP may be one of the 10% of the folks caught in the visa trap and I wish him/her well.

[bigbluueyes 0]

I believe this list comes from an artiicle writen by one of the of the immigration Attorney's out there that has a large website it may be Cyrus Mehta but I dont recall for sure. The list also includes snippets from the adjudicators field manual concerning the "red flags" that should alert the CO to potential visa fraud.

It seems to me that people on this board should always keep in mind the fact that they represent a very very small minority of the visa applications out there. It this was not true then the processing times would only be a few days

Most people here (90% plus) go through the process and are eventually approved. Because of this its natural to assume its slow but no big deal and in the majority of cases they are correct also some because of their good fortune assume they are experts on the process.

However, if just 10% of the petitioners on a national basis have their petitions returned for suspicion of visa fraud that is a enormous number.

I suspect the OP may be one of the 10% of the folks caught in the visa trap and I wish him/her well.

I am actually OK with hearing about something other than all the success stories. Im happy for them, but I am just staring the process and all information is good. I want to know what kind of trouble we can expect, what roadblocks we may find, etc. All information is good information )

So can we move on to the information part now? Maybe this is a good time to share any of YOUR roadblocks so that others can learn from them...