VISA DENIED 2ND TIME!!!

[morocco4ever 63]

I can't seem to get the quotes to work, so I've put Zyggy's comments in italics

Actually this is not exactly the case, the CO has the authority to send a petition back to the USCIS if in their opinion there is evidence that if the USCIS had known it would have resulted in a different outcome on their end. The evidence does not need to be written, it can be empirical, cultural or otherwise...

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

4. Providing solid evidence of fraud or misrepresentation in a petition relationship may not be achievable in many cases, particularly those involving marriage or relationship fraud. The FAM guidance on revocations makes this point on several occasions -- posts seeking revocations must show the "factual and concrete reasons for revocation." BCIS has asked us to remind consular officers that revocation requests must provide solid, factual evidence of fraud or misrepresentation, evidence that is likely to stand up in a court of law. In the case of sham marriages, for example, 9 FAM 42.43 N2.2 notes that BCIS requires at the least either documentary evidence that money changed hands between the petitioner and beneficiary or factual evidence that would convince "a reasonable person" that the marriage was entered into solely to evade immigration laws. Without such evidence, BCIS will be unlikely to obtain a petition''s revocation if a petitioner chooses to contest a notice of intent to revoke.

So it can't just be cultural... Saying that muslim men don't marry older women certainly wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1388.html

6. In adjudicating visa cases involving petitions, posts should

bear in mind three important factors: A. the consular officer''s

role in the petition process is to determine if there is

substantial evidence relevant to petition validity not

previously considered by DHS, and not to merely readjudicate the

petition; B. the memo supporting the petition return must

clearly show the factual and concrete reasons for recommending

revocation (observations made by the consular officer cannot be

conclusive, speculative, equivocal or irrelevant) and; C.

consular officers must provide to the applicant in writing as

full an explanation as possible of the legal and factual basis

for the visa denial and petition return.

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

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.

Second of all, the rules say that the petitioner and beneficiary may present additional evidence attempting to refute the CO's decision prior to the petition's being sent back. Most of the Moroccan petitions, on the contrary, have been sent back the following day. It's pretty hard to present additional evidence when you don't know what the CO's objection is and they send the application back immediately.

Can you cite the provision where this is the case...

I saw this in the Foreign Affairs Manual

9 FAM 41.81 Notes

d. Consular officers should return the K-1 petition to DHS for reconsideration if not satisfied with respect to the bona fides of the relationship or if the petitioner indicates that he or she no longer intends to go forward with the marriage.

I see nothing in the FAM that states that the opportunity for more information must be given...

Again from http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

Rather, a consular officer should only seek revocation of the petition if the officer knows, or has reason to believe, that the petition approval was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation or other unlawful means, or that the beneficiary is not entitled to the status conferred by the petition. Petitions generally should not be returned unless the post uncovers new information not known to BCIS at the time of petition approval. The FAM cautions that posts should seek revocations "sparingly," to avoid inconveniencing the petitioners and applicants and to avoid creating an additional administrative burden for BCIS.

and

VO supports this use of 221(g) with IV petitions, as returning a petition based on suspicion alone is not appropriate, and providing the applicant an opportunity to address post''s doubts is a fairer way of dealing with suspect cases. We encourage posts to use 221(g), except in those IV cases in which fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility for status can be clearly established. 221(g) allows petitioners and beneficiaries to supplement the initial application and in many cases overcome the refusal.

and

Posts should be generous in allowing applicants every opportunity to supplement their applications following a 221(g) refusal.

So you're right, it is only strongly encouraged that people be given the opportunity to refute the CO's decision. I don't think it's too much to ask that COs do what they are strongly encouraged to do.

You can find more here in a very helpful thread created by a woman whose petition for her fiance was sent back to DHS.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2687

Thank you !!!

Now you have the word straight from the book. These are the regulations, not someones imagination, and they aren't following them. Now if you don't have anything to add to help this woman go find another thread to hyjack. Why is it some people take so much pleasure in tell you whats wrong with you? Support here people!

Edited June 22, 2006 by Morocco4ever

[Bosco 1]

In regards to saying It's OK that we have a big age difference, Mohammed had an older wife... I mean, really can't the CO refute that by stating how many wives he had and how many he had at one time? I mean, come on, that was one era and this is another...

All you have to do is ask yourself, if you have a fiance/husband from the ME/NA, would he marry a morroccan woman who is much older than him? would he marry a divorced morroccan woman? would he marry a morroccan woman with kids? ask him as well.. it is more the exception than the rule there.

I have to agree with Icey. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) also had a "child" bride and regardless of when it was consummated, I don't think any of us would condone it today - and that argument certainly wouldn't fly with the consulate.

It is extremely rare within Morocco that men marry older women, and divorcees are also considered less desirable. There was recently a study done, and most people agreed that 25 was "old" for a woman to marry in Morocco. Older women are common in the Moroccan/American marriages, but so is the fact that the guy is underemployed/unemployed... and I think there are reasons for both.... none of which mean there cannot also be true love.

Rebecca

[morocco4ever 63]

In regards to saying It's OK that we have a big age difference, Mohammed had an older wife... I mean, really can't the CO refute that by stating how many wives he had and how many he had at one time? I mean, come on, that was one era and this is another...

All you have to do is ask yourself, if you have a fiance/husband from the ME/NA, would he marry a morroccan woman who is much older than him? would he marry a divorced morroccan woman? would he marry a morroccan woman with kids? ask him as well.. it is more the exception than the rule there.

I have to agree with Icey. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) also had a "child" bride and regardless of when it was consummated, I don't think any of us would condone it today - and that argument certainly wouldn't fly with the consulate.

It is extremely rare within Morocco that men marry older women, and divorcees are also considered less desirable. There was recently a study done, and most people agreed that 25 was "old" for a woman to marry in Morocco. Older women are common in the Moroccan/American marriages, but so is the fact that the guy is underemployed/unemployed... and I think there are reasons for both.... none of which mean there cannot also be true love.

Rebecca

Although at the moment it is not the norm there, more and more men are marrying older women. Lets face it, older women these days can be and are beautiful. Demi Moore for one, lets not forget. Initial attraction is what a man sees, not "wait, hold on, how old are you?"My husband admits, the first time he saw my picture he was extremely attracted to my eyes. He said I have tiger eyes.

He has a friend that met a woman online that is 60, he is 30. They were together for a year although they never met in person. She ended up dumping him and he was heartbroken for 2 years. I saw this with my own eyes, and no one can ever tell me that he wanted to use her.

Maybe its not the norm, and maybe its not for everyone, but if that is who we choose then so be it. Personally I don't see anything wrong with a Consular Officer selecting these relationships for deeper scrutiny, in fact I would encourage it. But when you aren't even allowed to show the evidence you do have its just bull.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Untrue, denials must be from concrete evidence, not suspision or opinions!

Nope, not at all. However, they need to follow the law, not their thier opinions. This is the problem.

You missed the point. Opinions as to whether the applicant meets the requirement as established by law and regulation, of which the ConOff is and should be aware. Now, in the case of an alien at an interview, there are many factors involved: demeanour and comportment, answers to enquiries, evidence etc. All come into play. If a ConOff does not ask for evidence, it could be that something in the other factors triggered an impression, that he/she believes could not be overcome. However, not being there, and not being the ConOff all of this is simply idle speculation. If the ConOff in Chiquita's opening post stated that he/she did not believe the relationship is real, then one has to conclude one of two points:

1) Either the applicant demonstrated genuine eligibility in all areas being reviewed as above, and the ConOff made a mistake and the applicant is eligible for the visa

2) Or the ConOff picked up on something which lead him/her to believe that the applicant is not

It would be wrong for us to determine which of the two was the case. It could be either.

Are you an immigration lawyer? Or have you studied immigration law?

I've read alot about this and everyone's interpretation comes down to a consular officer cannot base a decision on speculation or opinion, they have to have substantial proof.

The ConOffs are familiar with and utilise the regulations according to the law. In their capacity they are afforded some discretionary authority, NOT to change the regulations but to make certain that applicants meet them, as in, demonstrating that one is "eligible". If the ConOff has any question as to an applican't eligibility he/she can either refer them or deny. It's as simple as that really.

I don't see the need to answer your question of whether I've studied immigration law. I've not asked that of you, nor has anyone else, nor would I question your own preparation, so I find it somewhat impertinent of you.

[non 0]

" DERERT FOX said": But....My wife (then fiancee) received her visa....no problem...because we didnt have these kinds of issues. You must be in denial if you believe and any of the problems that I listed wont cause a problem. These threads are full of nothing but problems. Isnt is obvious to you yet when there are going to be red flags??? I see them every time I read of these posts. Since Im not emotionally involved, its relatively easy to see the problem. Older christian woman meets young good looking muslim while on vacation...he pays more attention to her than she has ever had in her life.....etc.....you fill in the blanks. I see it every time I go to Jamaica, and several other places that I have been. Young men that want to get out of their country and into the US.

my reply :

hi human, u think usa is a heaven on the earth? or money come from the sky? and the ones who will be in usa will not struggle like the americans to live, and pay taxes and taxes and so much things? u seem like u hold a hate towards foreigners or u r affraid they will share the oxygen with u,not all look to go out from theirs countries to be alive,as none die by hunger,just go out and see other countries and the beauty they have , not just poverty that the past europeans caused and made the 3rd world countries after swallowing lots and leaving a bunch of thieves who still swallow,one thing u seem u enjoy using ''boy toy'' and so on,in this respected site,maybe u get used to that with ur family.if u have infos to help these people nice, if not just go to chatrooms and u 'll find people to share insults with. B)

Edited June 22, 2006 by abderrahim n tina

[Together4ever 1]

Untrue, denials must be from concrete evidence, not suspision or opinions!

Nope, not at all. However, they need to follow the law, not their thier opinions. This is the problem.

You missed the point. Opinions as to whether the applicant meets the requirement as established by law and regulation, of which the ConOff is and should be aware. Now, in the case of an alien at an interview, there are many factors involved: demeanour and comportment, answers to enquiries, evidence etc. All come into play. If a ConOff does not ask for evidence, it could be that something in the other factors triggered an impression, that he/she believes could not be overcome. However, not being there, and not being the ConOff all of this is simply idle speculation. If the ConOff in Chiquita's opening post stated that he/she did not believe the relationship is real, then one has to conclude one of two points:

1) Either the applicant demonstrated genuine eligibility in all areas being reviewed as above, and the ConOff made a mistake and the applicant is eligible for the visa

2) Or the ConOff picked up on something which lead him/her to believe that the applicant is not

It would be wrong for us to determine which of the two was the case. It could be either.

Are you an immigration lawyer? Or have you studied immigration law?

I've read alot about this and everyone's interpretation comes down to a consular officer cannot base a decision on speculation or opinion, they have to have substantial proof.

The ConOffs are familiar with and utilise the regulations according to the law. In their capacity they are afforded some discretionary authority, NOT to change the regulations but to make certain that applicants meet them, as in, demonstrating that one is "eligible". If the ConOff has any question as to an applican't eligibility he/she can either refer them or deny. It's as simple as that really.

I don't see the need to answer your question of whether I've studied immigration law. I've not asked that of you, nor has anyone else, nor would I question your own preparation, so I find it somewhat impertinent of you.

It was quite a pertinant question, and honest enough. You seem to have a thing about advising me on the worthiness of my posts. I find that impertinent.

[non 0]

(Im not against older women/younger men....matters not to me. Even my ex-wife has a boy toy (9 years) and they get along great. )

HI, i see now why u use the boy toy and so on, u seem feel mad or have a bad feeling because o ur ex wife, and because she's now with her younger,so u become hate that? come on ,life is short dont hold hates

[gimygirl 0]

It was quite a pertinant question, and honest enough. You seem to have a thing about advising me on the worthiness of my posts. I find that impertinent.

if there is misinformation in your posts, it is quite pertinent that the errors be pointed out and correct information dispensed. if you don't like being corrected you should make sure that there are no holes in the information you post here.

da mermaid's profession is of no relevance here, nor are her studies. her information is factual and can be substantiated. that does not change regardless of the fact whether you want to read what she has to say on the subject!

[sarah and hicham 3]

(Im not against older women/younger men....matters not to me. Even my ex-wife has a boy toy (9 years) and they get along great. )

HI, i see now why u use the boy toy and so on, u seem feel mad or have a bad feeling because o ur ex wife, and because she's now with her younger,so u become hate that? come on ,life is short dont hold hates

haha I like your style.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Untrue, denials must be from concrete evidence, not suspision or opinions!

Nope, not at all. However, they need to follow the law, not their thier opinions. This is the problem.

You missed the point. Opinions as to whether the applicant meets the requirement as established by law and regulation, of which the ConOff is and should be aware. Now, in the case of an alien at an interview, there are many factors involved: demeanour and comportment, answers to enquiries, evidence etc. All come into play. If a ConOff does not ask for evidence, it could be that something in the other factors triggered an impression, that he/she believes could not be overcome. However, not being there, and not being the ConOff all of this is simply idle speculation. If the ConOff in Chiquita's opening post stated that he/she did not believe the relationship is real, then one has to conclude one of two points:

1) Either the applicant demonstrated genuine eligibility in all areas being reviewed as above, and the ConOff made a mistake and the applicant is eligible for the visa

2) Or the ConOff picked up on something which lead him/her to believe that the applicant is not

It would be wrong for us to determine which of the two was the case. It could be either.

Are you an immigration lawyer? Or have you studied immigration law?

I've read alot about this and everyone's interpretation comes down to a consular officer cannot base a decision on speculation or opinion, they have to have substantial proof.

The ConOffs are familiar with and utilise the regulations according to the law. In their capacity they are afforded some discretionary authority, NOT to change the regulations but to make certain that applicants meet them, as in, demonstrating that one is "eligible". If the ConOff has any question as to an applican't eligibility he/she can either refer them or deny. It's as simple as that really.

I don't see the need to answer your question of whether I've studied immigration law. I've not asked that of you, nor has anyone else, nor would I question your own preparation, so I find it somewhat impertinent of you.

It was quite a pertinant question, and honest enough. You seem to have a thing about advising me on the worthiness of my posts. I find that impertinent.

It would seem to me that you draw unnecessary and inaccurate conclusions from my posts and I can only surmise that must pertain to other conclusions you arrive at, or it might be a case of the material you are reading. You missed the nuance in my statement, that is certain.

I don't believe that I have alluded to or advised on the worthiness of your posts, at all. I find it impertinent to state that you have read something and therefore must be an authority and unless someone else is either an immigration attorney or has studied immigration law they are less than qualified to comment on your findings and conclusions. Frankly, in my opinion, they leave a lot to be desired. But, as you were.

[Meriem_DZ 37]

(Im not against older women/younger men....matters not to me. Even my ex-wife has a boy toy (9 years) and they get along great. )

HI, i see now why u use the boy toy and so on, u seem feel mad or have a bad feeling because o ur ex wife, and because she's now with her younger,so u become hate that? come on ,life is short dont hold hates

You go!!! abderrahim n tina

[non 0]

me and my fiancee in usa r going in this, i mean ve just started the process, and i read what that woman wrote about her friend problem, i'm sorry for that and also i'm wondering what will be for us, but i believe we have always to expect good things and never give up, nothing is impossible and when u have someone whom u love and he or she loves u too, it will be always sweet and delecious to try and try and still trying whatever obstacles the consulate will put.

[Together4ever 1]

It was quite a pertinant question, and honest enough. You seem to have a thing about advising me on the worthiness of my posts. I find that impertinent.

if there is misinformation in your posts, it is quite pertinent that the errors be pointed out and correct information dispensed. if you don't like being corrected you should make sure that there are no holes in the information you post here.

da mermaid's profession is of no relevance here, nor are her studies. her information is factual and can be substantiated. that does not change regardless of the fact whether you want to read what she has to say on the subject!

I have had it with both of you. There certainly a warning on this website about the way information is presented here so it was a pertinent question. I did not post misinformation. 99% of what I said was my opinion and stated as such. What I am fed up with is the patronizing attitudes and self importance of a few members on this board. I don't fell the attitudes are supportive, information yes, attitudes no. But its ok, I've remember the ignore feature and have applied. You'll have to find someone else to pick on.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

There certainly a warning on this website about the way information is presented here so it was a pertinent question.

What warning would that be? I'm curious

Oh come on! No one is trying to change your mind, if you wish to maintain your opinion, then be my guest, but to claim that others have an attitidue is preposterous. I see only one obstinate and antagonistic view here.

[zyggy 9]

Actually this isn't the book... If you look at the title it says.. guidance... it is NOT a regulation.. meaning the CO's can take it or leave it as they wish... They are not bound by it... If you told me this came from the FAM or the CFR then they would be bound by it....

This is nothing more than an advisory cable... the CO's do not have to follow it at all and are not bound to... and in the case of Casablanca, they have chosen not to....

The second you understand that, you know that you cannot rely on this cable as a way to either complain, or get at the consulate by other actions...

I can't seem to get the quotes to work, so I've put Zyggy's comments in italics

Actually this is not exactly the case, the CO has the authority to send a petition back to the USCIS if in their opinion there is evidence that if the USCIS had known it would have resulted in a different outcome on their end. The evidence does not need to be written, it can be empirical, cultural or otherwise...

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

4. Providing solid evidence of fraud or misrepresentation in a petition relationship may not be achievable in many cases, particularly those involving marriage or relationship fraud. The FAM guidance on revocations makes this point on several occasions -- posts seeking revocations must show the "factual and concrete reasons for revocation." BCIS has asked us to remind consular officers that revocation requests must provide solid, factual evidence of fraud or misrepresentation, evidence that is likely to stand up in a court of law. In the case of sham marriages, for example, 9 FAM 42.43 N2.2 notes that BCIS requires at the least either documentary evidence that money changed hands between the petitioner and beneficiary or factual evidence that would convince "a reasonable person" that the marriage was entered into solely to evade immigration laws. Without such evidence, BCIS will be unlikely to obtain a petition''s revocation if a petitioner chooses to contest a notice of intent to revoke.

So it can't just be cultural... Saying that muslim men don't marry older women certainly wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1388.html

6. In adjudicating visa cases involving petitions, posts should

bear in mind three important factors: A. the consular officer''s

role in the petition process is to determine if there is

substantial evidence relevant to petition validity not

previously considered by DHS, and not to merely readjudicate the

petition; B. the memo supporting the petition return must

clearly show the factual and concrete reasons for recommending

revocation (observations made by the consular officer cannot be

conclusive, speculative, equivocal or irrelevant) and; C.

consular officers must provide to the applicant in writing as

full an explanation as possible of the legal and factual basis

for the visa denial and petition return.

From http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

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.

Second of all, the rules say that the petitioner and beneficiary may present additional evidence attempting to refute the CO's decision prior to the petition's being sent back. Most of the Moroccan petitions, on the contrary, have been sent back the following day. It's pretty hard to present additional evidence when you don't know what the CO's objection is and they send the application back immediately.

Can you cite the provision where this is the case...

I saw this in the Foreign Affairs Manual

9 FAM 41.81 Notes

d. Consular officers should return the K-1 petition to DHS for reconsideration if not satisfied with respect to the bona fides of the relationship or if the petitioner indicates that he or she no longer intends to go forward with the marriage.

I see nothing in the FAM that states that the opportunity for more information must be given...

Again from http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegram...grams_1415.html

Rather, a consular officer should only seek revocation of the petition if the officer knows, or has reason to believe, that the petition approval was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation or other unlawful means, or that the beneficiary is not entitled to the status conferred by the petition. Petitions generally should not be returned unless the post uncovers new information not known to BCIS at the time of petition approval. The FAM cautions that posts should seek revocations "sparingly," to avoid inconveniencing the petitioners and applicants and to avoid creating an additional administrative burden for BCIS.

and

VO supports this use of 221(g) with IV petitions, as returning a petition based on suspicion alone is not appropriate, and providing the applicant an opportunity to address post''s doubts is a fairer way of dealing with suspect cases. We encourage posts to use 221(g), except in those IV cases in which fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility for status can be clearly established. 221(g) allows petitioners and beneficiaries to supplement the initial application and in many cases overcome the refusal.

and

Posts should be generous in allowing applicants every opportunity to supplement their applications following a 221(g) refusal.

So you're right, it is only strongly encouraged that people be given the opportunity to refute the CO's decision. I don't think it's too much to ask that COs do what they are strongly encouraged to do.

You can find more here in a very helpful thread created by a woman whose petition for her fiance was sent back to DHS.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2687

Thank you !!!

Now you have the word straight from the book. These are the regulations, not someones imagination, and they aren't following them. Now if you don't have anything to add to help this woman go find another thread to hyjack. Why is it some people take so much pleasure in tell you whats wrong with you? Support here people!

I have not told anyone what is wrong with anyone. All I have been doing is pointing out what is going on and what can be done to make your cases stronger in front of a CO. I am supporting you, by giving you a path for success. If you think that just parroting to the crowd and patting you on the back is support and tell them to stick it to the man, well... you have a twisted idea of what support is...

Try to read my, mermaid's, gimygirl's and fox's posts with your emotion switch turned off and see what we have to say then... I think that you will see that we have been very supportive... by trying to give you the keys to succeed.

Edited June 22, 2006 by zyggy