is this a red flag?

[^KK^ 3]

you should be fine...if they ask...just tell them the truth

[lion of judah 0]

explain "timely retraction"

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

that employer was the bully type, and on the day i left we had a huge quarrel, harsh words exchanged. so i didnt want to include him and then have him fabricate any stories or cause my process to slow down. not a huge gap cuz i was only there for like five months

They don't generally call your employers. They don't care what sort of relationship you had with your boss. However, they may care if previous information you gave them does not match current information. You can bet your previous visa application is in the computer, so they'll know about it.

When it comes to things like proof of ongoing relationship, you have the opportunity to cherry pick information that will help your case. When it comes to answering questions like "List ALL employment", you have to follow the instructions and give them the information they ask for, even if you think it won't reflect well on you. The consular officer only needs to find ONE discrepancy in your documents that USCIS didn't know about when they approved the petition, and that's enough to send the petition back to USCIS with a recommendation that it be denied.

You're going to have to list those jobs again on the DS-230, except this time you're going to need to go back 10 years. I recommend you include the employer you left out on the I-129F. If it comes up at the interview just say it was an oversight. The CO isn't likely to think it's significant enough to have caused the petition to be denied, and they'll let it slide.

Not all consulates use the DS230, Jim. Not sure about Jamaica, Ukraine defintely does not. He can correct it at that time if they do OR he can correct the G-325a at the interview. Since it is not material as to whether the petition is approved there should be no problems with correcting the error/omission.

Thanks, Gary. I've only read what's in packet 3 for a few consulates, and the DS-230 seemed to be one of the handful of forms that was pretty common.

[pushbrk 12,913]

i will do that. is there a great deal of emphasis placed on this?

There's a great deal of emphasis placed on truthful answers and some significant penalties for getting caught lying on immigration forms or to immigration officials. When you grow up, you'll learn that, "I didn't want the truth known." is not an excuse for lying.

Edited September 7, 2009 by pushbrk

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

Thanks, Gary. I've only read what's in packet 3 for a few consulates, and the DS-230 seemed to be one of the handful of forms that was pretty common.

It's interesting. The Foreign Affairs Manual (9 FAM 41.81 Procedural Notes, http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87393.pdf) does not list the DS-230 as a required document (cf PN 1), but later refers to DS-230 as part of Packet 3 (PN 3.2) and states that DS-230 is necessary to initiate clearance procedures (PN 3.3).

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

There's a great deal of emphasis placed on truthful answers and some significant penalties for getting caught lying on immigration forms or to immigration officials. When you grow up, you'll learn that, "I didn't want the truth known." is not an excuse for lying.

Geez... I'm all about encouraging truthfulness and completeness in completing immigration forms, but this is a bit over the top. Ever consider changing your member rank from "Straight Talk Member" to "Snarky Member"?

[sofianiami 0]

hi all

[D&R 0]

hi all

Hmmm... interesting post

[lion of judah 0]

pushbrk. in the future, if you have nothing helpful to say, i encourage you to keep your mouth shut and your opinions to yourself. your negativity is not needed or appreciated!!!!!!!!

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

To be fair, pushbrk is one of the most knowledgable and helpful members on VJ. I just wish he'd tone down the condescension a couple notches.

[Brad and Vika 129]

To be fair, pushbrk is one of the most knowledgable and helpful members on VJ. I just wish he'd tone down the condescension a couple notches.

Stephen and lion, having seen many of pushbrks posts before, I do not think the comment was meant the way it sounded. He was probably making reference to his age compared to yours (lion of judah). He really is trying to be cautionary and helpful I think. He may of course refute that at will.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

that employer was the bully type, and on the day i left we had a huge quarrel, harsh words exchanged. so i didnt want to include him and then have him fabricate any stories or cause my process to slow down. not a huge gap cuz i was only there for like five months

They don't generally call your employers. They don't care what sort of relationship you had with your boss. However, they may care if previous information you gave them does not match current information. You can bet your previous visa application is in the computer, so they'll know about it.

When it comes to things like proof of ongoing relationship, you have the opportunity to cherry pick information that will help your case. When it comes to answering questions like "List ALL employment", you have to follow the instructions and give them the information they ask for, even if you think it won't reflect well on you. The consular officer only needs to find ONE discrepancy in your documents that USCIS didn't know about when they approved the petition, and that's enough to send the petition back to USCIS with a recommendation that it be denied.

You're going to have to list those jobs again on the DS-230, except this time you're going to need to go back 10 years. I recommend you include the employer you left out on the I-129F. If it comes up at the interview just say it was an oversight. The CO isn't likely to think it's significant enough to have caused the petition to be denied, and they'll let it slide.

Not all consulates use the DS230, Jim. Not sure about Jamaica, Ukraine defintely does not. He can correct it at that time if they do OR he can correct the G-325a at the interview. Since it is not material as to whether the petition is approved there should be no problems with correcting the error/omission.

Thanks, Gary. I've only read what's in packet 3 for a few consulates, and the DS-230 seemed to be one of the handful of forms that was pretty common.

I think some consulates send a "visa package" with everything in it. I couldn't tell you for sure what Ukraine sends because the great and glorius People's Post Office of Ukraine never managed to deliver our packet 3 and I downloaded the forms they said I would need. But we never needed a DS-230 for either the K-1 or K-2s.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

pushbrk. in the future, if you have nothing helpful to say, i encourage you to keep your mouth shut and your opinions to yourself. your negativity is not needed or appreciated!!!!!!!!

You will find what Pushbrk says to be very helpful, though not sugar coated to be sure. He whacked me in the head a few times as a noobie but the outcome was worth it, and I appreciate direct advice. What he says is valid.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Gary and Alla

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Thanks, Gary. I've only read what's in packet 3 for a few consulates, and the DS-230 seemed to be one of the handful of forms that was pretty common.

It's interesting. The Foreign Affairs Manual (9 FAM 41.81 Procedural Notes, http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87393.pdf) does not list the DS-230 as a required document (cf PN 1), but later refers to DS-230 as part of Packet 3 (PN 3.2) and states that DS-230 is necessary to initiate clearance procedures (PN 3.3).

The K-1 is a NON immigrant visa and as such does not require a DS-230 form which is for immigrant visas. However, many consulates treat the K-1 as an immigrant visa and require the DS-230 for whatever purpose they deem necessary. Consulates have huge latitude on what they can require before issuing visas. I have always imagined though that at some point the DS-230 must get tossed or simply put to the back of the file in the "facetious BS" tab as it simply is not required at any point in the visa or AOS process for the K-1. There just is no use for it, officially.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

i will do that. is there a great deal of emphasis placed on this?

If I posted anything that led you to believe it is not important to be accurate, I am sorry. It is very important to be accurate and that is why I suggest you correct it when you have the opportunity. You will have to do another G-325a for the AOS and it would be best if everything matches. While this type of thing does not normally fall into the "visa fraud" category, it is nonetheless important. Trying to send a corrected G-325a now will just get lost in the USCIS black hole, so do it when you interview.