221 (g)

[soul_encounter 0]

I have been going through and through the mess of links to the acts and ammendments, and have found some interesting bits in the adjucators manual "i'll paste them at the bottom"... But I can not find the part that specifically deals with denials and this 221 (g) Has anyone else ever found it or by chance have a link for it? I'll kep looking in the meantime and if I find it i'll post it for anyone else who wants to read.

I did find this section on the CO asking names of previous spouses and other alarms they find but these are in reference to the I-130. I'm assuming it may apply to the I-129 as well:

Although the I-130 petition asks for the names of all prior spouses, the response to the question is sometimes inaccurate. The reasons given for an inaccurate answer are numerous, but the most common reasons are:

• Desire to conceal prior marriage(s) from spouse;

• Separated for many years and unsure if legally divorced;

• Even though legally divorced, not in possession of the divorce decree and unwilling to take time to get it;

• Not divorced because divorce is not allowed in the person's country of origin (e.g., the Philippines).

On the other hand, a marriage which was contracted solely for immigration purposes does not confer benefits under the Act. A number of factors may raise questions about the intent of the marriage, and therefore necessitate more in depth questioning (see Chapter 15 regarding interviewing techniques), or even a field examination (see Chapter 17) or an investigation (see Chapter 10.5(d)). Some indications that a marriage may have been contracted solely for immigration benefits include:

• Large disparity of age;

• Inability of petitioner and beneficiary to speak each other's language;

• Vast difference in cultural and ethnic background;

• Family and/or friends unaware of the marriage;

• Marriage arranged by a third party;

• Marriage contracted immediately following the beneficiary's apprehension or receipt of notification to depart the United States;

• Discrepancies in statements on questions for which a husband and wife should have common knowledge;

• No cohabitation since marriage;

• Beneficiary is a friend of the family;

• Petitioner has filed previous petitions in behalf of aliens, especially prior alien spouses.

[chiquita 0]

I have been going through and through the mess of links to the acts and ammendments, and have found some interesting bits in the adjucators manual "i'll paste them at the bottom"... But I can not find the part that specifically deals with denials and this 221 (g) Has anyone else ever found it or by chance have a link for it? I'll kep looking in the meantime and if I find it i'll post it for anyone else who wants to read.

I did find this section on the CO asking names of previous spouses and other alarms they find but these are in reference to the I-130. I'm assuming it may apply to the I-129 as well:

Although the I-130 petition asks for the names of all prior spouses, the response to the question is sometimes inaccurate. The reasons given for an inaccurate answer are numerous, but the most common reasons are:

• Desire to conceal prior marriage(s) from spouse;

• Separated for many years and unsure if legally divorced;

• Even though legally divorced, not in possession of the divorce decree and unwilling to take time to get it;

• Not divorced because divorce is not allowed in the person's country of origin (e.g., the Philippines).

On the other hand, a marriage which was contracted solely for immigration purposes does not confer benefits under the Act. A number of factors may raise questions about the intent of the marriage, and therefore necessitate more in depth questioning (see Chapter 15 regarding interviewing techniques), or even a field examination (see Chapter 17) or an investigation (see Chapter 10.5(d)). Some indications that a marriage may have been contracted solely for immigration benefits include:

• Large disparity of age;

• Inability of petitioner and beneficiary to speak each other's language;

• Vast difference in cultural and ethnic background;

• Family and/or friends unaware of the marriage;

• Marriage arranged by a third party;

• Marriage contracted immediately following the beneficiary's apprehension or receipt of notification to depart the United States;

• Discrepancies in statements on questions for which a husband and wife should have common knowledge;

• No cohabitation since marriage;

• Beneficiary is a friend of the family;

• Petitioner has filed previous petitions in behalf of aliens, especially prior alien spouses.

You have done good! Do you mind podting the link where you found this?

Have you read Ellis's postings?

chi

[soul_encounter 0]

I have been going through and through the mess of links to the acts and ammendments, and have found some interesting bits in the adjucators manual "i'll paste them at the bottom"... But I can not find the part that specifically deals with denials and this 221 (g) Has anyone else ever found it or by chance have a link for it? I'll kep looking in the meantime and if I find it i'll post it for anyone else who wants to read.

I did find this section on the CO asking names of previous spouses and other alarms they find but these are in reference to the I-130. I'm assuming it may apply to the I-129 as well:

Although the I-130 petition asks for the names of all prior spouses, the response to the question is sometimes inaccurate. The reasons given for an inaccurate answer are numerous, but the most common reasons are:

• Desire to conceal prior marriage(s) from spouse;

• Separated for many years and unsure if legally divorced;

• Even though legally divorced, not in possession of the divorce decree and unwilling to take time to get it;

• Not divorced because divorce is not allowed in the person's country of origin (e.g., the Philippines).

On the other hand, a marriage which was contracted solely for immigration purposes does not confer benefits under the Act. A number of factors may raise questions about the intent of the marriage, and therefore necessitate more in depth questioning (see Chapter 15 regarding interviewing techniques), or even a field examination (see Chapter 17) or an investigation (see Chapter 10.5(d)). Some indications that a marriage may have been contracted solely for immigration benefits include:

• Large disparity of age;

• Inability of petitioner and beneficiary to speak each other's language;

• Vast difference in cultural and ethnic background;

• Family and/or friends unaware of the marriage;

• Marriage arranged by a third party;

• Marriage contracted immediately following the beneficiary's apprehension or receipt of notification to depart the United States;

• Discrepancies in statements on questions for which a husband and wife should have common knowledge;

• No cohabitation since marriage;

• Beneficiary is a friend of the family;

• Petitioner has filed previous petitions in behalf of aliens, especially prior alien spouses.

You have done good! Do you mind podting the link where you found this?

Have you read Ellis's postings?

chi

Don't mind at all, but be forwarned, from what I can tell, there is no order rhyme or reason to this Act or Manual. I spent hour after hour just wandering lost from one page to the next skimming whatever seemed halfway relevant. In the searching though, it does give insight into the mindset, philosophy, technique etc of interviews and CO's. I would love to find the part directly concerning the 221 (g) though... it's a mission now. I don't think I know of Ellis's case no, i'll search, thanks.

http://www.uscis.gov/lpbin/lpext.dll/inser...d-chapter-32-15

http://www.uscis.gov/lpbin/lpext.dll/inser...pter-32-21-46-3

[babybunny 2]

this is good information. thank you for posting the links!!!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I don't think I know of Ellis's case no, i'll search, thanks.

Am I mistaken or is Ellis an immigration attorney who posts here on occasion?

Edited July 24, 2006 by szsz

[soul_encounter 0]

I FOUND IT!!!! Lol... not that it clarifies anything much at all, but from what I have been reading it is related to AR

Heres the link:

http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inser...ument-frame.htm

[babybunny 2]

I FOUND IT!!!! Lol... not that it clarifies anything much at all, but from what I have been reading it is related to AR

Heres the link:

http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inser...ument-frame.htm

your paving your road to becoming an immigrations attorney. keep up the good work...

[soul_encounter 0]

I FOUND IT!!!! Lol... not that it clarifies anything much at all, but from what I have been reading it is related to AR

Heres the link:

http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inser...ument-frame.htm

your paving your road to becoming an immigrations attorney. keep up the good work...

You know, not a bad career choice, but geez, after my own immigration ordeal is over, i don't think i'll ever be able to hear of immigration again.

I have learned some interesting things here though. I have seen others get caught by these officers techniques. A few interview tips, If your fiance has relatives in the US, (and they will ask), be sure the CO is clear on the nature of your relationship to those relatives, and when if ever you met them. If it was before you met your fiance, you may have problems. If your fiance introduced you after you met your fiance, be clear about that too. They automatically assume if your fiance has relatives here and you knew them before him, you had an arranged marriage.

Never ever under any circumstances if you have sent them money (wire transfer etc) or they to you, use those receipts as "proof of relationship". They see that as "buying a spouse". Any exchange of money either way is a sign of a scam marriage under their code. (one of the ladies i mentioned earlier used this)

Be sure your fiance knows the name of your former spouse, and the date your divorce was finalized. They will ask, and for whatever their reasoning, they believe he should know it.

If one or the other divorce proceedings were not finalized when you met your fiance, be very careful and cautious as to the "date of your engagement". If you were engaged or entered into contract with your current fiance before your or his divorce is final, you will be found ineligible and denied. (this was why the other lady I knew was denied. Her fiance had been married in his early years and although he only lived with her a year, had begun divorce proceedings, my friend and he had their engagement ceremony before that divorce was final).

It is just sad, I see these interview topics as major trick points and traps that a lot of us have or could easily fall into unawares. I mean, before reading that manual, I had discussed the circumstances of why my previous marriage failed with my fiance, but never thought to share the ex's name. I never imagined how much my fiance and I know of each other would be judged by such a silly fact.

And my sweetie has 2 half brothers here in the US, both in college, one in texas, the other south carolina. The one in texas, i have never met or spoken to, but the one in south carolina, i chat with, email, and he calls me regularly. My fiance introduced me to his brother, not the other way around. But I can see how this can be used as an interview trap.

Example:

CO - Do you have any relatives in the US?

Fiance - yes two brothers, both in college, one in texas and one in south carolina.

CO - Does your fiance know and have contact with your brothers there?

Fiance - The one in texas no, she has never known, but the other yes they talk regularly (fiance thinking this is a GOOD thing, showing family support)

CO then heads onto other questions, assumes marriage was arranged, denial. We sit around wondering why what went wrong for months being given no answer. NIGHTMARE!!!

[morocco4ever 63]

I FOUND IT!!!! Lol... not that it clarifies anything much at all, but from what I have been reading it is related to AR

Heres the link:

http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inser...ument-frame.htm

your paving your road to becoming an immigrations attorney. keep up the good work...

You know, not a bad career choice, but geez, after my own immigration ordeal is over, i don't think i'll ever be able to hear of immigration again.

I have learned some interesting things here though. I have seen others get caught by these officers techniques. A few interview tips, If your fiance has relatives in the US, (and they will ask), be sure the CO is clear on the nature of your relationship to those relatives, and when if ever you met them. If it was before you met your fiance, you may have problems. If your fiance introduced you after you met your fiance, be clear about that too. They automatically assume if your fiance has relatives here and you knew them before him, you had an arranged marriage.

Never ever under any circumstances if you have sent them money (wire transfer etc) or they to you, use those receipts as "proof of relationship". They see that as "buying a spouse". Any exchange of money either way is a sign of a scam marriage under their code. (one of the ladies i mentioned earlier used this)

Be sure your fiance knows the name of your former spouse, and the date your divorce was finalized. They will ask, and for whatever their reasoning, they believe he should know it.

If one or the other divorce proceedings were not finalized when you met your fiance, be very careful and cautious as to the "date of your engagement". If you were engaged or entered into contract with your current fiance before your or his divorce is final, you will be found ineligible and denied. (this was why the other lady I knew was denied. Her fiance had been married in his early years and although he only lived with her a year, had begun divorce proceedings, my friend and he had their engagement ceremony before that divorce was final).

It is just sad, I see these interview topics as major trick points and traps that a lot of us have or could easily fall into unawares. I mean, before reading that manual, I had discussed the circumstances of why my previous marriage failed with my fiance, but never thought to share the ex's name. I never imagined how much my fiance and I know of each other would be judged by such a silly fact.

And my sweetie has 2 half brothers here in the US, both in college, one in texas, the other south carolina. The one in texas, i have never met or spoken to, but the one in south carolina, i chat with, email, and he calls me regularly. My fiance introduced me to his brother, not the other way around. But I can see how this can be used as an interview trap.

Example:

CO - Do you have any relatives in the US?

Fiance - yes two brothers, both in college, one in texas and one in south carolina.

CO - Does your fiance know and have contact with your brothers there?

Fiance - The one in texas no, she has never known, but the other yes they talk regularly (fiance thinking this is a GOOD thing, showing family support)

CO then heads onto other questions, assumes marriage was arranged, denial. We sit around wondering why what went wrong for months being given no answer. NIGHTMARE!!!

OMG...this is exactly what happened to us! We had no idea it would even be considered that his sister in the US arranged our marriage, but that is exactly what they are thinking. Even proof isn't enough. I have his original interest sent to me on the dating website that we met each other, it is dated 11/19/03, they didn't even want to see it or anything else for that matter. The first time I talked to his sister was around 2 months after we met. They didn't look at any of our proof, just poof, no visa, no explanation, nothing. This is a trap. The stupid thing is if you had no contact with his family they would think it is a fraud marriage as well. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

My thought would be that to avoid the mess we are in now is to address all of your red flags with the initial petition, don't wait for the interview. If I could do it again I would have sent them a letter explaining all of our red flags. The age difference, the sister in Texas, which I had no idea was a red flag. Its a shame that we can't know these things in advance on how to do it right the first time, but having no experience with immigration who would know.

Thanks for posting this, it has been very insightful, and I hope it can help at least one person going through this journey to avoid the nightmare that so many of us from Morocco are going through.

[chiquita 0]

I don't think I know of Ellis's case no, i'll search, thanks.

Am I mistaken or is Ellis an immigration attorney who posts here on occasion?

Yes he is an attorney.

chi

[soul_encounter 0]

I FOUND IT!!!! Lol... not that it clarifies anything much at all, but from what I have been reading it is related to AR

Heres the link:

http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inser...ument-frame.htm

your paving your road to becoming an immigrations attorney. keep up the good work...

You know, not a bad career choice, but geez, after my own immigration ordeal is over, i don't think i'll ever be able to hear of immigration again.

I have learned some interesting things here though. I have seen others get caught by these officers techniques. A few interview tips, If your fiance has relatives in the US, (and they will ask), be sure the CO is clear on the nature of your relationship to those relatives, and when if ever you met them. If it was before you met your fiance, you may have problems. If your fiance introduced you after you met your fiance, be clear about that too. They automatically assume if your fiance has relatives here and you knew them before him, you had an arranged marriage.

Never ever under any circumstances if you have sent them money (wire transfer etc) or they to you, use those receipts as "proof of relationship". They see that as "buying a spouse". Any exchange of money either way is a sign of a scam marriage under their code. (one of the ladies i mentioned earlier used this)

Be sure your fiance knows the name of your former spouse, and the date your divorce was finalized. They will ask, and for whatever their reasoning, they believe he should know it.

If one or the other divorce proceedings were not finalized when you met your fiance, be very careful and cautious as to the "date of your engagement". If you were engaged or entered into contract with your current fiance before your or his divorce is final, you will be found ineligible and denied. (this was why the other lady I knew was denied. Her fiance had been married in his early years and although he only lived with her a year, had begun divorce proceedings, my friend and he had their engagement ceremony before that divorce was final).

It is just sad, I see these interview topics as major trick points and traps that a lot of us have or could easily fall into unawares. I mean, before reading that manual, I had discussed the circumstances of why my previous marriage failed with my fiance, but never thought to share the ex's name. I never imagined how much my fiance and I know of each other would be judged by such a silly fact.

And my sweetie has 2 half brothers here in the US, both in college, one in texas, the other south carolina. The one in texas, i have never met or spoken to, but the one in south carolina, i chat with, email, and he calls me regularly. My fiance introduced me to his brother, not the other way around. But I can see how this can be used as an interview trap.

Example:

CO - Do you have any relatives in the US?

Fiance - yes two brothers, both in college, one in texas and one in south carolina.

CO - Does your fiance know and have contact with your brothers there?

Fiance - The one in texas no, she has never known, but the other yes they talk regularly (fiance thinking this is a GOOD thing, showing family support)

CO then heads onto other questions, assumes marriage was arranged, denial. We sit around wondering why what went wrong for months being given no answer. NIGHTMARE!!!

OMG...this is exactly what happened to us! We had no idea it would even be considered that his sister in the US arranged our marriage, but that is exactly what they are thinking. Even proof isn't enough. I have his original interest sent to me on the dating website that we met each other, it is dated 11/19/03, they didn't even want to see it or anything else for that matter. The first time I talked to his sister was around 2 months after we met. They didn't look at any of our proof, just poof, no visa, no explanation, nothing. This is a trap. The stupid thing is if you had no contact with his family they would think it is a fraud marriage as well. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

My thought would be that to avoid the mess we are in now is to address all of your red flags with the initial petition, don't wait for the interview. If I could do it again I would have sent them a letter explaining all of our red flags. The age difference, the sister in Texas, which I had no idea was a red flag. Its a shame that we can't know these things in advance on how to do it right the first time, but having no experience with immigration who would know.

Thanks for posting this, it has been very insightful, and I hope it can help at least one person going through this journey to avoid the nightmare that so many of us from Morocco are going through.

I'm sorry you had to endure that, as I was reading about relatives here of the fiance it just clicked. Sadly, it seems they will use any trap, and I hope to find a way for my fiance to address that question fully in one answr, but who think it's a bad thing??? Anyhow, not as if we have tons of time to read and study all the whys and how to's of being a tricky CO... I do recommend all going through this to at least scan the pages for information pertinent to your case and hopefully find a way to overcome it ahead of time. Knowledge is power they say.

I am sooooooooo happy for you today btw chi, everytime i thought of your success at work, it made me smile. TY

[ellis-island 6]

I don't think I know of Ellis's case no, i'll search, thanks.

I may have a case number. It would be news to me though if I do.

I hope not. I don't think the beneficiary and I have been properly

introduced yet. That's a red flag for consular officers, if the petitioner

and beneficiary haven't been properly introduced.

If I learn what my case number is, I'll post more often here and

keep y'all apprised of how the case is progressing and how the beneficiary

performs at the interview, whoever she might be and wherever that interview

might be held.

Last time I checked though, I haven't petitioned for anyone.

Am I mistaken or is Ellis an immigration attorney who posts here on occasion?

Now & then I think he does.

Edited July 31, 2006 by ellis-island

[morocco4ever 63]

I don't think I know of Ellis's case no, i'll search, thanks.

I may have a case number. It would be news to me though if I do.

I hope not. I don't think the beneficiary and I have been properly

introduced yet. That's a red flag for consular officers, if the petitioner

and beneficiary haven't been properly introduced.

If I learn what my case number is, I'll post more often here and

keep y'all apprised of how the case is progressing and how the beneficiary

performs at the interview, whoever she might be and wherever that interview

might be held.

Last time I checked though, I haven't petitioned for anyone.

Am I mistaken or is Ellis an immigration attorney who posts here on occasion?

Now & then I think he does.

I don't think I know of Ellis's case no, i'll search, thanks.

I may have a case number. It would be news to me though if I do.

I hope not. I don't think the beneficiary and I have been properly

introduced yet. That's a red flag for consular officers, if the petitioner

and beneficiary haven't been properly introduced.

If I learn what my case number is, I'll post more often here and

keep y'all apprised of how the case is progressing and how the beneficiary

performs at the interview, whoever she might be and wherever that interview

might be held.

Last time I checked though, I haven't petitioned for anyone.

Am I mistaken or is Ellis an immigration attorney who posts here on occasion?

Now & then I think he does.

[soul_encounter 0]

I don't think I know of Ellis's case no, i'll search, thanks.

I may have a case number. It would be news to me though if I do.

I hope not. I don't think the beneficiary and I have been properly

introduced yet. That's a red flag for consular officers, if the petitioner

and beneficiary haven't been properly introduced.

If I learn what my case number is, I'll post more often here and

keep y'all apprised of how the case is progressing and how the beneficiary

performs at the interview, whoever she might be and wherever that interview

might be held.

Last time I checked though, I haven't petitioned for anyone.

Am I mistaken or is Ellis an immigration attorney who posts here on occasion?

Now & then I think he does.

Well, nice to meet the infamous ellis-island mystery man... Hello there