NOID Rebuttal successful

[BinhJerome 14]

Ok I am not talking about due process for a foreigner, I am talking about the person filing, the USC, if the check was drawn from a USC bank account, the law or their requirements are for WHO can file, the NOID happens here and the notice is sent to the USC not the SO, it is the USC that must defend himself, so yes due process should have a bearing, that or they are commiting fraud on the USC by telling him if you meet these requirements then you can file and this is what you will get for your money, noa1, noa2, and so on, but when they cash the USC check, then just send him a NOID based on things that the USC never had a chance to do a rebuttal, remember Jim I have been denied, and they told me that I would have the chance to do a rebuttal when it got back to the USA, and they lied, they did not give me a USC not Binh the SO a chance, I was supposed to get the chance to do a rebuttal. I also hired a lawyer that looked into my case, and what I was told was that the CO had committed slander against us in his own notes because he made clearly false acusations, but with him being in a foreign country, do you really think they would have shipped him back to USA to stand up in civil court? NO they wouldn't. Maybe I have not made my point or my argument clear enough, but I think it is time to do so, it is a due process viloation, as my lawyer has even said so on our case, granted we were not issued a NOID, but what we got was a violation of MY due process, and the USCIS even admitted so (not calling it due process, but saying my case was handled incorectly) My lawyer also commented that if there were enough people that this happend to that there would be grounds for a class action civil suit, but to try and agure one case would make it harder, and they would cite that the CO handeling the case just had an off day and they would show he was repremanded. This is why I keep calling id a violation of due process/slander because it is in fact both. If someone makes a statement about you on paper that is not true and you can prove it (I.E. that I only made 1 trip to Vietnam) when he notes himself that I have been there 3 times, this is slander, when a USC is told that they will have the chance to rebute the claims made against them, and instead of following through with this claim and they simply make your application expire then this is not giving the USC due process, it is vague I will admit, but in our case WITHOUT a NOID being issued, this is what my lawyer informed me could be done and claimed. The tricky part is to prove that it happens all the time, and not in just one instance, this is why my lawyer would rather do a class action lawsuit because his odds of winning would be far greater as well as his payday, and even though it is in America, if you still go against the government, bad things can happen. Jerome

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Ok I am not talking about due process for a foreigner, I am talking about the person filing, the USC, if the check was drawn from a USC bank account, the law or their requirements are for WHO can file, the NOID happens here and the notice is sent to the USC not the SO, it is the USC that must defend himself, so yes due process should have a bearing, that or they are commiting fraud on the USC by telling him if you meet these requirements then you can file and this is what you will get for your money, noa1, noa2, and so on, but when they cash the USC check, then just send him a NOID based on things that the USC never had a chance to do a rebuttal, remember Jim I have been denied, and they told me that I would have the chance to do a rebuttal when it got back to the USA, and they lied, they did not give me a USC not Binh the SO a chance, I was supposed to get the chance to do a rebuttal. I also hired a lawyer that looked into my case, and what I was told was that the CO had committed slander against us in his own notes because he made clearly false acusations, but with him being in a foreign country, do you really think they would have shipped him back to USA to stand up in civil court? NO they wouldn't. Maybe I have not made my point or my argument clear enough, but I think it is time to do so, it is a due process viloation, as my lawyer has even said so on our case, granted we were not issued a NOID, but what we got was a violation of MY due process, and the USCIS even admitted so (not calling it due process, but saying my case was handled incorectly) My lawyer also commented that if there were enough people that this happend to that there would be grounds for a class action civil suit, but to try and agure one case would make it harder, and they would cite that the CO handeling the case just had an off day and they would show he was repremanded. This is why I keep calling id a violation of due process/slander because it is in fact both. If someone makes a statement about you on paper that is not true and you can prove it (I.E. that I only made 1 trip to Vietnam) when he notes himself that I have been there 3 times, this is slander, when a USC is told that they will have the chance to rebute the claims made against them, and instead of following through with this claim and they simply make your application expire then this is not giving the USC due process, it is vague I will admit, but in our case WITHOUT a NOID being issued, this is what my lawyer informed me could be done and claimed. The tricky part is to prove that it happens all the time, and not in just one instance, this is why my lawyer would rather do a class action lawsuit because his odds of winning would be far greater as well as his payday, and even though it is in America, if you still go against the government, bad things can happen. Jerome

Ok, so we've migrated from the OP's original topic to the topic of your own case. Very well.

I don't know if CSC ever sent you a notice stating that they were closing your case because the petition expired (perhaps you said somewhere and I just don't remember reading it). Since that's what CSC does the vast majority of the time, I'm presuming that's what happened. If that's why you're claiming you never got a chance to rebut the CO's findings, then your argument is pretty slim. You never took any further action that might have allowed you to rebut the CO's findings. If you had filed another petition, you might have gotten a NOID, just like the OP and others are now getting from CSC.

This sort of dovetails with the theory I proposed in my first post in this thread. A certain percentage of petitioners won't do anything after their petition has been returned to USCIS. With this new tactic, CSC doesn't have to waste any time adjudicating those petitions. You had the option of taking this as far as you wanted to take it. The fact that CSC dead filed the petition put the ball in your court to take the next step. You never did.

At each and every step of the way, you have the option of going further. You could have filed another petition. You would have either gotten a NOID or an approval. If you'd gotten a NOID then you'd have had your chance for a rebuttal. If you'd gotten an approval, there would be no need for a rebuttal. You could keep going round and round between USCIS and consulate until either the consulate approves the visa, or USCIS revokes the petition approval and the P6C becomes a finding of fact. If the visa is approved, then you won - end of story. If USCIS revokes the petition approval, then you go to the BIA for an appeal. If they uphold your appeal, then you go back to the USCIS/consulate carousel. If they deny your appeal, then you file with a federal appeals court. This doesn't end for good until you're denied by the US Supreme Court.

You gave it one shot, failed, and effectively gave up when you had a number of options left open. You can call it lack of due process if you like, even though I've already explained repeatedly that due process is available to you if you choose to use it, in spite of the fact that it's not required. You can call it fraud if you like. Based on what you say about the consular officers notes, you might have a case. If you had continued with your case, and refiled, you might have gotten a NOID and an opportunity to rebut the CO's findings with the evidence you have. You chose not to do this. It wasn't forced on you.

I am sincerely sorry that your visa application was denied, and that things went bad for you. I can imagine how I'd feel if it had happened to me. It very likely could have happened to me. Did you know that my ex-wife was ALSO in prison at the time my fiance interviewed? The CO never asked about my ex-wife. In fact, he hardly asked any questions at all. I'm convinced it's because he'd already decided to approve the visa, and the petition package and other documents submitted didn't give him any clear openings to dig for a reason to deny.

I know that I would have taken a different approach if Phuong had been denied her visa. I decided early on that I would do whatever was necessary, and try as long and as hard as I needed to until we succeeded. Moving to Vietnam was never really an option for me. It would be very difficult for me to survive there, both financially and medically, and there are people in the US who depend on me for support. You chose to move to Vietnam and marry your fiancee. I'm glad that was possible for you. But, it wasn't lack of due process that ended your visa case. It was your decision not to refile and keep fighting.

[Dai. 7]

Ok, so we've migrated from the OP's original topic to the topic of your own case. Very well.

I don't know if CSC ever sent you a notice stating that they were closing your case because the petition expired (perhaps you said somewhere and I just don't remember reading it). Since that's what CSC does the vast majority of the time, I'm presuming that's what happened. If that's why you're claiming you never got a chance to rebut the CO's findings, then your argument is pretty slim. You never took any further action that might have allowed you to rebut the CO's findings. If you had filed another petition, you might have gotten a NOID, just like the OP and others are now getting from CSC.

This sort of dovetails with the theory I proposed in my first post in this thread. A certain percentage of petitioners won't do anything after their petition has been returned to USCIS. With this new tactic, CSC doesn't have to waste any time adjudicating those petitions. You had the option of taking this as far as you wanted to take it. The fact that CSC dead filed the petition put the ball in your court to take the next step. You never did.

At each and every step of the way, you have the option of going further. You could have filed another petition. You would have either gotten a NOID or an approval. If you'd gotten a NOID then you'd have had your chance for a rebuttal. If you'd gotten an approval, there would be no need for a rebuttal. You could keep going round and round between USCIS and consulate until either the consulate approves the visa, or USCIS revokes the petition approval and the P6C becomes a finding of fact. If the visa is approved, then you won - end of story. If USCIS revokes the petition approval, then you go to the BIA for an appeal. If they uphold your appeal, then you go back to the USCIS/consulate carousel. If they deny your appeal, then you file with a federal appeals court. This doesn't end for good until you're denied by the US Supreme Court.

You gave it one shot, failed, and effectively gave up when you had a number of options left open. You can call it lack of due process if you like, even though I've already explained repeatedly that due process is available to you if you choose to use it, in spite of the fact that it's not required. You can call it fraud if you like. Based on what you say about the consular officers notes, you might have a case. If you had continued with your case, and refiled, you might have gotten a NOID and an opportunity to rebut the CO's findings with the evidence you have. You chose not to do this. It wasn't forced on you.

I am sincerely sorry that your visa application was denied, and that things went bad for you. I can imagine how I'd feel if it had happened to me. It very likely could have happened to me. Did you know that my ex-wife was ALSO in prison at the time my fiance interviewed? The CO never asked about my ex-wife. In fact, he hardly asked any questions at all. I'm convinced it's because he'd already decided to approve the visa, and the petition package and other documents submitted didn't give him any clear openings to dig for a reason to deny.

I know that I would have taken a different approach if Phuong had been denied her visa. I decided early on that I would do whatever was necessary, and try as long and as hard as I needed to until we succeeded. Moving to Vietnam was never really an option for me. It would be very difficult for me to survive there, both financially and medically, and there are people in the US who depend on me for support. You chose to move to Vietnam and marry your fiancee. I'm glad that was possible for you. But, it wasn't lack of due process that ended your visa case. It was your decision not to refile and keep fighting.

For real man, in this thread it's seems like a conversation between you too only. You have a lot of very intelligent points and this will prove to be useful for many people in the future. Bravo for JimVaPhuong.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

For real man, in this thread it's seems like a conversation between you too only. You have a lot of very intelligent points and this will prove to be useful for many people in the future. Bravo for JimVaPhuong.

I guess I probably started it.

Jerome also makes some very good points, and his complaints about the process and consulate are all valid. Where we disagree is a technicality. He believes there is a basis for a claim that due process has been denied, and I don't. Since neither one of us are likely to go to court over this, we can just agree to disagree on this point.