How long is actually long enough?

[tanstaafl 1]

There is no real time limit. It depends on the CO period.

Example 1, A person on VJ met his fiancee and within one month asked her to marry him, he went there not knowing this woman for 30 days, he stayed there only 5 days, came home and filed for the visa. 6 months later they had the interview he flew back (only 5 days again) and were approved.

Example 2. I met my fiance (now wife) and we chatted for 9 months before I ever went to visit her. I stayed 15 days the first trip, came home waited about 2 months to file for the visa, and made 2 more trips. We were denied.

Example 3. A friend met his fiancee chatted for 3 months came to visit, went home and filed for a visa, 6 months later an interview they were denied, he came back (4th time) they got married, and they filed a CR1, this visa was also denied, all this time is now going on over 2 years, they just had their 3rd interview and were finially approved (4 years total)

As you can see, it truly depends on the CO, ours lied at the interview because he didnt like something about our case, and I have now been in Vietnam for an entire year and enjoying it. Some people can barely know their loved one and get approved, it all depends on the CO. There is no majic number of months or years, or even trips, the majic is all in the CO

Good luck Jerome and Binh

Thanks Jerome. So it's really coming down to the CO, isn't it? I like it when you presented some specific case like that. Funny thing is that they expect you to follow the local customs when even the local people don't follow them. I remember during one of our chats, my wife said that if she were to be a citizen and residing in of some other countries like France, Japan, Britain, etc., then we probably wouldn't have to go through all of these and living separate for months, even years. I don't know about other countries' customs but I think my wife is right.

[tanstaafl 1]

One final note.... These cultural norms that they are denying people for are currently being tried in a class action lawsuit. Clearly the lawyer taking the case feels that because there is no law or regulation stating a Dam Hoi must happen when they are denied for it that this is an unjust denial. Facts are facts, and when the CO's simply deny and give reasons, they throw whatever they want to on to the denial slip to make it look worse than it is. I personally know 4 people that were denied, and never confronted the reasons for a first denial, the only difference the second time around was they had more trips and more photos, they were approved the second time out, the Lack of Dam Hoi or other reasons for the first denial were all BS the new CO knew it and they were approved. Hopefully the class action lawsuit will help, but it will take years before we actually see any changes.

Jerome

Denying without reasons or with ridiculous reasons is absurd!

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Denying without reasons or with ridiculous reasons is absurd!

The consular officers are charged with detecting immigration fraud and stopping it before the intending immigrant gets a visa. The level of fraud in Vietnam is astronomical. The people there have strong motives to immigrate to the US. One motive is the large economic disparity between the US and Vietnam, combined with the cultural need for younger people to provide support for their older family members. Another motive is family reunification. The US has a unique history with Vietnam that led to several 'special' immigration programs, resulting in a relatively large portion of Viet Kieu living in the US. In addition, Vietnamese, like most east Asians, have a different set of morals than most Americans. Unless they're dealing with family members or close friends, they don't have any strong moral objections to cheating.

When a consular officer denies a visa it's not because they are being arbitrarily cruel. It's because they think the relationship stinks of fraud. It may just be a gut feeling based on the totality of the circumstances. The can't cite their "gut feeling" as a reason for denial, so they have to cite reasons that are available. When the relationship lasts long enough to make it to a second interview on a subsequently filed petition then they feel a lot more comfortable about issuing a visa. A substantial number of the people who are denied at the first interview do not return for another, at least not with the same petitioner.

This is what Jerome was referring to. Just because they write "no Dam Hoi" on the denial letter doesn't mean that's really why the visa is being denied. It just happens to be a convenient excuse that fits into their "reasonable person" model. The real reason is they think the beneficiary is trying to scam them, and possibly trying to scam the petitioner as well. They may issue a visa after the second interview, even if the beneficiary and petitioner still haven't had a Dam Hoi, just because the relationship survived.

The Tran v. Napolitano case may result in some procedural changes with DoS and USCIS, but I don't think it's going to change the rate of denials in HCMC. Just because there's no statutory requirement that someone have a Dam Hoi in order to get a visa doesn't change the fact that the consular officer has the discretion to determine if the relationship conforms to the cultural and traditional norms of the beneficiary's country. This is the consulate's most powerful tool in fighting fraud. That discretion is granted to the consular officer by law. Unless the court finds the law is flawed, they aren't likely to take that discretion away from the consular officer.

[ScottThuy 140]

I thought that case pretty much died with the response.......

[VinceN 25]

I think the CO's gut feeling is the only logical explanation for the approval in my case. I met my fiancee 2 months prior to getting engaged, and I got engaged on the first trip to see her. Some might say it's b/c of the overwhelming evidence that we have, while it is true we did have overwhelming evidence of the relationship, but the CO didn't even touch any of that at the interview...so yeah.

[Dau Que 6]

I think the CO's gut feeling is the only logical explanation for the approval in my case. I met my fiancee 2 months prior to getting engaged, and I got engaged on the first trip to see her. Some might say it's b/c of the overwhelming evidence that we have, while it is true we did have overwhelming evidence of the relationship, but the CO didn't even touch any of that at the interview...so yeah.

Different people have different scenarios. There are lots of "other" factors involved that can change the "fraud smell" indicator of petitions. Age of both petitioners and beneficiaries. The amount of trips petitioners made "prior" to the current relationship. For example, your case, although you indicated you got engaged to her only 2 months after your FIRST trip to visit her, how many trips you made prior to this trip? (all together, doesn't have to relate to this relationship)

A person made 10 trips to VN in the past and/or been divorced a few times WILL always look, smell like a fraud case, no matter how "careful" he plans any future petition. A middle age person, going thru a divorce in a fair recent time, hastily jumped to marriage in such a short period of time in the name of "love" will not convince the C/O. When your previous marriage failed, you just don't jump to the next one as quickly as possible. You want to take time, investigate, and "try" to avoid past mistakes.

When you get all the hidden here and there facts of any particular case, there must be a reason why the blue slip were handed out.

[tanstaafl 1]

The consular officers are charged with detecting immigration fraud and stopping it before the intending immigrant gets a visa. The level of fraud in Vietnam is astronomical. The people there have strong motives to immigrate to the US. One motive is the large economic disparity between the US and Vietnam, combined with the cultural need for younger people to provide support for their older family members. Another motive is family reunification. The US has a unique history with Vietnam that led to several 'special' immigration programs, resulting in a relatively large portion of Viet Kieu living in the US. In addition, Vietnamese, like most east Asians, have a different set of morals than most Americans. Unless they're dealing with family members or close friends, they don't have any strong moral objections to cheating.

When a consular officer denies a visa it's not because they are being arbitrarily cruel. It's because they think the relationship stinks of fraud. It may just be a gut feeling based on the totality of the circumstances. The can't cite their "gut feeling" as a reason for denial, so they have to cite reasons that are available. When the relationship lasts long enough to make it to a second interview on a subsequently filed petition then they feel a lot more comfortable about issuing a visa. A substantial number of the people who are denied at the first interview do not return for another, at least not with the same petitioner.

This is what Jerome was referring to. Just because they write "no Dam Hoi" on the denial letter doesn't mean that's really why the visa is being denied. It just happens to be a convenient excuse that fits into their "reasonable person" model. The real reason is they think the beneficiary is trying to scam them, and possibly trying to scam the petitioner as well. They may issue a visa after the second interview, even if the beneficiary and petitioner still haven't had a Dam Hoi, just because the relationship survived.

The Tran v. Napolitano case may result in some procedural changes with DoS and USCIS, but I don't think it's going to change the rate of denials in HCMC. Just because there's no statutory requirement that someone have a Dam Hoi in order to get a visa doesn't change the fact that the consular officer has the discretion to determine if the relationship conforms to the cultural and traditional norms of the beneficiary's country. This is the consulate's most powerful tool in fighting fraud. That discretion is granted to the consular officer by law. Unless the court finds the law is flawed, they aren't likely to take that discretion away from the consular officer.

Well said, Jim. But I still feel sorry for those who love each other really, no scamming, no cheating, just love if unfortunately they got denied the first time.