Petition returned to USCIS

[Wisjam 0]

So, My fiance had his interview in Kingston on Monday, October 24th. He was given a sheet saying that due to new evidence provided, the officer has reason to believe he is ineligible and his petition is being returned to USCIS. His paperwork and my tax transcripts, I134 and employment letters were removed (I assume sent to USCIS). So I think it's either a question of my income or a misunderstanding that he wasn't given an opportunity to explain. He was asked when we met. He answered 1999. Asked when engaged Dec. 2009. The problem is we did meet in 1999, but were not in a committed relationship until 2006. The officer asked if my son, 6 years old, is his. He answered no and was given a 221 (g). He was not given a chance to explain that, although we met in 1999, we were not in a committed relationship until after the birth of my son.

So, what do you think the reason is? Why did they take my I134 and supporting documents? What should I do next?

Thanks in advance.

[Nijabound 2]

Wisjam,

I am very sorry to hear what happened at the interview with the US Consulates. The consulate assumes that when you met in 1999 both of you were not in a committed relationship. Your committed relationship springs up in 2006 and later become in engaged in 2009. If i were you i will be interested to build a strong bonafide documentation that springs from 2006 till date to proof a bonafide relationship. I dont know if you have visited your fiancee after 1999, ie starting from 2006 when your relationship to marry become evident to you and both of you have spent a enough time together showing documentation as the supporting evidence till date

I dont think your son who is 6 years old has anything to do with the bonafide of the relationship. It is out of the contest it is the reason for the denial, no one can concur with the consulates for such denial. As long as both of you are free to marry,having a son has no effect to marriage and it will not be a reason for denial.

Another reason for a denial may be as result of your affidavit of support i-134 and your employment letters, Did you review the minimum and maximum requirements you need to meet in affidavit of support to know if you meet with the requirements of bring your fiancee since you have a son. I think the reason for the Consulates to take your i-134 affidavit of support and the supporting documents is to present that to USCIS as an evidence for their denial and to review it.

If the Consulate has no evidence of denial and just presented a written documentation to convince USCIS to deny and revoke your case, you can contest for it and still get your case re-approved again since they dont have such evidence but they are just questioning your relationship.

For me i dont know why the consulates should use 221g to return a case to USCIS for review and possible revocation instead of allowing you to supplement with an additional evidence to proof the bonafide of your relationship. OR in the case of the affidavit of support to allow you to get an additional person who is a US Citizens to assit you in the affidavit of support if you did not meet the requirments. The laws permits that and it is in the Memo sent to all the consulates.

I will advice you to email the consulates and ask them for the entire reason for the return of my approved petition to USCIS for possible revocation, If it is something that can be amended, Please ask them to give you time to supplment the denial with an additional evidence to over come them,if it is based on the information i stated above. Tell the consulates that you are willing to co-operate with them to provide additional information to overturn the denial if necessary or required than to return it to Uscis for review and possible revocation.

Hang in there

[Wisjam 0]

Wisjam,

I am very sorry to hear what happened at the interview with the US Consulates. The consulate assumes that when you met in 1999 both of you were not in a committed relationship. Your committed relationship springs up in 2006 and later become in engaged in 2009. If i were you i will be interested to build a strong bonafide documentation that springs from 2006 till date to proof a bonafide relationship. I dont know if you have visited your fiancee after 1999, ie starting from 2006 when your relationship to marry become evident to you and both of you have spent a enough time together showing documentation as the supporting evidence till date

I dont think your son who is 6 years old has anything to do with the bonafide of the relationship. It is out of the contest it is the reason for the denial, no one can concur with the consulates for such denial. As long as both of you are free to marry,having a son has no effect to marriage and it will not be a reason for denial.

Another reason for a denial may be as result of your affidavit of support i-134 and your employment letters, Did you review the minimum and maximum requirements you need to meet in affidavit of support to know if you meet with the requirements of bring your fiancee since you have a son. I think the reason for the Consulates to take your i-134 affidavit of support and the supporting documents is to present that to USCIS as an evidence for their denial and to review it.

If the Consulate has no evidence of denial and just presented a written documentation to convince USCIS to deny and revoke your case, you can contest for it and still get your case re-approved again since they dont have such evidence but they are just questioning your relationship.

For me i dont know why the consulates should use 221g to return a case to USCIS for review and possible revocation instead of allowing you to supplement with an additional evidence to proof the bonafide of your relationship. OR in the case of the affidavit of support to allow you to get an additional person who is a US Citizens to assit you in the affidavit of support if you did not meet the requirments. The laws permits that and it is in the Memo sent to all the consulates.

I will advice you to email the consulates and ask them for the entire reason for the return of my approved petition to USCIS for possible revocation, If it is something that can be amended, Please ask them to give you time to supplment the denial with an additional evidence to over come them,if it is based on the information i stated above. Tell the consulates that you are willing to co-operate with them to provide additional information to overturn the denial if necessary or required than to return it to Uscis for review and possible revocation.

Hang in there

Thank you for your response. I make $3000.00 above the 125% poverty line for a family of 3 (myself, my son, and my fiance). I also provided proof that I have $60,000. in home equity. I don't think finances should be an issue. I will email the consulate.

[LIFE'SJOURNEY 970]

He was given a sheet saying that due to new evidence provided, the officer has reason to believe he is ineligible and his petition is being returned to USCIS.

What was the new evidence provided. What was on the piece of paper that he was given?

[Wisjam 0]

He was given a sheet saying that due to new evidence provided, the officer has reason to believe he is ineligible and his petition is being returned to USCIS.

What was the new evidence provided. What was on the piece of paper that he was given?

There was no reason given on the paper aside from "new evidence". He did not provide any new evidence. Everything they discussed was on the original application. When he asked for the reason, they said that USCIS would sent me the reason. I have no idea what could have gone wrong.

[LIFE'SJOURNEY 970]

There was no reason given on the paper aside from "new evidence". He did not provide any new evidence. Everything they discussed was on the original application. When he asked for the reason, they said that USCIS would sent me the reason. I have no idea what could have gone wrong.

Then the new evidence was provided durning the interview discussion. You need to ask him to give you a very detail report of what was asked of him, and EXACTLY HOW HE RESPONDED.

[nikihutchiga 1]

The new evidence came up in the response your fiance gave to consular officer. Although you knew each other in 1999 you did not establish a relationship until 2006 therefore your fiance must indicate that you started dating in 2006. The year 1999 should never come up in the discussion as you had no serious relations at that time. You may try to appeal

[Wisjam 0]

From what he told me, it seemed to be the discussion of my son that ended the interview. It was indicated in the original paperwork that I had a son and he did not, so I thought that was clear from the beginning. I also explained how our elationship grew from a long standing friendship in the original packet.

Sheesh, being honest can be dangerous, huh?

How do I appeal? I emailed the embassy, asking for a specific reason for the 221 (g) and offering to provide any additional documentation or clarification needed.

[Wisjam 0]

I also noticed that they took only the employment records fron two of my three jobs. If they somehow missed that one (which was in the same pocket with all of the other I134 info)That would leave me about $2000.00 under the income threshold. I really don't see how they could have missed it since it was in the pocket marked Affidavit of Support along with all of the other info they took. Could they have somehow missed it? My tax transcripts from the last 3 years still verify sufficient income.

[milimelo 4,481]

Moving to 221g forum.

[pushbrk 12,898]

From what he told me, it seemed to be the discussion of my son that ended the interview. It was indicated in the original paperwork that I had a son and he did not, so I thought that was clear from the beginning. I also explained how our elationship grew from a long standing friendship in the original packet.

Sheesh, being honest can be dangerous, huh?

How do I appeal? I emailed the embassy, asking for a specific reason for the 221 (g) and offering to provide any additional documentation or clarification needed.

Only a full and complete report of the interview conversation, both sides, in detail has a chance of providing the information needed to know what caused the problem. Don't concentrate on the last question but the whole enchilada. That detailed report is critical and should be WRITTEN as soon as humanly possible, while the memories are fresh. Don't interpret in the report. Just be accurate. Interpretation comes after the detail. We'll help.

[bigdog 376]

Write a detailed report of everything, then review, Pushbrk is correct, get it down, then review.

[confusedasheck 21]

I would guess that (and this is pure speculation on my part, I am not accusing you of anything.)

1) The CO thought you two were in a relationship and you had a child that wasn't his. So he's thinking that you cheated on him and you two may not marry or get divorced later due to a weak relationship. This would lead to him becoming a public charge.

2) The CO thinks you divorced the father of your child (or are still in a relationship with him) and are trying to get this guy into the USA and then will get back with your real lover later.

You can find the list of reasons for denials here. I made my guess based on your statements, these reasons, and Jamacia being a high fraud consulate.

http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/ineligibilities/ineligibilities_1364.html

[bdawn 66]

You met in 1999 and your son is 6 years old. This means your son was born in 2005 (6 years after you met your now fiancé). The CO is thinking: if you were really interested in establishing a relationship of intimate dealings with him, why did you have to find someone else and get pregnant for him 6 years after you met with your current fiancé? If you were legally married to another man (assuming the "another" man is the father of your son), it brings some questions of 'moral values' to the fore; it's like looking for a marriage partner while still married to another man. This provokes some considerable doubts as to how genuine the relationship in question is. I don't mean to offend you; just trying to be objective as to the possible cause in order to device a tactful way around the difficulty.

Edited October 27, 2011 by benanddawn

[pushbrk 12,898]

You met in 1999 and your son is 6 years old. This means your son was born in 2005 (6 years after you met your now fiancé). The CO is thinking: if you were really interested in establishing a relationship of intimate dealings with him, why did you have to find someone else and get pregnant for him 6 years after you met with your current fiancé? If you were legally married to another man (assuming the "another" man is the father of your son), it brings some questions of 'moral values' to the fore; it's like looking for a marriage partner while still married to another man. This provokes some considerable doubts as to how genuine the relationship in question is. I don't mean to offend you; just trying to be objective as to the possible cause in order to device a tactful way around the difficulty.

While this speculation may well be correct, it is still speculation. Without a full report of the interview day, it will remain no more than speculation.