After US Visa interview FB1

[Schneider 5]

Please guys give your opinions

[Penguin_ie 5,993]

It sounds to me like they are checking if you comitted fraud/ material missrepresentation in your spousal visa case. They basically re-opened that case. If they find material missrep was created, that may carry a lifetime ban.

[catknit 144]

It sounds to me like they are checking if you comitted fraud/ material missrepresentation in your spousal visa case. They basically re-opened that case. If they find material missrep was created, that may carry a lifetime ban.

I think so, too.

The thing that keeps sticking out to me is the fact that nothing happened after the 221(g)and return to USCIS. SOP has been a NOID/NOIR [probably 9 out of 10 times] or a reaffirmation [1 out of 10-ish times with no NOID/NOIR]. I will wholly admit that anything that was typical before 2008-2009 I personally don't know since I didn't start needing to research this all before that time. Maybe in 2007-2008 they didn't have the same process??? It just seems off to me. And, the OP may not know since the NOID/NOIR or reaffirmation would have gone back to the wife to proceed, not him.

OP did mention that it was years later that they divorced. Did the wife live with you in Australia and the divorce happened due to typical marriage breakup reasons?????

[Schneider 5]

I had contacts with my ex-wife till 2010, after that she changed her number and place. I went to Australia by myself. I am 100% sure that she got no NOID/NOIR or reaffirmation till the 10th month of 2010.

My question is that Are they investigating my, my old case? but last time they investigated almost everywhere like marriage palace, registrar office, my village, my neighbors. All the documents attached was original, there was no material misrepresentation, the only thing went wrong was that some of my neighbors and villager said that I was unmarried, because i have not invited them to my wedding, usually we invite all villagers. The marriage took place away from my native place in presence of few relatives friends and my family. No one accompanied bride as she came from US with my family.

Embassy found all these facts and they concluded "marriage only for immigration purpose"

What are they gonna investigate more on that case, now the book is open to them.

[catknit 144]

The fact that you had a field investigation for fraud at your family village is a HUGE piece to this puzzle - that would explain why there was no follow up from USCIS. It is not "normal" for the consulate to go out to someone's village and ask around. This happens very rarely.

I would say without a doubt they are looking into your past case. You are, in essence, in a hold pattern until they either ask for more information or come to some decision. This could take weeks, months, years...it's really up to the discretion of the consulate.

Are you using an attorney? You may want to know all of your options going forward and a very good immigration attorney may be in your best interest....

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

The CO assumed you did not have a bona fide marriage and returned your case.

Was anything marked on your 221g letter, such as 221 (a)(6)©(i)? That would have been included if you had a material misrepresentation.

Being found ineligible due to "not bona fide" assumptions is not a misrepresentation, it becomes one if you don't respond. Then the soft marker becomes a hard finding. Your USC needed to respond to the NOID/NOIR even if you planned to divorce so it would not affect any petitions in the future.

An attorney should be consulted who is knowledgeable in returned cases.

A home investigation happens and is not at all unusual. You could have overcome their findings by addressing the reason of your wedding

preferences.

AP now needs to run its course and there is nothing anyone can do to shorten it. Contact an attorney to advice you with overcoming the p6c

marker so you will not run into obstacles in your current case.

Here is a link about misrepresentation and how an assumption that is not addressed turns into a hard finding.

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2010,0713-Ellis.shtm

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

Sounds like they're investigating the old case from 4 years ago. Getting married for immigration purposes is fraud, and carries a lifetime bar. I'm surprised they approved your visa in the first place.

What happened 4 years ago?

Assumptions of "for immigration purposes only" are unfortunately made often and are not automatically a misrepresentation but the CO uses discretionary

authority to return the case to USCIS, even if he just "feels" it is not a bona fide relationship and without factual evidence.

USCIS then sends out a NOIR/NOID letter for a chance of rebuttal by the petitioner. USCIS will either reaffirm and send it back to the embassy or deny

the case. At this time nothing points to the OP having committed any fraud whatsoever.

[Schneider 5]

The CO assumed you did not have a bona fide marriage and returned your case.

Was anything marked on your 221g letter, such as 221 (a)(6)©(i)? That would have been included if you had a material misrepresentation.

Being found ineligible due to "not bona fide" assumptions is not a misrepresentation, it becomes one if you don't respond. Then the soft marker becomes a hard finding. Your USC needed to respond to the NOID/NOIR even if you planned to divorce so it would not affect any petitions in the future.

An attorney should be consulted who is knowledgeable in returned cases.

A home investigation happens and is not at all unusual. You could have overcome their findings by addressing the reason of your wedding

preferences.

AP now needs to run its course and there is nothing anyone can do to shorten it. Contact an attorney to advice you with overcoming the p6c

marker so you will not run into obstacles in your current case.

Here is a link about misrepresentation and how an assumption that is not addressed turns into a hard finding.

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2010,0713-Ellis.shtm

Thanks for taking so much interest in my case,

Guys I told you so many times that none of us received NOID/NOIR or reaffirmation thing. No action was taken and the case was closed after 1 year.

Second thing is that there was only 221(g) only, no subsections such as 221 (a)(6)©(i)etc.

[Schneider 5]

The fact that you had a field investigation for fraud at your family village is a HUGE piece to this puzzle - that would explain why there was no follow up from USCIS. It is not "normal" for the consulate to go out to someone's village and ask around. This happens very rarely.

I would say without a doubt they are looking into your past case. You are, in essence, in a hold pattern until they either ask for more information or come to some decision. This could take weeks, months, years...it's really up to the discretion of the consulate.

Are you using an attorney? You may want to know all of your options going forward and a very good immigration attorney may be in your best interest....

Is there any way to get my passport back so that I can go back to Australia

[catknit 144]

You can request your passport back from the consulate.

Because of the switchover from VFS to ustraveldocs [or whatever the new outsourcing company is called] I have not yet seen anyone here post how they requested back their passport. I would start with an email to both ustraveldocs and the consulate and see what they say about getting the passport back. Make sure you include your case number in the subject line.

Best of luck.

[Schneider 5]

HI guys here is my previous denial

See attachment

You can request your passport back from the consulate.

Because of the switchover from VFS to ustraveldocs [or whatever the new outsourcing company is called] I have not yet seen anyone here post how they requested back their passport. I would start with an email to both ustraveldocs and the consulate and see what they say about getting the passport back. Make sure you include your case number in the subject line.

Best of luck.

I sent them email requesting my passport back, No response to yet

[Schneider 5]

After 2 months they asked me to submit reasons and circumstances under which I gave divorce to my wife. please guys I need your opinions, why I've been asked this question

[Penguin_ie 5,993]

They are concerned that the last marriage was for immigration purposes only, they told you that the first time. So then when you didn;t get a greencard through that woman, you divorced and found another US citizen wife to marry to get a greencard (that is what they are thinking). You need to prove to them you had genuine reasons for divorce.

[jaycali 415]

Assumptions of "for immigration purposes only" are unfortunately made often and are not automatically a misrepresentation but the CO uses discretionaryauthority to return the case to USCIS, even if he just "feels" it is not a bona fide relationship and without factual evidence.USCIS then sends out a NOIR/NOID letter for a chance of rebuttal by the petitioner. USCIS will either reaffirm and send it back to the embassy or denythe case. At this time nothing points to the OP having committed any fraud whatsoever.

So it's almost like a 214 basically? A discretionary decision is based on a 'hunch', but because there is no hard evidence, no fraud is 'officially' alleged?

After 2 months they asked me to submit reasons and circumstances under which I gave divorce to my wife. please guys I need your opinions, why I've been asked this question

Yep, they're dissecting your old visa application for potential fraud.

They are concerned that the last marriage was for immigration purposes only, they told you that the first time. So then when you didn;t get a greencard through that woman, you divorced and found another US citizen wife to marry to get a greencard (that is what they are thinking). You need to prove to them you had genuine reasons for divorce.

Agree - But the OP is being petitioned this time by his mother, not his spouse. Unless they ask for DNA evidence, they're not suspecting fraud this time, but looking into the old case.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Jay Jay

[Penguin_ie 5,993]

Agree - But the OP is being petitioned this time by his mother, not his spouse. Unless they ask for DNA evidence, they're not suspecting fraud this time, but looking into the old case.

Yes you are correct, I missed the bit about the mom.