Meeting Online affecting K1 Morocco results?

[myfellah 0]

I'll add in that my husband and I met online. In our case we "knew" each other for over two years by the time we filed for the K-1. My husband (then fiance) was denied a tourist visa and we had our first petition denied after 8 months because I failed to prove a hardship meeting their guidelines. So at his interview he had both failed tourist visa and fiance visa. There is also a very large age difference, I had been to Morocco only once after 16 months of knowing each other. Maybe the odds were stacked against us but his interview was relatively simple. Once we filed our second petition and it was approved to his interview it was less than 5 months and he joined me here 1 month after his interview. I submitted only what was requested never going overboard. As to the interview, never give them more information than they ask. Answer their question and don't add information.

Doreen

[MrsAmera 41]

Here's ours:

Not sure what to answer to this first one but Service Center? Nebraska

129F NOA1

129F NOA2

Interview Date: January 9

USC Petitioner: F

Age of Petitioner: 21

Age of Beneficiary: 22

Petitioner # of previous marriages:0

Beneficiary # of previous marriages: 0

Has the beneficiary lived outside of Morocco (past 5 years)? Which Countries? No

Has the petitioner lived outside of the U.S.(past 5 years)? Which Countries? No

Beneficiary Employment History (none/sporadic/consistent) none

Petitioner Employment History (none/sporadic/consistent) consistent (school and work)

Information provided for question regarding meeting in the past 2 years: "We met while I was on vacation in Morocco"

Evidence submitted: Passport stamps, and pictures (including with his familiy and him with my son)

Ever submitted before: No

[mikehofman 0]

Hello

I met my Fiance on Line,and met her in person October 2004

she was interviewed in Tbilisy Georgia April 2005 and she was given a 221-g

requesting a co sponsor i have sent all that to them,i got an email from them saying

We are sending your I-129 back to D H S for review and possible revocation, the consular officer has to many questions and concerns regarding the relathionship.

Any body knows how long the review takes ??

I just wrote to Senator Diane Feinsteine il see how she can help me.

[kerewin21 2]

Here's our info:

129F NOA1 6/2/05

129F NOA2 6/14/05

Interview Date 9/7/05

USC Petitioner M/F F

Age of Petitioner 28

Age of Beneficiary 36

Petitioner # of previous marriages 0

Beneficiary # of previous marriages 1

Has the beneficiary lived outside of Morocco (past 5 years)? Which Countries? Yes, Norway

Has the petitioner lived outside of the U.S.(past 5 years)? Which Countries? No

Beneficiary Employment History (none/sporadic/consistent) Sporadic

Petitioner Employment History (none/sporadic/consistent) None (had co-sponsor, beneficiary's cousin)

Information provided for question regarding meeting in the past 2 years Photos, passport photocopies, emails, plane tickets

Evidence submitted Same as above, plus letters, phone records

Has petitioner ever applied before: No

[Jenn! 918]

Here's our info:

129F NOA1 7/15/05

129F NOA2 8/4/05

Interview Date 11/21/05

USC Petitioner M/F F

Age of Petitioner 25

Age of Beneficiary 23

Petitioner # of previous marriages 0

Beneficiary # of previous marriages 0

Has the beneficiary lived outside of Morocco (past 5 years)? Which Countries? Italy, Spain

Has the petitioner lived outside of the U.S.(past 5 years)? Which Countries? Italy

Beneficiary Employment History (none/sporadic/consistent) Sporadic

Petitioner Employment History (none/sporadic/consistent) Consistent

Information provided for question regarding meeting in the past 2 years:

We met in Genoa, Italy in April 2003. Resided together in Genoa for 15 months. While living apart (I in Italy, he in Spain), we visited each other several times. He met my immediate family when they were visiting in Italy. I met his family when I traveled to Morocco with him.

Evidence submitted: passport stamp photocopies (showing we entered Morocco together in June, 2005); boarding passes for trips between Italy and Spain; 6 photos taken in Italy, Spain, and Morocco, including photos of me with his family and him with my family

Has petitioner ever applied before: No

When we get more info, I'll compile it all and we'll see if we can't figure out any trends.

BTW, in order to figure out any patterns, we'll need info from people whose petitions got returned. I think the same issues will apply not only to K1, but also K3 and the immigrant visas.

[babybunny 2]

I dont think meeting your SO online is a big factor.

for K-1 it has alot of bearing because, you had to have met in person in order to file. but, for marriage its a diffrent ball of wax. the goverment looks favorable i think towards K-1 because, at least they have some heads up over your pending marriage. however, when you marry they dont it pisses the goverment off. having said that .the bottomline is the goverment can not play cupid. they cant tell you whome to marry. so rember that.

[chiquita 0]

If this truly is the case then I go back to my post of the petition guidelines:

"In general, an approved petition will be considered by consular officers as prima facie evidence that the requirements for classification - which are examined in the petition process - have been met. Where congress has placed responsibility and authority with DHS to determine whether the requirements for status which are examined in the petition process have been met, consular officers do not have the authority to question the approval of petitions without specific evidence, generally unavailable to DHS at the time of petition approval, that the beneficiary may not be entitled to status (see 9 FAM 41.53, Note 2, 41.54 Note 3.2-2, 41.55 Note 8, 41.56 Note 10, 41.57 Note 6, and 42.43 Note 2) due to fraud, changes in circumstances or clear error on the part of DHS in approving the petition. Conoffs should not assume that a petition should be revoked simply because they would have reached a different decision if adjudicating the petition."

"When a petition is returned to DHS, if DHS concurs with the officer''s recommendation, DHS regulations require DHS/BCIS to provide the petitioner notice of intent to revoke, and to allow the petitioner an opportunity to rebut the grounds for revocation. DHS regulations require that, in the case of nonimmigrant petitions, the revocation must be based only on grounds specified in the regulations. Those grounds include evidence that the statement of facts in the petition was not true and correct, or that the approval involved gross error. The FAM often only summarizes the petition approval criteria because they are too lengthy and complicated to reproduce fully (the H regulations, for example, contain about 25 pages of double column material). Absent access to the full DHS regulations, conoffs may not be aware of all of the factors considered by DHS in approving a petition. In addition, conoffs are normally less knowledgeable about the basis for petition eligibility than DHS personnel; they therefore should not jump to conclusions regarding petitions. In addition, conoffs should return petitions only where there is specific, material and clear evidence to provide the DHS a basis to initiate petition revocation procedures.

Sufficiency of evidence"

As far as I am concerned this is discrimination.

Regarding my petition, DHS is full aware we met online and the timeframe between meeting and marriage proposal and approved the petition with supporting evidence of a valid relationship. It will be interesting to know about my case when I get a notification from BCIS...even if they still do not say the exact reason why, they will receive ALL of our ongoing evidence of a valid relationship.

~Kiya~

The guidelines clearly state:

consular officers do not have the authority to question the approval of petitions without specific evidence,

generally unavailable to DHS at the time of petition approval, that the beneficiary may not be entitled to status

conoffs should return petitions only where there is specific, material and clear evidence to provide the DHS a basis to initiate petition revocation procedures

If this is the guidelines, why then are they being violated? It says the CO must have SPECIFIC evidence. In America when one is considered a suspect they are told what the charges are against them and given the opportunity to defend themself. The DOS does not offer that to couples seeking to be together. WHY???

I don't think trying to figure out why a couple was denied will do any good. Why waste the time? I for one do not have such time. I feel the time would be better spent finding a way to hold this consulate responsible for violating our constutional rights. Those rights are ....being innocent until found guilty. My husband and I have been made to feel as if we are criminals. What did we do wrong? We angered the American government by getting married in Morocco????? (as suggested here on VJ) This is our penalty? Why then do K1's get denied? Because they want to get married? BS

People people, lets try to make sense of all this without all the guessing games.

Kiya, when we gonna start this group that is so desperately needed? Lets call it COUPLES DENIED VISAS.

[~kiyah~ 14]

If this truly is the case then I go back to my post of the petition guidelines:

"In general, an approved petition will be considered by consular officers as prima facie evidence that the requirements for classification - which are examined in the petition process - have been met. Where congress has placed responsibility and authority with DHS to determine whether the requirements for status which are examined in the petition process have been met, consular officers do not have the authority to question the approval of petitions without specific evidence, generally unavailable to DHS at the time of petition approval, that the beneficiary may not be entitled to status (see 9 FAM 41.53, Note 2, 41.54 Note 3.2-2, 41.55 Note 8, 41.56 Note 10, 41.57 Note 6, and 42.43 Note 2) due to fraud, changes in circumstances or clear error on the part of DHS in approving the petition. Conoffs should not assume that a petition should be revoked simply because they would have reached a different decision if adjudicating the petition."

"When a petition is returned to DHS, if DHS concurs with the officer''s recommendation, DHS regulations require DHS/BCIS to provide the petitioner notice of intent to revoke, and to allow the petitioner an opportunity to rebut the grounds for revocation. DHS regulations require that, in the case of nonimmigrant petitions, the revocation must be based only on grounds specified in the regulations. Those grounds include evidence that the statement of facts in the petition was not true and correct, or that the approval involved gross error. The FAM often only summarizes the petition approval criteria because they are too lengthy and complicated to reproduce fully (the H regulations, for example, contain about 25 pages of double column material). Absent access to the full DHS regulations, conoffs may not be aware of all of the factors considered by DHS in approving a petition. In addition, conoffs are normally less knowledgeable about the basis for petition eligibility than DHS personnel; they therefore should not jump to conclusions regarding petitions. In addition, conoffs should return petitions only where there is specific, material and clear evidence to provide the DHS a basis to initiate petition revocation procedures.

Sufficiency of evidence"

As far as I am concerned this is discrimination.

Regarding my petition, DHS is full aware we met online and the timeframe between meeting and marriage proposal and approved the petition with supporting evidence of a valid relationship. It will be interesting to know about my case when I get a notification from BCIS...even if they still do not say the exact reason why, they will receive ALL of our ongoing evidence of a valid relationship.

~Kiya~

The guidelines clearly state:

consular officers do not have the authority to question the approval of petitions without specific evidence,

generally unavailable to DHS at the time of petition approval, that the beneficiary may not be entitled to status

conoffs should return petitions only where there is specific, material and clear evidence to provide the DHS a basis to initiate petition revocation procedures

If this is the guidelines, why then are they being violated? It says the CO must have SPECIFIC evidence. In America when one is considered a suspect they are told what the charges are against them and given the opportunity to defend themself. The DOS does not offer that to couples seeking to be together. WHY???

I don't think trying to figure out why a couple was denied will do any good. Why waste the time? I for one do not have such time. I feel the time would be better spent finding a way to hold this consulate responsible for violating our constutional rights. Those rights are ....being innocen t until found guilty. My husband and I have been made to feel as if we are criminals. What did we do wrong? We angered the American government by getting married in Morocco????? (as suggested here on VJ) This is our penalty? Why then do K1's get denied? Because they want to get married? BS

People people, lets try to make sense of all this without all the guessing games.

Kiya, when we gonna start this group that is so desperately needed? Lets call it COUPLES DENIED VISAS.

Hi Chiquita...Yes, I am working on the group with a good sister whose petition was also returned right now. I want everything to be ready when we invite everyone who can benefit. We were working very hard yesterday on all the documentation and getting the group ready to share. I have the database to work on today which will gather the type of information that may highlight a pattern as to why the guidelines are not being followed. As soon as we are ready I will post a message on VJ...it will not be long now.

~Kiya~

[kerewin21 2]

Please let me know if any information from me can help you in trying to figure this out, I will gladly tell you anything you need to know. My heart just breaks for those of you who weren't as lucky as we were

Sharon

[morocco4ever 63]

I am quite excited to be a part of this group. I think we can not only benefit ourselves but help others that may be going through it. Kiya, thank you so much for taking the initiative to get this going, I for one really appreciate it!

Does anyone know how to get any statistical information on the amount of visa applications per location and the percent that is sent back to the CIS? I think this could be very beneficial in our fight.

As far as what the consulates are looking for in fraud marriages, I read this quite some time ago. These red flags are:

1-Meeting online

2-US Citizen is older than the beneficiary

3-Petitioner has recently divorced

4-Petitioner has brought over Aliens before

5-Petitioner needs a co sponsor

We only fit it on 1 and 2 and it was sent back. Anyone that knows our case is aware that I am 95% sure they believe that his sister arranged our marriage and is paying me. So in my way of thinking the red flag for this would have been numbers 4 and 5 not 1 or 2. Just my thought.

[morocco4ever 63]

Hello

I met my Fiance on Line,and met her in person October 2004

she was interviewed in Tbilisy Georgia April 2005 and she was given a 221-g

requesting a co sponsor i have sent all that to them,i got an email from them saying

We are sending your I-129 back to D H S for review and possible revocation, the consular officer has to many questions and concerns regarding the relathionship.

Any body knows how long the review takes ??

I just wrote to Senator Diane Feinsteine il see how she can help me.

This was back in April of 2005 and you haven't heard anything yet? What have you done about it?

[bornot2b 0]

Kiya,

Once you get everything set up, I would also like to join this group. I am still collecting all kinds of evidence

up and until I am asked to submit. Also bugging everyone I can to ensure I get my opportunity to clear up

whatever was unclear in Casa. Thank you for all efforts you are making to help all of us affected by the decisions that are being made in Casa.

Karen H

[maryandatif 0]

I am quite excited to be a part of this group. I think we can not only benefit ourselves but help others that may be going through it. Kiya, thank you so much for taking the initiative to get this going, I for one really appreciate it!

Does anyone know how to get any statistical information on the amount of visa applications per location and the percent that is sent back to the CIS? I think this could be very beneficial in our fight.

As far as what the consulates are looking for in fraud marriages, I read this quite some time ago. These red flags are:

1-Meeting online

2-US Citizen is older than the beneficiary

3-Petitioner has recently divorced

4-Petitioner has brought over Aliens before

5-Petitioner needs a co sponsor

We only fit it on 1 and 2 and it was sent back. Anyone that knows our case is aware that I am 95% sure they believe that his sister arranged our marriage and is paying me. So in my way of thinking the red flag for this would have been numbers 4 and 5 not 1 or 2. Just my thought.

Morocco4ever....can you remember where you saw this? I think it would be usful in dealing with all of this BS from Casa......BTW we meet 1,2 and 5....and why is that one a red flag??? co-sponsors are allowed by USCIS guidelines!!!! [not ranting at you ---CASA

Edited March 8, 2006 by maryandatif

[Dixie_Peach 1]

I agree... I want to know too... this is definitely an issue that has me worried... keep up the good work guys! thank you for what you are doing...

[Bosco 1]

I am quite excited to be a part of this group. I think we can not only benefit ourselves but help others that may be going through it. Kiya, thank you so much for taking the initiative to get this going, I for one really appreciate it!

Does anyone know how to get any statistical information on the amount of visa applications per location and the percent that is sent back to the CIS? I think this could be very beneficial in our fight.

As far as what the consulates are looking for in fraud marriages, I read this quite some time ago. These red flags are:

1-Meeting online

2-US Citizen is older than the beneficiary

3-Petitioner has recently divorced

4-Petitioner has brought over Aliens before

5-Petitioner needs a co sponsor

We only fit it on 1 and 2 and it was sent back. Anyone that knows our case is aware that I am 95% sure they believe that his sister arranged our marriage and is paying me. So in my way of thinking the red flag for this would have been numbers 4 and 5 not 1 or 2. Just my thought.

Morocco4ever....can you remember where you saw this? I think it would be usful in dealing with all of this BS from Casa......BTW we meet 1,2 and 5....and why is that one a red flag??? co-sponsors are allowed by USCIS guidelines!!!! [not ranting at you ---CASA

I am just guessing here, but I would think the reason #5 is a red flag because if a person is not making a lot of money, one might assume they are more willing to accept money for a fraudelent marriage to improve their situation. I don't think this would apply to Morocco so much since so many of the guys are jobless and would not be in the position to "buy" a marriage to get out of Morocco.

Rebecca