Husband had interview, but they gave him a blue paper wanting more info, now what?

[Melissawruiz 0]

My husband had his interview on the 15th of July in juarez. Everything was going good until they asked him when he entered the US. Our lawyer made sure we left.out his attempted entry in 2005 because it was more than 10 years old and "wouldn't be a problem." He was about to recieve a green paper when the consular asked if he had proof that he was in mexico between 2005 and 2008. He didn't have proof on him and was handed a blue paper requesting proof be sent via DHL along with his passport. He was able to get a letter from the president of his town stating he was there, working. A letter from secretary from his town, 3 personal letters from his boss at his work along with 2 photos of him at his job, and a hospital record where he was there in 2007. All solid proof he WAS in mexico between the years 2005-2008.. his letter from the consulate said he is not intelligible because of this, they just needed proof. He just was able to over night this proof today. Question is, what happens now? Is it likely he will be approved? Does it take forever for them to review such little info? I'm so nervous and the wait is killing me! Please, anyone with insight!

[TBoneTX 45,704]

Welcome to VJ. Your thread is moved from the Off Topic forum to the Mexico/Latin & South America regional forum, where folks perhaps familiar with your situation can comment.

---

If the consular officer believes the proof, approval seems likely. If there were lies or deception, that's another matter. Others can comment with more authority.

[Melissawruiz 0]

Thanks Tbone, no lies or deception so praying for the best. Anyone have any input on a possible time frame? Similar experience? Do you feel our evidence is enough? We have letter from secretary and president of his town, his mother, his father, his boss and 2 pics of him working, something like a discharge paper from a hospital visit proving he was there in 2007 (during 2005-2008).

Oh plus we already have been approved with the waiver before he left. Not sure this helps?

[jan22 3,056]

Thanks Tbone, no lies or deception so praying for the best. Anyone have any input on a possible time frame? Similar experience? Do you feel our evidence is enough? We have letter from secretary and president of his town, his mother, his father, his boss and 2 pics of him working, something like a discharge paper from a hospital visit proving he was there in 2007 (during 2005-2008).

Oh plus we already have been approved with the waiver before he left. Not sure this helps?

Unfortunately, you have not provided enough information for people to reassure you. You say there were "no lies or deception", but you also said you made sure not to include his attempted entry in 2005. Whether you included it or not, there might be a record of it that USCIS found or that the consular officer will uncover. That could be viewed as a deception -- whether the lawyer is right that it won't matter or not, it still could be viewed as an attempt to conceal something from the visa officers. Whether it matters now or not depends, in part, on the waiver you referred to.

If I read your posts right, your husband attempted an unlawful entry into the US in 2005. Based on your use of the word "attempt", I assume he was not successful. What happened at that time? Was he just unable to find a way to try to enter or was he caught by border officials and turned around? Since you referred to already having his waiver, I am also assuming that he tried again to enter the US (in or after 2008, which is the end of the period the consular officer wanted documented) and was successful and only went to back to Mexico for the visa adjudication.

If officials turned him around in 2005 and he then unlawfully re-entered in/about 2008, he would face a 9C ineligibility in addition to his 9B for unlawful presence. A waiver of a 9C ineligibility can only be applied for after the individual has been outside the US for at least 10 years.

When you refer to a "waiver", I assume you mean the 601a, provisional waiver for unlawful presence. The only ineligibilities that a 601a can cover are 9B1 (overstay of more than 180 days and less than a year) and 9B2 (overstay of more than a year). So, that would still leave him ineligible for a 9C finding, depending on the circumstances of his 2005 attempted entry and what USCIS records or the consular officer interview and review of records find.

I don't want to cause unnecessary panic, perhaps there was no problem caused by his 2005 attempt, but can't tell from your post.

[Melissawruiz 0]

Thanks for your reply. The officer at his interview found his attempted entry and voluntary return from 2005 and showed my husband. He was told that this doesn't make him ineligible, all he had to do was send in proof that he was in mexico from 2005 to 2008.. which he was. He reentered in 2008 and had been here ever since only returning for his interview. The officer said all they were waiting on was a little proof. Our waiver was hardship waiver.

[Melissawruiz 0]

He dint have his waiver from 2008, his waiver was only approved a couple months before the inter view. We didn't know any different with the 2005 entry, our lawyer did all the paperwork. We never attempted to conceal or lie.

[jan22 3,056]

Unfortunately, you are responsible for what your lawyer submits; if the lawyer didn't reveal something (like the 2005 entry), it is still your responsibility. It doesn't sound like, however, that the officer isn't going to pursue the non-disclosure, so that's a good thing.

The hardship waiver you got was a 601a, right? That only waives your husband's unlawful presence; if he has any other ineligibilities, they are not waived by the 601a.

You still didn't indicate how your husband re-entered the US in 2008; I am assuming he "entered without inspection", i.e., unlawfully. If so, the officer is correct when he says the 2005 entry does not make him ineligilbe. But, depending on how they documented the 2005 voluntary return (whether they indicated it was an ordered removal), and assuming he entered unlawfully in 2008, he still might be found ineligibile under 9C by the officer or when a senior officer reviews the case for the 2008 re-entry after having been removed from the US. If so, no waiver is available for 10 years after the departure from the US.

I'm not trying to scare you -- just trying to say you're not out of the woods yet. It is possible that there is something in the set of facts in your particular case that makes it not rise to a 9C ineligibility -- most likely the way the 2005 removal was written up. Hope that is the case and you get the visa soon.