K-1 Visa Revisited

[b6543 25]

I suggest a more proactive action, that will help you get approval for your case in AP. 

 

First I would try to find out what is the reason for AP for your case?  At interview, did you get a paper with some description and/or codes?  

 

What exactly were you told at interview - what type of information is missing?

 

You can contact embassy immigration inquiry and ask for what type of information is  needed by consulate for further processing?

 

In any case, you can submit additional information/documents to consulate - based on what is needed?  

[LionessDeon 2,060]

Exactly what I have been trying to relay instead of just tossing in the towel and starting over.

[jan22 3,056]

1 hour ago, Agustus said:

I appreciate what you say and would love to believe you, but I think we have to take off our rose colored glasses and realize that people who work in the US government are not always your friends.  They are likely interested in protecting their jobs and doing their job even if its in a draconian way. 

Of course they (the consular officers) are not your friends -- this is a professional transaction, not a personal relationship.  That also means they are not your enemies, either.  They are there to evaluate your case, based on the information they have, in accordance with US regulations and laws -- even the parts that seem draconian.  They have no personal stake in the outcome -- there is no need to "protect" their jobs, as the job does not depend on the decision in any one case or group of cases.

 

There is no benefit to cancelling this application and starting over, especially without knowing what the issue with this one actually is.  It may not be what you think it is and, if you leave it unaddressed in a new application, you will be right back where you are now.

Edited January 27, 2017 by jan22

[pantonia 39]

I agree with the others, that you should try a few different things before giving up on this application. While it may happen to others, being stuck in AP indefinitely with no explanation isn't the right approach and I think you can inquire about the reason for it and how to fix it. If they doubted your relationship this badly, they probably would have just denied you. I've heard of other people being put on AP for lack of evidence of bona fide relationship, and they are given the chance to provide further information. While I agree that they are not your friends (nor they have to be), they also don't have evil intentions of putting tons of people on AP limbo just to hide denials. If they want you denied, they'll do it, period. Especially since denials are technically due to lack of evidence of some sort from the petitioner/beneficiary part, not the clerk.

 

If you are this close to jumping the gun and calling the whole thing off and start over, at least try your congressman now, not in 90 days. I don't know, just try some more things before giving up and doing it all over again.

 

Also, I truly believe that nobody here is being irrationally positive or oblivious to reality, since all of us have gone through the draconian/miserable/cruel process ourselves. I believe we are all giving you down to earth options and possibilities, so I think we have an informed opinion on the matter and you should try our suggestions. It would be such a shame to waste a whole k-1 process when not all options have been explored.

[Agustus 0]

2 hours ago, b6543 said:

I suggest a more proactive action, that will help you get approval for your case in AP. 

 

First I would try to find out what is the reason for AP for your case?  At interview, did you get a paper with some description and/or codes?  

 

What exactly were you told at interview - what type of information is missing?

 

You can contact embassy immigration inquiry and ask for what type of information is  needed by consulate for further processing?

 

In any case, you can submit additional information/documents to consulate - based on what is needed?  

It was a 221g directing that no further information is needed.  The officer indicated a lack of phone calls and mostly emails sent through a dating agency.  So there is no real way to submit more evidence.  

[Rc123rc 528]

I understand what you are saying and why you are saying it. If you are that stubborn about it then maybe you should consider going there, get married and file a CR-1. Just make sure you fix all the things you think are doubt first before filing anything.

[Agustus 0]

One can look at the raw statistics like I am, but in the end it's a case by case situation.  So perhaps I will wait it out for 4 months, but if I wait for 6 possible the law of diminishing returns kicks in.  At this point it's probably better to get a fresh start.

[David & Diana R 1,005]

5 hours ago, Agustus said:

It was a 221g directing that no further information is needed.  The officer indicated a lack of phone calls and mostly emails sent through a dating agency.  So there is no real way to submit more evidence.  

A "dating agency"?  As in mail order bride?  Don't you have skype or other communications?  But if they said no further information was needed then no additional information is needed.  I made probably 6 phone calls to my fiance in the Philippines in over 1 year.  Who uses the phone anymore?  Something is missing from your post.

[geowrian 22,338]

13 minutes ago, David & Zoila said:

A "dating agency"?  As in mail order bride?  Don't you have skype or other communications?  But if they said no further information was needed then no additional information is needed.  I made probably 6 phone calls to my fiance in the Philippines in over 1 year.  Who uses the phone anymore?  Something is missing from your post.

Same. I've only had a few actual phone calls with mine as well. We Skype. We Facebook chat for multiple sessions every single day. Phone calls likely aren't an issue here. OP needs to find out why they think the relationship isn't bona fide before considering filing a new petition, or else he will be doomed to repeat history.

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

To further speculate you need to give a few more facts.

 

1. Is she a Swedish national or of another nationality and residing in Sweden, perhaps studying  ?

2. Have you ever petitioned anyone else or has she ever been petitioned before or has she applied for another visa ?

3. How many times have you seen each other and how long did you stay before filing ?

 

When the CO told your fiance she doesn't have enough phone/email evidence what did she say to the CO ?
She should have offered to submit more relationship evidence right then and there and asked for that second chance.
221g's are often given just for this purpose.

Sweden is an easy embassy and they do not ask for a lot of evidence at all.
Something else is amiss. The CO may have just used the 'not enough evidence' line and it's about something else.

There could be many other reasons for AP.
Don't be too rigid thinking you know 100% why your case is in AP. Seldom is something as it seems in immigration.
 

It is incorrect that a K1 takes waiting around for a year to return with recommendation to revoke. That is for CR/IR cases.
Once a K1 is returned you can fly over and marry and file a CR1 or file another K1. No waiting. None.
You include a simple relationship timeline narration and briefly mention the returned K1 with case number and data and a multiple filing
waiver request in your next petition (needed for K1 only not CR1) and that's it, no waiting necessary.

K1's are not reviewed because they will be purposely expired.

What you can do tomorrow is make an inquiry through your senator as to what exactly your case is undergoing, background
checks or security checks. You steer the ship with what exactly you want to know don't rely on the senator's aide to

ask the questions. They have to answer the senator but will not state in detail the reason(s) only general checks.
You can also request a second interview and for you to be present if another interview is granted and bring
more relationship evidence. It may be granted and it may not, I have seen it work out before but

only after the visa was refused or after AP was completed. Nothing can end AP sooner.

At least they know you will have offered more evidence and being present in person.

That would be proactive and show a bona fide effort.

 

You can try emailing the consulate yourself and wait and see what they reply before inquiring through a senator.
I would definitely not withdraw and re file now.
 

 

[Agustus 0]

1 hour ago, Ebunoluwa said:

To further speculate you need to give a few more facts.

 

1. Is she a Swedish national or of another nationality and residing in Sweden, perhaps studying  ?

2. Have you ever petitioned anyone else or has she ever been petitioned before or has she applied for another visa ?

3. How many times have you seen each other and how long did you stay before filing ?

 

When the CO told your fiance she doesn't have enough phone/email evidence what did she say to the CO ?
She should have offered to submit more relationship evidence right then and there and asked for that second chance.
221g's are often given just for this purpose.

Sweden is an easy embassy and they do not ask for a lot of evidence at all.
Something else is amiss. The CO may have just used the 'not enough evidence' line and it's about something else.

There could be many other reasons for AP.
Don't be too rigid thinking you know 100% why your case is in AP. Seldom is something as it seems in immigration.
 

It is incorrect that a K1 takes waiting around for a year to return with recommendation to revoke. That is for CR/IR cases.
Once a K1 is returned you can fly over and marry and file a CR1 or file another K1. No waiting. None.
You include a simple relationship timeline narration and briefly mention the returned K1 with case number and data and a multiple filing
waiver request in your next petition (needed for K1 only not CR1) and that's it, no waiting necessary.

K1's are not reviewed because they will be purposely expired.

What you can do tomorrow is make an inquiry through your senator as to what exactly your case is undergoing, background
checks or security checks. You steer the ship with what exactly you want to know don't rely on the senator's aide to

ask the questions. They have to answer the senator but will not state in detail the reason(s) only general checks.
You can also request a second interview and for you to be present if another interview is granted and bring
more relationship evidence. It may be granted and it may not, I have seen it work out before but

only after the visa was refused or after AP was completed. Nothing can end AP sooner.

At least they know you will have offered more evidence and being present in person.

That would be proactive and show a bona fide effort.

 

You can try emailing the consulate yourself and wait and see what they reply before inquiring through a senator.
I would definitely not withdraw and re file now.
 

Hello Ebunoluwa:

Excellent post and great points.  I was trying to see what kind of answers I would get from you guys by presenting the problerm as menacing and threatening as I saw it.

 

So I presented the problem earlier to someone else and you appear to have the correct answer.  Your answer aligns with the answer I got from a Jewish lawyer on the east coast.  The lawyer told me he could win my case if certain parameters were satisfied.  I asked how in the world could he get my case out of AP and he wouldn't tell me.  He just said he could do it for $4500.  I asked how he had the ability to communicate with the embassy and get them to approve, but he would not tell me.  It appears you, Ebunoluwa have the missing piece of the puzzle the lawyer was hiding to protect his "business secrets".

 

So now the question is if I should use this lawyer or go ahead and do it myself, contact my congressman in the manner you have described?  Any thoughts?

 

BTW private message sent.

  

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

Ditch the lawyer and do it yourself as stated and with senator. This is not worth $4500 unless you get a full refund if not out of AP
in 2 weeks. He will be laughing with your money all the way to the bank. Trade secrets is BS, an ethical attorney should be transparent.

He is a shady dude, don't do it.