No detail given on Misrepresentation 212(a)(6)(C)(I) on the refusal letter

[Redro 4,609]

45 minutes ago, GreenDoggie said:

If this is what it looks like IF I filed a I-130, then I'm in the wrong.

 

However, I don't remember what form I filed. Is there a way to find out from the embassy? If I can, then it'll answer my question. 

Your USC spouse or the lawyer should have a copy of the form they filled out/ they should remember, too.(as your USC spouse is the petitioner). You might be remembering the DS260 or the i-130A(the beneficiary fills out that form). Maybe chat to them/ have the USC join the forum to help make sense of this issue. 

Edited October 5, 2021 by Kor2USA

[GreenDoggie 9]

4 hours ago, pushbrk said:

Yes, that's what I mean by "no".

Thank you for this. From this, I can conclude that, "212(a)(6)(C)(I) was already associated with the beneficiary from another agency’s finding," they were NOT talking about my interview in Shanghai. The only department/people that know about this is the consulate in Shanghai. 

 

That leaves Department of State as the "other agency."

 

Interesting, because during MY IR-1 visa interview in Tokyo, the CO asked about 2 things in details:

#1. The interview in Shanghai regarding my daughter. However, since the consulate in Shanghai is not considered to be "another agency", that would lead to #2.

#2. My case in the US that got dropped. 

 

After the interview, the CO kept my passport, which my lawyer said was a good sign. I've gotten a couple of "request for further information" from the consulate for police and court records regarding the case. We were guessing that the CO wanted more detail about the case-more than we submitted earlier, so we got police records/criminal records from every place we thought they might have records of me.The denial letter came a few months after. Since I submitted so many police records (about 6-7, I think?) that said I have no criminal record, I thought I was free. But I guess there's still something wrong, and it's probably DHS saying so. If the CO knew that DHS is has a problem with me before the interview, I wonder why he took my passport? 

 

Sound like trying to find what DHS is looking for is like men trying to find what women want... 

[pushbrk 12,606]

1 hour ago, GreenDoggie said:

Thank you for this. From this, I can conclude that, "212(a)(6)(C)(I) was already associated with the beneficiary from another agency’s finding," they were NOT talking about my interview in Shanghai. The only department/people that know about this is the consulate in Shanghai. 

 

That leaves Department of State as the "other agency."

 

Interesting, because during MY IR-1 visa interview in Tokyo, the CO asked about 2 things in details:

#1. The interview in Shanghai regarding my daughter. However, since the consulate in Shanghai is not considered to be "another agency", that would lead to #2.

#2. My case in the US that got dropped. 

 

After the interview, the CO kept my passport, which my lawyer said was a good sign. I've gotten a couple of "request for further information" from the consulate for police and court records regarding the case. We were guessing that the CO wanted more detail about the case-more than we submitted earlier, so we got police records/criminal records from every place we thought they might have records of me.The denial letter came a few months after. Since I submitted so many police records (about 6-7, I think?) that said I have no criminal record, I thought I was free. But I guess there's still something wrong, and it's probably DHS saying so. If the CO knew that DHS is has a problem with me before the interview, I wonder why he took my passport? 

 

Sound like trying to find what DHS is looking for is like men trying to find what women want... 

Dept. of State deals with visas.  USCIS deals with petitions.  Without further details, I'm shooting in the dark.

[pushbrk 12,606]

What actually happened with the attempt to get a stepchild US Citizenship?  If there was a misrepresentation associated with that, it could be simply misstated as "other agency" when it is still US Consular Services.  Did your US Citizen husband actually represent that your daughter was his biological child?  If so, that's the problem, a BIG ONE.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

48 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

What actually happened with the attempt to get a stepchild US Citizenship?  If there was a misrepresentation associated with that, it could be simply misstated as "other agency" when it is still US Consular Services.  Did your US Citizen husband actually represent that your daughter was his biological child?  If so, that's the problem, a BIG ONE.

Also interested in this answer - while a stepchild (of the right age) is treated as a child of USC for immigration purposes, they do not have the right to automatically acquire citizenship like a biological or adopted child does. So it is certainly possible that this is at the issue here, if the nature of the parent/child relationship was misrepresented. (Though OP would presumably have had to be actively involved in the misrep as that case is technically between two other people?)

[Mike E 11,732]

18 hours ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

She's talking about a previous petition and her now former husband. 

 

9 hours ago, GreenDoggie said:

I made a mistake earlier. Mine is a IR-1 visa. NOT a K-1.

And I am out.  

[GreenDoggie 9]

On 10/5/2021 at 10:28 PM, pushbrk said:

What actually happened with the attempt to get a stepchild US Citizenship?  If there was a misrepresentation associated with that, it could be simply misstated as "other agency" when it is still US Consular Services.  Did your US Citizen husband actually represent that your daughter was his biological child?  If so, that's the problem, a BIG ONE.

Sorry for the delay. 

 

She has a green card. 

 

The CO probably thought that we did, but for reasons stared before, we didn't. That probably won't change how that CO looks at it and reports it. If you think that's the problem, they wouldn't say it's from "another agency" and that they would outright TELL ME that, that's the reason for 212(a)(C)(6)(I) rather than leaving it blank?

[pushbrk 12,606]

6 hours ago, GreenDoggie said:

Sorry for the delay. 

 

She has a green card. 

 

The CO probably thought that we did, but for reasons stared before, we didn't. That probably won't change how that CO looks at it and reports it. If you think that's the problem, they wouldn't say it's from "another agency" and that they would outright TELL ME that, that's the reason for 212(a)(C)(6)(I) rather than leaving it blank?

You never know.  I'm sorry but your posts are confusing with regard to the attempt to get your child US Citizenship.  If your husband represented his stepchild as "his child", on a US Government form, then he did indeed "misrepresent".  What actually happened?

[GreenDoggie 9]

18 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

You never know.  I'm sorry but your posts are confusing with regard to the attempt to get your child US Citizenship.  If your husband represented his stepchild as "his child", on a US Government form, then he did indeed "misrepresent".  What actually happened?

I'm to blame for the confusion, but my case is not simple either. 

 

We don't remember the details from my daughter's case because it was such a long time ago. We believed she was eligible for US citizen, if not a green card. So we filed SOMETHING-whatever that was. It was such a long time ago. What I wrote in my past post is all we can remember. We told the CO at MY visa interview what happened, and what we said, I wrote in my past post. 

 

I guess what we said make no difference because if the CO from my daughter's case says it misrepresentation, then it is. I am jury, king, emperor, whatever...

[pushbrk 12,606]

42 minutes ago, GreenDoggie said:

I'm to blame for the confusion, but my case is not simple either. 

 

We don't remember the details from my daughter's case because it was such a long time ago. We believed she was eligible for US citizen, if not a green card. So we filed SOMETHING-whatever that was. It was such a long time ago. What I wrote in my past post is all we can remember. We told the CO at MY visa interview what happened, and what we said, I wrote in my past post. 

 

I guess what we said make no difference because if the CO from my daughter's case says it misrepresentation, then it is. I am jury, king, emperor, whatever...

Yes, that's pretty much how it is.  There's an old saying that applies here.  "Ignorance of the law, is no excuse."  Know that words mean things.  His daughter, and "his step daughter" are not the same thing.  It sounds like a case could be made that the misrepresentation was unintentional and a misunderstanding, but you cannot make that case if you don't remember the actual facts.  Tough situation.

[pushbrk 12,606]

Another disadvantage for you is that whomever found misrepresentation made real time notes, so no need to rely on memory.

[Redro 4,609]

2 hours ago, GreenDoggie said:

I'm to blame for the confusion, but my case is not simple either. 

 

We don't remember the details from my daughter's case because it was such a long time ago. We believed she was eligible for US citizen, if not a green card. So we filed SOMETHING-whatever that was. It was such a long time ago. What I wrote in my past post is all we can remember. We told the CO at MY visa interview what happened, and what we said, I wrote in my past post. 

 

I guess what we said make no difference because if the CO from my daughter's case says it misrepresentation, then it is. I am jury, king, emperor, whatever...

1.) Is your daughter in the States or is she still overseas? When all did this happen? Last year a few years back?

 

2.) Unfortunately a faulty memory /bad memory is no defense. Either have your lawyer or partner pull up the forms you filed or perhaps get your immigration records through FOIA. https://www.uscis.gov/records/request-records-through-the-freedom-of-information-act-or-privacy-act

Perhaps you can resolve this issue. If not, you and your partner and kid will have to live in your country/ a third country. Sounds like both China and Japan could be options. 

 

Good luck! 

Edited October 12, 2021 by Kor2USA

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

5 hours ago, pushbrk said:

Another disadvantage for you is that whomever found misrepresentation made real time notes, so no need to rely on memory.

Yes. OP might not be able to remember the facts but whoever adjudicate the case would have made notes, which are presumably in the daughter’s A-file.

 

6 hours ago, GreenDoggie said:

I guess what we said make no difference because if the CO from my daughter's case says it misrepresentation, then it is. I am jury, king, emperor, whatever...

 You make it sound like the finding of misrepresentation can be arbitrarily made by someone acting as “jury, king” etc and that you clearly feel wronged by this (even though you don’t remember what happened). Actually, precisely because the finding of misrepresentation has such serious consequences, the reasons for the finding need to be properly documented. The finding must include (among other things) that the misrepresentation was knowingly made (and was material, that part is obvious from what you were trying to do). 

[jan22 3,018]

While a lot of the focus here has been on the confusion about your daughter and what you may or may not have filed, I think there is another issue that you have been equally confusing about. 

 

I may have mixed up some things, since your posts have jumped all over the place, but I believe there are some statements that lead me to believe that there were some criminal charges/issues that you dealt with that you discussed openly in the visa interview.  My question would be whether that was always the case.  I believe you have applied for visas and been in the US before, and/or maybe also entered under the visa waiver program? If so, were you up-front about any criminal charges or issues each and every time you were asked? 

 

Most US visa and immigration forms phrase questions in this area along the lines of "Have you ever...." and ask about arrests or detentions as well as convictions.  You must answer "yes" even if you were arrested/detained and released.  If convicted and you later benefited from having the record sealed, expunged, or followed some other procedure such as a pardon or amnesty, you still need to say "yes" to a question that asks if you were ever convicted.

 

Was there ever any time on a petition form or at a Port of Entry when you were asked about arrests or conviction where you were not as forthcoming as you say you were at the visa interview or where you said nothing about it since it didn't show up on current police records?  If so, USCIS or CBP may have decided you cut off a line of inquiry by concealing a potential ineligibility.   I'm not saying this is the reason for the 6C finding -- just pointing it out as another possibility.  And, you don't need to reveal here any details you may not want to -- I'm just suggesting you think about whatever the situation was and how you may have represented the information to immigration officials in the past.

[John & Rose 7,239]

On 10/5/2021 at 8:28 AM, pushbrk said:

What actually happened with the attempt to get a stepchild US Citizenship?  If there was a misrepresentation associated with that, it could be simply misstated as "other agency" when it is still US Consular Services.  Did your US Citizen husband actually represent that your daughter was his biological child?  If so, that's the problem, a BIG ONE.

Were they attempting CRBA for a non biological child?  So many questions.  K-1 to citizenship at the consular interview?  I think you hit it on the head.  They may have been trying to pass off a step child as a biological child and that starts to get into a grey area that may even include human trafficking if the facts fall in the wrong way.  Definitely a misrepresentation if the US citizen stated the child was biologically his.