IR5 Interview

[limegreenbowler 45]

Immediate relatives applying through consular processing are absolutely subject to the 90 day rule. Nothing in any of the FAM sections posted has indicated anything to the contrary. However, in order to make a finding under the 90 day rule, the officer must present the applicant with finding and give them the opportunity to rebut during the interview. The officer does not have to accept the rebuttal. It's possible that the officer did not do this and your parents are getting a second interview to give them an opportunity to rebut the presumption of misrepresentation. If their rebuttals are not accepted, they'll just get the same finding. But honestly, none of us can say until the interview. I am also curious to hear how this goes.

[SkolVikes 19]

1 minute ago, limegreenbowler said:

Immediate relatives applying through consular processing are absolutely subject to the 90 day rule. Nothing in any of the FAM sections posted has indicated anything to the contrary. However, in order to make a finding under the 90 day rule, the officer must present the applicant with finding and give them the opportunity to rebut during the interview. The officer does not have to accept the rebuttal. It's possible that the officer did not do this and your parents are getting a second interview to give them an opportunity to rebut the presumption of misrepresentation. If their rebuttals are not accepted, they'll just get the same finding. But honestly, none of us can say until the interview. I am also curious to hear how this goes.

What kind of rebuttal would in your eyes be acceptable?

[Redro 4,611]

5 hours ago, SkolVikes said:

The 10 year bar was giving for the over stay... When returning for interview in 2021 the new bar was for working within 90 days when entering on a tourist visa, which is  a perm. bar.

 

I can only hope this is good news. I mean why have us schedule an interview after a denial? Months after the fact.

Did they disclose their work in the first application or only in the second application? 

I am interested in the result of this case... I wonder if they will approve the case after second interview or give the option of filing a waiver. 

[SkolVikes 19]

5 minutes ago, ROK2USA said:

Did they disclose their work in the first application or only in the second application? 

I am interested in the result of this case... I wonder if they will approve the case after second interview or give the option of filing a waiver. 

The child when petition for a parent isn't a qualfying realtive for a waiver.. I am sure they did. That interview was around 12 years ago. Doubt they remember those questions but I am sure they filled that out on their DS-260.

[Redro 4,611]

4 minutes ago, SkolVikes said:

The child when petition for a parent isn't a qualfying realtive for a waiver.. I am sure they did. That interview was around 12 years ago. Doubt they remember those questions but I am sure they filled that out on their DS-260.

AH~ I hope you guys get your approval! 

[limegreenbowler 45]

14 minutes ago, SkolVikes said:

What kind of rebuttal would in your eyes be acceptable?

That would be a better question for an attorney who has a lot of experience in consular processing and knows the details of their case, but in general, a rebuttal would need to convince the officer that they legitimately entered as tourists and that something happened to cause them to violate their status within the first 90 days. 

[SkolVikes 19]

1 minute ago, limegreenbowler said:

That would be a better question for an attorney who has a lot of experience in consular processing and knows the details of their case, but in general, a rebuttal would need to convince the officer that they legitimately entered as tourists and that something happened to cause them to violate their status within the first 90 days. 

No attorney wanted to touch this case lol.....At this point they will be told as they were told prior. Their intent was never to over stay...

[Family 4,065]

22 minutes ago, SkolVikes said:

No attorney wanted to touch this case lol.....At this point they will be told as they were told prior. Their intent was never to over stay...

It is noteworthy to just think how many I-601 A ( purely waiving ULP) are routinely issued with eyes closed to black and white ( DS-260 ) disclosures/admissions of unauthorized employment…aside from procedural issues ( this being OP s 2 nd interview, w no such finding at the 1st one a decade ago) it does take MORE than unauthorized behavior to sustain presumption of misrep. …there is actually a list of all elements.  

[SkolVikes 19]

Just wanted to provide every an update:

 

The last month and a half has been a roller coaster. Trying to communicate with the consulate has been awful. They really have refused to give us clarity with the matter. So on the https://ais.usvisa-info.com/ they were required to schedule Biometrics appointment. They couldn't scehdule the interview, we tried to find out why, but never got an answer. We were also told a new medical exam was required since it's been over 6 months. They completed the medical exam last week and when attending the biometrics appointment they were told that they didn't need to do it since it was still within a year. So they exited, and were told to schedule an interview now on https://ais.usvisa-info.com/. This was annoying since they could have flew to RIO and completed their medical and interview all at once. So this meant another plane trip and hotel. We followed up with the consulate by email wondering why this couldn't have all been done at once and if an interview was needed, we were informed an interview was no longer needed and to just send the passports in. So that's where we are at now. Passport being sent out!

[SkolVikes 19]

I emailed LegalNet in September, got a generic reply that same day. Today I got an email stating the following:

 

Dear ****************

 

Thank you for contacting LegalNet.

 

According to our records, your mother’s ineligibility under section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) has been removed.  Please contact the U.S. Consulate in Rio de Janeiro for further instructions on how to proceed with the case.

 

Sincerely,

 

BJB

LegalNet

Department of State

[SkolVikes 19]

1 visa has been approved. Just waiting on the other now!

[Family 4,065]

1 hour ago, SkolVikes said:

1 visa has been approved. Just waiting on the other now!

Thank you for keeping this post updated . It should give others great hope if faced with the same problems and you Absolutely Rocked by Challenging Consulate by every means possible FOR YEARS, on your own. A true DIY Victory! Keep posting 

[SkolVikes 19]

This particular case was a very very long journey and trying. I spent long nights studying and trying to figure out a way as I'm sure many of you do too. I really leaned on VJ to make this happen especially since Immigrate2us was gone. Where it all began. I wish I knew of the back door conversations that occured on this case but it's likely I'll never know. Big thanks to "HRQX"  This person informed me all about LegalNet where the journey began. I truly believe this is where I won the case. Also another big thanks to "Family" for providing all the support needed. Without this page this really wouldn't have been possible. In closing when one is searching for answers, people are looking for a glimmer of hope, unfortunatelly there was one that really wasn't very companssionate in their response and tried to rain on our parade. So if you are going through a similiar situation remain hopeful!, as this is a DIY page they may be right or may not. If I could be of assistance I will.

 

GOOD LUCK TO ALL!!

[kokoro88 1]

Hi @SkolVikes

 

I have been following your post for months and I am so happy the outcome is positive, hope you reunite with your in laws soon.

 

Because this is the first time I find a case on VJ where someone successfully challenged a bar/inadmissibility from the Consulate (and without the help of an attorney!), I think this is a really good and positive reference for myself and others. 

 

If you don't mind, can you list out and elaborate a bit about all the communication channels you used to contact the different US agencies (and your experience from that, like if they ever replied or how long it took) to have them look into your case? I read through the post again and you mentioned Legalnet, email to Washington, email to Consulate...etc. 

 

Thank you!! 

Edited June 2, 2022 by kokoro88

[SkolVikes 19]

16 minutes ago, kokoro88 said:

Hi @SkolVikes

 

I have been following your post for months and I am so happy the outcome is positive, hope you reunite with your in laws soon.

 

Because this is the first time I find a case on VJ where someone successfully challenged a bar/inadmissibility from the Consulate (and without the help of an attorney!), I think this is a really good and positive reference for myself and others. 

 

If you don't mind, can you list out and elaborate a bit about all the communication channels you used to contact the different US agencies (and your experience from that, like if they ever replied or how long it took) to have them look into your case? I read through the post again and you mentioned Legalnet, email to Washington, email to Consulate...etc. 

 

Thank you!! 

Hello!

 

This is the 2nd time I challenge an inadmissibility, the first time was 12 years ago with my then fiance. They tried giving her a 10 year bar when it should have been a 3. It didn't matter at the end of the day because I still had to file a waiver. But non the less they made an error then too.

 

So when you petition for your parents there isn't a waiver for us in this scenario unfortunatelly. So when they were denied the initial time with a 10 year bar we just had to wait it out. We expected the 2nd time around we would get an approval but that didn't go as expected.  When they were denied the 2nd time I was in contact with the RIO consulate right away. I noticed any in debth answers I wouldn't get a reply back, it would take a while, or it was a reply with not the content I was looking for. I would then send more emails to them. I was worried that whoever was reading them wasn't passing my message along but I think due to my persistence that they seemed to escalate the matter to some sort of a supervisory level. The reason why I say this is I got a reply stating this: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

The ineligibilities were applied by a Consular Officer of the United States and reviewed by the Immigrant Visa Chief Unit and confirmed. The Decision provided is final. You may contact the USCIS directly for information concerning possible waivers or exceptions.  Please review the link below for additional information.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

It was at this point I either take no for an answer or try something else. No lawyer wanted to touch the case that I could find with a denial.  I then reached out to LegalNet. I explained the entire case to them from start to finish. I got a generic reply back. Lost a lot of hope. Rio then reached out 9 months later stating they wanted to conduct another interview and that the charges "may" be dismissed. I knew at this point something changed. If Rio kept giving us a no, I knew it had to come from LegalNet. When I reached out to LegalNet after this Rio email I got a quick reply from them stating that the charges were dropped.