Elon

Hello VJ Family, As promised, I’m sharing an update regarding the case mentioned in the title. Since it’s been a while, the original thread has been closed to new replies. I’m happy to report that my wife has finally received her visa. After USCIS reaffirmed the case, she had to complete several steps again, including: Redoing the medical examination Updating the DS-260 form Renewing all expired documents For those interested in the details of the original case, you can find the discussion here: Thank you again.

Hello VJ Family, to give you an update on this issue, as of today, the case was reaffirmed and sent back to NVC.Here is part of response: Statements by the petitioner and beneficiary acknowledge the beneficiary misrepresented her marital status on her previous non-immigrant visa applications, acting on the advice of an unofficial visa application consultant. The NOIR response included the beneficiary's "attestation de celibat" ( document certifying single status) which, per the Department of State Reciprocity Table, must be presented to sector officials prior to Marriage. USCIS has determined that this evidence sufficiently overcomes the grounds for revocation because it shows that, although the beneficiary previously misrepresented her marital status on prior non-immigrant visa applications, she was single and therefore legally free to marry the petitioner at the time of their marriage.

Hello VJ, I find myself in a very similar situation that I have seen here(but some policies seem to have changed). In 2018 and 2019, my wife's agent lied on her applications (Student visa and Tourist visa), falsely stating that she was married when she was not (he invented a name for her spouse). Both visa applications were denied based on 214b. When I petitioned for her by filing out I-130 after our marriage in 2021, it was approved. However, during the interview, the visa was denied, and the case was sent back to the USCIS. I am still awaiting their response, and it has been one and a half years. Now, we have a son who has obtained his US passport and lives with his mother. It has been tough, but I adhere to a rule: if there is nothing I can do about a situation, I don't need to worry about it. I consulted with lawyers, and many advised filing a waiver (the challenge with the waiver is meeting the extreme hardship clause). Most lawyers in the US lack experience with these cases, and many have lost them. So, I've decided that if the USCIS sends the motion to revoke, I will have to appeal. I'll attempt to argue that the misrepresentation was not material, as stated by the attorney general and some Department of State manuals. You can find more information about the misrepresentation of material fact in this link: FAM Section 30.2. It states that if an applicant was found ineligible for a visa under a different and unrelated ground of ineligibility (such as INA 214(b)), a subsequent discovery that they had misrepresented certain aspects of the case would not be considered material. This is because the misrepresented facts did not tend to lead to an erroneous conclusion. For instance, if an applicant made a misrepresentation on the visa application about having a well-paying job to show they have a residence abroad, but before the misrepresentation was discovered, the visa was refused because the applicant could not, on the known facts, qualify as a nonimmigrant, the subsequent discovery that the applicant misrepresented their job status would not support a finding of materiality. This is because it had no bearing on the proper adjudication of the case. An applicant will never be ineligible under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) if they can demonstrate eligibility based on the true facts. Therefore, an assessment of ineligibility under this ground is not complete until the true facts, considering the applicant's misrepresentation, have been considered. The applicant bears the burden of establishing the true facts and bears the risk that uncertainties caused by their misrepresentation may be resolved against them. However, if the true facts support a finding that the applicant is eligible for a visa, the misrepresented fact is not material. I am not currently using a lawyer as they are very expensive. Any ideas and plz be nice. Happy new year 2024 Thank you all.