One for noneufo and timeline...

[mercator]

I am just wondering if there is any correlation when the Chinese SO was previously divorced and if they were not married before...

 

We are about to pass a friend of my wife's who has had her application stuck at the P-3 stage for a year. I wonder if it is because she left her husband to marry her American husband, and it threw up a red flag with GUZ.

 

My wife was never married before, and with me it was well over a year since I was divorced, let alone the months before we were separated. I don't see much correlation on the US side, but I wonder if those on the Chinese side who may have divorced, if the GUZ looks at them closely to be sure the divorce is genuine.

 

We've seen a few posts on this lately (like JamesBDennis), where the GUZ seems to be looking things over very closely and with harmful effect.

 

I'd be interested to see if there is anything to this theory, and if so, if we could nail down some ways to protect fellow CFL'ers from the dreaded blue slip by making sure they have extra paperwork for their spouses at the interview.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

I'd be interested to see if there is anything to this theory, and if so, if we could nail down some ways to protect fellow CFL'ers from the dreaded blue slip by making sure they have extra paperwork for their spouses at the interview.

183155[/snapback]

I think it very unlikely that any petition is delayed or held in abeyance because either the petitioner or beneficiary has been previously married. Though in many cases we will never really know the true reason for delays, it's more likely that a case is delayed because the beneficiary presents a concern to national security. Issues of more concern are those that would exclude the beneficary from entering the US.

 

Things that raise concern with the adjudicator are:

 

1. Previous dealings with US immigration, whether positive or negative

2. Concern of fraud

3. Negative marks on the police report

4. Excludible health concern

[david_dawei]

Since their stuck at P3, one can only assume they are caught in the name check.. so one question would be whether the previous marriage issue has any impact on the name check...

 

My understanding is that the name check is only on the beneficiary and nothing to do with her previous marriages (??).

[mercator]

I am not sure, but the fact that she left her husband to marry the American SO maybe triggers the concern of fraud angle.

 

When I heard it, I was skeptical, and I have talked to her American SO before, at the request of my wife.

 

I think part of the problem too is that the guy is woefully uninformed about the process, and is relying on a lawyer, who seems to only have fees on the brain, and not genuinely helping them out.

 

I told him about CFL but he is 'not a computer guy,' so he hasn't come, as far as I know. *sigh*

 

The woman is my wife's best friend, so I try and help out where I can...

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

We've seen a few posts on this lately (like JamesBDennis), where the GUZ seems to be looking things over very closely and with harmful effect.

183155[/snapback]

Best thing you can do is complete all the paperwork in a timely fashion and have all the the evidence and certificates to support your petition. Read from Davids FAQ as it contains a lot of historical information.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

I am not sure, but the fact that she left her husband to marry the American SO maybe triggers the concern of fraud angle.

183170[/snapback]

Reminds me of a song from the past, buffalo springfield......"paranoia strikes deep"

 

Don't worry man, you will be fine....

[david_dawei]

The woman is my wife's best friend, so I try and help out where I can...

183170[/snapback]

I'd do the same..

 

---

 

Since you mention she left her husband for an American.. how can the VO really get that idea as well ? based on close proximity of divorce and filing ?

 

while this might certainly be an issue when they view the paperwork at the interview, the name check is a different form of scrutiny... but I'd like to hear nooneufo's thoughts as well...

[Guest pushbrk]

I am not sure, but the fact that she left her husband to marry the American SO maybe triggers the concern of fraud angle.

 

When I heard it, I was skeptical, and I have talked to her American SO before, at the request of my wife.

 

I think part of the problem too is that the guy is woefully uninformed about the process, and is relying on a lawyer, who seems to only have fees on the brain, and not genuinely helping them out.

 

I told him about CFL but he is 'not a computer guy,' so he hasn't come, as far as I know.  *sigh*

 

The woman is my wife's best friend, so I try and help out where I can...

183170[/snapback]

Leaving a Chinese husband to marry an American would certainly raise red flags with me if I were a VO. Two issues come immediately to mind.

 

1. Third party correspondence from the former husband is being investigated.

 

2. More detailed review by superiors due to recent divorce.

 

Either would explain delays. I'm only speculating.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Leaving a Chinese husband to marry an American would certainly raise red flags with me if I were a VO.  Two issues come immediately to mind.

 

1.  Third party correspondence from the former husband is being investigated.

 

2.  More detailed review by superiors due to recent divorce.

 

Either would explain delays.  I'm only speculating.

183177[/snapback]

Again, there is NOTHING, not a thing written in any document relating to marriage based visas that state, suggest, or otherwise imply that the adjudicator should use extra discretion when looking at a case where the beneficiary has been previously married or dumped her man to marry an American. Heck, we're talking about the US here, capital of all divorce states. We wear divorce here like a fashion statement.

 

The only things that are of concern are issues of fraud, excludability, or threat to US citizens.

[david_dawei]

true jesse.. but the VOs clearly have latitude in how to apply the 'fraud' vise grips... anything that raises an eyebrow can lead to a blue slips and fall under the ubiquitious 'questioning of bona-fide marriage'.. how they justify it is to simply place a check mark on the slip...

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

true jesse.. but the VOs clearly have latitude in how to apply the 'fraud' vise grips...  anything that raises an eyebrow can lead to a blue slips and fall under the ubiquitious 'questioning of bona-fide marriage'.. how they justify it is to simply place a check mark on the slip...

183197[/snapback]

Right David, true indeed. I also gather from the posts from GUZ that intuition plays a big role in the adudication process. The point I'm attempting to make in my posts here is that there a whole lotta things with which one should be concerned regarding their case, like preparing papework and gathering evidence. Then, after that, organizing it. If someone is attempting to defraud the government their are things that will alert a savvy VO, like:

 

1. Little to no communication

2. Few if any photos together

3. Lack of strong supporting evidence

[Guest pushbrk]

Leaving a Chinese husband to marry an American would certainly raise red flags with me if I were a VO.  Two issues come immediately to mind.

 

1.  Third party correspondence from the former husband is being investigated.

 

2.  More detailed review by superiors due to recent divorce.

 

Either would explain delays.  I'm only speculating.

183177[/snapback]

Again, there is NOTHING, not a thing written in any document relating to marriage based visas that state, suggest, or otherwise imply that the adjudicator should use extra discretion when looking at a case where the beneficiary has been previously married or dumped her man to marry an American. Heck, we're talking about the US here, capital of all divorce states. We wear divorce here like a fashion statement.

 

The only things that are of concern are issues of fraud, excludability, or threat to US citizens.

183181[/snapback]

Yes, what I mention would be red flags for possible fraud. The red flag causes a delay for further investigation. Only actual evidence of fraud would cause a denial.

[mercator]

I guess I see the situation with my wife's best friend as a shame, since she sees our progress and hers and it seems unfair. I wish she would go faster as well, but I can't help but wonder if things like age gap and divorce history on the Chinese side, since it isn't common, to spring red flags. They are about 16 years apart in age (he's 50 shes 34). I think he is divorced twice before. They also have common names, and I wonder if that slows it down while they narrow their names down...

 

My wife was never married, no criminal record, 8 year gap (which if the VO's know China, its kind of the default age gap in the eyes of Chinese woman...), and I have a resaonable time since my divorce. Our names are both uncommon...

 

I guess I am like timeline and noneufo in that the reasons why timelines vary so much fascinate me, or that my desire to find logic in what is somewhat random...

[david_dawei]

your striking the nail more with the issue of 'common names' causing delays.. this is well known to occur... unfairness may be one that is also well known to occur.. but this is not a process about being fair or not..

 

data also fascinates me... but I don't think the process is truly as random as it appears.

[mercator]

I dont think it is either, but the formula may well be something even 'good will hunting' would be stumped by...

 

I guesstimate that the following all affect timelines:

 

Ages of P&B (low)

Age gap between P and B (medium)

Criminal records (high-very high)

recent divorce P (very low)

recent divorce B (medium)

divorce history B (medium)

involvement of children (high)

Name common/uncommon (high) (x2 both checks)

P USC or PR (extremely high)

 

I am sure there are more, but this is what I came up with so far...

Edited January 16, 2006 by mercator (see edit history)