visa denied

[chilton747]

Ok folks here is what I know now. My SO's VO was a young USA man. He could not speak Chinese very well and my SO could not understand him much. He kept asking her if her exhusband was in the USA. Her ex lives in China and always has. He also asked her several times why I have not come to china to marry her. He asked her how we communicated and she said she spoke some english but mostly we chatted as she can write good english. She offered to give him all of our emails and chats but he refused to want to see them. He only looked at the pictures and said that we lie. He asked her my job and she answered him correctly and he still said that she lied. I double checked all of my paperwork and everything is correct! After he gave her a denial paper she went to see a lawyer in the consulate building. He said he could not help her as the case has to be sent back to the USA. I will fight this to the end. My SO told me that the VO was refusing visas to others also. The VO's initials are BK. We are really heartbroken at this time but we will regroup and get this thing done. We vowed a long time ago to never change our love no matter what. My SO and I are sticking to this no matter how long it takes or if I have to go to China and live. We talked about us getting married in China but I must agree with LeeFisher's comments. Thank all of you for your sympathies and your advice. It really means a lot to me.

 

There are several things I can't believe about this that I've bolded above. Do they really think that her ex-husband lives in the US? Saying "that we lie" at the interview is simply badgering. I-129F applicants don't marry their fiance's in China.

 

Can you determine from your SO exactly when the interview went south? Or was it from the beginning? Did it arise from a communication problem? It seems like knowing this might help in dealing with the consulate.

 

randy raises a good point... I think that the VO considered it a sham marriage... and he would base that on evidence we not yet aware of..

 

But why would he ask about the 'ex' being in the US and not marrying her, unless he believe the non-marriage was due to keeping her unmarried on purpose... for future reuniting with an "ex" in the US (?). yes, some speculation, but it seems the consulate has some angle on this we don't have.

 

My SO's ex is not and has never been in the USA. I know this for certain. I do not know why he asked her this. I double checked all of my paperwork and their is nothing in there saying he lives or has ever lived in the US. I did not make a mistake on the paperwork. Obviously he made this up probably to see what kind of response he would get. The vO also asked her if I sent her money. She answered correctly saying yes that I sent her money for her to live on. He then asked her if she gave money to me to get her into the USA. She said no. My case was the truth all the way. Many women that morning got turned down. I really think they have quotas and they are instructed to maintain these quotas no matter what.

[frank1538]

My SO's ex is not and has never been in the USA. I know this for certain. I do not know why he asked her this. I double checked all of my paperwork and their is nothing in there saying he lives or has ever lived in the US. I did not make a mistake on the paperwork. Obviously he made this up probably to see what kind of response he would get. The vO also asked her if I sent her money. She answered correctly saying yes that I sent her money for her to live on. He then asked her if she gave money to me to get her into the USA. She said no. My case was the truth all the way. Many women that morning got turned down. I really think they have quotas and they are instructed to maintain these quotas no matter what.

As indicated in some of the links from my prior post, the consulate is supposed to be in possession of information that was not available to USCIS and is supposed to prepare a memorandum documenting its basis for recommending revocation. I think this is where your lawyer can be of the most help - getting access to that information and memorandum before the files leave the consulate. Right now, you're in the dark about why things have gone south.

[warpedbored]

Regardless of whether or not you retain King or any other lawyer if you don't do something pretty quick the petition is going back to the USCIS. You will then have a bigger mess to deal with.

[LeeFisher3]

Regardless of whether or not you retain King or any other lawyer if you don't do something pretty quick the petition is going back to the USCIS. You will then have a bigger mess to deal with.

 

Correct, once the case is reviewed and the VO receives approval to send it back there is no way to keep it in GZ. It doesn't matter if the file is physically still in China because the process has been completed on their end.

[IluvmyLi]

My friend who also went through this same denial bs was told by king that 2 months is the deadline to present your case or it will be sent back to uscis

[LeeFisher3]

My friend who also went through this same denial bs was told by king that 2 months is the deadline to present your case or it will be sent back to uscis

 

I would advise not assuming the cases are similar without some assurance on this specific case.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

My friend who also went through this same denial bs was told by king that 2 months is the deadline to present your case or it will be sent back to uscis

 

I would advise not assuming the cases are similar without some assurance on this specific case.

What Lee states here is ever so important. Though many of the visa processes are similar, each and every case is different. In the short time I've been a member of candle there have been very few visas recommended for denial and even fewer for revokation. Of these, very few if any Candle member has been priviledged to know the specifics of the case. Case specific information is only provided as a matter of discovery when and "IF" a case goes to court. It's hard to know just how many cases that once denied or revoked are continuously pursued, but there is likely to be a considerable attrition rate. While speculating about the specifics of a case can be helpful to those that know immigration law AND the facts of a case. Anything less than that stands the chance of being harmful.

[SirLancelot]

Of these, very few if any Candle member has been priviledged to know the specifics of the case. Case specific information is only provided as a matter of discovery when and "IF" a case goes to court. It's hard to know just how many cases that once denied or revoked are continuously pursued, but there is likely to be a considerable attrition rate.

 

Hmm.. Are you saying that when you're denied, they don't give you a reason? That can't be what you're saying. So far, I still haven't read what was the exact reason of denial given on the slip which was returned to the OP's SO.

[Dean Hall]

I have not read every single word on this post, and it is only my speculation, as many others have speculated.

 

But I smell third party interference.

 

For a visa officer to make a statement of "you lie" indicates to me that he may have had a third party piece of paper that had enough info to get his attention.

 

Did any one other than yourself or your wife handle the documentation?

[Randy W]

 

Hmm.. Are you saying that when you're denied, they don't give you a reason? That can't be what you're saying. So far, I still haven't read what was the exact reason of denial given on the slip which was returned to the OP's SO.

 

The law concerning revocations gives the consulate a list of reasons why an application may be recommended for revocation. The blue slip simply quotes one of these items, and usually does not give anything specific to the case.

 

 

I have not read every single word on this post, and it is only my speculation, as many others have speculated.

 

But I smell third party interference.

 

For a visa officer to make a statement of "you lie" indicates to me that he may have had a third party piece of paper that had enough info to get his attention.

 

Did any one other than yourself or your wife handle the documentation?

 

 

Third party correspondence, or a background check that possibly erroneously indicated her ex was in the US, maybe? They need to know.

 

It was more than just extremely rude of the VO and/or consulate to not have someone who could speak to her fluently in any case.

Edited September 2, 2006 by Randy W (see edit history)

[david_dawei]

 

Hmm.. Are you saying that when you're denied, they don't give you a reason? That can't be what you're saying. So far, I still haven't read what was the exact reason of denial given on the slip which was returned to the OP's SO.

 

The law concerning revocations gives the consulate a list of reasons why an application may be recommended for revocation. The blue slip simply quotes one of these items, and usually does not give anything specific to the case.

 

 

What I find more interesting (sadly) is that it appears to be falling under one of the sections of "Immediate Revocation"... which I don't ever recall TPC producing.. Usually, TPC falls into overcome and the VOs use 221g (instead of revocation, at first)...

 

So I tend to doubt TPC. Although I do acknowledge that TPC often leads to a belief that the relationship is not bona-fide and can eventually lead to recommendation for revocation.

 

The idea of a sham marriage and one- and two-way fraud (see the Interview FAQ) would put a case into recommendation for revocation... I just disagree with jumping to the 'immediacy' of a determination... that's what overcome is for; to help both sides of this issue (beneficiary to better show the case and VO to understand it).

[chilton747]

This past week has really been one of the toughest weeks in my life. I have been reading all of you posts and I am very thankful for all of your concerns and opinions. I have finally assembled what I believe to be the correct sequence of the interview questions.

 

The VO first asked if my SO could speak english. She said she could only speak a little. Then he asked her for a picture and she gave some to him. My SO said that he looked at our pictures a long time.Then the VO spoke english to her rapidly and she could not understand. Then the VO spoke chinese (my SO said his chinese was very poor)and asked my SO if her husband is in the USA. She answered that I am her future husband. The VO then said he meant her exhusband and said his name. My SO said no. She said that her ex lived in jiujiang and they have been divorced for 13 years. Then the VO asked her if someone was giving her money. She said yes that I was giving her money to live. Then the VO asked why we have not gotten married in China. She told him that I have not been divorced very long and wanted for us to know each other more. then the VO asked her what I did for a living. She told him that I work in printing as an engineer and that I play music also. The vO seemed to stay on the subject of me being a musician. He told her that he did not believe that I played music. She had a picture of me playing and tried to give it to him. My SO said he became very angry and did not want to see the picture. The VO kept asking her about my music and then called over another VO that spoke Chinese and that VO asked her the same questions about my music in Chinese. My SO answered the same correctly.Then the vO asked what dates I came to china. She answered him correctly. Then the VO gave her the white slip. My fiancee fell to the floor and had to be carried out.

What went wrong? I might probably never know. My SO thinks that the vO thought that she was only trying to come to the USA and using me to do this. I know that this happens a lot but it was definitely not our case. my SO and I have vowed that we will always stay together forever and that will never change. I will be going to china next month to marry my beloved SO. This will bring us more peace and assurance of our forever love. We will try the K3 if my congressman cannot get the K1 reinstated. If we fail again with the K3 then I will move to china. Yes this will mean more time apart but our love is very strong and we will endure all things.

[frank1538]

She told him that I have not been divorced very long and wanted for us to know each other more.

 

To be honest, all the answers seem quite reasonable. I highlighted this one only because I could see a VO thinking that there was no real intent to get married, but I really think that would be a stretch. The answer is innocuous enough, and I would certainly hope that the VO wasn't basing his denial on her answers to the various questions.

 

Me thinks there's more to it than just the interview.

[david_dawei]

The VO .... then called over another VO that spoke Chinese and that VO asked her the same questions about my music in Chinese.

 

The newest info that jumped off the page at me was this one.. I've heard of VOs asking another to come over, and never thought much of it till now. It seems possible that they do this in order to have 'another witness' to the testimony that they are about to dispute (in a denial or recommendation for revocation). I can mentally recall VOs being called over in other denial cases.

 

The strange thing is that it also seems a stretch to base this on the questioning of music of all things

 

 

I think that the issue in this case is not any one question nor any one answer; it is all of it put together for them...

 

frank points out a subtle issue that on it's own is a stretch, but as one part of the puzzle, it is maybe less puzzling... If the VO believed this was a sham marriage, that the beneficiaries 'ex' was in the US... that the beneficiary is only using the relationship to get to the US... then an answer about why no marriage in china comes out sounding a bit wishy washy (no strong intent mentioned, no strong emotional bond feelings mentioned, etc) may add to it. Add to it the pictures which may not of been viewed as a positive expression for the relationship...

 

I know that some argue that the K1 is less damaging to the relationship in the sense that one can 'see if they get along' in 90 days and decide to get married or not.. and avoid a divorce... it seems to me that the K1 has an implied immigration intent TO GET MARRIED, not decide whether you want to or not. That's why "Intent to marry" forms are used.

 

Again, on it's own, this seems like a silly semantic argument... but it could be that all the pieces put together are the summation of subtle issues that mean something much more to the VO.

[Randy W]

This past week has really been one of the toughest weeks in my life. I have been reading all of you posts and I am very thankful for all of your concerns and opinions. I have finally assembled what I believe to be the correct sequence of the interview questions.

 

The VO first asked if my SO could speak english. She said she could only speak a little. Then he asked her for a picture and she gave some to him. My SO said that he looked at our pictures a long time.Then the VO spoke english to her rapidly and she could not understand. Then the VO spoke chinese (my SO said his chinese was very poor)and asked my SO if her husband is in the USA. She answered that I am her future husband. The VO then said he meant her exhusband and said his name. My SO said no. She said that her ex lived in jiujiang and they have been divorced for 13 years. Then the VO asked her if someone was giving her money. She said yes that I was giving her money to live. Then the VO asked why we have not gotten married in China. She told him that I have not been divorced very long and wanted for us to know each other more. then the VO asked her what I did for a living. She told him that I work in printing as an engineer and that I play music also. The vO seemed to stay on the subject of me being a musician. He told her that he did not believe that I played music. She had a picture of me playing and tried to give it to him. My SO said he became very angry and did not want to see the picture. The VO kept asking her about my music and then called over another VO that spoke Chinese and that VO asked her the same questions about my music in Chinese. My SO answered the same correctly.Then the vO asked what dates I came to china. She answered him correctly. Then the VO gave her the white slip. My fiancee fell to the floor and had to be carried out.

What went wrong? I might probably never know. My SO thinks that the vO thought that she was only trying to come to the USA and using me to do this. I know that this happens a lot but it was definitely not our case. my SO and I have vowed that we will always stay together forever and that will never change. I will be going to china next month to marry my beloved SO. This will bring us more peace and assurance of our forever love. We will try the K3 if my congressman cannot get the K1 reinstated. If we fail again with the K3 then I will move to china. Yes this will mean more time apart but our love is very strong and we will endure all things.

 

but this whole part that I've highlighted seems like one big failure to communicate, and that the second VO contributed nothing (unless, like you suggest, he was called over as a witness). So the turning point had to either be the pictures, or something external prior to the interview. What did he say "rapidly in English" that she didn't understand?

 

This interview was so stressful and so shocking to her that she fainted at the end. What's wrong with this picture?