Chinese Marriage/Visa Brokers

[david_dawei]

Does anyone know if they asked any questions concerning if the fiancee was sent IMBRA information at the interview? I also just read that a federal district court rulled the IMBRA as unconstitutional. It guess it will head for the supreme court now.

 

PROBLEM OF CONSULAR INTERVIEW: Another problematic issue for the foreign owner (or U.S. owner living overseas) is the Consular Interview for the visa. Under this law, the Officer is required to ask the lady if they met through an IMB (as broadly defined in that law to include a foreign-based IMB). IF the answer is YES, he MUST ask if the IMB provided the lady with all the background client information on the U.S. client and secured her signed written release before the couple communicated. If NOT, then the Officer presumably, as part of his wide discretion to issue the visa or not, MAY choose to DENY issuance of the visa or at least place the case into "ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW" because of the broker violation (even though it was a foreign-based company).

We know that many people find it difficult to believe, and may even be amazed to hear, that there is any possibility or risk that the lady's visa at the Embassy could actually be in jeopardy because of a broker violation. Some ask how can that be if she "qualifies" for the visa. Some ask would not the Consular Officer simply document the broker violation and create a list of broker violators for future investigation, without penalizing the lady's visa.

 

Certainly, the Consular Officer CAN choose this course. The issue is does he have to?

 

Our point is NOT that the Consular Officer could not or even would not issue the visa under this circumstance, only that the Consular Officer does not have to do so. In other words, the Consular Officer is never bound to or required to issue a visa anyway even under normal circumstances, but especially not if there is a legal violation in the record as part of the visa case. In short, there is a risk which exists, and it's better to know about that risk rather than to ignore it or pretend it does not exist.

 

Let me know what you folks think about the above. Thanks.

 

My understanding is the VO has to.. just as the adjustment officer has to.. but I'm not really sure if this is simply one lawyer's interpretation or not... I haven't bother to research this topic much since it first came out.. Here's one link I had kept which I thought was good:

 

http://usaimmigrationattorney.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=2

3) Consular Interview requirements and Adjustment of Status Interview requirements. These say that the Consular Officer at Embassy Interview or Immigration Officer at Green Card Interview must review and answer questions about Petitioner's domestic violence and other criminal record with the lady beneficiary in her primary language. Section 833( B ).

Edited November 29, 2006 by DavidZixuan (see edit history)

[SirLancelot]

 

I also just read that a federal district court rulled the IMBRA as unconstitutional. It guess it will head for the supreme court now.

 

 

Can you give any more info? Which district? Do you have the article--or even better yet, the actual ruling? Many people think a lawsuit filed is itself a ruling. Unless a ruling was issued in the last week, I think you're reading about lawsuits filed in federal district courts. No rulings yet. If you have an actual ruling, please share the link to the actual ruling. I would be most interested in reading any actual rulings for myself.

 

Here's a good reply by a poster on another forum:

 

Steve, the link you posted is not a court decision. It is a motion or brief filed on behalf of the plaintiffs in a court case, specifically as it states on the first page "PLAINTIFFS¡¯ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION." The courts have not decided anything on the IMBRA as of this time. The only two relevant decisions that I know of is the TRO (Temporary Restraining Order) issued in Georgia in which the court said that the plaintiff may be able to win on the merits (and that IMBRA may violate numerous consitutional provisions, including prior restraint on free speech) and the rejection of a TRO in Ohio in which that court takes exactly the opposite stance.

 

By the same poster (who seems to be a lawyer)

 

Yes, if you want to see an actual court ruling look at:

 

http://www.usaimmigrationattorney.com/imag...urtOrderTRO.pdf

 

(TRO issued by CLARENCE COOPER; UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE - Georgia). Note that there are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least one district in each state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Three territories of the United States -- the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands -- have district courts that hear federal cases, including bankruptcy cases.)

 

The rejection of the TRO in the case that you posted about is at:

 

http://usaimmigrationattorney.com/JudgeRos...rDenyingTRO.pdf

 

(TRO rejected by THOMAS M. ROSE; UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE - Ohio)

 

The rejected TRO from the District Judge in Ohio is funny to read. He essentially sees the USC as a product being sold to foreign customers (your beneficiaries) and the IMBRA notification to your beneficiary is just a product warning label. You--as the USC--in this case is a product being sold by the marriage broker, no different than if they were selling beer and needing product warning labels. Hahahaha. That is funny! You're just a sack of human meat being sold and you need a product warning label if you've been bad.

 

The statute compels provision of information regarding a product, the domestic client, being offered to a potential foreign spouse, not unlike product labeling laws that compel and regulate speech in other markets. See Adolph Coors Co. v. Brady. 944 F.2d 1543, 1546 -47 (10th Cir. 1991) (upholding a labeling regulation on beer).

 

 

It is really interesting and enlightening to see how two judges can rule so differently on two very similar motions. Indeed, it does look like no matter the outcome of any of these district courts, it will ultimately land in the US Supreme Court's lap.

Edited November 29, 2006 by SirLancelot (see edit history)

[dnoblett]

When filling out the IMBRA page of the I-129F I noted Cherry Blossoms as an IMB, even though the folks at blossoms don't consider their service as an IMB.

 

I emailed Cherry Blossoms about IMBRA and they responded this way:

While we do not consider our company a marriage agency because we do not charge the women nor do we charge couples that end up marrying that meet on our web site. But our government has written a very broad definition of Marriage Broker so we will leave it up to you what to fill in.

 

Not sure if it hinders your petition to state that you used a marriage broker or not.

 

Sorry for the ambiguity but this law is an odd item. If you say you did not use a marriage broker you should let your Fianc¨¦e know so that at her interview she does not mention Cherry Blossoms.

 

Would suggest you call the USCIS and ask for clarification: 800-375-5283, at the voice prompts push, 1, 3, 4, & 9 to get to the correct department.

 

Over 200 of our clients called the USCIS and spoken to agents (it can be a long hold on the phone ¨C hour or more) and all but two have reported that they were told Cherry Blossoms is not a Marriage Broker. You may want to call to confirm.

 

Aloha

 

Duane

 

CB Staff

 

Cherry Blossoms, Inc.

P.O. Box 1562

Kapaau, HI 96755

[david_dawei]

When filling out the IMBRA page of the I-129F I noted Cherry Blossoms as an IMB, even though the folks at blossoms don't consider their service as an IMB.

 

I emailed Cherry Blossoms about IMBRA and they responded this way:

While we do not consider our company a marriage agency because we do not charge the women nor do we charge couples that end up marrying that meet on our web site. But our government has written a very broad definition of Marriage Broker so we will leave it up to you what to fill in.

 

Not sure if it hinders your petition to state that you used a marriage broker or not.

 

Sorry for the ambiguity but this law is an odd item. If you say you did not use a marriage broker you should let your Fianc¨¦e know so that at her interview she does not mention Cherry Blossoms.

 

Would suggest you call the USCIS and ask for clarification: 800-375-5283, at the voice prompts push, 1, 3, 4, & 9 to get to the correct department.

 

Over 200 of our clients called the USCIS and spoken to agents (it can be a long hold on the phone ¨C hour or more) and all but two have reported that they were told Cherry Blossoms is not a Marriage Broker. You may want to call to confirm.

 

Aloha

 

Duane

 

CB Staff

 

Cherry Blossoms, Inc.

P.O. Box 1562

Kapaau, HI 96755

 

It's these situations which cause the most concern IMO... Any service saying, "We will leave it up to you" is the lamest of excuses...

 

If they are an IMB, then they are required to be capable of providing that information to their paying customers; If they are not an IMB, they don't.. this is one of the few times the application of an otherwise ambiguous law is black or white; You're either an IMB or your not; Your operational capability includes providing this information about USCs or it does not.

 

Asking a service if they are an IMB does not always get a straight answer; I'd suggest asking them if they are capable of and do provide to their paying clients background on USCs.. if they cannot answser yes/no to that, then they are simply wanting to avoid any responsibility.

 

 

In the end, we have to see what happens at the interviews and AOS when discrepancies exists between what's on a form, what's on a list, and what the beneficiary did or did not get from a service...

[Guest Byron]

When filling out the IMBRA page of the I-129F I noted Cherry Blossoms as an IMB, even though the folks at blossoms don't consider their service as an IMB.

 

I emailed Cherry Blossoms about IMBRA and they responded this way:

While we do not consider our company a marriage agency because we do not charge the women nor do we charge couples that end up marrying that meet on our web site. But our government has written a very broad definition of Marriage Broker so we will leave it up to you what to fill in.

 

Not sure if it hinders your petition to state that you used a marriage broker or not.

 

Sorry for the ambiguity but this law is an odd item. If you say you did not use a marriage broker you should let your Fianc¨¦e know so that at her interview she does not mention Cherry Blossoms.

 

Would suggest you call the USCIS and ask for clarification: 800-375-5283, at the voice prompts push, 1, 3, 4, & 9 to get to the correct department.

 

Over 200 of our clients called the USCIS and spoken to agents (it can be a long hold on the phone ¨C hour or more) and all but two have reported that they were told Cherry Blossoms is not a Marriage Broker. You may want to call to confirm.

 

Aloha

 

Duane

 

CB Staff

 

Cherry Blossoms, Inc.

P.O. Box 1562

Kapaau, HI 96755

 

It's these situations which cause the most concern IMO... Any service saying, "We will leave it up to you" is the lamest of excuses...

 

If they are an IMB, then they are required to be capable of providing that information to their paying customers; If they are not an IMB, they don't.. this is one of the few times the application of an otherwise ambiguous law is black or white; You're either an IMB or your not; Your operational capability includes providing this information about USCs or it does not.

 

Asking a service if they are an IMB does not always get a straight answer; I'd suggest asking them if they are capable of and do provide to their paying clients background on USCs.. if they cannot answser yes/no to that, then they are simply wanting to avoid any responsibility.

 

 

In the end, we have to see what happens at the interviews and AOS when discrepancies exists between what's on a form, what's on a list, and what the beneficiary did or did not get from a service...

 

 

After researching this, I am more confused than ever. However, I did have to fill out the IMBRA forms on all the sites that I wrote to the ladies, so at the time I assumed they were considered marriage brokers. It wouldn't even let me write the letter until I filled out the form. I am worried about the interview now because I put the marriage broker AFF on the i129f but my SO never got anything back from AFF and she certainly didn't sign anything giving me permission to write to her. At this point she will have to say yes because that is what I put on the petition, but then again I can tell her to say no, because she doesn't consider it a marriage broker. Next thing you know they will ask for evidence that she signed the permission and release statement from the so called marriage broker. Another reason for them to deny the visa. Vote that congresswoman out who initiated the IMBRA.

[Randy W]

When filling out the IMBRA page of the I-129F I noted Cherry Blossoms as an IMB, even though the folks at blossoms don't consider their service as an IMB.

 

I emailed Cherry Blossoms about IMBRA and they responded this way:

While we do not consider our company a marriage agency because we do not charge the women nor do we charge couples that end up marrying that meet on our web site. But our government has written a very broad definition of Marriage Broker so we will leave it up to you what to fill in.

 

Not sure if it hinders your petition to state that you used a marriage broker or not.

 

Sorry for the ambiguity but this law is an odd item. If you say you did not use a marriage broker you should let your Fianc¨¦e know so that at her interview she does not mention Cherry Blossoms.

 

Would suggest you call the USCIS and ask for clarification: 800-375-5283, at the voice prompts push, 1, 3, 4, & 9 to get to the correct department.

 

Over 200 of our clients called the USCIS and spoken to agents (it can be a long hold on the phone ¨C hour or more) and all but two have reported that they were told Cherry Blossoms is not a Marriage Broker. You may want to call to confirm.

 

Aloha

 

Duane

 

CB Staff

 

Cherry Blossoms, Inc.

P.O. Box 1562

Kapaau, HI 96755

 

It's these situations which cause the most concern IMO... Any service saying, "We will leave it up to you" is the lamest of excuses...

 

If they are an IMB, then they are required to be capable of providing that information to their paying customers; If they are not an IMB, they don't.. this is one of the few times the application of an otherwise ambiguous law is black or white; You're either an IMB or your not; Your operational capability includes providing this information about USCs or it does not.

 

Asking a service if they are an IMB does not always get a straight answer; I'd suggest asking them if they are capable of and do provide to their paying clients background on USCs.. if they cannot answser yes/no to that, then they are simply wanting to avoid any responsibility.

 

 

In the end, we have to see what happens at the interviews and AOS when discrepancies exists between what's on a form, what's on a list, and what the beneficiary did or did not get from a service...

 

 

David, I think the Cherry Blossoms response is spot on. No one knows what constitutes an IMB, because no ruling has been provided. Providing the form is very simple - something they can do in CYA mode.

 

Yes - they are taking no responsibility because they HAVE no responsibility. And won't until some guidelines are being provided.

 

I am still of the opinion that the only reasonable answer to the "Did you use an IMB?" question is "No!".

 

So far, it seems like there is no downside to answering "Yes", but the USCIS may someday have to take a position on that issue.

[lostinblue]

When filling out the IMBRA page of the I-129F I noted Cherry Blossoms as an IMB, even though the folks at blossoms don't consider their service as an IMB.

 

I emailed Cherry Blossoms about IMBRA and they responded this way:

While we do not consider our company a marriage agency because we do not charge the women nor do we charge couples that end up marrying that meet on our web site. But our government has written a very broad definition of Marriage Broker so we will leave it up to you what to fill in.

 

Not sure if it hinders your petition to state that you used a marriage broker or not.

 

Sorry for the ambiguity but this law is an odd item. If you say you did not use a marriage broker you should let your Fiancée know so that at her interview she does not mention Cherry Blossoms.

 

Would suggest you call the USCIS and ask for clarification: 800-375-5283, at the voice prompts push, 1, 3, 4, & 9 to get to the correct department.

 

Over 200 of our clients called the USCIS and spoken to agents (it can be a long hold on the phone – hour or more) and all but two have reported that they were told Cherry Blossoms is not a Marriage Broker. You may want to call to confirm.

 

Aloha

 

Duane

 

CB Staff

 

Cherry Blossoms, Inc.

P.O. Box 1562

Kapaau, HI 96755

 

It's these situations which cause the most concern IMO... Any service saying, "We will leave it up to you" is the lamest of excuses...

 

If they are an IMB, then they are required to be capable of providing that information to their paying customers; If they are not an IMB, they don't.. this is one of the few times the application of an otherwise ambiguous law is black or white; You're either an IMB or your not; Your operational capability includes providing this information about USCs or it does not.

 

Asking a service if they are an IMB does not always get a straight answer; I'd suggest asking them if they are capable of and do provide to their paying clients background on USCs.. if they cannot answser yes/no to that, then they are simply wanting to avoid any responsibility.

 

 

In the end, we have to see what happens at the interviews and AOS when discrepancies exists between what's on a form, what's on a list, and what the beneficiary did or did not get from a service...

 

 

After researching this, I am more confused than ever. However, I did have to fill out the IMBRA forms on all the sites that I wrote to the ladies, so at the time I assumed they were considered marriage brokers. It wouldn't even let me write the letter until I filled out the form. I am worried about the interview now because I put the marriage broker AFF on the i129f but my SO never got anything back from AFF and she certainly didn't sign anything giving me permission to write to her. At this point she will have to say yes because that is what I put on the petition, but then again I can tell her to say no, because she doesn't consider it a marriage broker. Next thing you know they will ask for evidence that she signed the permission and release statement from the so called marriage broker. Another reason for them to deny the visa. Vote that congresswoman out who initiated the IMBRA.

This is what I recieved from match.com

 

Thank you for contacting Match.com.

Match.com is not an international marriage broker as defined by the International Marriage Brokers Regulation Act of 2005.

Congratulations on your engagement! We are always happy to hear success stories such as yours. If you have not yet done so, please visit the success story section of Match.com at the following link: http://success.match.com/. It gives you the options to share your story and read other Match.com success stories.

Best Wishes,

 

I answered no to the Imbra question , in a few weeks when my fiance goes to the interview we shall see how this answer plays out.We did meet through Match.com . I was a paying member, She was not . She only posted a profile with match. She could not answer me,We worked around that issue. I believe everyone has to keep their eyes wide open when using any dateing service. Even in this country plenty of women are looking for a free ride to easy street. The better looking she is the more money you need to make and your status plays into it also. Sorry I am not into Harleys or tattoos that many seem to require . This is one reason I looked to the east for a relationship. It was easier to use a dateing site than for me to meet an asian women in my area. Having dated a Chinese woman years ago helped me greatly to filter out what I would consider the scamers. I believe that I have been involved with a very honest person. That is the best you can do. If not for internet dateing how many would be members of this board?

[SinoTexas]

Okay, okay, as the original poster, I can see that we got kinda side tracked onto IMBRA. I know I didn't help, because I too, added to the IMBRA diversion. Ya'll think we can move it back to the original topic? I'm teaching the cross cultural class late next week and the initial posting were great information. In case ya'll forgot, here is the original consolidated posts:

 

Having read about the marriage/visa broker on several other threads, I am curious as to how it works from the Chinese side. Here in the US, I'm familiar with the dating web sites and of course the personal ads that appear in various forms of print. I'm basically talking about domestic dating sites. They all are more or less "dating" services with no mention of marriage as the final result. You pay your fees to have access to the database of people and basically pay for the service of the web site/printed media of "connecting" you to similar profiles, etc. These fees can be small or fairly substantial, but in the end you pay your fee's with no guarantees other a chance to meet.

 

In China, I understand that it is a different arrangement. My ex-SO was involved with a marriage broker and I have known others that were involved in the on-line service. I guess the Chinese woman pays a fee to be listed on a web site, and if she cannot read or write English or whatever language of the country she wants to be listed on, she pays additional fees for email correspondence (whether she actually writes them or not) and a maintenance fee. Do these marriage/visa services require the final fee when a marriage takes place or when a visa is successfully obtained? If a USC and Chinese national are married in China, then is that considered the final and successful arrangement and payment is due? Or is a final payment due when the Chinese national is issued a visa and marriage has little or nothing to do with the process. If a marriage takes place and there is not a visa issued because of problems, is only partial payment allowed? I guess I'm trying to understand whether these are really marriage brokers or visa brokers? I am curious as to how these are "marketed" in China...marriage or visa.

 

Would it be fair at the start of an on-line relationship to ask the girl/guy if she or he is using a marriage/visa broker? Would it be fair to ask if they were paying for this service? Then one would know whether they are actually communicating with the person or the service.

 

I brought this thread up, because I wanted to get some thoughts on marriage/visa brokers and this is a great site to get that kind of information. I teach a class on heritage tourism at one of the universities here in Central Texas and a couple of the sessions deal with cross culture relationships. I also teach the same class at a university in China and so I was looking for some "talking points" as part of my lesson plan. It will be interesting to see how my students here in Texas and in China view the issue. These are all graduate level students ranging in age from 20 - 25 with a few "mature" students thrown in the mix.

 

Thanks guys and gals...

 

As aye,

 

Jim

[Randy W]

 

here is a thread at visa journey about people who had interview IMBRA involved

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=32393

 

 

 

Sounds like the other embassies are treating it the same way GUZ is (no IMBRA questions at the interview)!

[Randy W]

Okay, okay, as the original poster, I can see that we got kinda side tracked onto IMBRA. I know I didn't help, because I too, added to the IMBRA diversion. Ya'll think we can move it back to the original topic? I'm teaching the cross cultural class late next week and the initial posting were great information. In case ya'll forgot, here is the original consolidated posts:

 

 

 

Oh, I see! Yeah, I thought IMBRA, also, when I read your original post.

 

I think that really the differences between us and them are financial, Internet access, and the fact that most of the Internet (especially these broker/dating sites) is English.

 

The sites themselves seem to be skewed in the same way a purely American site would be - toward the male paying a small to large fee, while the woman gets by with a lower to non-existent bill.

 

But her expenses come for the Internet access and/or a translator/facilitator who provides "services" of some sort. In order to make it affordable for the woman, they will charge low fees up front, with a final bill to be paid at P4, Visa time, or marriage. Thus it would be paid by the male in most cases.

 

The only real cultural factors involved are the limited Internet access, attitudes toward divorce, and the degree to which these services have caught on in an area.

[Thomas Promise]

My soon to be Ex- SO and myself had a major problem with a dating service she used. I asked her who wrote her e-mails and translated my e-mails to her. She told me her worker friend did and she also introduced me to her. (I found out later that my SO did not even work where she said she did). She told me after she was here in the US that she owed 60,000 RMB to her family and friends for this dating service to meet me and must be paid back in one years time. She then told me that her friend was actually an agent of this dating brokerage house and they really took advantage of her on the cost they originally told her. I have heard all kinds of rumors that my SO's or her family may have been under the threat of physical violence by these people if they where not paid. I know that money is an evil obsession with her.

[ForLily]

My soon to be Ex- SO and myself had a major problem with a dating service she used. I asked her who wrote her e-mails and translated my e-mails to her. She told me her worker friend did and she also introduced me to her. (I found out later that my SO did not even work where she said she did). She told me after she was here in the US that she owed 60,000 RMB to her family and friends for this dating service to meet me and must be paid back in one years time. She then told me that her friend was actually an agent of this dating brokerage house and they really took advantage of her on the cost they originally told her. I have heard all kinds of rumors that my SO's or her family may have been under the threat of physical violence by these people if they where not paid. I know that money is an evil obsession with her.

This is an interesting thread! To this post above, you really need to be careful with this even though you love your SO. It "may" be a ploy for you to give her family some money.