HELP Appeals Attorney Needed

[Smitty]

I couldn't say for sure, but the advice in the comments above would be your best bet in this situation.

[selena]

My girl-friend has made an appointment with Peter and will hire him for our case. Also got Mr. Marc Ellis's article: Denials Of Family-Based Immigrant Visas At Consulates And DHS Petition Revocations, in http://www.ilw.com/articles/2006,0323-ellis.shtm. The article provides some important information.

[Randy W]

My girl-friend has made an appointment with Peter and will hire him for our case. Also got Mr. Marc Ellis's article: Denials Of Family-Based Immigrant Visas At Consulates And DHS Petition Revocations, in http://www.ilw.com/articles/2006,0323-ellis.shtm. The article provides some important information.

 

This is the big "what-if" that is the point of that article

If a Service Center begins a revocation proceeding for that K-1 petition, a petitioner¡¯s failure to respond will mean that DHS will revoke the approval of the petition. When that happens, the 212(a)(6)©(i) that is pending in our beneficiary file, will become hard finding of Misrepresentation, under 9 FAM 40.63 N10.1 (above).

Notice that he's saying you WILL have a chance to respond, IF a revocation procedure is begun.

 

He also states later on

In my experience, different USCIS Service Centers handle K-1 revocations in different ways. I have seen Vermont and Nebraska notify the petitioner at once and give him or her 60 days to submit rebuttal evidence. I have seen California and Texas give a petitioner only 30 days to respond.

 

 

 

But I have also seen USCIS Service Centers not even use the revocation process for returned K-1 petitions. I have seen I-797 notices mailed to petitioners informing them that the petition was returned from the Consulate and that the approval for the petition has expired. California and Texas Service Centers seem to have at least a quasi-policy of not sending out NOID letters unless the petitioner requests one.

 

I don't think we've seen anyone who has had the revocation procedure initiated by the US Service Center. We have seen the Service Center simply allow the petition to expire.

 

Marc's point with the article is to watch your mailbox and respond to anything you receive concerning the denied petition.

[Guest Rob & Jin]

I don't think we've seen anyone who has had the revocation procedure initiated by the US Service Center. We have seen the Service Center simply allow the petition to expire.

 

Marc's point with the article is to watch your mailbox and respond to anything you receive concerning the denied petition.

 

 

 

 

 

So if the service centers just let them "expire" are they denied ? as their own process was never followed/completed , in that the petitioner was never given the opportunity of appeal.

 

This would have implications for a new petition as denial and expired dont mean the same or secretly do they ?

[Randy W]

I don't think we've seen anyone who has had the revocation procedure initiated by the US Service Center. We have seen the Service Center simply allow the petition to expire.

 

Marc's point with the article is to watch your mailbox and respond to anything you receive concerning the denied petition.

 

 

 

 

 

So if the service centers just let them "expire" are they denied ? as their own process was never followed/completed , in that the petitioner was never given the opportunity of appeal.

 

This would have implications for a new petition as denial and expired dont mean the same or secretly do they ?

A new petition can be filed at any time. Marc's point is that if a revocation hearing is conducted, a negative ruling MAY impact the new petition.

 

I think that these revocation hearings are much more rare than Marc's article would have you believe.

 

All petitions have an expiration date, which is automatically extended while at GUZ. The USCIS has used this expiration as an excuse to NOT take an action on a petition that was white-slipped and returned - telling the petitioner to simply file a new petition (start over). You're right - there is nothing to appeal or contest in this situation

 

'Denied' and 'revoked' seem to be used interchangeably regarding petitions.

[Guest Rob & Jin]

I don't think we've seen anyone who has had the revocation procedure initiated by the US Service Center. We have seen the Service Center simply allow the petition to expire.

 

Marc's point with the article is to watch your mailbox and respond to anything you receive concerning the denied petition.

 

 

 

 

 

So if the service centers just let them "expire" are they denied ? as their own process was never followed/completed , in that the petitioner was never given the opportunity of appeal.

 

This would have implications for a new petition as denial and expired dont mean the same or secretly do they ?

A new petition can be filed at any time. Marc's point is that if a revocation hearing is conducted, a negative ruling MAY impact the new petition.

 

I think that these revocation hearings are much more rare than Marc's article would have you believe.

 

All petitions have an expiration date, which is automatically extended while at GUZ. The USCIS has used this expiration as an excuse to NOT take an action on a petition that was white-slipped and returned - telling the petitioner to simply file a new petition (start over). You're right - there is nothing to appeal or contest in this situation

 

'Denied' and 'revoked' seem to be used interchangeably regarding petitions.

 

 

I get what your saying Randy, but if USCIS/DHS just let it expire, then they have not followed process, so the petition was not denied or revoked, as the applicant was not given "due process" ie appeal.

 

So on the new petition they could answer NO to "have have you ever been denied a visa" as it was deliberatly just let to expire by them without the opportunity to waiver or appeal.

[Randy W]

I get what your saying Randy, but if USCIS/DHS just let it expire, then they have not followed process, so the petition was not denied or revoked, as the applicant was not given "due process" ie appeal.

 

So on the new petition they could answer NO to "have have you ever been denied a visa" as it was deliberatly just let to expire by them without the opportunity to waiver or appeal.

 

There is nothing to appeal if the USCIS does not make a finding. The VO's decision is final regarding the visa - it is the petition that would be revoked. The USCIS hearing would be concerning a potential finding of fraud or misrepresentation.

 

The beneficiary WAS denied a visa - she would have to disclose this fact in any subsequent application. The petitioner is free to file another petition and try again - a denied visa is a relatively minor black eye

 

This is closer to an inter-agency squabble than a legal process. USCIS has already approved the petition, so they are less likely to revoke it based on another department's findings. The VO usually covers his legal ass by stating simply, "not a valid relationship", and not indicating why. This is all he is required to do to justify the denial, but it leaves the USCIS without a clue as to what to do.

 

There is NO due process regarding the consulate activities. The best lawyer can simply consult with consular officials and get them to act on good will. There may be a legal path to take action against a consulate through the US judicial system, but I strongly doubt that ANYONE has found it.

[Guest Rob & Jin]

I get what your saying Randy, but if USCIS/DHS just let it expire, then they have not followed process, so the petition was not denied or revoked, as the applicant was not given "due process" ie appeal.

 

So on the new petition they could answer NO to "have have you ever been denied a visa" as it was deliberatly just let to expire by them without the opportunity to waiver or appeal.

 

There is nothing to appeal if the USCIS does not make a finding. The VO's decision is final regarding the visa - it is the petition that would be revoked. The USCIS hearing would be concerning a potential finding of fraud or misrepresentation.

 

The beneficiary WAS denied a visa - she would have to disclose this fact in any subsequent application. The petitioner is free to file another petition and try again - a denied visa is a relatively minor black eye

 

This is closer to an inter-agency squabble than a legal process. USCIS has already approved the petition, so they are less likely to revoke it based on another department's findings. The VO usually covers his legal ass by stating simply, "not a valid relationship", and not indicating why. This is all he is required to do to justify the denial, but it leaves the USCIS without a clue as to what to do.

 

There is NO due process regarding the consulate activities. The best lawyer can simply consult with consular officials and get them to act on good will. There may be a legal path to take action against a consulate through the US judicial system, but I strongly doubt that ANYONE has found it.

 

 

 

 

Thanks Randy, interesting process they have going on. I'm sure your info has help those facing this dilemma.

[tsap seui]

It's not written anywhere but the dirty lil' secret is...when dealing with the DOS and it's grocery clerks in Guangzhou, China, somewhere along the process you signed off on any rights you have as an american citizen. Lawd help ya if ya don't get the simple lil' 3 questions with a smile and a nod as they hand over your pink slip.

 

I've exhausted every possible option, as an american citizen, I could research, dream up, or think of to get GUZ to get off their butts and give us the visa. I've got the letter from some chief within the DOS, generated by my letter to the president, that clearly states the fact I have no recourse to what some VO decides. NONE!!!! And we'll never know why or what they were looking at.

 

I have bent over backwards and grabbed my ankles to be nice to the DOS specialists, with the wordin' of my e-mails to the consulate, letters to two congressmen as well as the president, and with my presentation to an ACH VO the day after our AP blue slip.

 

The pleasant ACH VO lied through his teeth at me during my time at his window. Told me our case looks very strong and he felt that in one month, maybe a month and a half, we should be getting a letter from the consulate to come back with the passports....that was OVER 8 months ago. Hell, we waited almost 10 months for the interview, now we've lost over 8 months of totally ripped out of our lives time together.

 

And...after leaving us in blue slip hell for all that time...they're probalby gonna soon send us a letter that says we have no "bona fide" relationship.

 

Good luck to everyone, I sincerely hope ya get the 2 or 3 silly lil' questions and the pink slip...instead of a grueling and machine gun paced 31 questions which "truly" show you have a bona fide relationship, and then you get an AP blue slip.

 

 

tsap seui

[selena]

Deleted and see the update one.

Edited March 30, 2008 by selena (see edit history)

[selena]

I had a comprehensive discussion with my GF (Selena) about her white slip received on 03/07/08. She told me in the interview, the VO asked her why your BF how many time your BF had visited you. She replied only once. Then,my GF wanted to explain the reason but was stopped by the VO. The main reason was that I am still in prohibition status by Chinese traditions (or a kind of religion) due to the pass-away of my father. In China, a person whose parent(s) just passed away should not step into other houses in abut 1 year. Besides, there are some other prohibition rules. My GF will talk to her lawyer (PP in GUZ) and see what will happen.