White Slip

[georgeandli]

DavidZixuan, Well put! The thing is that most petitioners go into this thinking its like getting married here. Pull a license and do it. Once you get into the paperwork...

[splinterman]

Yes David, I think you're right on with the things you've said.

 

Consider this: I live in a small town in Pennsylvania. About 3 weeks ago there was an article in the local paper about how USCIS busted 2 Vietnamese women and one Vietnamese man on charges of Slavery and Marriage Fraud. One of the women owned a nail salon and traveled back and forth to Vietnam to recruit young Vietnamese women to work in her shop under the guise of getting a visa to marry in the USA. The man was used to promise marriage and petition for the girls to come to the US. Once they got here the women took their green cards and put them to work in the nail salon 7 days per week for nothing more than a child's allowance. USCIS ended up arresting all the players, confiscating a house, two bank accounts and a Toyota Highlander vehicle that were all used in the scam. Deportation will be the eventual result .

 

The point is, this can happen anywhere and there are a lot of people who are involved in their own little scams that results in immigration benefits. This is the very thing that GUZ is trying to prevent. Each time something like this happens it just proves USCIS's contentions and justifies GUZ's actions. So, the holes in the net are extremely small to snare as many of the scammers as possible. As a result, innocent couples who really do have the best and honest intentions are entangled, like dolphins when fishing for tuna. I don't think that a VO has to really have any evidence at all to deny a visa. All they have to do is have an idea or hunch or a suspicion, unfounded or not, and you're getting the white slip. You're guilty until you prove yourself innocent under their system, and the way you prove your innocence is by trying again, and again, and demonstrating that there is commitment to your relationship. Considering that a white slip adds at least another 1 to 1 1/2 years onto the eventual process of bringing your SO here, I do believe that GUZ just wants to see if you will stick it out. Sorry Charlie, only the best get to be Starkist!!!!

[IllinoisDave]

Sometimes, I think we are too caught up in: Is it about the petitioner or beneficiary... it's about both. A 'relationship' implies at least two.

 

I agree that ultimately it ends up being about both in the sense that both are definately affected. But I'd say the vast majority that are denied because of GUZ's suspicion/evidence of fraud involve cases where the USC is not an active/aware party to the fraud.

Edited January 4, 2009 by IllinoisDave (see edit history)

[splinterman]

But you know, the thing that gets me is if GUZ has evidence of a misrepresentation or worse-fraud-then why can't the evidence be presented or referenced early on to the USC in the denial process? If the USC is really being scammed then as a government agency, which all of them ultimately exists to serve it's citizens, then wouldn't GUZ be doing a service to the USCs to present to them what they've found? I don't really believe that 'immediate presentation' gives the scammers a leg up on seeing what GUZ is looking at, because they look at everything! GUZ especially is pretty relentless at looking at every possible angle, even imagining or 'seeing' some that aren't even really there.

 

Our laws are written with the Right to face our accusers being kept in mind. If the interview results in a visa denial, and we're not given an opportunity to know the reasons why and possibly never even find out, how is this 'protecting our Right' vs 'being denied our Right'?

 

If I'm being scammed I want to know about it so I don't waste my time pursuing an appeal or filing again for this person.

[Guest jin979]

But you know, the thing that gets me is if GUZ has evidence of a misrepresentation or worse-fraud-then why can't the evidence be presented or referenced early on to the USC in the denial process? If the USC is really being scammed then as a government agency, which all of them ultimately exists to serve it's citizens, then wouldn't GUZ be doing a service to the USCs to present to them what they've found? I don't really believe that 'immediate presentation' gives the scammers a leg up on seeing what GUZ is looking at, because they look at everything! GUZ especially is pretty relentless at looking at every possible angle, even imagining or 'seeing' some that aren't even really there.

 

Our laws are written with the Right to face our accusers being kept in mind. If the interview results in a visa denial, and we're not given an opportunity to know the reasons why and possibly never even find out, how is this 'protecting our Right' vs 'being denied our Right'?

 

If I'm being scammed I want to know about it so I don't waste my time pursuing an appeal or filing again for this person.

 

my understanding is there are no "rights" for obtaining visas. its up to them to give it or not. they are the boss your job is to make a relationship with them so they grant it. understand ?

[splinterman]

I wasn't referring to a Right to obtain a visa. I was talking about, as a US Citizen, a Right to know what evidence or information they obtained/used to accuse us of fraud or misrepresentation, or being a party to that. Understand?

[Guest jin979]

I wasn't referring to a Right to obtain a visa. I was talking about, as a US Citizen, a Right to know what evidence or information they obtained/used to accuse us of fraud or misrepresentation, or being a party to that. Understand?

 

dont think you will get that. rembember if they think or pretend chinese spouse is the fraud or even you they are not going to say which, visa is not about they prove you wrong but you prove right.

 

This has been posted many times its you as couple that must satisfy them, its not just forms but it is feeling to them. denials dont happen for no reason its either bad interview, bad documentation (includes not adressing concerns in paper work before interview) lying in paperwork etc.. etc.. preperation is key. most important is you work together and understand what is needed.

[HKG]

A right to know, what is wrong with a right to know why a petition is denied? Maybe because in "WE the Government" consider it a privilege to obtain a visa, like a drivers license. I hear GUZ is in need of walnut shells the old shells wear out quickly. Why is it "We the People" are the ones that are messing up in our paperwork or interviews or whatever in these highly subjective decisions?

[LeeFisher3]

A right to know, what is wrong with a right to know why a petition is denied? Maybe because in "WE the Government" consider it a privilege to obtain a visa, like a drivers license. I hear GUZ is in need of walnut shells the old shells wear out quickly. Why is it "We the People" are the ones that are messing up in our paperwork or interviews or whatever in these highly subjective decisions?

There were no accusations leveled only a determination concerning a visa, it's not like a court of law where the law provides for you to face your accuser.

[david_dawei]

Is the proof on DOS/GUZ to show why they deny or on the applicant to show why they deserve?

 

I know that someone's going to say, it's on GUZ to state why they deny since it's in various regs or manuals or memos...

 

I'm simply saying; at the very start of this: is it a right to enter the US or a need to show evidence why one should be allowed to enter the US?

 

And who said the USC is being scammed? The couple can be in love... but the government feels they are being 'scammed' by so-called love...

 

The USC is only being scammed in very select cases... it's the governemnt which feels the relationship problem.

[splinterman]

I think most of us have read the regs, Directives, Memos and policy letters the DOS has issued on visa and denial processing, and those who have done this are aware that VOs are not supposed to be making subjective, unsubstantiated or conclusive decisions in granting/denying a visa. So, just a 'feeling' that a VO has about a case is not supposed to be a reason to deny. I think that they certainly do rely on a subjective feeling or reason to deny a visa but they sum it up in a reason as not a bona fide relationship. I'm sure of it.

 

Many times, I believe that a VO cannot find a definative reason to deny a visa other than they have some doubts about the intentions of the beneficiary or even the petitioner. So, they institute a 'waiting game' by denying the visa because they know that if the couple are serious they will marry and/or apply again. I believe this is a test and I agree with many others here that it is used extensively especially in GUZ.

 

Because there are subjective reasons used in denying visas I also believe this is why the DOS makes it so difficult if not impossible to obtain the consular officer's notes or at least their reasons for denying the visa. It doesn't have to be a matter of law such as in a courtroom for a USC to be entitled to this information under the Freedom Of Information Act. We still have a Right to this information. The DOS will not be forthcoming about giving it up and will not make it easy for you to get, but if your name is on the file, you have the right to know what is written there.

 

I know many of you will disagree, and might have all kinds of examples of where the government has refused the disclosure of records, but there are just as many examples of people first being denied information specific to them, challenging it, and then being furnished what they asked for.

 

All of this takes time, and that is really what DOS and GUZ wants to achieve anyway. Make you demonstrate your sincerity and your persistence by applying for the visa again because that also has the benefit of proving you DO have a bona fide relationship with your SO.

 

There are not always some specific reason(s) the VO finds in your file to deny the visa to your beneficiary, and that's why many people here have expressed the opinion that extensive preparation is not a qualifying factor in success or failure. I think it helps but no matter how well you and your SO prepare the paperwork or for that interview, it can still come down to a subjective reason that the VO has about your case.

[Randy W]

I think most of us have read the regs, Directives, Memos and policy letters the DOS has issued on visa and denial processing, and those who have done this are aware that VOs are not supposed to be making subjective, unsubstantiated or conclusive decisions in granting/denying a visa. So, just a 'feeling' that a VO has about a case is not supposed to be a reason to deny. I think that they certainly do rely on a subjective feeling or reason to deny a visa but they sum it up in a reason as not a bona fide relationship. I'm sure of it.

 

Many times, I believe that a VO cannot find a definative reason to deny a visa other than they have some doubts about the intentions of the beneficiary or even the petitioner. So, they institute a 'waiting game' by denying the visa because they know that if the couple are serious they will marry and/or apply again. I believe this is a test and I agree with many others here that it is used extensively especially in GUZ.

 

Because there are subjective reasons used in denying visas I also believe this is why the DOS makes it so difficult if not impossible to obtain the consular officer's notes or at least their reasons for denying the visa. It doesn't have to be a matter of law such as in a courtroom for a USC to be entitled to this information under the Freedom Of Information Act. We still have a Right to this information. The DOS will not be forthcoming about giving it up and will not make it easy for you to get, but if your name is on the file, you have the right to know what is written there.

 

I know many of you will disagree, and might have all kinds of examples of where the government has refused the disclosure of records, but there are just as many examples of people first being denied information specific to them, challenging it, and then being furnished what they asked for.

 

All of this takes time, and that is really what DOS and GUZ wants to achieve anyway. Make you demonstrate your sincerity and your persistence by applying for the visa again because that also has the benefit of proving you DO have a bona fide relationship with your SO.

 

There are not always some specific reason(s) the VO finds in your file to deny the visa to your beneficiary, and that's why many people here have expressed the opinion that extensive preparation is not a qualifying factor in success or failure. I think it helps but no matter how well you and your SO prepare the paperwork or for that interview, it can still come down to a subjective reason that the VO has about your case.

 

You're pretty much right on the money, here.

 

However, the conulates are a whole different ball game - you have no recourse, or anyone to file anything with as long as the case is there (except through the good-will of the consulate - no, I don't mean that as an oxymoron).

 

You DO have access, however, once the case is back in the states (Freedom of Information, court action, etc.), but no guarantees that there will be anything helpful.

[splinterman]

Right on, Randy. Thanks.

 

Though I do wonder if it is always necessary to have to wait until the file gets back to the USCIS before you can get any consular information back under the FOIA. I have a DOS FOIA request going now, mailed it 8 Dec but as of yet haven't gotten a reply, could be a delay because of the holidays. I was asked to provide specific consulate information that I believe would be be used to contact GUZ to try and get the VOs notes.

 

I'll have to wait until I hear from them to be able to answer this question. And I think you're right, the info may be useless anyway, especially if it happens to be the VOs subjective reasons for our denial.

[Randy W]

Right on, Randy. Thanks.

 

Though I do wonder if it is always necessary to have to wait until the file gets back to the USCIS before you can get any consular information back under the FOIA. I have a DOS FOIA request going now, mailed it 8 Dec but as of yet haven't gotten a reply, could be a delay because of the holidays. I was asked to provide specific consulate information that I believe would be be used to contact GUZ to try and get the VOs notes.

 

I'll have to wait until I hear from them to be able to answer this question. And I think you're right, the info may be useless anyway, especially if it happens to be the VOs subjective reasons for our denial.

 

Good luck, there. Let us know how the request turns out - I don't think we've heard of this (DOS FOI) before

[LeeFisher3]

Right on, Randy. Thanks.

 

Though I do wonder if it is always necessary to have to wait until the file gets back to the USCIS before you can get any consular information back under the FOIA. I have a DOS FOIA request going now, mailed it 8 Dec but as of yet haven't gotten a reply, could be a delay because of the holidays. I was asked to provide specific consulate information that I believe would be be used to contact GUZ to try and get the VOs notes.

 

I'll have to wait until I hear from them to be able to answer this question. And I think you're right, the info may be useless anyway, especially if it happens to be the VOs subjective reasons for our denial.

 

Good luck, there. Let us know how the request turns out - I don't think we've heard of this (DOS FOI) before

I would love to see this door opened, the last time I heard someone traveling this path they hit a wall as GZ described the information they had on file as critical to the visa process as disclosure could harm the process they have established in preventing visa fraud.

 

I doubt anyone believes that reason, but they can delay and defer much longer than you and their legal team is limitless at taxpayer expense.

 

The purpose is to get your loved one to the US as quickly as possible, fighting with GZ over a white slip and the law is probably not the most expedient method of accomplishing your goal. And yes it is extremely annoying.