Non-bonafide rulings

[C4Racer]

I give up with this guy

 

A long long time ago.

 

HKG, you are missing the boat. Let me give you a little analogy. You are like in a boat out in the middle of the South China Sea in a typhoon. Now, you are lucky because this boat has a captain and crew who are well versed with storms, weathering many storms and typoons before. It is also filled with a group of people who are more than happy to help you get through to the other end. Now, you find yourself going outside on deck to piss into the wind. You close the door forgetting the life line inside, so now you have no one to help you and you risk being swept overboard, never to be found again.

 

Yes, non-bonafide relationship is a legal term. Yes, it is one GUZ seems to use quite often. You are tackling this like they have burden of proof. Not the case.

 

You have the burden of proof. You must prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that your relationship is a true relationship. The burden of proof is on you and your spouse/fiancee.

 

No one in their right mind would shift the burden of proof. The argument is not if they can use non-bonafide relationship or not, but how much proof do you need, what kind of proof do they need and how much disclosure must they provide. This is the battle we must fight and one we are losing at this time.

 

Marc Ellis, on burden of proof

 

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2006,0323-ellis.shtm

 

 

I am quite aware of this article. I also don't get the same read you got. I understand the consulate appears to have a large burden of proof, however if you go into this thinking you are set because they can't disprove, then you are sorely mistaken. One of two things will happen.

 

One, they will dig up something you didn't expect and was not available to DHS at time of approval. Thus shooting you down.

 

or Two, you will not supply enough evidence of a relationship, so they will shoot you down due to lack of evidence. How can they do this? Quite simple, you are applying for a family visa, they will simply show you didn't maintain enough contact or can't communicate well enough between each other that any reasonable person would suspect that this relationship is only for the purpose of securing a visa. Therefore, the burden of proof gets shifted back to you during the wait period and interview.

 

The whole point of the article and what I have been argueing with many on this board for way longer than you have tried to get your visa is to front load the I-129 petition:

I¡¯ve only addressed the petitioner¡¯s side of the relationship. There are other red flags that can afflict the beneficiary. But the point to remember is that consulates are not supposed to deny family-IV applications for reasons that were generally available to DHS at the time of approval, so tell DHS in advance of any potential red flags when you file the petition. That doesn¡¯t guarantee consular officers won¡¯t find other reasons unknown to DHS, but at least you will have served your client well by disarming the obvious landmines in his or her path. And you will make the consular officers work by forcing them to examine each and every fact asserted in the petition to see if DHS had knowledge of the information used to justify the recommendation for revocation.

 

Front load the petition and you stand a much better chance with GUZ. You still must prove to them you have a valid relationship. Prove to them the relationship is valid as you would any reasonable person and chances are on your side. Fail that, GUZ only has to tell DHS you lack a relationship. Remember, with DHS you only had to prove meeting in person one time. No where in the paperwork are you told you must show a true relationship. This is the one piece left up to the discretion of both the VO and IO.

 

Don't assume just because you get through GUZ that you are done proving your relationship. Sorry, but this is just the start. You will have to prove it time and time again at each stage of the game. This is the only reason for an interview during AOS. They want to see proof of an ongoing relationship. Then removal of the conditions. You usually can get away with submitting documents that show you are financially tied together, but still they are looking for continuation of a relationship. Even if she were to file for citizenship. If she files at three years based on marriage to a USC. Guess what? You must submit more proof of an ongoing relationship. I don't understand where you get the idea that you don't have to prove it, but this is the one piece of the puzzle that is all on you and yours. The burden of proof of a relationship is all on you. It is only for other reasons of denials that GUZ is held to such strong evidence.