Stepbrow Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 This subject has come up many times, and Randy has brought up court cases that clearly support the Principle Consular Non-Reviewability. So that door is closed. There is a back door though: One thing that we are not made aware of is that all Visa Refusals are reviewed. According to '9FAM42.81PN1.5 Submit Case to Supervisor Review' All refusals must be reviewed by the Consular Supervisor (who us usually the IV Chief). It states that the Supervisor must review the refusal on the day of the refusal, or at least within 30 days. Based on the review, the Supervisor must either confirm the decision or disagree. If they disagree they must either send the case for an advisory opinion or assume personal responsibility for the case and reverse the refusal decision. If you get a white slip, this is your only chance for a reversal before your case hits stateside, and you appeal with the USCIS. If you go this route you must be prepared to do your homework. Demand a meeting with the ConOff. Ask him/her specifically what are all the reasons for the decision.You and your SO have this right per 9FAM42l81PN1(show a copy to him/her) Alternately, grill your SO on exactly what where the questions asked so that you can prepare responses and provide documents if available. For example, let's say the ConOff said that she did not believe that you have a Bonifide Relationship because your SO cannot speak English. Go get a video cam and tape a conversation you have, and submit that as overcome evidence. Take a copy of the above mentioned Regulation, and also 9FAM42.81PN1(5). Best of Luck Link to comment
chilton747 Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 http://candleforlove.com/FAQ/revocation_1.jpg This is my then fiancee's actual white slip. You can see where it says that if the petitioner or beneficiary contacts the Consulate then no specific information will be provided nor will any additional documents be accepted. This is contrary to the FAM code. Link to comment
BilLing Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Thanks for the research Stepbrow. Any history of success with this approach? I am scheduled for the ACH Feb 9. Am sceptical initally for, frankly, I fear pissing them off before they get my responding CR1. The following is a response from a popular legal resource here that I had asked concerning the same subject: "Hi XXXX, Got your email from XXXX @ Candle. We're listed as BilLing there. We were white slipped on Dec 30th. K-3. NBFR Am headed to China in 2 weeks and Guangzhou ACH on the 9th. Have resigned ourselves to going the CR1 route as we believe we clearly understand our red flags. That said, have a quick question if you will please. What is the best way to approach the consulate during the ACH so we can have revealed our red flags for certain? Is that a possibility? Thanks" "Hi. Sorry you were refused. There are four possibilities: The problem is on your side OR It's on her side OR It's on both sides OR the consulate has just screwed up. If it's on your side, they have probably spotted something in a data base. You play the where's the ex game with consulates. If you've been divorced, are you still sharing assets or debts with the ex or anyone else? Have you co-signed loans? Is anyone living at your home or using your address for anything? Does anyone have your address on the bank account, cc's, voter registration, property records or drivers' license?Is the phone in your name? Those are the typical problems. If it's on her side, does she have relatives in the US? If she's divorced, where's her ex? Who lives with her? Would someone write a poison pen letter about her? I've also seen GUZ deny a lot of visas where there is no good reason. Those cases often seem to have children of the beneficiary who are getting close to aging out. Those are the things the consulate is looking at. Clear them up for them. That's the best approach. All the Best" Link to comment
Randy W Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 IR2 Visa Denied 11/21/05 I won't spoil the ending Link to comment
BilLing Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Randy that was 2005 with clear violations of policy and procedure. The blood was still fresh too. Possibly a better question would be "recent evidence of success?" Regardless, excellent story of success. Thanks for sharing it. Link to comment
Stepbrow Posted January 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Thanks for the post Randy. Link to comment
Randy W Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Randy that was 2005 with clear violations of policy and procedure. Not by the consular staff The blood was still fresh too. Possibly a better question would be "recent evidence of success?" Regardless, excellent story of success. Thanks for sharing it. That should give you a strong indication of how often it happens. In the stories we've heard more recently, the American citizen was given hardly more than what was stated on the white slip. The response most typical would be, "The case is locked down" Link to comment
BilLing Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 so you are saying this approach is "moot". or has Stepbrow uncovered something new? Link to comment
Randy W Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 so you are saying this approach is "moot". or has Stepbrow uncovered something new? Like he says, If you get a white slip, this is your only chance for a reversal before your case hits stateside, and you appeal with the USCIS But usually, GUZ is on a "Don't call us - we'll call you" basis, if the case is still open Stepbrow found a side entrance to the consulate, and also that they have their lines down pretty pat. Link to comment
BilLing Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 so there is no "recent evidence of success"? Link to comment
Randy W Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 so there is no "recent evidence of success"?None that I'm aware of Link to comment
BilLing Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 so were looking for a "beta" here? a pilot? sacrificial lamb? please understand I am interested, however, cautious.....risk seems great....GUZ has me paranoid now... the entire issue is revelation of denial reasons...as a K-3 I'm told my "odds" of receiving these are fair once the file is returned stateside....California notwithstanding....living with the delay is painful....but pain is the price of admission.... i just want to know why.......if I can expedite this I will.... then I'll fix it.... so much gray.... Stepbrow, i admire your tenacity.....Randy, your contribution of time and insight... Link to comment
splinterman Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 This subject has come up many times, and Randy has brought up court cases that clearly support the Principle Consular Non-Reviewability. So that door is closed. There is a back door though: One thing that we are not made aware of is that all Visa Refusals are reviewed. According to '9FAM42.81PN1.5 Submit Case to Supervisor Review' All refusals must be reviewed by the Consular Supervisor (who us usually the IV Chief). It states that the Supervisor must review the refusal on the day of the refusal, or at least within 30 days. Based on the review, the Supervisor must either confirm the decision or disagree. If they disagree they must either send the case for an advisory opinion or assume personal responsibility for the case and reverse the refusal decision. If you get a white slip, this is your only chance for a reversal before your case hits stateside, and you appeal with the USCIS. If you go this route you must be prepared to do your homework. Demand a meeting with the ConOff. Ask him/her specifically what are all the reasons for the decision.You and your SO have this right per 9FAM42l81PN1(show a copy to him/her) Alternately, grill your SO on exactly what where the questions asked so that you can prepare responses and provide documents if available. For example, let's say the ConOff said that she did not believe that you have a Bonifide Relationship because your SO cannot speak English. Go get a video cam and tape a conversation you have, and submit that as overcome evidence. Take a copy of the above mentioned Regulation, and also 9FAM42.81PN1(5). Best of Luck Stepbrow, this information about a conoff's decision being subject to a supervisory review-usually immediately on the same day of the decision or as soon as possible afterward-and it's legal basis was contained in the legal brief my attorney forwarded to the IV Chief as well as my congressional representative when my fiancee was denied the K1 visa on 8/21/08. The brief was ignored and not even acknowledged by the IV Chief. To date, there has been no response to the brief from GUZ. It was 'blown off' just like every complaint/concern about what takes place in GUZ everyday when our beneficiaries attend these interviews (more like interrogations) that we wait months to get and only moments to conclude. Now, maybe if a USC is present in Guangzhou when the interview takes place they may have a SLIM chance to use this information to try and change a refusal, but I'm sure I recall one of your earlier posts mentioning about your meeting with the actual VO who conducted your SO's interview where you asked her 'how soon after a refusal is that refusal reviewed by the IV supervisor' and she told you that they are not reviewed. So, if there is ANY chance at all of getting this part of the FAM observed in any case, it can only be for those who are there in GUZ when the interview happens. Unfortunately, not everybody can do that. But every single one of us who petitions for our SO's to be granted a visa are entitled to the same treatment, whether or not we are in Guangzhou when the interview takes place. So, that is GUZ procedural policy and although it violates the FAM it is obvious that GUZ violates that and the other regs, policy letters, directives, etc., with impunity because nobody is requiring them to adhere to the provisions of law when adjudicating petitions. Guangzhou is looking the other way, and the rest of the system is too. This is exactly the nature of the Great Injustice that is happening everyday in Guangzhou, and this is EXACTLY what our congressional representatives are supposed to put an end to when we make them aware that it's happening. Not just roll their eyes and say, "Ohhh, GUANGZHOU!!!" when you tell them that's why you're there for their help. And I also wonder, where is the DOS and the USCIS Inspector General's office in all this? They know it's happening because I am damn sure the statistics, as well as other information that's coming out of GUZ is telling them. Are our visits, emails, telephone calls, etc. to our congressmen saying anything different or are they just being ignored also because there's not enough of them to warrant an investigation? Why aren't the congressional representatives contacting the IG's office and asking them to look into what is happening at this consulate? Maybe working on this aspect of the problem is better served once our SO has gotten a visa and is safely in the USA (but is there really a 'safe' time?) before we start pushing these buttons, but I don't believe there is one CFL member out there who DOESN'T think something needs to be done to change the way business is being conducted in Guangzhou. I have a meeting Tuesday with a congressional aide and these are the things I intend to discuss with him. These are the problems I want his office, and his boss my Senator, to undertake. It won't give me any help to get my SO here, but it just might do some good for that poor, naive bastard who is just beginning his petition to bring his wife/fiancee here and has no idea of the world of shit that is about to hit him square in his face. Link to comment
BilLing Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 here's to the NEXT poor, naive bastard.... DUCK!! Link to comment
heyjimi Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 This subject has come up many times, and Randy has brought up court cases that clearly support the Principle Consular Non-Reviewability. So that door is closed. There is a back door though: One thing that we are not made aware of is that all Visa Refusals are reviewed. According to '9FAM42.81PN1.5 Submit Case to Supervisor Review' All refusals must be reviewed by the Consular Supervisor (who us usually the IV Chief). It states that the Supervisor must review the refusal on the day of the refusal, or at least within 30 days. Based on the review, the Supervisor must either confirm the decision or disagree. If they disagree they must either send the case for an advisory opinion or assume personal responsibility for the case and reverse the refusal decision. If you get a white slip, this is your only chance for a reversal before your case hits stateside, and you appeal with the USCIS. If you go route you must be prepared to do your homework. Demand a meeting with the ConOff. Ask him/her specifically what are all the reasons for the decision.You and your SO have this right per 9FAM42l81PN1(show a copy to him/her) Alternately, grill your SO on exactly what where the questions asked so that you can prepare responses and provide documents if available. For example, let's say the ConOff said that she did not believe that you have a Bonifide Relationship because your SO cannot speak English. Go get a video cam and tape a conversation you have, and submit that as overcome evidence. Take a copy of the above mentioned Regulation, and also 9FAM42.81PN1(5). Best of Luck theoretically perhaps,in reality,i doubt,anyone has a chance in hell,getting it reversed by the chief.It is like having a police officer turn in another fellow police officer,of corruption.The chief is not going to reverse it,otherwise you would hear of cases being reversed,imagine getting this letter "dear sir,we are sorry,but your denial,i have found to be unwarranted,have your wife (or fiancee) ...i mean ...your beneficiary,come down for another interview....or come and pick up your visa".....i mean your reading,what the rules should be.......what the rules are is different than what they should be.this is obvious.but hey,having said that ,its a shot, by all means,its worth pursueing.never give up the fight !!!!!! jimi Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now