NOIR Letters for CR-1/IR-1 - CSC

[ellis-island]

Hi. Someone came to me today with an NOIR letter from CSC.
It had sat 20 months. That is fast in my experience.

Some observations, the Service Center adjudicator seemed to
take the consular officer's observations at face value, even the
silly ones.

So maybe this case is an anomaly. Or maybe CSC is speeding up
on CR-1/IR-1's. From what I can see, K-1's are still a black hole.

If it is speeding up, it may be because some USCIS adjudicators may merely
be accepting the consulate's conclusions as "legally sufficient" and sending out an NOIR letter, no matter
how legally insufficient, or even downright silly, the consulate's conclusions may have been.

[Sebastian]

IIWY, I would not make any opinion based on 1 case. But - since it's YOUR case - I would (again, IIWY) question and query each and every step , comment, finding and ruling, that occurred at GUZ - ask for facts, ask for 'supervisors comments' and ask for GUZ ConOff's 9FAM quotings -

 

then try to match up all that was 'said' in GUZ with what was 'quoted' in 9FAM, and then, only then, find the anomolies.

 

I don't have to tell you how to do your job, right? Others have great faith in you and yer ability to read, do research, use personal contacts to dig for information, use great research skills to show how 'silly stuff' is not promulgated as policy .

 

Right?

Edited April 20, 2009 by Sebastian (see edit history)

[ellis-island]

This is merely a warning that CSC may have speeded up the sending out of NOIR letters for CR-1/ IR-1's. That means petitioners have to have their cases ready.

 

Having a case ready means translations - especially of emails, chats, letters, etc must be already be prepared. USCIS does not accept untranslated Mandarin documents. And translations must be accompanied by a certificate. It also means all copying must be done (2 copies minimum), one to hold back and one to send to USCIS. Finally, it means the rebuttal argument must be nearly finalized.

 

In GUZ and some other consulates, it's more difficult because the consulate plays "hide-the-ball". In HCMC the reasons and relevant FAM sections are set out in the DS-194. But I've done at least a thousand interviews from consulates around the world. Probably a lot more. It's rare when I can't figure out what the consulate is looking at in a case.

 

name='Sebastian' date='Apr 20 2009, 01:02 AM' post='488602']

IIWY, I would not make any opinion based on 1 case. But - since it's YOUR case - I would (again, IIWY) question and query each and every step , comment, finding and ruling, that occurred at GUZ - ask for facts, ask for 'supervisors comments' and ask for GUZ ConOff's 9FAM quotings -

 

then try to match up all that was 'said' in GUZ with what was 'quoted' in 9FAM, and then, only then, find the anomolies.

 

I don't have to tell you how to do your job, right? Others have great faith in you and yer ability to read, do research, use personal contacts to dig for information, use great research skills to show how 'silly stuff' is not promulgated as policy .

 

Right?

[LeeFisher3]

We do appreciate your input, especially in the more difficult areas of the process.

 

Thanks for the heads up.

[ellis-island]

Once a case has been definitely returned from GUZ to the

Service Center, P really needs to get to work on translations -

if there are any. If you're chatting in yahoo in Mandarin,

you could have hundreds, thousands of pages of chat.

How are you going to translate all that in a week or two?

 

You'll need to pick & choose. Choose one or two chats

a week, translate them. Ditto for emails. I'd translate all

post-marked letters.

 

But the worst case scenario is for P to have an NOIR letter

arrive, giving him 30 days to respond and he has thousands

of documents yet to translate.

In revocations - it is not merely enough to prove the consulate

is incorrect in its conclusions. You have to prove your relationship

is bona fide all over again.

 

A USCIS adjudicator could conclude that the consulate has

the facts wrong and yet still revoke your petition, because

you have not proven your case.

 

For instance, in a case where the consulate alleges in its

memorandum that a beneficiary is actually carrying on a

marital relationship with her ex-husband.

 

Petitioner is conclusively able to prove the ex-husband has

remarried and had a child with his new spouse and is living 2000

miles away from the beneficiary.

 

OK. Point for Petitioner. But if Petitioner has not returned in 3 years.

If he has not written a letter or sent an email in 3 years. If he produces

scant evidence of telephone contact. Or even worse,

if he has all that evidence of email and postal contact, but has

not had it translated, USCIS won't consider it when he submits

it.

 

Even though a petitioner has successfully overcome the consulate's concerns,

he could fail to prove his case. And the petition's approval

is likely to be revoked.

 

It's not enough to submit an affidavit stating your marriage is real.

Once your case is returned, start arranging for translating chats, emails and letters.

Don't wait around for an NOIR letter.

 

This is especially urgent if Service Centers are speeding up

the revocation process. I can't say they are. But I've

seen at least one case that moved comparatively fast.

Edited April 28, 2009 by ellis-island (see edit history)

[whome?]

Once a case has been definitely returned from GUZ to the

Service Center, P really needs to get to work on translations -

if there are any. If you're chatting in yahoo in Mandarin,

you could have hundreds, thousands of pages of chat.

How are you going to translate all that in a week or two?

 

You'll need to pick & choose. Choose one or two chats

a week, translate them. Ditto for emails. I'd translate all

post-marked letters.

 

But the worst case scenario is for P to have an NOIR letter

arrive, giving him 30 days to respond and he has thousands

of documents yet to translate.

In revocations - it is not merely enough to prove the consulate

is incorrect in its conclusions. You have to prove your relationship

is bona fide all over again.

 

A USCIS adjudicator could conclude that the consulate has

the facts wrong and yet still revoke your petition, because

you have not proven your case.

 

For instance, in a case where the consulate alleges in its

memorandum that a beneficiary is actually carrying on a

marital relationship with her ex-husband.

 

Petitioner is conclusively able to prove the ex-husband has

remarried and had a child with his new spouse and is living 2000

miles away from the beneficiary.

 

OK. Point for Petitioner. But if Petitioner has not returned in 3 years.

If he has not written a letter or sent an email in 3 years. If he produces

scant evidence of telephone contact. Or even worse,

if he has all that evidence of email and postal contact, but has

not had it translated, USCIS won't consider it when he submits

it.

 

Even though a petitioner has successfully overcome the consulate's concerns,

he could fail to prove his case. And the petition's approval

is likely to be revoked.

 

It's not enough to submit an affidavit stating your marriage is real.

Once your case is returned, start arranging for translating chats, emails and letters.

Don't wait around for an NOIR letter.

 

This is especially urgent if Service Centers are speeding up

the revocation process. I can't say they are. But I've

seen at least one case that moved comparatively fast.

 

This leads to an interesting situation also for someone married and living in China but has to return back to the USA before the spouse's interview. For example: a person lives with his spouse in China for 8 months and then returns to USA while they await the spouse's interview at GUZ. the interview is 4 months later. will they be expected to provide documenation of conversations, meetings, etc. during those 4 months even though they lived together in China? I would assume that they would be viewed differently as someone who has DCF while living in China.

[Guest jin979]

hey Mark,

 

good to see you posting here, on the other had bad to see you and the other lawyer guy ars now so frustrated with GUZ, that you need us.

 

Hope you and the other guy, plus the smart ones here can work out a good plan.

[ellis-island]

hey Mark,

 

good to see you posting here, on the other had bad to see you and the other lawyer guy ars now so frustrated with GUZ, that you need us.

 

Hope you and the other guy, plus the smart ones here can work out a good plan.

 

Hi. I'm not frustrated with GUZ. I expect it to operate exactly the way it is operating. After all, it's the State Department.

 

I'm a little perturbed that DHS is not fulfilling its statutory role of training consular officers in immigration law and supervising the immigration process at consulates. And I'm baffled that DHS has so thoroughly botched the question of review & revocation of K-1's.

 

But I always expect DOS to be DOS. It's been a model of dysfunctional Federal bureaucracies for decades, if not centuries. Presidents and political parties come and go. But DOS remains as unchanged as Gibraltar.

 

The good news is - DHS can come in and shake things up at consulates. The bad news is - It hasn't done it. And I don't think DHS even knows it has that authority to do it under Sec. 402 & 428 of the Homeland Security Act.

--

Concerning whome's post, there would be documentary evidence of the 8 months petitioner lived in China. And that could be presented at the interview with phone bills, etc.

 

I was talking about post-refusal cases, post return to USCIS. So whome's scenario is not as bad of a case as someone whose case has been returned, sitting around waiting for an NOIR letter and then upon receiving it, discovering he has nothing translated for USCIS.

 

If your case is sent back - start working on translations.

And continue to work on them as the chats, letters, etc., accrue.

It's important.

Edited April 28, 2009 by ellis-island (see edit history)