lawyers: need advice administrative review
amys
I hope someone can help. We are stuck in administrative review in
mumbai india for almost 3 months now. Right now we just have vague
responses from the consulate mentioning they need to investigate. They
are not telling us whats the problem. We asked questions what they need
from us and still get the same response. We also had a lawyer do the
paperwork. Nothing is wrong in our case.
My first question can they hold our application for k1 for no reason.
Why are they not telling us why they are holding it. In my opinion
theres no reason to hold it. Do they have to tell us why they are
holding it after 3 months of waiting.
My second question is how long do they have to open and finish the
review. Is their a time limit? I think it might be a year, but
somewhere someone mentioned 6 months. Do they have to do something
within 3 months?
What gets me is that some people get approval the same day while we are
under review for no reason. We have to wait and wait and
wait.........for no fault of our own.
thanks in advance
amy
--
amys
also forgot
Thirdy, can they deny us based on thinking we should not be together
cause we are different race. Can they just deny cause they feel like
it. I thought they can only deny based on criminal record, medical
issues, and other major issues.
Sorry for all of this worrying cause i miss my fiance so much and we did
nothing wrong. We have no idea why this is happening to us and others
are getting their visas on the same day with no problems. I just don't
understand we went by the books and we are delayed. Its mind boggling
and frustrating.
amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
Hi:
No, they can't deny expressly for interracial marriages. That said,
they can deny simply because they are not satisfied.
However, one thing I would NOT worry about is prejudice against
interracial marriages -- as a group, Consular Officers statistically
tend to have more interracial relationships and marriages.
This is a matter of observation on my part.
--
Certified Specialist, Immigration & Nat. Law, Cal. Bar Board of Legal Specialization
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
>
> Hi:
>
> No, they can't deny expressly for interracial marriages. That said,
> they can deny simply because they are not satisfied.
>
> However, one thing I would NOT worry about is prejudice against
> interracial marriages -- as a group, Consular Officers statistically
> tend to have more interracial relationships and marriages.
>
> This is a matter of observation on my part.
This is scaring me, they can deny cause they feel like it. Do they ever
realize how they are hurting the couple that are in love. How can they
make a life changing decision based on their own opinion. Has anybody
been denied cause the consular just decided on a whim that a couple
should not be together. This bothers me so much. I know I shouldn't be
worried but hate to have this happen.
amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
>
> This is scaring me, they can deny cause they feel like it. Do they
> ever realize how they are hurting the couple that are in love. How
> can they make a life changing decision based on their own opinion.
> Has anybody been denied cause the consular just decided on a whim that
> a couple should not be together. This bothers me so much. I know I
> shouldn't be worried but hate to have this happen.
>
> amy
Hi:
I don't think the Consular Officers are out to "hurt people."
Furthermore, YOU have made "a life changing decision based upon [your]
opinion" have you not??
Seriously, the system has long been set up that the consular officer
considering the visa application has been given much in the way of
"gatekeeper" power. Fortunately, most do not abuse that power.
In evaluating the system, it pays to remember that the immigration law
is generally one of "Aliens, stay out" with certain exceptions being
made, and it is presumed that the alien is NOT qualified for the
exception.
And once your past the consular gatekeeper, you have the port of entry
gatekeeper. Unfortunatley, I can't be as confident in the POE
gatekeeper abilities.
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
>
> Hi:
>
> I don't think the Consular Officers are out to "hurt people."
> Furthermore, YOU have made "a life changing decision based upon [your]
> opinion" have you not??
>
> not opinion, i just want facts how they can deny and if this has been
> done before.
>
> What I was trying to get at is that the consular is making a big
> decision based on their opinion that a couple should not be together.
> This is very detrimental if they deny, cause a couple will never be
> together and they could have the best marriage ever. Its scary when
> they can decide your destiny. I am just wondering why we are under
> review when we did nothing wrong and why they need to do this. It just
> makes me wonder what they are thinking about cause if nothing was
> wrong in their "mind" we would have gotten the visa. My mind is going
> crazy thinking this and that.
>
> thanks
> amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
> [i
> I don't get your saying that i made a life changing decision....Its
> not opinion, i just want facts how they can deny and if this has been
> done before.
>
> What I was trying to get at is that the consular is making a big
> decision based on their opinion that a couple should not be together.
> This is very detrimental if they deny, cause a couple will never be
> together and they could have the best marriage ever. Its scary when
> they can decide your destiny. I am just wondering why we are under
> review when we did nothing wrong and why they need to do this. It just
> makes me wonder what they are thinking about cause if nothing was
> wrong in their "mind" we would have gotten the visa. My mind is going
> crazy thinking this and that.
>
> thanks
> amy
Hi:
Love and affection is both a fact and an opinion. A strong one. BTW,
I've been married for a long time.
Also, in my experience, the Consular officers do not evaluate whether a
couple "should" or should not be together -- they consider that beyond
their purview. WHAT they are concerned about is whether or not the
relationship is genuine and not a sham. That is a different matter than
whether you should be together. A law school classmate became a
consular officer and he told me he has seen many marriage cases where he
wondered how in the hell that couple got together, found the
relationship strange, but if it was genuine and not a sham just to get a
green card -- he would grant the case. Lets put it this way, Tom told
me that he saw many cases where he felt the US citizen was being taken
for ride, but genuinely loved "the bastard" [Tom's word, not mine] and
he would grant the visa.
Good luck.
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
>
> Hi:
>
> Love and affection is both a fact and an opinion. A strong one. BTW,
> I've been married for a long time.
>
> response. We are definately not sham and love each other. I just
> hope they see that.
>
> I just hope our review gets over soon. Hey do you know if they have
> to tell me after a certain amount time why we are under review. Also
> whats the time limit for them, at one place I saw that they have 6
> months but I think its more like 1 year. Its hard for me to know when
> they are going to review, its a waiting game.
>
> amy
--
Andrew DeFaria
> Furthermore, YOU have made "a life changing decision based upon [your]
> opinion" have you not??
>
> Seriously, the system has long been set up that the consular officer
> considering the visa application has been given much in the way of
> "gatekeeper" power. Fortunately, most do not abuse that power.
Lacking the traditional smiley, come on! She made a decision to change
her life based on her opinion. That's a world of difference to somebody
making a decision to change somebody else's life (in this context) based
on their 3rd party opinion.
Andrew DeFaria
> Also, in my experience, the Consular officers do not evaluate whether
> a couple "should" or should not be together -- they consider that
> beyond their purview. WHAT they are concerned about is whether or not
> the relationship is genuine and not a sham. That is a different matter
> than whether you should be together.
Please give me an example of a couple that "should" be together but is
also a "sham". You see to most rationally thinking people the two just
doesn't mix. If the marriage is a sham then, by definition it's not a
marriage where the couple "should" be together.
> A law school classmate became a consular officer and he told me he has
> seen many marriage cases where he wondered how in the hell that couple
> got together, found the relationship strange, but if it was genuine
> and not a sham just to get a green card -- he would grant the case.
> Lets put it this way, Tom told me that he saw many cases where he felt
> the US citizen was being taken for ride, but genuinely loved "the
> bastard" [Tom's word, not mine] and he would grant the visa.
Yes, whether or not the consular officer feels the marriage will fall
apart in a short time or if say the lady is taking the man simply for
his money should not (idealistically) be of concern to the consular as
far as the administration of immigration law is concerned. In reality
though I believe that many consular officers are not like your friend
and will attempt to hold up a marriage that they just don't think
"should" be together. Of course this is a very grey area and hard to prove.
For the life of me, however, I can't see how not fully disclosing the
issues involved in the consular's decision to go for administrative
review helps anybody at all! I would think that most people would want
to know if the consular feels that the beneficary is attempting entry to
the US merely for an immigration benefit and would be more than willing
to offer additional evidence that this is not so (or be unable to offer
additional evidence that this is not so). IOW how does keeping the
issues from the beneficary and petition serve anybody?!?
Andrew DeFaria
> I just hope our review gets over soon. Hey do you know if they have to
> tell me after a certain amount time why we are under review. Also
> whats the time limit for them, at one place I saw that they have 6
> months but I think its more like 1 year. Its hard for me to know when
> they are going to review, its a waiting game.
I think they can take as long as they want. After 1 year, however, the
embassy will consider the petition abandoned. In my case my petition was
sent back to the service center in the US for administrative review.
They just sat on it for a year. I emailed the embassy in an attempt to
get an official explaination in writting for the reason for the refusal
to issue the visa. I got it. It was not at all helpful simply stating
that the petition was returned to the service center for administrative
review. But there was a little fine print there saying that after 1 year
the embassy will consider the petition abandoned. I emailed the embassy
again telling them that it was not my fault that this petition was being
held up and that I was employing everything within my means to get a
status of my petition in administrative review but the INS had not
budged one bit. The embassy granted me another attempt at a visa with no
promises. We went back out there and they interviewed my fiancée, asked
a few questions and let her pass.
My advice is to be persistent and a pain in the ass to anybody involved
in this decision constantly asking for a status, what's the hold up,
etc. Let them know that you are indeed interested and impatience. After
all, IMHO you have a right to know what's going on and what's delaying
the process (after all this is your government!). Offer assistence in
anything they ask for (they won't). There is nothing wrong with doing
this IMHO. If you show no interest they will assume that it was a sham
and just let it abandon by itself.
Good luck.
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by donahso:
> Amy...do a search on here for "mumbai" and you will find yourself
> in good company. You story is familiar to folks who have been here
> for awhile. For some reason, that consulate lets the toadies run
> the place.
>
> Don't give up! You will get the visa after you cow-tow and grovel
> enough to suit them. They are just a bunch of sadistic bastards
> (opinion based on reports from other victims). Hang tuff and play
> their game. I'm sure some of the other successful victims will chime
> in if they see 'Mumbai" in the subject line.
>
> -Don H
Hi:
Please forgive me, but LOL.
Jan Pedersen in Washington DC is the AILA national maven on consular
practice. When she lectures at our various CLE seminars, she
emphasizes the need for the atorney to "grovel." I've teased Jan that
what she means is that while you are being assertive, you have to be
exceedingly polite.
I usually take the line of "You are correct, BUT ..."
With the INS, I used to take the line of responding to what they said
rather than what they meant. But I found a while back that that is no
longer effective. Sigh.
donahso
Amy...do a search on here for "mumbai" and you will find yourself in
good company. You story is familiar to folks who have been here for
awhile. For some reason, that consulate lets the toadies run the place.
Don't give up! You will get the visa after you cow-tow and grovel enough
to suit them. They are just a bunch of sadistic bastards (opinion based
on reports from other victims). Hang tuff and play their game. I'm sure
some of the other successful victims will chime in if they see 'Mumbai"
in the subject line.
-Don H
--
amys
If you show no interest they will assume that it was a sham
and just let it abandon by itself.
Good luck.
Thanks Andrew, thanks for your advice. At first I didn't inquire much,
but now I am getting pissed. I have inquired via the congressmans
office twice. I also emailed them twice. All four times I received the
same letter stating they just have to investigate, same exact letter. I
asked specifically what is the hold up and they don't tell me nothing.
(I hope this was enough asking to prove that we love each other).
I will be asking under the freedom of information act why we are under
review. This will be hard for them cause theres no reason to hold us.
Now I will be emailing and calling once a week now to see what the hell
is going on over there. At first I didn't think it was good to bug them
but now this is getting out of hand, 3 months of this BS.
I might call a lawyer to help me with this process, maybe they can have
a pull. Maybe if the consulate sees that I payed more for a lawyer they
might think Gee this girl is in love.
Andrew I had read your pass experiences and you went through the ringer.
Please email me at am...@adres.nl for any advice and how
you went about finally getting her visa. I just need to know what more
I can do now. This is ridiculous.
amy
--
Andy Platt
> I will be asking under the freedom of information act why we are under
> review. This will be hard for them cause theres no reason to hold us.
Not really. The purpose of the review is to determine if there is anything
bad; sending it for administrative review can be done on a whim
unfortunately. All the FOIA request will show is what they have to review
which may be nothing but that won't stop the process until they review it! I
don't want to put you off making the request though - at the very least it
will allow you to know if there is something they have wrong or if there is
something they do know that you don't.
Andy.
--
I'm not really here - it's just your warped imagination.
amys
[. All the FOIA request will show is what they have to review
which may be nothing but that won't stop the process until they
review it! I
don't want to put you off making the request though - at the very least
it
will allow you to know if there is something they have wrong or
if there is
something they do know that you don't.
Andy,
You would think they would have a "kind heart" and tell me what is going
on and why are they holding my life up. I think I deserve an
explanation why. I am us born citizen and so surprise that my own
government is treating me like this. So many people do not realize how
they treat us. I don't get nothing out of the consulate like we are
sorry this is what we need to do. Nothing from them, nothing. They
don't care about me and my well-being even though I pay tons of taxes
and good law-abiding citizen and active in the community.
What I don't understand is why they want to review us when we did
nothing wrong and let others go with a 10 minute interview and get
their visa the same day. How come they believe one persons story over
another one.
Its so hard for me to be home alone while my love is so far away from
me. We did nothing wrong and we are getting punished cause we love
each other.
All of this does not make sense, we followed the rules and not
getting no where.
amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
> I will be asking under the freedom of information act why we are under
> review. This will be hard for them cause theres no reason to hold us.
>
>
Hi Amy:
I agree that inquiries are a good thing. However, the ONE thing you
should NOT do is to invoke the Freedom of Information Act [FOIA].
Section 222(f) of the Immigration & Nationality Act makes the visa
records of the Department of State "confidential" and the Department
STRONGLY takes the position that this trumps FOIA. Once you attempt to
invoke FOIA, you will get no response whatsoever lest the Department
even has the appearance of complying with a FOIA request.
A lot of immigration law is counterintuitive -- and this is one of those
areas -- asking for information under FOIA is asking for them to clam
up and give you nothing.
By all means, keep asking, express interest. Always be polite in
your requests [honey works better than vinegar], but forget the FOIA
even exists.
Good luck.
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
> Hi Amy:
>
> I agree that inquiries are a good thing. However, the ONE thing you
> should NOT do is to invoke the Freedom of Information Act [FOIA].
>
So what should I do, just keep on inquiring via congressman and myself
via phone calls, emails and faxes. I just feel that it would be humane
and common courtesy why we are under review and how long we should wait.
I don't think I am asking a miracle from the consulate. Just want to
know why we are held up so long without a peep from them.
Since your a lawyer, can a lawyer help me out further. Remember I had a
lawyer before but declined in using one for further help cause of money.
Now I am thinking I should have a lawyer to help out now and forget out
about the money cause this means so much to me.
thanks amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
Hi:
In your particular case, I have no idea if a lawyer would be
helpful or not. These cases are particularly frustrating to
members of the bar also.
My practice doesn't include marriage cases through the consulate in
India. If you were my client, I would first make inquires among the
immigration bar about their experience. We have a quite well developed
"gossip" network which predates the internet!
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
>
>
> Hi:
>
> In your particular case, I have no idea if a lawyer would be helpful
> or not. These cases are particularly frustrating to members of the
> bar also.
>
> I am in an unusual circumstance. That even lawyers are mind boggled
> on these cases. I just can't believe I am stuck in this mess and no
> "higher-ups" can protect a us citizen.
>
> What immigration bar are you talking about. I did a search on the
> internet and seem not to find a good one. If you can tell me which
> one is helpful cause boy I need help.
>
> Also would going to the state department of consular affairs be
> helpful such as Christine Rocco for the asian affairs.
>
> Before I was not doing much but now I am fired up cause of this long
> delay and no answers from them at all. To me it looks like game
> playing, thats what they are doing.
>
> thanks so much amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
Hi:
If you were my client, I would contact Alan Kaye in New York at 212 964
5858. If anyone can help you, it would be him. If he says "nothing can
be done" -- I would trust him on that one.
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
> If you were my client, I would contact Alan Kaye in New York
>
>
> people start calling this guy up and bothering him.
>
> How about consular affairs of the state dept, would I have luck there.
>
> thanks amy
--
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by Matthew Udall:
> He was treated with respect and issued his K-1 visa on 09/26 and is
> not here in the U.S. (and will be married very soon).
>
Oops, typo. That should read, he is "now" here in the U.S.
--
amys
Hey Matt, For your client you were talking about earlier, when was the
first noa from INS, cause i am thinking if it was a long time from the
first noa till the interview they had time to do the background
checks. I am trying to figure out what is going on with my case, why
it took only 2 months for your client and mine is taking 3 months and
possibly forever.
amy
--
amys
Originally posted by Matthew Udall:
>
>
> I'm coming into the middle of your story, so I don't have all of the
> facts, but when did your fiancée first go for his interview (where he
> was turned away without his visa)? Was it recently (within the past 3
> to 4 months)?
>
>
> Hello Matt,
>
> Your clients must be very happy that he is here and she must be on top
> of this world. Jump right in the conversation, need any help and
> advice I need. I was kind of shock that your client got an interview
> date after his initial interview. See we didn't get that and not to
> happy about this aspect. Kind of inhumane to keep us hanging without
> and date set.
>
> I am the amy from way back in august. I thought you remember that I
> posted alot before in august/september time. I have been posting alot
> before. My fiance had his interview first week of August at mumbai
> and was never told for another appoinment date. How nice is this. So
> we are left in the hanging, don't know when we will ever be called.
> We don't know why we are under review.
>
> I asked specifically myself personally and via congressmans office if
> this is for security checks. They just responded only we need to
> investigate. Thats it just need to investigate. Nothing for
> security checks.
>
> If it was for security checks we should have gotten a call by now
> cause your client received his visa already.
>
> My fiance has never been married, no children, never been to usa and
> never previously applied for another visa.
>
> All i have is children and they can't believe he loves me cause i have
> children blah blah. they were very very rude
>
> amy
--
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by amys:
Hi Amy,
I'm coming into the middle of your story, so I don't have all of the
facts, but when did your fiancée first go for his interview (where he
was turned away without his visa)? Was it recently (within the past 3 to
4 months)?
The only reason I ask is that there are many Consulates that stopped
issuing K-1 visas around the end of July, and some of those
beneficiaries were told their cases were being "reviewed". I don't
believe this review, in all cases, is a true "administrative review" but
perhaps (and this is pure speculation on my part) is just a way of
getting the beneficiary to leave without his or her visa (when the
Consul knows full well they cannot issue the visa now due to the fact
that they have been directed not to issue visas "until" all of the
security checks have come back).
One of my beneficiaries was not given his K-1 visa on 07/31/02 at the
Consulate in New Delhi (and there was a lot of reports about this same
problem at the posts in India about this same time). The Consul told him
they were going to "review" the case since he thought the beneficiary
and petitioner were lying, and that due to their particular facts they
"did not make a good couple" (impossible for them to be in love... and
why didn't he, the beneficiary simply find a nice Indian girl to marry
in an arranged marriage).
My beneficiary, however, was given a date to go back to the Consulate
(on 09/26 if memory serves… he was given this date to return at the
conclusion of his first interview). During the time between his visits
to the post, I sent a fax and letter to the head of that particular
Consulate to let him know what had happened and to express my concerns
(and to argue the equities of the clients situation). The petitioner,
beneficiary and I also put our heads together and put together a new
evidence package with quite a few various items to address the Consular
officers concerns that they were not a good couple who could be in love.
We also had to put together a new I-134 affi pack since the petitioner
changed jobs between the bene's first and second visit to the Consulate.
He was treated with respect and issued his K-1 visa on 09/26 and is not
here in the U.S. (and will be married very soon).
So how do you "know" it’s an "administrative review" and not simply some
sort of review excuse while they wait for security checks to come back?
Did they ever indicate another date for him to contact them? By the way,
does your fiancée have a very common name? Had he ever been married
before? Has he any children (regardless of whether or not he has been
married before)? Has he been to the U.S. before?
If he wasn’t given a date to return or contact them, I'd probably start
communicating with the Consulate every month or so, asking if there is
any news about when your fiancée will be called in again, and also
restate the problem and explain the equities of your case.
Good luck.
Oh, I've recently had an I-129f approved at the CSC, and the beneficiary
will be processing through Mumbai. Should be fun :-).
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
--
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by amys:
Originally posted by amys:
I don't think the first NOA from the INS would trigger the Consulate to
do anything as the Consulate would not even be aware of the case at that
time. The Consulate only becomes aware of the case once a cable is sent
from the INS to them, or the attorney contacts them, or the original
materials (I-129f petition and supporting documentation) arrives to the
Consulate from the Service Center.
But since you want to know the dates, I'll give them to you.
The notice date on the first NOA was 04/05/02, from the VSC (and we had
cable sent in this case).
The notice date on the approval notice was 04/30/02.
The original interview at New Delhi was on 07/31/02, and his second
visit was on 09/25/02. At the conclusion of that second visit, he was
told to come back the next day to pick up his visa. He did just that,
and obtained his visa on the 26th.
Good luck.
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by amys:
>
> Hello Matt,
> I asked specifically myself personally and via congressmans office if
> this is for security checks. They just responded only we need to
> investigate. Thats it just need to investigate. Nothing for
> security checks.
>
> If it was for security checks we should have gotten a call by now
> cause your client received his visa already.
>
> My fiance has never been married, no children, never been to usa and
> never previously applied for another visa.
>
> All i have is children and they can't believe he loves me cause i have
> children blah blah. they were very very rude
>
> amy
to remember non-client’s postings (and therefore, sometimes don’t
remember) on the board as I have so many details to keep track of
already for my own clients. Sorry.
If all they said was they needed to "investigate" (again, speculation on
my part), to me that does not necessarily mean "administrative review".
They used the "investigate" word with my clients too, but they were not,
as far as I can tell, put into an "administrative review".
I don't agree with your assumption that if it were for security checks,
you would have received a call by now due to the speed in my client's
case. Each case is different, and it might take whatever agency is
giving the security report to the Consulate a different amount of time
to do create and supply their report. Also, my client went through New
Delhi, not Mumbai, and during this transition, maybe both posts put in
their security check requests at different rates, or at different parts
of the process (both your and my case came during a "transition" phase
from the old process to the new process).
My petitioner has children too, and was one of the reasons the
Consular officer said my bene could not love her. My petitioner's kids
knew the bene very well through personal meeting, and I had them both
write letters to the Consulate describing their affection for the
bene, and his affection for each of them, and details about the time
they spent together.
Good luck.
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by amys:
I don't think the first NOA from the INS would trigger the Consulate to
do anything as the Consulate would not even be aware of the case at that
time. The Consulate only becomes aware of the case once a cable is sent
from the INS to them, or the attorney contacts them, or the original
materials (I-129f petition and supporting documentation) arrives to the
Consulate from the Service Center.
But since you want to know the dates, I'll give them to you.
The notice date on the first NOA was 04/05/02, from the VSC (and we had
cable sent in this case).
The notice date on the approval notice was 04/30/02.
The original interview at New Delhi was on 07/31/02, and his second
visit was on 09/25/02. At the conclusion of that second visit, he was
told to come back the next day to pick up his visa. He did just that,
and obtained his visa on the 26th.
Good luck.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by amys:
> Hey Matt,
>
> who is on review sayed there are other people interivewed recently got
> approved,
>
> amy
Hi Amy.
Obviously we are both speculating here, but my speculation is a little
different than yours.
Above, you mention people "interviewed recently". Well, they stopped
issuing visas when they "started" the transition phase between the old
and new policy (the new policy being the Consulate no longer has the
authority or discretion to issue the visa if the security check does not
come back in a certain amount of time). This stoppage happened at the
end of July, so your fiancée was right at the beginning of the new
policy just like my client was (and thus, were caught up in the new
policy at the very last, when the new policy barely had come on line).
People interviewed "recently" might have had the security checks come
back as their case materials likely arrived to the Consulate once the
new policy was "already" on line (not so for your case and my
client's case).
Maybe I’m not expressing my speculation clearly. Let me try again. Those
caught up in the new policy, who were going to their interviews shortly
after the new policy came on line; in my opinion, will likely experience
(or feel like they are experiencing) a longer delay than those whose
cases arrive at the Consulate after the new policy came on line (and
before their interviews had been scheduled).
I don't know why my client was given his next appointment date and your
fiancée wasn't, however keep in mind that we are talking about two
different U.S. Consulates in India, Mumbai vs. New Delhi.
I don't believe for one minute that the Consuls are treating couples
where one of the parties is not Indian, differently than couples where
both parties are both Indian (but that's just my take on it from
experience.... I believe most Consulates are staffed by some of our
brightest Foreign Service personnel, and I don't believe they would
discriminate based on this reason alone).
Good luck with your case.
amys
Hey Matt,
I don't think its for security checks because my fiance and another who
is on review sayed there are other people interivewed recently got
approved, cause they had the perfect "indian mating" no prior marriage,
same culture, no age difference, no kids, same everything. They get a
10 minute interview with no problems and get visa. Thats why I believe
its not for security checks. They are blowing smoke on the ones they
don't feel should be together. Thats my opinion. They are trying to
prove a point that if you are the perfect indian couple your fine, we
will be nice to you. But anything unusual of the indian context your up
against a fight for your life.
We have no age difference, hes little older than me so age is no
big problem.
amy
--
amys
(I believe most Consulates are staffed by some of our brightest Foreign
Service personnel, and I don't believe they would discriminate based on
this reason alone).
Matt lets hope so that they are bright, so they can figure out that we
are in love and that this process of whatever this review is is
hurting me alot.
So you think that we are caught in the wrong timing. Kind of that we
are forgotten about, when they were changing over. Its like INS, if
you caught in an audit or they randomly pull your petition for further
checks. I guess we are the unlucky ones during this time.
I am trying to reason why we are under this review and how long this
painful process will go on.
amy
--
amys
Matt
Also forgot to mention someone got approved 9/10/02 at mumbai. Here we
had interview first week of august and its now october 22nd. Go figure
this out. How come they got approved now and we are still
waiting.......
Also another mumbai victim mentioned that his wife had interview middle
of august, they are under review now and others who had perfect indian
union that day walked with their visa.
Thats why i don't believe its security checks or like you sayed we are
caught in the wrong timing and left behind to suffer.
amy
--
Andrew DeFaria
> Thanks Andrew, thanks for your advice. At first I didn't inquire much,
> but now I am getting pissed. I have inquired via the congressmans
> office twice. I also emailed them twice. All four times I received the
> same letter stating they just have to investigate, same exact letter.
> I asked specifically what is the hold up and they don't tell me
> nothing. (I hope this was enough asking to prove that we love each other).
Who did you ask? The congressman. So the congressman knows. (So you have
inept congress critters too. I know that feeling). They've made inquires
to where exactly? The consulate or the INS. If the INS then the INS
knows and not the consulate. If the consulate then they know and not the
INS. Your search is to find who is responsible for making the decision
and make sure that they now you will not give up the fight. Telling
everybody else probably won't hurt.
> I will be asking under the freedom of information act why we are under
> review. This will be hard for them cause theres no reason to hold us.
You can make a FIOA request. It will not tell you why you are under
review! It will, however give you a level playing field in that you will
have all the info that they have (except any classified info (my isn't
that convenient) and any info in their heads). It's where you can build
a case should you need to. I got two FIOA reports. They didn't help.
> Now I will be emailing and calling once a week now to see what the
> hell is going on over there. At first I didn't think it was good to
> bug them but now this is getting out of hand, 3 months of this BS.
>
> I might call a lawyer to help me with this process, maybe they can
> have a pull.
IMHO lawyers have little, if any, pull. IME (In My Experience - haven't
used that one before) lawyers are way too content to sit and wait for
the government to shi^h^h respond. After all it a lot of work (pulling
teeth comes to mind) and why do that when you client has already paid
you and all you need to is wait? Good luck finding a lawyer willing to
pursue this agressively.
> Maybe if the consulate sees that I payed more for a lawyer they might
> think Gee this girl is in love.
How would the consulate know what you paid for a lawyer? Really? You
gonna send them a copy of your bill? Actually if the consulate or INS
see you being persistent (polite but persistent) they will know that you
are serious and that's all you need - or that's about all you can do.
> Andrew I had read your pass experiences and you went through the
> ringer. Please email me at am...@adres.nl for any advice and how you
> went about finally getting her visa. I just need to know what more I
> can do now. This is ridiculous.
I got the visa exactly as I expressed it before. I emailed the embassy
and told them not to abandon my petition due to inaction, that I was
acting all I can but was impeeded by the INS. I had had several emails
and conversations with Warsaw in the beginning and occasionally
throughout the ordeal. It was a total shock that they granted us another
interview. Perhaps it was because I filed a complaint against the, IMHO,
abusive consular officer (I don't think that complaint every really got
filed - I asked for acknowledgement but never received it). Maybe it was
because I did enlist my congressman to contact the embassy a few times.
In any event I think that my persistence was more than evident with the
consulate and I guess they figured that if I was that persistant then
they really doubted that my fiancee's intentions were fraudulent. I
don't know. You can ask them if you like - I'm done with them.
Andrew DeFaria
> You would think they would have a "kind heart" and tell me what is
> going on and why are they holding my life up.
You would think that they would be smart and recognize than more often
than not these admin review things are mistakes that just need to be
cleared up and that sharing information and requesting additional
information is the way to clear them up.
> I think I deserve an explanation why.
I felt the exact same way.
> I am us born citizen and so surprise that my own government is
> treating me like this.
I felt the exact same way. But remember, they will say that it is not
them treating you like this rather it is them administering immigration
law against a non-US citizen that's the problem. Of course anybody with
have a brain would realize that such situations have a direct impact on
the US citizen too.
> So many people do not realize how they treat us.
The only people who realize how they treat "us" (i.e. people going
through the immigration ringer) are people who are going through the
immigration ringer. Most other Americans only think of immigration and
illegal, oftimes Mexican workers. Most Americans do not know a think
about immigration law, process and problems.
> I don't get nothing out of the consulate like we are sorry this is
> what we need to do. Nothing from them, nothing. They don't care about
> me and my well-being even though I pay tons of taxes and good
> law-abiding citizen and active in the community.
Totally understandable (from my perspective).
> What I don't understand is why they want to review us when we did
> nothing wrong and let others go with a 10 minute interview and get
> their visa the same day.
If they knew you did nothing wrong then they wouldn't be holding you up
for administrative review. That's the whole point! They think there's
something wrong (lacking they are doing this on a whim).
> How come they believe one persons story over another one.
Because it's more plausible or has more compelling evidence. Let me ask
you this, have you ever believed one persons story over another one?
Sure you have. Same reasons.
> Its so hard for me to be home alone while my love is so far away from
> me. We did nothing wrong and we are getting punished cause we love
> each other.
I know exactly how you feel. It is hard. Do things to help you cope.
Keep the pressure up. It is all you can do at this moment.
> All of this does not make sense, we followed the rules and not getting
> no where.
From my reading of the law there is a section which states that the
consular officer can send some thing for admin review and can keep
things secret. It's closely related to other, much more extreme things
like spying and marriage fraud rings, etc. Doesn't seem to me that such
individual questionable relationships should fall under these secrecy
clauses but they are lumped in there. I guess they are thinking that for
all they know, you and your loved one may be trying to commit
immigration fraud and may be associated with a marriage fraud ring. I
know you're saying "Preposterous! Can't they see that we are just two
people in love?" and I'd tend to agree with you.
The other reason why they may wish to keep this secretive is that they
may think that while you are in love your lover is part of a sham
unbeknownst to you and that by revealing such information to you might
cause you to do something stupid or violent.
Finally they may think that you and your lover are indeed committing
immigration fraud and given information that they know about what they
suspect might be your angle you might be able to cover your angle and
fabricate evidence to satisfy them but still commit immigration fraud.
That's the only reasons I can think for such secrecy.
Andrew DeFaria
Originally posted by amys:
I will be asking under the freedom of information act why we are under review. This will be hard for them cause theres no reason to hold us.Hi Amy:
I agree that inquiries are a good thing. However, the ONE thing you should NOT do is to invoke the Freedom of Information Act [FOIA].
Section 222(f) of the Immigration & Nationality Act makes the visa records of the Department of State "confidential" and the Department STRONGLY takes the position that this trumps FOIA. Once you attempt to invoke FOIA, you will get no response whatsoever lest the Department even has the appearance of complying with a FOIA request.
A lot of immigration law is counterintuitive -- and this is one of those areas -- asking for information under FOIA is asking for them to clam up and give you nothing.
karen
on at the mumbai consulate. My husband and I have been in
"administrative review" since January of this year. This is a
ridiculous amount of time to have to wait! My husband happens to be
muslim too....hmmmm wonder why he's not getting a visa!!! When i try
to contact the consulate they email me back the same exact thing that
they always have. The senator's assistant is just dumbstruck that
this is happening, but as Folinsky said, basically there is nothing we
can do as the "little man". The consulate's decision is final, and if
they ruin someone's life that's ok.
I have learned after waiting so long that there is nothing I can do.
Trying to contact the Consulate and beg them for answers just makes
them enjoy their jobs a little more. And yes they do enjoy harrasing
people Mr Udall. They laughed at our wedding pictures and told my
husband that his father looked paralyzed in the pictures.. You don't
call that discrimanatory and harrasing? Not even 2 emails to Theodore
Andrews has helped...he has done absolutely nothing. So when you say
that the aren't discrimanatory I don't think you've had enough
experience with the embassy to realize there are some people that work
at the Mumbai Consulate that shouldn't be there....especially the
indians with their already discriminating class conscious ways.
Now I'm done with my whining....hey at least we're in 1st place for
the longest wait in history for k3! whoopppeeeeee
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by Andrew Defaria:
> one for me and one for my fiancee. My fiancee's was 100 pages
> and mine was
> 50 pages. Boring stuff really. IIRC one 1 page was censored.
> for non-compliance.
> They have 20 days to respond or they need to provide a
> reasonable explanation
> as to why they need more time (too many documents to process)
> along with
> a time table.
>
>
Hi:
Out of curiosity -- who responded to your FOIA? The INS is required to
respond to a FOIA. So, you should be able to get a copy of the
petition. I have gotten DOS visa records WHEN they have been provided
to INS. In fact, the FAM instructs consular officers to be careful in
writing stuff they send to INS because, unlike internal DOS stuff, it is
subject to disclosure.
If your FOIA went to Department of State, I'm curious as to the
jurisidiction in which you live and when you made the request.
amys
This is great they think we are in immigration fraud. Why would they
even think this, i am in the medical profession plus have children. Why
would I risk my profession and risk my job and childrens future if I was
trying fraud.
It makes wonder why my own govet thinks I am fraud. I would I risk my
life to fly there in turmoil times to meet him and fall in love over the
two years.
What I don't get what makes them think we are in a ring or something
like that.
I can handle anything professionally if they suspect something. It does
not make sense to me.
amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by Karen:
> on at the mumbai consulate. My husband and I have been in
> "administrative review" since January of this year. This is a
> ridiculous amount of time to have to wait! My husband happens to be
> muslim too....hmmmm wonder why he's not getting a visa!!!
>
Hi:
I don't know your case. My comments above are general in nature.
However, there ARE instances of running into the Consular Officer From
Hell. From personal experience I've run into exactly two of them. I
KNOW that they lied about what happened in the immigrant visa interview.
Although it may not seem like much of a benefit, it is better being in
"review" than having a 212(a)(6) denial. At least the case is still
pending and you may be able to arrange for a new interview with a
different ConOff.
The problem you run into is that there is strong legal and managerial
presumption accorded a government official of "regularity in presumption
of their duties." [I know that the actual real presumption often goes
the other way in real life -- but I'm talking about law and internal
management here -- I worded the preceding sentence quite carefully].
These issues have to be approached quite gingerly -- anger can get the
door to the US welded shut -- right now you are in the position of the
door is simply locked and you have to either find the key or pick the
lock -- which takes time [sigh].
I suggest you hire a lawyer who has experience in actually dealing with
the consulates in India on difficult cases. And it is NOT me. However,
if an particular attorney does a LOT of work through a particular
consulate, they can often establish a personal rapport or reputation for
veracity that might help you. I once had established such a rapport
with an Asian IV chief that once upon an intitial refusal, he asked in
my FIRST phone call [and no followup faxes] what my evaluation of the
case was -- I told him -- and he said, "OK, tell your client to come in
tomorrow to pick up his visa." It was after I had hung up that it
struck me that our two years of long conversations and correspondence,
he had learned to trust me -- I had never called him an idiot, never
said his juior officers were wrong, just lacking information, and in
this one case it finally paid off. [BTW, the few denials that I was not
able to overcome, this conoff convinced me that my client had lied to me
-- not that I would have ever admitted that to him -- but he was
cognizant of the fact that I was bound by rules of advocacy].
Good luck.
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
>
> Thanks so much Folinskyinla. I will try to find a lawyer that has
> good reputation with the consulate. I might have to go to new york
> city cause where I live theres not many lawyers that can handle mumbai
> or don't even have experience in this unfairness. I have to make a
> trip nyc, i live about 3 hrs from the city.
>
> You scared me when you sayed that they can say anything what happened
> in the interview. Its there word against yours and guess what the
> government is going to believe the consular.
>
> Should I ask spefically for another interviewer and another date set.
> This seems so unfair in life.
>
> Do you have any more ideas that come to your mind. Everything little
> bit of information I get will be helpful. It feels like I am for a
> big fight of my life. You would think the consular would have some
> kind of smartness to him to believe we are in love.
>
> What kind of education do these consulars have or are they off the
> street kind of job? Hmmm makes you wonder if no education how can
> they make a big decision like this.
>
> amy
--
amys
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
>
>
> Hi:
>
> 964 5858. If anyone can help you, it would be him. If he says
> "nothing can be done" -- I would trust him on that one.
>
Hey Folinskyinla
I called the lawyer and will have a phone consultation with me. I did
not get a chance to ask him if he has experience with mumbai consulate
or that he knows how to deal with difficult people. Does he have good
experience?
amy
--
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by Karen:
> people Mr Udall. They laughed at our wedding pictures and told my
> husband that his father looked paralyzed in the pictures.. You don't
> call that discrimanatory and harrasing?
>
Hi Karen,
In my posting, I said it was my belief that they are not harassing
couples just because one may be Indian and the other one is not of
Indian descent. That's all. And of course, that is my "belief"; I'm not
stating empirical data from a statistical analysis of any kind.
In my case, the original officer made rude comments to my client too
(on his initial interview/visit). Rude people are nothing new, but my
job is not to change their behavior but rather to help my bene get his
visa. I care more about getting the visa than whether or not there are
rude officers out there (because there are some rude ones out there...
a fact of life).
I made my waves, and supplied more evidence. My client was then treated
with respect and received his visa either because of the waves I
created, or it was the fact that they had to wait for security
clearances to come back (which obviously must have come back).
And remember, this recent "problem" case was at New Delhi. I've
processed many cases through Mumbai in the past too, none had any
problems; however I've just had a case approved at the CSC that will be
going to Mumbai soon, so we'll see if they treat my client badly. If
they do, I'll do for this client what I did for my clients in New Delhi.
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by amys:
> street kind of job? Hmmm makes you wonder if no education how can
> they make a big decision like this.
>
> amy
I've heard there are a large number of people who take the Foreign
Service exam (lots of competition), and naturally the brightest are
selected. Many PHD'S in the lot (but that's just what I've heard).
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by Matthew Udall:
>
>
> Service exam (lots of competition), and naturally the brightest are
> selected. Many PHD'S in the lot (but that's just what I've heard).
>
> Regards,
> Matthew Udall
> Attorney
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
Just to clarify, I'm talking about the actual U.S. Citizen Consular
officers, not the local foreign service nationals they often hire to do
much of the "front end" or ministerial jobs that must be done at a
Consulate.
--
amys
Originally posted by Matthew Udall:
>
>
>
> processed many cases through Mumbai in the past too, none had any
> problems; however I've just had a case approved at the CSC that
> will be going to Mumbai soon, so we'll see if they treat my client
> badly. If they do, I'll do for this client what I did for my
> clients in New Delhi.
>
> for not asking more money when someone goes on review.
>
> I had a lawyer previously and did not get further help unless i payed
> more BIG bucks.
>
> I feel so cheated in life, you charge a very good and reasonable rate
> and I wish I had you as a lawyer. Now I have to pay more and more for
> something my previous lawyer should have done. I will never recommend
> my old lawyer for no one. Now I have to pay for another lawyer in
> which I should have gotten help from the previous one. How cruel life
> can be. I guess my family will not be eating well this month or two.
>
> This kind of upsets me that I have to pay tons of money for something
> that should have been given to me(visa).
>
> amy
--
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
>
> Hey Folinskyinla
>
> I called the lawyer and will have a phone consultation with me. I did
> not get a chance to ask him if he has experience with mumbai consulate
> or that he knows how to deal with difficult people. Does he have good
> experience?
>
> amy
Hi:
AILA publishes the Consular Processing Guide. The AILA powers that be
have chosen Alan to write the chapters on the consulates in India. His
is the person **I** would call if I ran into problems with India.
On the educational & training level of consular officers -- they are
the result of a highly competive examination and selection process.
All are college grads, many with graduate degrees. A fair number have
law degrees.
However, in the Foreign Service, the "consular cone" is considered the
least desirable of the various Foreign Service career "cones." Also,
many new Foriegn Service officers rotate through the various "cones"
before going into the final one. I understand that the various
poltical, economic and other diplomatic cones are considered much sexier
and appealing than consular work. Within the "consular cone" work on
the visa line is considered the least desirable.
So the officers on the visa line in high volume posts are usually quite
junior, often on their first tour of duty. So the problems I have
usually witnessed have been more to youth and inexperience rather than
being nasty. But overall, I give the consular officers high grades --
if they were not, on the whole, competent people, their absolute power
would be even more frightening.
The best consular officers I encountered on the visa line have been
those who entered the Foreign Service as a second career. They have
been uniformly wonderful in my experience -- their decision making
process is tempered with prior "real world" experience.
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by Folinskyinla:
>
> AILA publishes the Consular Processing Guide. The AILA powers that be
> have chosen Alan to write the chapters on the consulates in India.
> His is the person **I** would call if I ran into problems with India.
>
Originally posted by amys:
> I just want to make sure that a lawyer actually made a guide for the
> consulate people to go by. I am surprised a governmental agency will
> allow a lawyer to create a guide for them.
>
> Again thanks for his number and I hope he can help me out.
>
Amy, he's talking about an AILA (American Immigration Lawyers
Association) publication that is available for purchase by AILA members.
I'm an AILA member, and I've been purchasing that publication (called
the Visa Processing Guide), as well as the publication called "The U.S.
Consular Posts Handbook" each year as new editions are released.
These publications are not publications that are used by the government,
but instead are used by other immigration attorneys dealing with various
U.S. Consulates around the world.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
--
Matthew Udall
Originally posted by Matthew Udall:
> And remember, this recent "problem" case was at New Delhi. I've
> processed many cases through Mumbai in the past too, none had any
> problems; however I've just had a case approved at the CSC that
> will be going to Mumbai soon, so we'll see if they treat my client
> badly. If they do, I'll do for this client what I did for my
> clients in New Delhi.
>
Originally posted by amys:
> Matt, you are such a good lawyer who will help your clients especially
> for not asking more money when someone goes on review.
>
> I had a lawyer previously and did not get further help unless i payed
> more BIG bucks.
>
> I feel so cheated in life, you charge a very good and reasonable rate
> and I wish I had you as a lawyer. Now I have to pay more and more for
> something my previous lawyer should have done. I will never recommend
> my old lawyer for no one. Now I have to pay for another lawyer in
> which I should have gotten help from the previous one. How cruel life
> can be. I guess my family will not be eating well this month or two.
>
> This kind of upsets me that I have to pay tons of money for something
> that should have been given to me(visa).
>
> amy
Not all attorneys have the same sort of fee arrangements with their
clients. I just so happen to “usually” bid my fiancée work as a flat
rate fee. I know from experience how much time and effort goes into a
typical case where the INS or Consulate don’t screw up along the way or
need some sort of follow up (I estimate around 12 to 15 hours on such a
case), and I’ve tried to keep my rates low. But if a case needs many
more hours of additional follow up work due to an INS or Consulate screw
up I follow up for no additional fee as that is the deal I struck with
my client at the outset.
However, some attorneys charge based on their hourly rate (typically in
the area of $125.00 per hour and up). If your old attorney were on an
hourly rate with you, it would make sense that he or she would charge
additional fees for additional work. So what sort of deal did you strike
with your attorney when you originally hired him or her? Was there any
discussion at the outset as to what duties/responsibilities/tasks would
be covered by the fee (if flat rate) and what would not be covered?
If you end up hiring this new attorney for something other than a
consultation, you might want to come to an agreement as to the fee
structure (flat rate or hourly) and discuss exactly what is and what is
not covered. You might want to even ask about what type, or the
frequency of follow up (with the Consulate) that the attorney thinks
would be appropriate or willing to do under certain contingencies.
Good luck with resolving your problem case.
amys
[However, some attorneys charge based on their hourly rate (typically in
the area of $125.00 per hour and up). If your old attorney were on an
hourly rate with you, it would make sense that he or she would charge
additional fees for additional work. So what sort of deal did you strike
with your attorney when you originally hired him or her? Was there any
discussion at the outset as to what duties/responsibilities/tasks would
be covered by the fee (if flat rate) and what would not be covered?
Matt Udall
The lawyer I had basically had me fill out the retainer and the last
paragraph it mentioned about that they will require another retainer if
additional work needs to be done. OK well I told the lawyer from the
beginning that I know the consulate has been known to give a hard time
and that the lawyer told me that I will see the light at the end of the
tunnel. The lawyer never thought I would have trouble.Yeah right,
theres no light yet and I thought the lawyer could of helped me but I
guess its no big deal for the lawyer.
God, I hope this misery will end for me, it hurts me so bad that we did
nothing wrong and my own govt thinks i am fraud. How can I live knowing
this, that my love can;t be with me.
amy
--
Andrew DeFaria
Still I think a FOIA on the INS could serve to at least get you about as much information as you can as to what possible problems there might be.
Andrew DeFaria
> This is great they think we are in immigration fraud. Why would they
> even think this, i am in the medical profession plus have children.
> Why would I risk my profession and risk my job and childrens future if
> I was trying fraud.
What makes you think they are suspecting you? Perhaps they merely
suspect your fiance.
> It makes wonder why my own govet thinks I am fraud. I would I risk my
> life to fly there in turmoil times to meet him and fall in love over
> the two years.
Because you are in love. Maybe they feel he's on in love and playing you.
> What I don't get what makes them think we are in a ring or something
> like that.
Maybe they don't think your in the ring. Maybe they think he's in the
ring. Or maybe not even a ring at all but just pure and simple document
fraud somewhere along the line.
> I can handle anything professionally if they suspect something. It
> does not make sense to me.
Perhaps you're just looking at it the wrong way. Then again, more likely
they are just mistaken like the other 99.99% of the cases held up. This
is where, IMHO, more full disclosure and less secrecy would help a lot
(on their part that is).
Folinskyinla
Originally posted by amys:
>
> I just want to make sure that a lawyer actually made a guide for the
> consulate people to go by. I am surprised a governmental agency will
> allow a lawyer to create a guide for them.
>
> Again thanks for his number and I hope he can help me out.
Hi:
AILA is the American Immigration Lawyers Association, a private
organization. The Association started in 1946 as the Association of
Immigration & Nationality Lawyers. Due to dissatisfaction with the
acronym, there was a plebiscite of the membership in 1983 or 84 and the
vote was to change the name to the Immigration & Nationality Lawyers
Association with the American Immigration Lawyers Assoication coming in
second. Someone pointed out the acronym problem with with winning name,
so AILA it is.
The Visa Processing Guide is a publication of the Association. It is
not available on-line. Each chapter is written by an attorney who does
a lot of work with the consulate in question and includes an interview
with a senior official in the post. The rough draft of each chapter is
sent to the post inviting their further comments. I used to be "Mr.
Seoul" for the earlier editions.
When I have a question about a particular post, before I contact them, I
call the author of the applicable chapter in the Visa Processing Guide.