i130 Why would an I130 application be forwarded to a local office when the beneficiary is not in the USA?

[SalishSea 16,748]

Was he present in the United States when you filed?  Since they requested his passport, could they be under the impression that he is still here?

[K & R 343]

I agree with the above information that has been given too. I also suggest having a good talk with your spouse just to make sure there is nothing on his part that would surprise you at the interview . Good luck! ☺️

[R&OC 348]

The worst is the factor distrust and I from what I hear now is that you are unsure how you feel about this situation.

 

Sending you all my best wishes for a swift resolution.

 

PS: By the way, I had one thought and it may not relate to your case. Different cultures have different interpretations of truth. I see that my business negotiations sometimes. 

[geowrian 22,335]

52 minutes ago, Jorgedig said:

Was he present in the United States when you filed?  Since they requested his passport, could they be under the impression that he is still here?

I was wondering the same thing, but it sounds like the interview notice is only for the I-130 and was addressed to the petitioner. If they thought it was an AOS case, there would be an I-485, the notice is actually sent under the name of the beneficiary, etc. It just sounds like this is purely for an I-130, in which the beneficiary being present isn't necessary.

 

It is possible - as others noted - for the petitioner to be called in for an interview. This is clearly noted in the I-130 instructions. It is quite rare, though. Nothing jumps out as a reason/cause for it here, so all the OP can do is be prepared.

It's also possible they ran a background check and a hit came up, potentially for somebody else. It's far from the first time this happened.

 

53 minutes ago, R&OC said:

Different cultures have different interpretations of truth.

This is so wrong.

...but it is also accurate.

[Mollie09 1,543]

He may have stated in the tourist visa application that he was married to "ensure" he got the visa, we've seen that here before, usually from people receiving (bad) advice.

[josandme 6]

14 hours ago, s007rrt said:

I honestly didn't 100% quite understand it based on our discussion and the paperwork. It had something to do with funds (not enough to support) and a flight ticket. I don't think it was misrepresentation.

This sounds like an arrival and he was deemed inadmissible. Was this before or during your relationship? 

If that is correct was he ordered removed?  If so he has a ban for a period of time, at least 5 years. 

If he HAD a visa and it was revoked or cancelled when he tried to arrive in usa there will me some numbers written in his passport. what are they? for example, 212) (a)(7)…. 

[SalishSea 16,748]

1 minute ago, josandme said:

This sounds like an arrival and he was deemed inadmissible. Was this before or during your relationship? 

If that is correct was he ordered removed?  If so he has a ban for a period of time, at least 5 years. 

If he HAD a visa and it was revoked or cancelled when he tried to arrive in usa there will me some numbers written in his passport. what are they? for example, 212) (a)(7)…. 

No bar if he voluntarily withdrew his application for admission.

[s007rrt 7]

1 hour ago, R&OC said:

The worst is the factor distrust and I from what I hear now is that you are unsure how you feel about this situation.

 

Sending you all my best wishes for a swift resolution.

 

PS: By the way, I had one thought and it may not relate to your case. Different cultures have different interpretations of truth. I see that my business negotiations sometimes. 

Yes the distrust part is for another day and forum, I suppose. I have a distrusting spirit about EVERYTHING AND PEOPLE (lol!) If you can message me your thought, that would be fine. I probably don't need another thought to execute in my min (ha)

[s007rrt 7]

3 minutes ago, josandme said:

This sounds like an arrival and he was deemed inadmissible. Was this before or during your relationship? 

If that is correct was he ordered removed?  If so he has a ban for a period of time, at least 5 years. 

If he HAD a visa and it was revoked or cancelled when he tried to arrive in usa there will me some numbers written in his passport. what are they? for example, 212) (a)(7)…. 

Hello, it was before the relationship and yes. 212(a) (7) (i) (I) ...you do not have sufficient funds to support yourself while in the United States. Therefore you can not overcome presumption of an intended immigrant.

[josandme 6]

2 minutes ago, Jorgedig said:

No bar if he voluntarily withdrew his application for admission.

read again what I actually wrote. I was accurate in what I said. 

 

6 minutes ago, josandme said:

If that is correct was he ordered removed?  If so he has a ban for a period of time, at least 5 years. 

 

[josandme 6]

 

4 minutes ago, s007rrt said:

Hello, it was before the relationship and yes. 212(a) (7) (i) (I) ...you do not have sufficient funds to support yourself while in the United States. Therefore you can not overcome presumption of an intended immigrant.

Ok, what year?  was he ordered removed? It will say that also in his passport more than likely.

 

 

Edited February 23, 2019 by josandme

[s007rrt 7]

2 minutes ago, josandme said:

 

Ok, what year? He has a ban, probably for 5 years.  You must overcome that ban if the 5 years has not yet passed. 

 

Nope it has not been 5 years since the date of that notice. Okay, noted. Thank you.

[SalishSea 16,748]

11 minutes ago, josandme said:

read again what I actually wrote. I was accurate in what I said. 

 

 

I did read what you actually wrote.  How do you know he was removed?  Like I said, if he withdrew his application for admission, there would be no bar.

[s007rrt 7]

2 hours ago, Jorgedig said:

Was he present in the United States when you filed?  Since they requested his passport, could they be under the impression that he is still here?

No he was not present in the USA when the application was filed. 

[Illiria 980]

Also seen this happen when petitioner had the same birthdate and name and current city as someone who was convicted of a crime (think it was a awa covered crime but not sure) so they had to go and do biometrics to show they weren’t that person. Freaky but it happens.