Does NVC keep track of previous CEAC applications? [merged threads]

[pushbrk 12,247]

13 minutes ago, roughlyworried said:

Understood. Is the embassy likely to have a problem with conflicting information on the I-130 and DS-260? I would think they would question the whole validity of the I-130, but I’m not sure. If they ask her, what should her approach?

Her "approach" would be to tell the truth.

[roughlyworried 5]

1 hour ago, pushbrk said:

Her "approach" would be to tell the truth.

Naturally. I’ve always told the truth when it comes to this. That’s why on those DS-160s for tourist visas I always put that we were married.

 

 I also noticed we missed an apartment she stayed at for a few months on the I-130. I can’t believe I missed these and forgot about them. Its definitely ok to not correct the errors on the I-130 but just put all the correct information on the DS-260? Both the missing address and the missing job?

[pushbrk 12,247]

2 minutes ago, roughlyworried said:

Naturally. I’ve always told the truth when it comes to this. That’s why on those DS-160s for tourist visas I always put that we were married.

 

 I also noticed we missed an apartment she stayed at for a few months on the I-130. I can’t believe I missed these and forgot about them. Its definitely ok to not correct the errors on the I-130 but just put all the correct information on the DS-260? Both the missing address and the missing job?

Yes, and if asked about either, tell the truth.

[roughlyworried 5]

10 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

Yes, and if asked about either, tell the truth.

Ok. I am thinking of all the possible scenarios to perhaps prepare. I’m also realizing there are some dates (such as when she quit college, and what we put on the DS-160, as well as her moving in date of the missing address, and employment end date). Some of these in regards to dates I know won’t line up between the DS-160 to the DS-260 because we simply don’t remember. Forgive me for my worrying, but this all seems like it could blow up. 

[roughlyworried 5]

32 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

Yes, and if asked about either, tell the truth.

Not if you would particularly know this, maybe you do, but for the DS-160 (we submitted 3 different ones), that has the conflicting information, we never scheduled interview. I wonder if it would even show up in their system? And if it does, if it’s even counted since we never attended an interview so the information was never tied nor verified by my wife to actually be correct since I know if you make a mistake on a DS-160, your supposed to just make a new one for an interview. I’m still correcting the address and employment on the DS-260. But it is an Interesting thought, in the manner if my concerns are even valid.

[roughlyworried 5]

On 9/8/2022 at 4:00 AM, Chancy said:

 

Purpose of travel for a prior B1/B2 application is not relevant for current immigrant visa application, so no need to worry about that at all.  As for missing entries for part-time jobs, also not significant, unless those missing jobs were related to prostitution, drug/human trafficking, or terrorist activity.

 

 

The consul officer is not likely to ask about addresses and employment in the applicant's native or resident country.  If the applicant ever lived or worked in other countries AND does not have the corresponding police certificates, the CO might ask about it.  In my case, I mentioned in a prior tourist visa application that I had been assigned for work abroad, but I did not list any foreign addresses in the DS-260 for my spouse visa application.  The CO asked me about it, but he made it clear that he was only interested in any overseas stays 6 months or longer.  When I said that I traveled abroad only for short business trips, he was fine with it and didn't ask further.  I suspect he only asked to see if I needed to submit additional police certificates.

 

As for the likely interview questions at Guangzhou, check the consulate reviews here -- https://www.visajourney.com/reviews/index.php?trim=no&cty=&cnty=China&page=1&dfilter=5&topic=IR-1/CR-1 Visa

 

Coming back to this since I now have more information on what exactly I did. Late 2020, we did a tourist visa application, and we did correctly list the jobs and addresses. We paid for and scheduled an interview which was then cancelled by the embassy for staffing issues.

 

two days after it was cancelled we did ANOTHER application, this is time we listed her new job (the one missing from the I-130) as WELL AS listing an address she had for about 4 months that we didn’t forgot to list on the I-130 as well. For this DS-160, we didn’t schedule an interview

 

10 days after the second DS-160, we submitted another application for a consulate nearby. I’m not sure at all what info I put in this one, but I assume it was the same as the second one since nothing was really different, but I’m not sure. This one as well, we didn’t even schedule an interview for. 
 

to recap, first one DS-160 we filed for, we got interview for that was cancelled. All the info in this one is correct.

 

Second and third DS-160, I’m not sure what info I put, except that from chat messages with my wife I know we definitely put her address and job at the time that we forgot to put in the I-130. 
 

Now, I don’t remember why we didn’t use the second and third ones. Perhaps I made mistakes on them and decided not to use them. If I, in fact, did fill these out but never scheduled interview for them, do they even consider them valid since we never even attempted to prove their validity in front of an IO?

 

Thanks

[pushbrk 12,247]

You just explain it the best and most accurate way you can.  There is really nothing else to do now that the mistakes have already been made.  That's life.

[TBoneTX 43,433]

Similar-themed threads have been merged.

[roughlyworried 5]

20 hours ago, pushbrk said:

You just explain it the best and most accurate way you can.  There is really nothing else to do now that the mistakes have already been made.  That's life.

So an interesting little discovery I made here. The DS-160s don’t seem like they could even be used against someone if they never went to the interview. I deduce this from this except in the foreign affairs manual:

 

now, I’m obviously not an expert, but does my deduction seem correct? The misrepresentation HAS to be made before a US official for it to fall under grounds for inadmissibility, not simply an application/form. Any comments or thoughts around the wording? My reading comprehension abilities aren’t exactly the best, hence why I ask.

[BLC 112]

15 hours ago, roughlyworried said:

So an interesting little discovery I made here. The DS-160s don’t seem like they could even be used against someone if they never went to the interview. I deduce this from this except in the foreign affairs manual:

 

now, I’m obviously not an expert, but does my deduction seem correct? The misrepresentation HAS to be made before a US official for it to fall under grounds for inadmissibility, not simply an application/form. Any comments or thoughts around the wording? My reading comprehension abilities aren’t exactly the best, hence why I ask.

Once you sign your name to it, it’s recorded. So I think you just need to come to terms with the fact you are going to have inconsistencies. If it will make you feel better and more secure, why don’t you upload a letter into your pending file and explain the situation. 

[roughlyworried 5]

10 minutes ago, BLC said:

Once you sign your name to it, it’s recorded. So I think you just need to come to terms with the fact you are going to have inconsistencies. If it will make you feel better and more secure, why don’t you upload a letter into your pending file and explain the situation. 

I ended up talking to someone who used to do the visa interviews, and they said (which seems to be backed up by what I posted before), that unless you go to your biometrics and interview, it’s impossible for them to issue a 6C1 because of it. In addition, the information that was in the DS-160 wasn’t directly relevant to our current CR1 petition. This is also backed up by this:

 

 

 

 

Either way, if you don’t attend the interview (therefore swearing an oath), and the misrepresentation was not made in front of an officer. In addition, we didn’t lie about being married, or any facts pertaining to that. It was simply college history missing (which she majored in business and japanese, not tech). All in all, it seems that the DS-160s are irrelevant in such a case where an interview is never attended.