Jameson78

20 hours ago, new yorker87 said:

Hi Vj people, 

 

Does anybody in the group had the experience of bitter divorce with full revengeful feelings?

As i had this experience and i highly suspect my ex wife has wriiten bad letter to uscis . So it was making me anxious and was thinking how badly it can affect my application?

Kindly share your experience if anyone has gone through similar condition.

Thanks

Look, you need to pony up the shekels and get a lawyer when dealing with anything regarding the USCIS, if you suspect this problem. The reason being that they are low level, low-agency government workers and it isn't worth their trouble to hassle you or exercise malicious judgment, if they suspect that they'll come under scrutiny because you have a $350/hour attorney watching their behavior during interviews/reading their notices. Why would you want to make your life difficult if you're some 100 IQ, 10am-4pm paper shuffler in some random town in Vermont?

4 hours ago, xilef said:

Case transfers from CSC to VSC https://www.uscis.gov/workload-transfers

This is probably why the VSC cases haven't been moving.

6 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Agreed...ROC is basically a giant burden to both the immigrants and USCIS. It doesn't do much to serve it's intended purpose.

As far as I can tell, most of USCIS is there to provide a sop to the base of whichever political party is in power  - making it 'rigorous' and excessively onerous to get status if the Republicans are in, or make it facile if the Democrats are in. It's very hard to get yourself deported unless you are really up to some serious shenanigans, and even then....that said, it's a great job creation scheme in methed-out Vermont, or pseudo-Mexico Orange County, so I get it from that perspective. I just wish they'd triple the filing fees so that they can staff it adequately, and make everyone's life easier.

3 minutes ago, geowrian said:

The burden is on the petitioner to show they qualify for the benefit being sought (ROC), at least while USCIS has it. This means the petitioner must show that they entered into the marriage in good faith, not the government showing that it was entered into via fraud. This a requirement under the INA with USCIS being granted to power to make this determination.

 

Once it goes to court, the only thing USCIS has to show is that the I-751 was denied and therefore the alien can be ordered removed. That's their burden, not the merits the of the decision. Of course the defendant will argue that the I-751 was adjudicated improperly, but then they are responsible for proving this assertion.

 

From a slightly more technical stance, it works like this:

1) USCIS denies the I-751 and asserts that the alien is now removable, thereby issuing an NTA for a hearing.

2) An IJ reviews the case. The burden on DHS is only to show that the alien is removable due to failure of removing conditions. The alien can argue that they are not removable because the I-751 was improperly adjudicated.

3) The IJ makes a ruling, either determining that the I-751 was improperly denied and ordering DHS to approve it, or confirms that the I-751 was properly adjudicated and therefore the alien can be ordered removed. They can also plead for a hardship waiver in some circusmtances.

4) The ruling can be appealed to a federal appellate court, which reviews the prior case.

 

Note that this is different than almost any other removal situation in which it is the government initiating a procedure against the alien and therefore has the burden to prove their case.

Interesting, thank you for the technical insight. In practice, I think we both know that unless the USCIS demonstrates that the i-751 was denied for good cause, which is very difficult without proof that there was an element of fraud involved, then the respondent almost always wins.  Otherwise, how come almost all of these cases are won by respondents who retain counsel?

7 minutes ago, missileman said:

If an I-751 is denied due to lack of evidence of a bona fide marrage, who has the burden of proof?  Would the immigrant not have to provide sufficient evidence to sway the IJ?

In the i-751 process, the immigrant does indeed face burden of proof, yes. When you get to immigration court, which is a formal legal proceeding, then the burden of proof flips, as the first post in the link that you provided clearly demonstrates. When it gets to that stage, the USCIS must prove that you intended to evade the immigration laws of the U.S. This is impossible, unless they have first-hand evidence of the respondent endeavouring to engage in fraud. 

Obviously, they do catch people doing so on occasion, like the Russian-Israeli Chabad Mafia sisters who engaged in marriage fraud pertaining to the San Bernardino shooting. But it's very rare, especially with a low-rent government lawyer and limited budget to spend on discovery, and even more especially if the respondent can afford to hire an attorney who didn't graduate from the University of the District of Columbia law school.

19 minutes ago, missileman said:

These attorneys say differently.

 

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/burden-of-proof-on-uscis-or-immigrant-in-immigrati-1641677.html

To elaborate on the post above: can you even imagine a judicial system under which the burden of proof rest on the respondent, lol? So if someone maliciously files a motion against missileman for molesting his daughter, simply because the complainant dislikes missileman, the burden of proof rests on missileman to prove that he has never done so, otherwise he is liable? I mean, I dislike government as much as the next right winger, but the west hasn't (yet?) allowed its judiciary to plummet those kind of depths, thank goodness.

4 minutes ago, missileman said:

These attorneys say differently.

 

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/burden-of-proof-on-uscis-or-immigrant-in-immigrati-1641677.html

Did you read your own link?

(a) Deportable aliens. A respondent charged with deportability shall be found to be removable if the Service proves by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is deportable as charged. 

As to the rest of them, they are shilling for business, without citing any rules or statutes.

1 hour ago, Enzo jack said:

thank you amadia, i received summons long time ago but couldnt go and thats how she got divorce but i dont know about our son what rights she got. i dont have attorney i have no finances i lost my ss card and green card and i am waiting for the removal of condition so i can work, i have been through a hell. hope i can see him again, its not fair.

Firstly, learn to speak English. This might be the kwa, but at least show a modicum of respect. It will also help you dealing with the bureaucrats.

Secondly, have your attorney file in court for a paternity test, if you haven't already. This will help a lot, because people engaging in marriage fraud don't generally have children with their spouse.

Thirdly, have your lawyer get on top of what has and hasn't been filed in the relevant court(s).

2 hours ago, kevin876 said:

We filed May 29th,  I received a letter for more evidence in June 20th, mail the evidence off last week and when I checked the website today it said they received it and will continue to work on it so I dont know how long after I will hear from that

What did you submit, and what time period did it cover?

1 hour ago, geowrian said:

1. Yes
2. No. You are applying for a benefit and therefore are responsible for demonstrating the facts of your case that the marriage is bona fide.
   1. If it were the other way around, one could theoretically submit no evidence and be approved just because USCIS had nothing to use against them.
3. Assuming the only issue is a denied ROC, yes. Until an IJ determines otherwise, she can maintain LPR status. She can get an I-551 stamp via an InfoPass appointment to act as a green card for 1 year at a time...until LPR status is removed.
   1. Note that you can file an I-751 again even if denied, and USCIS must adjudicate that before removal. So it's not just a one-and-done process if one wants to fight it.
4. False - she can work. She can use an unrestricted SSN card + driver's license or other proper unexpired ID to satisfy I-9 requirements. Or she can use the I-551 stamp.
5. She can travel abroad fine and return, assuming she has an I-551 stamp.
6. See #2 - she must prove her case, not the other way around.
7. See #2 again.

But you are wayyyy jumping the gun...if you have a bona fide marriage, then donm't worry about being denied. There are a very small number of cases where ROC is denied initially (and eventually overcome)...don't go into the process expecting or anticipating a denial.

Most of this is correct, except for the burden of proof. In this court, as in all other courts, the burden of proof rests with the party filing the motion, i.e., the government in this case. Basically, nobody gets deported in this situation unless a) they actually want to/don't care, or b) they are functionally retarded, or c) they can't afford/are too feckless to get a lawyer. 

As you surmised, the government must indeed show that you intended to defraud the system by engaging in a fraudulent marriage, without an underlying legitimate relationship. Unless you have been caught red-handed doing this (i.e., you've been recorded discussing how to go about the scam with your associates/the government has acquired incriminating emails or texts or social media posts), then you're going to win, in a nutshell. This effectively demonstrates that the entire ROC process is a waste of time, save for maybe catching a few percent of the people who engage in fraud of this nature and are dumb enough to incriminate themselves to a degree which satisfies the burden of proof standard in legal proceedings.

That said, you would obviously need to get a lawyer. Regardless of whether or not someone is guilty of what they're accused off, almost everyone without a lawyer loses their case in immigration court, while almost everyone who retains one wins. The reason being that you would be highly likely to trip yourself over on some procedural technicality, or answer questions that you don't need to, without the guidance of competent counsel.

1 minute ago, Cati23 said:

Wow I personally i will never bite any body cause i hate blood , i said beat( punch) if I had your number I would send you videos of him explaining why he  leid .. when I asked him. .... he said he wanted to sleep and he didn’t know it would be a big issue,, I have lots of videos I asked him to talk to the judge so it can go off my record he said he will be charged or arrested for false accusations .. that’s all the truth..

You wrote 'bite', not 'beat' or 'punch.' Do you mean he beat his own ###, like Edward Norton in fight club, and then accused you of doing it? 

On 7/15/2018 at 6:33 PM, Cati23 said:

ITS LOng to read and My English is not good but your time is appreciated,,,,,,,,Hi , am 23 year old immigrant ,  Am a conditional residence ( have conditional green card through my husband) we recently got into an argument and somehow he bite himself and called police on me and said i beat him ..police came didn’t listen to me as i was crying and my accent came out so they couldn’t understand what i was explaining i guess, They talked to my husband and then just handcuffed me and got me arrested because my husband had acut on his lip it looked like i beat him which Honestly i don’t fight cause am naturally weak ,, am a conditional resident and all am an immigrant who knows well that any crime could lead me to deportation,,, so Apparently my husband dropped the charges and I didn’t get to see  a Judge..so the case was Closed ,, he has put his hands on me way back for asking him to stop smoking weed as I don’t do any drugs or alcohol,, I didn’t call police cause i was always scared of him ,, am stressed i have a criminal record on something I didn’t do ,, he’s alli have as I don’t have family here ,, i never told his parents about the fact that he hit me ,, cause his parents are divorced and the dad is married to achinese woman ( who wanted my husband to marry her cousin so he can bring her here from China) and my husband ended up marrying me ,, in that case the His step mother and my father in law technically don’t like me ,, i. Only run to afreind for my problems 😭😭 i still stay with my husband things seem to be ok , he apologises everyday for putting me through this but tbh am stressed about what’s going to happen next year when it’s time to file for REMOVAL Of CONDITIONS on my green card will i be denied , or deported ?? Am so Scared as i feel like i have failed my self in life 🤦🏾‍♂️😭 please advise me should I leave and don’t file or should i go ahead i will get my Green card with no problems,,, I would rather leave the country voluntarily than deportation,,, any advise will be highly appreciated,,,, as I cannot deal with the depression anymore ,, i want go to school but am scared of wasting my money and don’t get anything at the end ,,,, also if I expunge the case will that be helpful at all?? The arrested me for Simple battery ( simple domestic violence which is the most scenario on which deportation could occur,, thanks good people advise me please 🙏🏾

Lol, you know that they can very quickly work out who bit who, right? Unless you have literally exactly the same teeth and dental records. I hope you haven't naughtily been practicing cannibalism on your spouse, and then pretending that he is pretending that you did it to him....?

7 minutes ago, VIFRANRIRO said:

Actually, I probably sent less evidence than most of u guys:

 

Marriage certificate

Rental lease

Auto insurance cards

Birth certificates for my two kids

 

I did not send pics or affidavits or any joint bank accounts statements, so I guess that the best evidence was our two kids.

Fair enough. I think that they are much more stringent on the financial stuff for people who don't have kids. It is quite unlikely that somebody who has had children with their partner is engaged in a sham marriage.

3 hours ago, VIFRANRIRO said:

Hello Guys!!

 

I have great news!!! I just got a mail today where they confirmed that they approved my I751 and that I will be receiving my green card soon.

One important thing that I need to mention is that the receipt # that I have used to check the status of my case was not the good one cuz in the notification I received today in my mail, they had the case # that they used when they sent me the extension letter which is different from the one that they used for my biometric appointment letter...  I know it can be confusing buttt....... I just used the new EAC# and now it says that they already mailed the new green card yesterday.

Anyways, just wanted to share this info with you just in case this could be happening to you as well. My NOA date was July 3, 2017.

Already filed the N400 and already had the fingerprints for that too last week... Will keep you posted.

 

 

 

 

Out of interest, what did you send? Around a quarter to a third of people are getting RFEs from VSC now.

2 hours ago, khano1 said:

I don't think there are any marriage without challenges. I understand what you are saying and every couple face those challenges (not only immigrants). Every couples perception of good faith marriage may differ from others, also from religious or cultural perspective. One couple may value romance more over responsibility, vice versa. Imagine you are an officer and we tell you how happy we are as a couple and the values we feel are more important for a relationship, while you may feel that these reasons are not worthy of good relationship because your perspective on marriage is different and deny the request.

 

For a side note I know someone who married a US citizen and applied for GC/citizenships right after their marriage. The relationship ended in a divorce after 3 years of marriage but he was still able to gain his immigration status because the reviewers looked at whether he went into marriage with good faith and not how it ended. Now I don't know how he did that. 

 

The reason I say that its going to delay the process is because they are going to mail you a letter with an interview date two months from the date of that letter. After interview they will process and send you the new card etc. All these chain of events will only delay the process by additional 2-3 months if not more.

The law states that they must approve or deny the petition based on the evidence as to whether or not you entered into the marriage to evade immigration laws. If you have in your possession enough financial and tax documents, joint leases and so forth, and there is no evidence against you (i.e., no hard evidence that you entered into a sham marriage to evade the law), then they have to approve you. Now, I understand that this is only the law as written, and that some of the IOs may deny you anyway based on their subjective opinion. This is why, in my opinion, you'd be well advised to speak to a lawyer and have him or her attend any subsequent interview, if you find yourself in a sticky situation. They're much less likely to ignore policy and the law with an attorney there, even though said attorney is not allowed to answer questions for you.

It shouldn't matter why the marriage ended. However, it will go more smoothly if you indicate that it was because of mutual incompatibility/irreconcilable differences. If you started thotting around from the moment you entered the country, then that would tend to indicate that you engaged in a sham marriage and had no intention of maintaining a relationship with your spouse.

4 minutes ago, Jose V said:

Who gives the right to judge other immigrants and their pursue of their American dream? I wonder where you come from...

You got it wrong fam, I don't judge anyone. I empathize entirely, and actually appreciate the honesty. It's not even a country anyway, it's the North American Economic Zone, sustained by consumption, state-promoted degeneracy, an endless strategy of tension, and fiat currency. I'd probably be trying to do exactly the same thing if I were from one of the lower social strata third world, by any means necessary. In many ways, many third world immigrants have much better moral values than the native Anglo inhabitants.

8 hours ago, gc@gc said:

 

you have no idea what i was talking about 

Well, you wrote that we should never forget why we came to Amerikwa, in the context of sympathizing with DACA applicants, whose parents illegally snuck into the country in order to derive benefit from being in an affluent economy and in proximity to high agency, white people. Since you wrote it in that context, this strongly implies that you yourself moved for the same reasons. I'm literally going on what you wrote. Maybe you meant it, maybe you didn't (I'm not a mind-reader), but you are the one who wrote it, not me, lol.

8 hours ago, gc@gc said:

 

daca came to the states when they were very young and with their parents,  they didnt really have to ability to make such decision then and their parents made for them, i wouldnt call them illegal. i would believe those children have suffered enough all those years.

 

government is just trying to be compassionate to take care of this group of people, it would be great helpful to their growing: physically and mentally.

 

i can hardly image if one would like to live in a country lack of human and compassionate. 

 

we should alway remember why we come to the states for. 

Lol, you mean to imply that you came to the states because it is a richer place than where you came from, and not primarily because of a romantic relationship with a US citizen...? While I appreciate the honesty, I'm not sure I'd be owning up to that if I were you...

4 minutes ago, Novemberfiler said:

Am not trolling anyone,  just reading the text and giving my opinion. You are the troll who is living on a different planet. Who cares about the words, it's the deeds that matter, don't you see what's happening?. All am doing is trying to make sure that who ever reads David's and your baseless posts take the new policy seriously

Read it again. It is very obviously aimed at people who submit placeholder applications, or applications which contain very little of the evidence or facts required to support positive adjudication of the application. You'll get a straight denial if you file an I-751 with no documents, or with a shell bank account with no activity and nothing else, and no explanatory note. if you send a complete application, but with (say) incomplete tax transcripts, no executed lease, or documents not covering the entire time you've been in the U.S. before filing it, then you'll get an RFE. It's not hard to grasp.

2 minutes ago, Novemberfiler said:

Oh david, you,he and everybody else should be worried. The policy is as clear as day, starting september 11, 2018 all applications will be affected, those that were filed before that date included, only exeption is daca filers before that date. It had nothing to do with initial review, that policy has always been implemented. When they recieve your case they look at it, if something is missing it gets rejected and sent back, no rfe or itd is sent. This policy is clearly talking about adjudicating an application. So yes what it means is that there will be tons of denials without any prior intent to deny or rfe notices being sent, think about how many people get rfe mainly and maybe few itd, now all of them will be denied starting september 11, 2018. The scary part is that its open to io interpretation as to how compete is the case, just like the new question being added on n400 form, regarding committing or aiding in committing a crime or thinking about it, when asked about what would be considered a crime the uscis representative replied, driving 5miles over the speed the limit could count. You shoud worry my friend and try not to speed

If you read it, it is to prevent obviously fraudulent or meritless applications. They aren't going to give you a straight denial because you didn't send enough bank statements or the full tax transcripts instead of the main pages, if the rest of the application looks reasonable. Don't troll people, sure it can be funny, especially when teasing third worlders, but it shows bad faith.

16 minutes ago, gc@gc said:

 

i dont think it is fair to make such statement about government employees like that

Lol, have you ever met any? On several occasions, I've genuinely thought that they have learning difficulties. Maybe they did and maybe they didn't, but it's obviously a job creation program for people who have degrees but cannot compete in the private sector.

15 minutes ago, curiousgeorgina said:

I'd like to call USCIS and talk to an actual person and not some automated response.. how could i get to one? It directs me to the status updated and if I have some problems regarding the case I can talk to someone but it hangs up after I choose that one.

 

I really just want to know why my case is taking so long...

They won't give you a straight answer until it's been 16.5 months since you filed it, FYI. The reason is that they're lazy government employees who don't care about you and, unlike private sector employees, have no accountability. It's not because you're on a terror watchlist or they think you are committing marriage fraud or anything. Unfortunately, it'll get done when it gets done.

Just now, CharlieBrown said:

I would guess most of DACAs are processing in CSV.. Idk why we cant all file directly with our local office in the first place when every state already has its own office.. 2 offices for the entire country is clearly not enough

The whole thing makes no goddamn sense, because it is funded entirely by fees.  They clearly aren't high enough because they are chronically understaffed. Just double or triple them, hire more staff, and be done with it, for god's sake.

3 hours ago, mrs thb said:

Congrats!

 

I cannot believe the way VSC is whipping these approvals out.  Yippee for VSC filers.

 

And, I also cannot believe nothing has been done to adjust the disparity between the 2 service centers!!!  

As you would expect, California deals with the larger proportion of DACA, illegals trying to adjust status, related family petitions, and god knows what else, since there are more of them in the border states. Assisted by various NGOs, they all get priority over you people doing it the right way, suckaaaaaa.

4 minutes ago, geowrian said:

That bit was a joke, obviously (although I know it's widespread there in particular). But to the OP's point, you are actually allowed to get married and bring your wife or husband over without combining so much as a Costco card, if you so desire. They'd interview you, but you'd pass it it you had a legit relationship. The financial documents are them looking for a heuristic to approve people without the time and cost of doing interviews. They're not the actual legal criteria as to whether you can bring your foreign spouse. Chill balls.