Applicant sought out our firm after receiving a misrepresentation finding against him at the consulate for visa stamping. We reviewed his file and were unable to ascertain any factual basis for the fraud/misrepresentation finding. We began directly corresponding with the consulate, and requested information from various government agencies In addition, we consulted with The Office of Visa Services (Visa Office) within the Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs . After about ten months and numerous letters to the consulate, our client’s fraud/misrepresentation finding was removed.
B Visa Sample Cases
These are some sample cases from our files. It is impossible for us to present all have done past over 15 years of our practice. But these were some cases that came to mind when we started writing this column 2-3 years ago.
Type of Case: B1/B2 Visa
Category: B-2 Visa, B-1 Visa, Fraud/Misrepresentation, General Nonimmigrant Visa
Status: Fraud/Misrepresentation finding removed
DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Type of Case: B-1/B-2 Extension for Autistic Child
Category: B-2 Visa, B-1 Visa, B Visa
Status:
Our office was retained to file a B-1/B-2 extension on behalf of a 34-year old male who was diagnosed with autism and requires ongoing supervision and monitoring. He is dependent on his mother, a permanent resident of the US, who is his legal guardian and only source of care. His father is a resident of Botswana. Botswana regulations do not make provisions for a child above the age of 21 to reside in the country as a dependent. Even in the US, regulations do not consider children over the age of 21 to be dependents of their parents. Our office submitted the extension request to Service requesting discretionary relief as permitted in appropriated cases where family members are not eligible for derivative status. The extension request was approved without an RFE.
DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Category: B-2 Visa, EB5 Green Card
Status:
We have received two interesting B-2 extensions. It has been my view that under certain circumstances B-2 can and should be permitted by USCIS to be used even where the applicant has an immigrant intent or is otherwise staying longer than usual in USA. Apparently, USCIS agrees.
In the first case, we were preparing an EB-5 (One Million Dollar investment) for an applicant who was here on a B-2 visa. So, we disclosed fully to the government that we have immigrant intent, but should not be required to leave because we are in the process of investing. A forced visit back to home country serves no useful purpose. USCIS approved the case.
In the second case, we have just received a third B-2 extension for the parent of a green card holder. The applicant suffers from chronic ailments and needs to be monitored. Both his sons live in USA (H-1 and green card). Once again, USCIS approved the case.
DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Type of Case: B-1/B-2 Visa
Category: B-2 Visa, B-1 Visa
Status: B-1/B-2 visa granted.
We requested a reconsideration of a B-1/B-2 visa denial by a US Consulate in India. The applicant and his wife applied for visa to visit their son in the U.S. The wife was granted a 10 year multiple entry visa, but the husband's application was denied based on Section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (possible immigrant). This obviously made no sense. Why would one of the husband-wife applicants be denied while the other one granted the visa? We requested reconsideration, fully explaining the circumstances in his favor and providing further proof.
DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.