Fiancée visa wrongly refused for not 'showing enough love'

In an unpublished, but very helpful case, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in Washington D.C. ruled that US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) was wrong in revoking a fiancée visa petition based on a consular officer’s conclusion, at the visa interview, that the relationship was not “bona fide”.

The consul’s conclusion that the relationship was not bona fide (or real) was based on the beneficiary’s “apparent lack of knowledge regarding the petitioner’s past.” The consul also believed that the couple provided insufficient evidence supporting the closeness of their relationship. In other words, the consul felt that the fiancée did not know enough about the petitioner, and concluded that the relationship was not “real”. (The petitioner had provided evidence that he had made at least two trips to the Philippines, submitted copies of text messages between himself and the beneficiary, as well as photos of the couple being together during his last trip to the Philippines. Still, that apparently was not enough to show that the couple was “in love”.) So the Embassy sent the case back to USCIS, which revoked the fiancée petition.

The AAO ruled that the USCIS’ revocation of the petition was improper, because the law states that the USCIS “shall” approve the Form I-129F [fiancée petition] when a petitioner submits evidence to establish that he/she and the beneficiary have met within the two-year period preceding the filing the Form I-129F, have a bona fide intention to marry and are legally able and willing to marry within 90 days of the beneficiary’s arrival in the US”. That’s all!

The AAO noted that the “approval of a Form I-129F does not depend on the level of closeness between the two parties”, such that the consular officer’s questions and concerns regarding the “level of intimacy” between the petitioner and the beneficiary at the time of the beneficiary’s interview should not be a factor in connection with a fiancée petition or the issuance of a fiancée visa. The law simply requires a “bona fide intention to marry”, “which is not synonymous with a requirement that the petitioner establish the closeness of their relationship.” In other words, the law does not require that the beneficiary be intimately knowledgeable regarding the petitioner or his life-history, or that USCIS evaluate the closeness of the relationship before approving the fiancée petition. Instead, the law allows for approval of a fiancée petition when the petitioner and beneficiary have met within the 2-year period before filing of the K-1 fiancée petition.

Of course once a person enters the US on a K-1 (fiancée or fiancé) visa, he or she must marry the American who petitioned them within 90 days, and then must prove that their relationship is bona fide and not fixed. This procedure also makes sense: if the only requirement for a fiancée visa is that the couple have met at least once within the past two years (as well as that they intend to marry), one meeting is certainly is not enough time to enable people to know the intimate details and backgrounds of each other’s lives. (In fact, there was a game show on television, called “The Newlywed Game”, where married couples were separated and asked questions about each other, and many times they got the answers wrong. These people were already married and yet didn’t know intimate details of the other’s life and habits. Imagine if a couple may have met only once or twice, and developed that relationship only via text and email. Certainly, they could not be expected to know as much about each other as newlyweds.

If you were refused a fiancée visa because you did not have detailed knowledge about the intimate details of your fiancé or fiancée’s life or background, I would suggest that you seek the advice of a reputable attorney, who can perhaps seek reconsideration from USCIS or the Embassy, if the visa was refused (or the petition was revoked) based on an improper application of the law, or because requirements were imposed that are not part of that law.

* * *

WEBSITE: www.gurfinkel.com

Four offices to serve you:  PHILIPPINES: 894-0258 or 894-0239; LOS ANGELES; SAN FRANCISCO; NEW YORK : TOLL FREE NUMBER: 1-866-GURFINKEL (1-866-487-3465)