I was arrested for domestic violence while I was in the college in the U.S. and I was charged for the same matter, later the court dismissed the case. After that, I return to my home country and applied for F1 visa 2 years ago for master degree, I did not disclose any of those both in DS160 and during the interview when asked, I thought since the case is dismissed I could answer no. Then my case went to Administrative Processing, and during AP the embassy sent me an email asking my court record for that matter, so I emailed my lawyer and got the document and sent it back to them, later the case was denied. And I applied two more times in the same month, both got denied. A year later, I applied another school and applied for it again, and also got denied. All 4 denials are under 214b.

Is this mean I got permanently banned due to material misrepresentation?

I'd be appreciated for any help, thanks!

  • "Is this mean I got permanently banned due to material misrepresentation?" No it doesn't. INA 214(b) is for immigrant intent. You may or may not have a ban, but the denials so far don't tell you whether you have a ban or not. – user102008 Jan 22 '19 at 7:26
  • which country are you from? – ΦXocę 웃 Пepeúpa ツ Jan 22 '19 at 13:57
  • @ΦXocę웃Пepeúpaツ China – milkyway Jan 23 '19 at 9:45
  • 3
    To the people voting to close as off-topic, as "about US Law and immigration", I strongly disagree that this is a reason to close. The question is about the parts of US law that pertain directly to travel. And, although the asker is trying to get a visa for a long-term visit, their question applies to any kind of visa and the answers would be the same if they were looking for a tourist visa. – David Richerby Jan 28 '19 at 12:49

INA214(b) is not a permanent ineligibility. You can reapply anytime. The consular officer could have concluded you were inadmissible under the criminal or material misrepresentation provisions of INA 212 but he chose not to.

That is a good thing. The dropped charges lead the consular officer to believe that the alleged activity did not mean you had committed a crime of moral turpitude on preponderance of the evidence (a lower standard than required for a criminal conviction).

Secondly, the consular chose not to find you inadmissible for wilful material misrepresentation. That means he believed that you were either not wilful or that the fact was not material. It was probably the latter. Since your alleged criminal activity would not have/did not lead to a finding of inadmissiblity, your omission did not lead to a material misrepresentation. That means your visa would have been refused even if you had disclosed the charges which in themselves would have had no effect on your visa.

Unfortunately, your apparent lie will always be part of your USA visa application record. This will cause the consular officer to doubt whatever you say and make it more difficult to obtain a visa in the future. However, the main reason for your refusal was not your alleged criminality or misrepresentation. It was your lack of ties to your home country.

  • 2
    I would add in the last sentence: good objective proof of your ties to your home country. The lie has an effect on how to interpret what you write, so you must provide more objective proofs. – Giacomo Catenazzi Jan 22 '19 at 9:11
  • 2
    For all practical intents and purposes he is not getting a nonimmigrant visa to the USA anytime soon, probably ever. Four refusals in a row? Although he does not have a ban they’re holding the criminal record (despite the dismissal) and lie to the consular officer (although not banned) against him. Someone who returned to his country after a first F1 Visa would typically not be accused of immigrant intent on a subsequent nonimmigrant visa application. He’s toast, for a very very long time maybe permanently. – Augustine of Hippo Jan 22 '19 at 10:47
  • @Honorary World Citizen it's much harder to get a B visa than an F even after returning from the USA after having used one. Also an applicant isn't accused of immigrant intent because the onus of proving that he doesn't have that intent is on him/her. – user58558 Jan 22 '19 at 17:11
  • Also an applicant isn't accused of immigrant intent because the onus of proving that he doesn't have that intent is on him/her I think you understand exactly what I meant. Bottom line I don't see him overcoming the presumption of immigrant intent. it's much harder to get a B visa than an F even after returning from the USA after having used one. That just supports my point. – Augustine of Hippo Jan 22 '19 at 17:43
  • @HonoraryWorldCitizen What about an immigrant visa like K1? Would previous denials have an impact on K1 interview? For example, would consular think everything I say is lying based on my very first F1 interview? – milkyway Jan 23 '19 at 9:49

There is no way as such, however, if you have or had a problem with the migration department, they may not give you access.

You Can visit this

  • 1
    Link-only answers are strongly discouraged. Can you summarize the content at that link to explain why you've included it in the answer? This is especially useful for the future, when the link may no longer work. – phoog Jan 22 '19 at 22:49

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.