U.S. immigration law takes marriage fraud very seriously. If you have been accused of entering into a sham marriage for the sole purpose of evading immigration laws, you could face severe consequences, including permanent inadmissibility to the United States. At Cohen Immigration Law Group, our experienced, licensed immigration attorneys understand the complexities of 204(c) marriage fraud cases and can provide the knowledgeable legal guidance you need to defend your rights and prove your bona fide marriage.
Any current or future visa petitions based on marriage will be denied, including I-130 petitions and green card applications
You may be permanently barred from entering the United States, under INA 204 C, which creates a fraud finding that follows you for life.
You could face deportation (removal) from the U.S. by DHS and ICE, with limited options for relief.
In some cases, marriage fraud can lead to criminal prosecution with penalties including fines and imprisonment.
If you have been accused of marriage fraud, it is crucial to have an experienced immigration attorney on your side. Possible defenses against 204(c) allegations include:
Demonstrating that the marriage was entered into in good faith with the intention of creating a life together, not just for immigration benefits. This requires submitting joint documentation such as marriage certificates, joint bank accounts, lease agreements, and affidavits from family and friends who can testify to the legitimacy of your relationship.
Examining the evidence presented by the government and challenging its validity or relevance. Our aggressive defense strategy includes contesting the burden of proof and demonstrating that USCIS has not met the preponderance of evidence standard required for a fraud finding.
In some limited circumstances, a waiver of inadmissibility may be available. Our dedicated team, led by Raisa Cohen, will file waiver applications, motions to reopen, and administrative appeals when appropriate, and can pursue federal court review if necessary.
An INA § 204(c) finding can permanently block every future green card petition, no matter who you marry next. There is no statutory waiver. No expiration. No second chance through the family system unless the finding is challenged. Here is what most people do not realize: some of these findings are based on thin or misinterpreted evidence, and they can be attacked.
Most people do not find out about § 204(c) until they file again, and the new petition is denied. By then, time, money, and options are already lost. Do not file anything new until you understand your record.
Short answer: This is more common than people realize. Many § 204(c) cases involve real marriages that ended in divorce, couples who performed poorly at a separate spousal interview (Stokes), inconsistent or incomplete documentation, or statements by one spouse that hurt the case. USCIS may interpret these issues as fraud even when the relationship was genuine. The issue is not always what happened. The issue is what the record shows. And records can be challenged.
Real marriages get misread as fraud when:
If your marriage was real, the path forward is showing what is actually in the record. The standard from Matter of P. Singh requires USCIS to establish that fraud is ‘more than probably true.’ That standard is not met by suspicion or by ambiguous documentation. Honest evidence, documented well, is how these cases get won.
DEFINITION. INA § 204(c): A federal statute (8 U.S.C. § 1154(c)) that bars USCIS from approving any future immigrant petition (most notably Form I-130) on behalf of a person who has previously entered into, attempted to enter into, or conspired to enter into a marriage for the purpose of evading immigration laws. The bar is triggered by a USCIS finding based on substantial and probative evidence. A criminal conviction is not required.
Once § 204(c) attaches to a person, it follows them for life. Every U.S. citizen or LPR who later petitions for that person, in any new family relationship, is denied. There is no statutory waiver. The bar is treated as permanent on paper.
USCIS decisions in these cases are highly discretionary and fact-specific. The agency must articulate a specific evidentiary basis for the finding. When that articulation is thin, conclusory, or unsupported, the finding can sometimes be reopened.
Short answer: USCIS applies the ‘substantial and probative evidence’ standard. The Board of Immigration Appeals clarified this standard in Matter of P. Singh, 27 I&N Dec. 598 (BIA 2019), which held that to be substantial and probative, the evidence must establish that it is ‘more than probably true’ that the marriage is fraudulent. The standard is more than preponderance and less than clear-and-convincing. USCIS bears the burden once derogatory evidence is in the record.
Officers look at the totality of the record. The BIA in P. Singh listed factors USCIS may rely on: deliberate attempts to deceive immigration officials regarding cohabitation or joint finances; detailed reports from on-site visits and field investigations; evidence of other romantic partners; statements from family, employers, or acquaintances; tax filings as ‘single’ during the marriage; and patterns of multiple marriages by the petitioner.
Important rule from P. Singh: where there is evidence of fraud in the record, affidavits alone generally are not enough to overcome it. Documentary corroboration is required.
USCIS does not need to prove the prior marriage was a sham beyond a reasonable doubt. The agency does need to articulate the evidentiary basis with specificity and afford procedural protections. A vague or conclusory § 204(c) determination can be challenged on that ground alone.
Short answer: USCIS uses several investigation tools to build § 204(c) cases. The agency reviews documents, interviews each spouse separately, sends officers to your home or workplace unannounced, talks to neighbors and acquaintances, and reviews social media. The investigation results become part of the record. The Board of Immigration Appeals treats reports from on-site visits and field investigations as legitimate evidence in Matter of P. Singh and successor cases.
Short answer: USCIS sometimes sends officers, often from the Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate (FDNS), to the home address on your I-130 to verify that you and your spouse actually live there. The officer may arrive unannounced. The officer may ask to look at the home, observe sleeping arrangements and shared belongings, ask whether both spouses live there, and try to interview either spouse alone. The officer may also speak with neighbors, the building superintendent, or other people in the building.
If USCIS has already conducted an investigation and now you have received a NOID or a denial, the report is in your file. We pull the FOIA, examine what USCIS actually documented (versus what the agency concluded), and determine whether the evidentiary basis for the finding holds up under the P. Singh standard.
Short answer: Not every § 204(c) finding can be challenged successfully. The cases we evaluate as potentially winnable share certain features in the original record: the prior denial relied on thin or conclusory evidence, the procedural protections were not honored, the original officer applied the wrong legal standard, or new evidence has come to light that undermines the original conclusion. If your case has any of these features, the consultation is worth it.
If any of these signals apply to your prior file, send us the denial language and the supporting record. We will tell you in the consultation whether reopening is realistic.
Short answer: We are honest with prospective clients. Some § 204(c) cases are hard to reopen no matter how much money is spent. The cases that are very difficult to overturn share certain features in the prior record: a documented admission of fraud, multiple prior fraud findings against the same beneficiary, falsified documents in the prior filing, or strong direct evidence (such as cooperating witnesses or contemporaneous communications) that the marriage was entered for immigration purposes. We will tell you that in the consultation.
We do not take cases we cannot win. The consultation is the diagnostic. If your case is in this category, we will say so. You will not be sold a path that does not exist.
Want an honest evaluation? Book a consultation. We will tell you if it is worth pursuing.
Short answer: Every future I-130 will be denied. New petitions will fail regardless of the new relationship. The issue will follow you across all future filings. Many people only discover this after filing again and being denied again. By that point, the second filing fee is gone, the timeline has been wasted, and the original record is now harder to attack because USCIS has reaffirmed the finding.
Specific consequences if § 204(c) is left in place:
The longer the finding sits unchallenged, the more times USCIS reaffirms it on subsequent denials, the harder it becomes to reopen later. Time is not on your side. Neither is filing blind.
Got a prior § 204(c) finding sitting in your file? Address it before you file anything else. (718) 275-1234
Short answer: Through one or more of these procedural pathways: a Form I-290B Motion to Reopen or Motion to Reconsider before USCIS within 30 days of the prior denial (33 if mailed); a Form EOIR-29 appeal of an I-130 denial to the Board of Immigration Appeals within 30 days; a federal court challenge under the Administrative Procedure Act in narrow circumstances; or, where appropriate, a new I-130 filed by a different petitioner with a clear evidentiary record that the new marriage is bona fide and addresses the prior § 204(c) record head-on.
Ready to evaluate the path forward? Book a consultation.
Most attorneys have never reviewed § 204(c) records from the bench. I have. I read these denials for years, both as a government attorney evaluating whether the agency’s evidentiary basis was strong enough, and later as an Immigration Judge reviewing the consequences when the bar came up in removal proceedings.
Here is what I learned:
Most firms refer § 204(c) cases out. We do not. The combination of bench experience and prosecutor experience is what makes these cases work when they work. We do not promise reopening. We promise an honest evaluation.
Want a former IJ to evaluate your § 204(c) record? Book a consultation.
Yes. USCIS officers are people. They draw conclusions from incomplete records. A § 204(c) finding can be entered based on misinterpreted documentation, an officer’s impressions from a single interview, a thin investigation report, or statements by one spouse that did not reflect what actually happened in the relationship. The Board of Immigration Appeals in Matter of P. Singh held that USCIS bears the burden of substantial-and-probative evidence. When that burden is not actually met, the finding can be challenged.
Yes, and it happens. Real marriages get denied as fraud when documentation is thin, when the couple performed poorly at a separate spousal interview, when one spouse later said something damaging out of anger, or when a USCIS officer’s report draws conclusions the underlying observations do not actually support. The defense is procedural and evidentiary: pull the prior file, identify what USCIS relied on, and test whether the substantial-and-probative standard was actually satisfied.
There is no statutory waiver. The path forward is reopening the original finding through Form I-290B (Motion to Reopen or Motion to Reconsider) or through the Board of Immigration Appeals on Form EOIR-29 from a denied I-130. In narrow cases, federal court review is available. The work is procedural and evidentiary: FOIA the prior file, attack the original record on the substantial-and-probative-evidence standard, present new evidence that undermines the original conclusion, and brief the legal theory. Affidavits alone are generally not enough (per Matter of P. Singh).
It is the legal standard USCIS must meet to enter a § 204(c) finding. Per Matter of P. Singh, 27 I&N Dec. 598 (BIA 2019), the evidence must establish that it is ‘more than probably true’ that the marriage is fraudulent. The standard is higher than preponderance of the evidence and lower than clear-and-convincing. Suspicion is not enough. Conclusory officer impressions are not enough. The evidence has to be specific, documented, and supported.
There is no statutory waiver. § 204(c) is treated as permanent on paper. The path forward is reopening the original finding (Form I-290B or BIA appeal via Form EOIR-29) or, in narrow cases, federal court review. A new petition that does not address the prior record will be denied.
The bar’s primary application is to family-based I-130 petitions. USCIS has applied § 204(c) reasoning to certain other immigrant petitions where the underlying eligibility runs through a marriage. The bar generally does not affect non-immigrant visas or naturalization on its own, but a § 204(c) record will appear in any future immigration interaction and may affect discretion in waivers and other relief.
No. A NOID is a Notice of Intent to Deny. It is the agency telling you it is preparing to deny and giving you a chance to respond. A well-built NOID response, addressing every point the officer raised, can prevent the formal § 204(c) finding from being entered. The window is short (typically 30 days) and the response has to be substantive, not generic.
Not yet. A NOID is the prevention point. If we engage at the NOID stage, the work is to prevent the § 204(c) finding from being entered in the first place. That is much easier than reopening a finding that has already attached. Call us the day you receive a NOID, not after the denial issues.
Varies. USCIS motions are decided in months to a year, depending on field office. BIA appeals take roughly six months but vary. Federal court challenges take longer. We give realistic timelines at the consultation based on the specific procedural posture of your case.
Almost never successfully. USCIS pulls the prior file. The § 204(c) record is in the system. Filing a new I-130 without an explicit, evidence-backed strategy to address the prior record is the most common reason these new filings are denied.
Got a NOID, denial, or prior § 204(c) record? Send us what you have. (718) 275-1234
Most firms offer free consultations that lead nowhere. This is a paid strategy session where you leave with a real legal evaluation.
Current consultation fee is confirmed when you book.
Experienced Immigration Attorneys: Our NY Immigration lawyers have extensive experience handling complex immigration cases, including those involving 204(c) marriage fraud allegations. With years of experience and a proven track record of successful outcomes, we provide thorough interview preparation and witness preparation to strengthen your case.
Former Immigration Judge: Our firm is led by Raisa Cohen, a former Immigration Judge who brings unique knowledge and expertise to your case. Her courtroom experience and understanding of how USCIS investigates marriage fraud gives our clients a distinct advantage.
Personalized Attention: We understand the sensitive nature of these cases and provide compassionate, individualized attention to each client. As a client-focused firm, we offer consultations to discuss your case and affordable payment plans to make quality legal representation accessible.
Strategic Defense: We develop a strategic defense tailored to your specific circumstances. Our legal strategy includes documentation preparation, filing appeals when visa petitions are denied, and pursuing stays of removal and bond hearings when clients face deportation.
Effective Advocacy: We effectively advocate for your rights, representing you before USCIS and, if necessary, in immigration court. We contest fraudulent allegations, investigate the facts thoroughly, and defend victims of false accusations with reliable, dedicated representation.
If you are facing allegations of marriage fraud or have been denied a visa petition due to 204(c), contact Cohen Immigration Law Group today for a consultation. Our experienced immigration attorneys can assess your case, advise you of your options, and provide the strong legal representation you need to protect your rights and your future. Whether you need to prove the legitimacy of your marriage, file an I-751 to remove conditional residence, or overturn a fraud finding, our multilingual, AILA member attorneys are here to help 24/7.
🔒 100% Confidential. We treat your case with care and clarity.
