Interim Decision #3048
MATTER Or HILAIRE
In Visa Petition Proceedings
A-2745E061
Decided by Board March 8, 1988
A petitioner may submit a certified copy of a document in support of a visa petition in accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 204.20)(1) (1988);
however, if the Immigration and Naturalization Service requests
the original document in order to determine that document's authenticity, the petitioner must comply with that request under
8
C.F.R. § 204.20)(3) (1988).
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: ON BEHALF OF SERVICE:
Vincent J. Agresti, Esquire Teresita R. Guerrero
56-58 Ferry Street General Attorney
Newark, New Jersey 07105
BY: Milhollan, Chairman; Dunne, Morris, Vacca, and Heilman, Board Members
The lawful permanent resident petitioner applied for preference
status for the beneficiary as his unmarried daughter under section
203(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act,
8 U.S.C.
§ 1153(a)(2) (1982). In a decision dated March 6, 1986, the Immigration and Naturalization Service Regional Adjudications Center
("RAC") director denied the petition. The petitioner has appealed.
The appeal will be dismissed.
The beneficiary is a 31 -year-old native and citizen of Haiti. The
petitioner is a 72-year-old native and citizen of Haiti who was admitted to the United States on September 11, 1985, as a lawful permanent resident. On September 20, 1985, the petitioner filed a visa
petition on behalf of the beneficiary claiming preference status for
her as his unmarried daughter. A copy of an Extract from the Registers of Birth Certificates executed in September of 1985, and a
copy of an Extract from the Registers of Marriage Certificates executed in January 1986, submitted with the visa petition, reflect
that the beneficiary is the petitioner's legitimate daughter.
566
Interim Decision *3048
On December 9, 1985, the Immigration and Naturalization Service informed the petitioner that "[gill birth and marriage certificates from Haiti must be in the form of original extracts from the
National Archives which have been issued subsequent to July 12,
1983." The petitioner failed to proffer the original documents requested by the Service.
In a decision dated March 6, 198E, the RAC director denied the
petition because the petitioner failed to submit the requested documentation. The RAC director stated in his written decision that the
authenticity of foreign documents can be more easily verified in
the original form rather than through copies.
On. appeal, the petitioner argues that 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(h) (1982),
subsequently redesignated as 204.2(j)(1) (1988), states that a copy of
a document submitted in support of a visa petition filed pursuant
to section 204 of the Act,
8 U.S.C. § 1154 (1982), may be accepted,
though unaccompanied by the original, if it bears a certification by
an attorney. The petitioner argues that the copies of the birth and
marriage certificates submitted in this case meet these requirements and should be accepted here.
The general attorney for the Service argues in a written brief to
the Board that the original documents must be submitted by the
petitioner if requested by the Service, citing
8 C.F.R. § 204.20(3)
(1988).
In this case, we note that 8 § 204.2(j)(1) (1988) provides that
a copy of a document properly certified by an attorney "may be accepted," but that
8 C.F.R. § 204.2(j)(3) (1988) clearly provides that
the original document "must be submitted if requested by the Service." Here, the Service requested the original documents for review.
The Service notes that it did so because of problems with fraudulent documents submitted in support of Haitian visa petitions in
the past and its ability to more easily verify the authenticity of
original documents. Under the provisions of
8 C.F.R. § 204.2(j)(3)
(1988) the petitioner was required to submit the originals. As this
was not done, the petition was properly denied. Accordingly, the
appeal will be dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
5A7
