INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i)

Can I Fix 212(a)(6)(C)(i)? The Complete Guide to Overcoming a Willful Misrepresentation Bar

by

A finding under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i) which refers to willful misrepresentation of a material fact is one of the most serious and confusing issues in United States immigration law. It can result in a permanent lifetime bar from the United States.

But here’s the truth: Many people can fix a 212(a)(6)(C)(i) finding and many more can fight it and get it reversed entirely.

If you’ve been accused of misrepresentation or fraud by USCIS or a US consulate, this guide explains what your real options are, how the law works, and when you should contact us for help.

What Does 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Mean?

INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i) applies when a person:

  • Willfully
  • Misrepresented
  • A material fact
  • To obtain a visa, entry, or immigration benefit.

To stick, the government must prove all four elements. If even one is missing, the finding is invalid and it can be overturned.

Can I Fix a 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Finding?

Yes but the method depends on whether the finding is correct and what stage your case is at. There are three primary ways to fix a misrepresentation finding:

1. Fight the Accusation and Get It Reversed

This is the strongest solution if the allegation is wrong, and many 212(a)(6)(C)(i) findings are wrong. Many cases can be fixed without ever seeking a waiver by rebutting the officer’s reasoning through an RFE/NOID response, administrative appeal, or legal argument.

2. Apply for a 212(i) Waiver (If Eligible)

If the finding is correct and cannot be contested, the main remedy is a 212(i) waiver for immigrant cases.

To qualify, you must prove extreme hardship to a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse or parent. Children do not count for the 212(i) waiver. If you do not have a qualifying relative, a 212(i) waiver is unavailable.

3. Apply for a 212(d)(3) Nonimmigrant Waiver (For Temporary Visas)

For tourist visas, student visas, work visas, and other temporary entries, you can request a 212(d)(3) waiver.

The 212(d)(3) waiver:

  • Does not require a qualifying relative
  • Can forgive almost any ground of inadmissibility
  • Is granted at the discretion of DHS
  • Is often approved when properly prepared

This is one of the most powerful tools to fix a 212(a)(6)(C)(i) finding if you are seeking temporary entry into the U.S.

Common Situations Where 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Can Be Fixed

These types of cases are often successfully overcome:

  • OPT / CPT Employment Issues (Findream, Integra, Sinocon cases)
  • DS-160 mistakes (dates, jobs, addresses)
  • Miscommunication during visa interviews or at the port of entry
  • Marriage-based application inconsistencies
  • Incorrect employment titles or résumé differences in work visas

How Long Does It Take to Fix 212(a)(6)(C)(i)?

Depending on the remedy, it can be resolved in as little as 2 months but more complicated cases will take longer. Cases involving misrepresentation require meticulous legal strategy and not just not generic templates.

Do Not Fight a 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Finding Alone

A misrepresentation charge is one of the most dangerous findings in immigration law. A poorly crafted response, or one prepared without legal expertise will lock in the lifetime bar and destroy any future immigration options

If you’ve received a fraud/misrepresentation accusation, denial, RFE, NOID, or consular refusal, you need immediate legal help. We are one of the leading US immigration law practices with a strong record of:

  • Reversing wrongful 212(a)(6)(C)(i) findings
  • Preparing winning 212(i) hardship waivers
  • Securing 212(d)(3) waivers for nonimmigrant visas
  • Representing clients worldwide in complex fraud cases

Call: 305-515-0613
Email: info@messersmithlaw.com
Same-Day Consultations Available

INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i): How We Assist Applicants Overcome Misrepresentation Findings (Real Successful Case Examples)

by

INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) commonly referred to as “212a6ci” is one of the most feared findings in US immigration law. It applies when USCIS or a US consulate believes an individual willfully misrepresented a material fact to obtain an immigration benefit.

A 212(a)(6)(C)(i) finding triggers a lifetime bar but it does NOT always mean denial is final. Every year, we assist many applicants successfully challenge, appeal, obtain I-601 hardship waivers, or 212(d)(3) waivers to overcome this bar.

This comprehensive guide explains:

  • What 212(a)(6)(C)(i) means;
  • Why it is issued;
  • How to fight it;
  • Realistic successful case examples;
  • When a 212(i) waiver works; and
  • How to maximize your chances of approval.

What Is INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i)?

If a person willfully and materially misrepresents a fact to gain a US immigration benefit, they become inadmissible for life.

Key elements US government must prove:

  1. The applicant knowingly provided false or misleading information.
  2. A false statement, omission, or misleading response.
  3. The fact must be significant enough to influence the immigration decision.
  4. The misrepresentation must be intended to gain a U.S. immigration benefit.

Common Reasons Leading to 212(a)(6)(C)(i)

  • Incorrect employment information (OPT or H-1B)
  • Misstating immigration history
  • Failing to disclose a prior visa denial
  • Knowingly using fraudulent documents
  • Incorrect marital or family information
  • Inconsistencies during visa or green card interviews
  • Student visa (F-1) misrepresentation allegations
  • OPT/CPT misuse allegations (very common)

Yes, We Can Overcome 212(a)(6)(C)(i). Here Are Examples of Our Successful Cases.

Successful Case #1: Misrepresentation Reversed (No Waiver Needed)

Issue:
An applicant filed I-539 on his own and received a Request for More Evidence. USCIS claimed the company he listed as an employer on an OPT I-20 was fraudulent and alleged misrepresentation.

Outcome:
USCIS withdrew the 212(a)(6)(C)(i) allegation. Our client’s I-539 was approved without a waiver.

Successful Case #2: I-601 Hardship Waiver Approved for Spouse

Issue:
A consular officer claimed an immigrant visa applicant failed to disclose prior overstays.

Outcome:
I-601 approved and our client received an immigrant visa

Successful Case #3: Green Card Granted After NOID Rebuttal

Issue:
USCIS accused our client of misrepresenting previous employment during an H-1B petition.

Outcome:
USCIS closed the misrepresentation allegation and I-485 approved.

Successful Case #4: Student Visa Misrepresentation Overcome

Issue:
The applicant allegedly lied about previous visa denials in DS-160.

Outcome:
The consulate removed the 212(a)(6)(C)(i) finding and F-1 visa was issued.

Successful Case #5: Misrepresentation Not Material → Bar Removed

Issue:
Applicant entered an incorrect job title on a visa form due to an innocent mistake.

Outcome:
Officer overturned the 212a6ci finding and no waiver was required.

When You Need a I-601 Waiver

If the finding cannot be overturned, you must show extreme hardship to a US citizen or LPR spouse or parent. Hardship can include:

  • Medical conditions
  • Pregnancy or high-risk pregnancy
  • Mental health issues (anxiety, PTSD, depression)
  • Financial collapse
  • Losing access to essential care for children
  • Country specific dangers
  • Separation hardship

A well-documented hardship package can secure approval even when the misrepresentation occurred many years earlier.

Your Path to Approval Starts with the Right Legal Team

Overcoming an INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) misrepresentation finding is entirely possible with the right strategy, the right evidence, and the right guidance. Every year, we help applicants just like you successfully challenge USCIS, Consulate, CBP mistakes, reverse wrongful findings, win I-601 waivers, and secure the approvals when they once thought were out of reach. Your case is not hopeless and you don’t have to face this process alone. Email us at info@messersmithlaw.com or call us at 305-515-0613 Same-Day Consultations Available. Let us help you turn a 212(a)(6)(C)(i) setback into a success story of your own.

Immigration Success Stories – INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) and 212(a)(9)(B)

by

Any foreign national who has been unlawfully present in the U.S. for more than 180 days faces a three-year ban on reentry, and those unlawfully present for one year or more face a ten-year ban. However, there are exceptions and nuances in the law that can be leveraged to achieve successful outcomes.

For instance, any alien (other than one lawfully admitted for permanent residence) who has been unlawfully present in the United States for more than 180 days but less than one year, and then voluntarily departs and seeks reentry within three years, is considered inadmissible. Similarly, those unlawfully present for a year or more who seek reentry within ten years are also inadmissible. However, time spent under the age of 18, while a bona fide asylum application is pending, or under family unity protection does not count towards the unlawful presence period. Additionally, VAWA petitioners and victims of severe trafficking can also be exempt from these provisions.

We have successfully assisted many clients in overcoming Notices of Intent to Deny (NOID) due to INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) and INA 212(a)(9)(B). Here are a few notable success stories:

One of our clients, who had an approved I-140 through the EB1 category and was on an O1 visa, received an NOID. During his in-person interview, USCIS questioned him about his O1 visa application and issued an NOID citing INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) for misrepresentation and INA 212(a)(9)(B) for unlawful presence. USCIS argued that his stay on the O1 visa was unlawful due to alleged misrepresentation upon his initial entry to the U.S. We meticulously pieced together all aspects of his case, demonstrating the validity of his claims and ultimately secured a successful outcome.

Another case involved a client sponsored by his U.S. citizen wife. Despite their approved I-130, the client received an NOID citing INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) and INA 212(a)(9)(B) for alleged marriage fraud and overstay which related to his previous B2 visa application. Inconsistencies during the I-485 interview raised red flags, complicating their case. We presented a compelling legal argument and provided sufficient evidence to counter the allegations, leading to the approval of the I-485.

These cases highlight the importance of thorough preparation, strategic legal arguments, and a deep understanding of immigration law. If you are facing similar challenges, we are here to help. Please contact us at 305-515-0613 or info@messersmithlaw.com for expert assistance with your immigration needs.