How USCIS Exposed a Major U Visa Fraud Scheme

In early 2025, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) fraud officers noticed identical crime descriptions and repeated dates across multiple U visa petitions.

They launched an audit of Form I-918 applications and found common addresses and witness statements that did not match public records.

This review led to a joint probe with the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security.

Investigators detailed how active and former law enforcement officers wrote fake robbery reports and certified them on Form I-918B.

The U Visa Fraud scheme inflated the caseload of ineligible applicants seeking protection under Section 101(a)(15)(U) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

U Visa Fraud Scheme Uncovered by USCIS

USCIS’s Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) team flagged multiple U visa petitions with identical robbery narratives.

Each report named foreign nationals as victims of armed robberies in central Louisiana.

USCIS opened a joint inquiry with the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security.

Their work highlights the importance of vigilance against U Visa Fraud.

Key Players in the U Visa Fraud Case

Federal prosecutors indicted five Louisiana men for U visa fraud, bribery, and mail fraud. The defendants included four active and former law enforcement officers:

1. Chandrakant Patel (“Lala”) – Oakdale facilitator.
2. Chad Doyle – Oakdale chief of police.
3. Michael Slaney (“Freck”) – Oakdale marshal.
4. Glynn Dixon – Forest Hill chief of police.
5. Tebo Onishea – Former Glenmora chief of police.

Patel recruited aliens, charged thousands of dollars, and bribed a Rapides Parish deputy. He then directed co‑conspirators to file false police reports. This network exploited the U Visa Fraud vulnerability in the system.

How the U Visa Fraud Scheme Operated

The indictment outlines a nine-and-a-half-year conspiracy. The conspirators followed a consistent, step-by-step process to commit U Visa Fraud:

1. Prospect identifies facilitator: A foreign national seeking U status contacts Chandrakant Patel or an associate. They negotiate fees ranging from $5,000 to $10,000 for the service.
2. Payment and agreement: The alien transfers funds to Patel. In return, Patel guarantees inclusion as a “victim” in a staged armed robbery.
3. Preparation of false reports: Patel instructs co-conspirator officers (Doyle, Slaney, Dixon, Onishea) to draft police reports. These reports describe a violent robbery narrative, complete with fictitious assailant descriptions and property losses.
4. Certification on Form I-918B: Officers sign and stamp certifications on USCIS Form I-918B, attesting to the report’s authenticity. This form is mandatory for U visa applications and must come from law enforcement.
5. Submission of U visa petition: The beneficiary attaches the fabricated police report and Form I-918B to their Form I-918 (Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status) and files with USCIS.
6. Fraud detection and case review: USCIS FDNS employs data analytics tools to compare details across petitions. Identical narratives, matching dates, and recurring officer signatures trigger manual review.

Following the joint federal investigation, agents executed search warrants at law enforcement offices, seized records, and interviewed witnesses.

They confirmed that no actual robberies occurred. The layered fraud undermined the integrity of the U visa program by granting status to ineligible applicants.

U Visa Fraud Charges and Penalties

Federal law sets strict penalties for U visa fraud. The table below summarizes potential sentences:

Indicted defendants face combined penalties. Courts may impose consecutive sentences.

Impact of U Visa Fraud on Legitimate Applicants

U Visa Fraud cases force USCIS to tighten verification. Genuine victims face three main challenges:

1. Longer processing times: USCIS may pause adjudication to perform manual reviews. Valid applicants see waits extend from 8–10 months to over 12–14 months.
2. Stricter document requirements: Adjudicators demand multiple corroborating proofs. Petitioners must submit additional police records, witness statements, and forensic evidence to prove genuine harm.
3. Policy adjustments: In response to fraud, USCIS may revise eligibility guidelines. Upcoming rule changes could narrow qualifying crimes or raise the burden of proof for certification on Form I-918B.

These measures protect program integrity but burden true victims:

• Emotional toll: Delays leave survivors without stable immigration status for longer.
• Financial strain: Collecting extra documentation increases legal and translation costs.
• Uncertainty: Policy shifts can retroactively affect pending petitions.

USCIS must balance rigorous fraud control with its mandate to provide timely relief for crime victims.

Stakeholders should prepare for heightened scrutiny while advocating for safeguards that prevent undue hardship on legitimate applicants.

Best Practices

Immigration lawyers, law enforcement officers, USCIS officials, and applicants must act together to stop U Visa Fraud. Follow these core strategies:

1. Routine Audit of Police Records: Law enforcement agencies should run quarterly audits of reported crimes. Cross-check incident locations, dates, and victim witness statements against local dispatch logs. This prevents fabricated reports from entering the system.
2. Standardize Form I-918B Certification: USCIS should update its policy manual to require detailed narratives on Form I-918B. Officers must include CAD event numbers and official report IDs. This adds a verification layer for every U visa packet.
   • See USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 3, Part B, Chapter 3: Certification Requirements.
3. Data Analytics Screening: USCIS FDNS should expand its software to flag petitions with matching text patterns, similar victim names, or overlapping dates. Automated flags must trigger immediate manual review.
4. Enhanced FDNS Training: Conduct biannual workshops for FDNS officers and local law enforcement. Cover red flags like identical robbery narratives and forged signatures. Use real case studies, including this Louisiana indictment, to illustrate tactics.
5. Clear Reporting Channels: Publicize USCIS OIG’s hotline and online form. Encourage whistleblowers to submit tips on suspected fraud.
   • Report at USCIS Fraud Reporting.
6. Applicant Education: Immigration counsel should brief clients on legitimate U visa criteria. Warn against intermediaries promising guaranteed approval. Provide the official USCIS brochure on U nonimmigrant status.

These measures reinforce trust in the U visa program. They protect victims who meet the strict standards under Section 101(a)(15)(U) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

By following these steps, stakeholders keep the system honest and efficient.

Conclusion

The recent U Visa Fraud indictments reveal vulnerabilities in the system when bad actors exploit law enforcement trust.

True victims of qualifying crimes risk longer waits, stricter reviews, and policy shifts designed to deter abuse.

By understanding how fraud occurs and implementing robust checks—from routine record audits to data-driven analytics—stakeholders preserve the U visa’s promise: safe harbor for crime victims who assist justice.

Don’t let fraud allegations jeopardize your U visa application. Maple Crest Immigration Law Firm offers:

1. Comprehensive Case Review: We audit your Form I-918 packet and police certifications.
2. Strategic Fraud Defense: We prepare responses to FDNS inquiries and ensure your documentation meets USCIS standards.
3. Ongoing Support: We monitor your case, liaise with government agencies, and guide you through every stage.

Secure your U nonimmigrant status with confidence. Contact Maple Crest Immigration Law Firm today for a personalized consultation and protect your path to lawful residency.