22 C.F.R. § 41.105

Supporting documents and fingerprinting

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Supporting documents—(1) Authority to require documents. The consular officer is authorized to require documents considered necessary to establish the alien's eligibility to receive a nonimmigrant visa. All documents and other evidence presented by the alien, including briefs submitted by attorneys or other representatives, shall be considered by the consular officer.

(2) Unobtainable documents. If the consular officer is satisfied that a document or record required under the authority of this section is unobtainable, the consular officer may accept satisfactory alternative pertinent evidence. A document or other record shall be considered unobtainable if it cannot be procured without causing the applicant or a member of the applicant's family actual hardship as distinct from normal delay and inconvenience.

(3) Photographs required. Every applicant for a nonimmigrant visa must furnish photographs of the number and specification prescribed by the Department. The applicant must either upload a digital photograph electronically as part of submitting an online visa application or submit a paper photograph at the direction of the Department or consular officer. The photograph shall be considered signed when the applicant signs the appropriate application form pursuant to § 41.103(b)(3).

(4) Police certificates. A police certificate is a certification by the police or other appropriate authorities stating what, if anything, their records show concerning the alien. An applicant for a nonimmigrant visa is required to present a police certificate if the consular officer has reason to believe that a police or criminal record exists, except that no police certificate is required in the case of an alien who is within a class of nonimmigrants classifiable under visa symbols A-1, A-2, C-3, G-1 through G-4, NATO-1 through NATO-4 or NATO-6.

(b) Fingerprinting. Every applicant for a nonimmigrant visa must furnish fingerprints, as required by the consular officer.

[52 FR 42597, Nov. 5, 1987; 53 FR 9112, 9172, Mar. 21, 1988, as amended at 61 FR 1522, Jan. 22, 1996; 61 FR 53058, Oct. 10, 1996; 64 FR 13510, Mar. 19, 1999; 67 FR 8478, Feb. 25, 2002; 72 FR 74175, Dec. 31, 2007; 73 FR 49092, Aug. 20, 2008; 88 FR 13696, Mar. 6, 2023]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2022–2026 · leading case: Melody Pak v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., 91 F.4th 896 (7th Cir. 2024).
Melody Pak v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., 91 F.4th 896 (7th Cir. 2024). “” 22 C.F.R. § 41.105 (a). We might be able to infer bad faith “if [an applicant] had presented strong evidence … that the consular officer refused to consider.”
Edae v. U.S. Dep't of State (D.D.C. 2022). · cites it 2× “They allege that, when adjudicating her first visa application, the consular officer did not consider “[a]ll documents and other evidence presented by” Edae and therefore did not comply with 22 C.F.R. § 41.105 (a)(1). Id. ¶¶ 12–13. They further claim that mandamus relief should…”
Karbasian v. United States Dep't of State (S.D. Ill. 2025). · cites it 2× “” 22 C.F.R. § 41.105 . The alien’s additional statements to the consular officer “become a part of the visa application,” and “[a]ll documents required by the consular officer under the authority of § 41.”
The Province of St. Joseph of the Capuchin Order, Inc., et al. v. United States Sec'y of State, et al. (E.D. Mich. 2026). “494 (citing 22 C.F.R. § 41.105 (a)(1);2 9 FAM 403.7-2(3);3 9 FAM 403.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.