sun_burn

I see, thanks. I have no idea how London B2 applicants get adjudicated on a 221(g) without documentation being in the picture, then. I'm guessing everyone either gets a visa or a 214(b) denial for demonstrating insufficient ties, which is basically insurmountable (1% of denials get overturned, as the state department data shows). I wouldn't rate OPs chances highly, unless she tries a few years hence, with substantially different professional circumstances and a different tourism-focused plan. Having multiple closely spaced denials as a youngster tends to suggest proof of immigrant intent, which is hard to overcome.
Well once again I'm not familiar with London, but the State Dept data I quoted shows 214(b) denials far outnumber 221(g) ones. Also, the reversal rates are vastly different. With 221(g)s, there are 800K denials and 670K reversals of decision on further documentary proof. 214(b) denial is a dead end - 2.7 million denials with 27K reversals.

crg

DOS often doesn't have the time or interest in reviewing the bulk of self-serving B1/B2 documents submitted. Does anyone think the note from the USC family member (who may have overstayed/adjusted/claimed asylum themselves a few years before) is worth reading?

Many of the 221(g) denials/reversals are for administrative processing, to review a possible criminal issue or other issue, pending concurrence from DHS for a waiver or vetting, or anything else (not enough passport validity, consent from another parent).

Since there is no pending status, every visa must either be approved or placed into a denied status within a business day (214b, 221g or hard finding of ineligibility). The ones that have a chance to be approved later sit in 221(g) until DOS is ready to proceed. 214b for insufficient ties or failing to establish the activities fit within the nonimmigrant classification being sought is essentially the trash pile.

scrubbedexpat099

There is no appeal for a B.