Jump to content
katej0203

Immigration officer comes to your house??

 Share

43 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
If one day they came to my house I would have absolutely NOTHING to fear since my marriage is for true love and I have never lied to US Immigration.
The fact is that you (and none of us) would not know WHAT exactly they're looking for, and they are not required to tell you, or even to tell you the truth if you ask. Furthermore, anything that they see within the house (once they're invited in or allowed to enter) becomes fair game for any action that they wish to take. Now, with this in mind, how would it be prudent to invite or allow them in?
So, don't try "fear" for me when my fears or no fears are none of your business.
Thanks for your little lecture (with such "peace"!) All of the advice that I offer on VJ is from the standpoint of "what is the WORST that can possibly happen, and what is the most PRUDENT course of action to minimize or eliminate it?" If you believe that it is completely risk-free to ALLOW a governmental agent to enter someone's property and for that someone to OFFER answers to questions on the AGENT'S agenda and timetable, that's your personal belief, and you're entitled to it. However, if you advocate that practice to other VJ readers without also acknowledging the "worst possible" that can happen as a result of following your advice, that's entirely different, and irresponsible.

Helping a law officer solve a crime is one thing. Being blindsided as a result of our failure to claim and exercise our Fourth & Fifth Amendment rights is naive, at BEST. How would you feel if someone took your advice and ended up regretting having done so?

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
If one day they came to my house I would have absolutely NOTHING to fear since my marriage is for true love and I have never lied to US Immigration.
The fact is that you (and none of us) would not know WHAT exactly they're looking for, and they are not required to tell you, or even to tell you the truth if you ask. Furthermore, anything that they see within the house (once they're invited in or allowed to enter) becomes fair game for any action that they wish to take. Now, with this in mind, how would it be prudent to invite or allow them in?
So, don't try "fear" for me when my fears or no fears are none of your business.
Thanks for your little lecture (with such "peace"!) All of the advice that I offer on VJ is from the standpoint of "what is the WORST that can possibly happen, and what is the most PRUDENT course of action to minimize or eliminate it?" If you believe that it is completely risk-free to ALLOW a governmental agent to enter someone's property and for that someone to OFFER answers to questions on the AGENT'S agenda and timetable, that's your personal belief, and you're entitled to it. However, if you advocate that practice to other VJ readers without also acknowledging the "worst possible" that can happen as a result of following your advice, that's entirely different, and irresponsible.

Helping a law officer solve a crime is one thing. Being blindsided as a result of our failure to claim and exercise our Fourth & Fifth Amendment rights is naive, at BEST. How would you feel if someone took your advice and ended up regretting having done so?

Ok TBoneTX, you got my attention, so what could happen if you allow an Immigration officer in your house under these circumstances:

1- you don't have any illegal immigrant hiden in your house

2- you don't have contact with illegal immigrants

3- you are not an illegal immigrant

4- you status is legal

I understand your point saying people have the right to allow them to enter or not (it's not even prudent you allow a stranger in your house but the subject here is an actual officer). If someone have any problem of course they will try to be as far as possible from the officers. But I need you to please answer me then, in my case why wouldn't I let them enter if everything is right? Because when I first gave my advice i said: "if everything is true, there's nothing to fear". I came to the United States with everything right, my husband and I did our best in our processes (k-1, AOS) and I have nothing to hide from immigration. My point is: if you are true (under immigration law) what so bad thing could happen to you?

Plus, I never said your advices are bad or good, I don't know you and if you say u help lots of people here I believe you, but as I said I have my question above with no answer.

Peace. :star::luv:

Caroline (Brazil) and Phil (USA)

yPnbm4.png

2003i9szfhw0aa.jpg

f2MWm5.png

View my Timeline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ICE are the same ones who interview us? :unsure: I thought ICE was just for busting possible illegal alien operations such as companies employing them? :unsure:

Would it not be the same sort of immigration officer who conducts the interviews at the office that would come for a home interview? :unsure: or are they the same? :unsure:

Homer Sez:

Increase your wordiness,

Boudoir:

Where a French guy does it.

Our full time line is in our story on our profile.

K1

04-30-2008.......I-129F POSTED

05-01-2008....NOA1 (Touched 05-04-2008, Touched 04-07-2008)

09-23-2008....NOA2 Approved(See below for receipt of actual NOA2 and update in the USCIS System***)

01-13-2009....INTERVIEW (APPROVED)

02-18-2009....POE (LAX)

04-09-2009....WEDDING

AOS

06-12-2009.....AOS,EAD and AP Fedexed.

06-15-2009.....Signed for by J.CHYBA

06-18-2009.....NOA1 dated for AOS/AP/EAD

06-19-2009.....Check cleared

06-23-2009.....Touched AOS/EAD/AP

07-20-2009.....phoned helpline to report no biometrics appointment sent, Service request generated.

07-25-2009.....Recieved biometrics notice (generated on the 22nd june) for the 08-19-2009.

07-30-2009.....Did early walk in biometrics.

07-31-2009.....Touched AOS/EAD

08-06-2009.....Generated interview notice(received 08/10/09)

08-10-2009.....EAD/AP Approved

08-19-2009.....***NOA2 (Finally received after 6 Phone calls, 11 months late) :)

09-09-2009.....Aos interview.(APPROVED)first card production email

09-12-2009.....Welcome Notice Received.

event.png

rmq4qx3kup.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
ICE are the same ones who interview us? :unsure: I thought ICE was just for busting possible illegal alien operations such as companies employing them? :unsure:

Would it not be the same sort of immigration officer who conducts the interviews at the office that would come for a home interview? :unsure: or are they the same? :unsure:

I think you are right.

Caroline (Brazil) and Phil (USA)

yPnbm4.png

2003i9szfhw0aa.jpg

f2MWm5.png

View my Timeline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know a couple to which this happened (not VJ participants). The immigration officials have a limited budget and a bunch of cases, so they only make a home visit if they think there's a reasonable chance it will uncover something. In other words, only if they already smell something bad.

Regarding whether to let them in, everyone's got the 4th amendment rights to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. They absolutely cannot throw you in jail for remaining silent, and/or refusing to let them in without a warrant. On the other hand, if they are trying to make a decision on an immigration benefit which you have applied for, you have the burden of proving eligibility for that benefit, via a preponderance of the evidence. If you don't sustain that burden of proving eligibility, they can deny the benefit. The burden of proof isn't the same as the burden of proof for a criminal trial. You may want to consult with your immigration attorney if you're concerned about this (and if you're really concerned about this, you probably should have an immigration attorney).

It could be an opportunity to show them you're a valid couple. Or, since they typically only do this when they already suspect something is wrong, it could be an opportunity for them to gather evidence to confirm their suspicions. They probably won't be looking too hard for evidence that's in your favor, and they may misinterpret things against you.

I've also heard of them interviewing neighbors. You don't get to decide whether your neighbors talk to them. They may show your photos to your neighbors and ask your neighbors whether they ever see you coming and going, and if they see the two of you together. So it doesn't hurt to introduce yourselves to your neighbors, and perhaps even to be somewhat affectionate in front of them.

As has been said, this isn't a common thing, so I wouldn't be too concerned, especially not if you're a bona fide couple.

04 Apr, 2004: Got married

05 Apr, 2004: I-130 Sent to CSC

13 Apr, 2004: I-130 NOA 1

19 Apr, 2004: I-129F Sent to MSC

29 Apr, 2004: I-129F NOA 1

13 Aug, 2004: I-130 Approved by CSC

28 Dec, 2004: I-130 Case Complete at NVC

18 Jan, 2005: Got the visa approved in Caracas

22 Jan, 2005: Flew home together! CCS->MIA->SFO

25 May, 2005: I-129F finally approved! We won't pursue it.

8 June, 2006: Our baby girl is born!

24 Oct, 2006: Window for filing I-751 opens

25 Oct, 2006: I-751 mailed to CSC

18 Nov, 2006: I-751 NOA1 received from CSC

30 Nov, 2006: I-751 Biometrics taken

05 Apr, 2007: I-751 approved, card production ordered

23 Jan, 2008: N-400 sent to CSC via certified mail

19 Feb, 2008: N-400 Biometrics taken

27 Mar, 2008: Naturalization interview notice received (NOA2 for N-400)

30 May, 2008: Naturalization interview, passed the test!

17 June, 2008: Naturalization oath notice mailed

15 July, 2008: Naturalization oath ceremony!

16 July, 2008: Registered to vote and applied for US passport

26 July, 2008: US Passport arrived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
The immigration officials have a limited budget and a bunch of cases, so they only make a home visit if they think there's a reasonable chance it will uncover something. In other words, only if they already smell something bad.
Yes -- a red flag.
They probably won't be looking too hard for evidence that's in your favor, and they may misinterpret things against you.
Bingo.

The point, Lisa, is that even if YOU think that you are a bona fide couple, and all of the other factors that you mention are true, you don't know what the IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS really want, and (by Supreme Court ruling!) they can LIE to you. The prudent response would be to listen to their purported reason, and, no matter WHAT it is, tell them (through a closed door) "I can't talk right now. Please leave your business card in the door; my attorney may get back with you soon."

As lucyrich says, such a visit would be uncommon. That's a very good idea about becoming acquainted with the neighbors.

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline

TboneTX, wow I would never imagine something like that. I didn't know immigration could lie. Since we have to tell the truth always. No fair! :wacko:

This is what I was imagining if they came they would check documents, evidences and everything would be ok.

So, even though being a bona fide couple and being as the immigration laws rule we must be prepared for these things! Seriously, I didn't know that.

Well, thank you for the answer, I can't imagine something like that happening [even though it's rare] and I being far from my babe, no way.

Just to clarify, what would be the reason for the immigration to lie, is it just to send people back even if they are bona fide couple and everything is under the law?

Peace, always. :star::luv:

Caroline (Brazil) and Phil (USA)

yPnbm4.png

2003i9szfhw0aa.jpg

f2MWm5.png

View my Timeline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: Afghanistan
Timeline

Who hear actually answers the door when a federal agent or officer knocks?? I mean they either want to ask you silly questions, tell you a loved one is dead or incarcerated or let you know that a hurricane, bomb, gas leak... whatever is coming.

I'm being silly, but seriously I never answer the door its always bad news.

Edited by lancer1655
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
I didn't know immigration could lie.
And so can any law-enforcement personnel. This is why if we're ever detained or arrested, we do best to claim and exercise our right to remain silent (completely silent!) and to confer with an attorney.
what would be the reason for the immigration to lie, is it just to send people back even if they are bona fide couple and everything is under the law?
It's summed up this way: The State (meaning from the local police up through the Federal level) is after BODIES. This is to get money (through fines), to incarcerate, to deport, or whatever else. ANYTHING that they see (in your home, in your car, or on your person), and ANYTHING that you tell them -- even in a simple "contact" on the street that seems to you like a harmless chat -- can and will be used against you. Do not let the State have that opportunity!

In the U.S., only a judge can order us to answer questions. Let the State drag us into court without our willing or unwitting help. If the State is interested enough, it will, but we'll have at least some time to prepare and to operate through the legal system, with an attorney to represent us... as long as we didn't hose ourselves ahead of time by consenting to warrantless searches or by volunteering information by answering questions!

When an agent of the State asks us something, the response "Nothing personal, sir, but I don't have to answer that" is quick, true, and elegant.

THREE different attorneys -- two of whom are immigration attorneys -- gave me this advice, over time, in differing words: In every circumstance, avoid Federal agents like the plague!

If anyone believes that the above is paranoid, I prefer to call it "being prudent." We don't KNOW what immigration agents or others really want from us, which is why it makes sense to protect ourselves from the unknown.

Edited by TBoneTX

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
I didn't know immigration could lie.
And so can any law-enforcement personnel. This is why if we're ever detained or arrested, we do best to claim and exercise our right to remain silent (completely silent!) and to confer with an attorney.
what would be the reason for the immigration to lie, is it just to send people back even if they are bona fide couple and everything is under the law?
It's summed up this way: The State (meaning from the local police up through the Federal level) is after BODIES. This is to get money (through fines), to incarcerate, to deport, or whatever else. ANYTHING that they see (in your home, in your car, or on your person), and ANYTHING that you tell them -- even in a simple "contact" on the street that seems to you like a harmless chat -- can and will be used against you. Do not let the State have that opportunity!

In the U.S., only a judge can order us to answer questions. Let the State drag us into court without our willing or unwitting help. If the State is interested enough, it will, but we'll have at least some time to prepare and to operate through the legal system, with an attorney to represent us... as long as we didn't hose ourselves ahead of time by consenting to warrantless searches or by volunteering information by answering questions!

When an agent of the State asks us something, the response "Nothing personal, sir, but I don't have to answer that" is quick, true, and elegant.

THREE different attorneys -- two of whom are immigration attorneys -- gave me this advice, over time, in differing words: In every circumstance, avoid Federal agents like the plague!

If anyone believes that the above is paranoid, I prefer to call it "being prudent." We don't KNOW what immigration agents or others really want from us, which is why it makes sense to protect ourselves from the unknown.

Thank you for the reply!!!

Well, may I ask one more question? Let's say you are driving or walking on the street and some officer stops you. Are you in this kind of risk? :unsure:

The thing that makes me so upset about this is that it seems like they care more about busting legal people more than illegal. I don't wish anything bad to illegal people but unlike us, they don't have to wait, they don't have to pay what we pay, even my husband is very upset with this fact. While we are here to live with our families forever, after all we have passed with K-1 or CR-1/k-3, most of illegal people are here to make money and go back to their country.

And please, if u can answer I have another question: does this happen even after our naturalization?

Thank you for the patience with me. :star:

Caroline (Brazil) and Phil (USA)

yPnbm4.png

2003i9szfhw0aa.jpg

f2MWm5.png

View my Timeline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: Afghanistan
Timeline

That depends where you are stopped. If you are in state or community that has a stop and identify law in the books then any law enforcement including ICE can demand ID. If you do not have ID you must give your name and address.

Otherwise, no, you do not need to identify yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
That depends where you are stopped. If you are in state or community that has a stop and identify law in the books then any law enforcement including ICE can demand ID. If you do not have ID you must give your name and address.

Otherwise, no, you do not need to identify yourself.

Lancer is correct. In Texas, for example, the "failure to identify" law (Texas Penal Code 38.03) says that you are required to provide ID or name/address/birthdate IF the officer has good cause to believe that you are a witness to a criminal offense, or if you are being lawfully detained or (of course) arrested. This arose from Hiibel v. 6th Judicial Court of Nevada a few years ago -- an awful Supreme Court decision, if you ask me (but no one is asking or cares). If you are stopped while driving, you must provide your driver's license regardless.

Lisa, my understanding (from talking with attorneys and looking at Supreme Court decisions) is this: At least for now, if a law-enforcement officer merely "contacts" you and tries to ask you questions while you are on foot, you are free to walk away without a word, or with a "Sorry -- I have no time to talk right now" type of statement. If he ORDERS you to stop, you must, but you are not required to answer questions. The officer can detain you with "reasonable articulable suspicion" (more than just a hunch), or arrest you with "probable cause." If there is any doubt whether you are being detained, ask, and always state "I wish to be on my way. Am I free to go?" Currently, the longest that an officer can detain you without reasonable articulable suspicion is apparently around 90 minutes. The foregoing is my honest understanding as a layman; please consult an attorney before relying on anything above. If you are ever detained or arrested, ALWAYS tell EVERY officer that you exercise your right to remain silent, and you want an attorney... and then shut UP, no matter how hard they try to get you to talk!

Your rights are somewhat less if you're stopped while driving (for example, you must provide identification if asked), although you can and should always, ALWAYS refuse any request to search your vehicle. Nothing good can EVER come of it. The officer is free to inspect whatever is in plain view from wherever he stands outside the car.

It does seem that "legal" immigrants are being hassled. I believe that there is so much anti-ALL-immigrant sentiment out there, because people are so frustrated about the seemingly unconquerable problem with Illegals, that they take it out on the nearest targets, meaning us. There is little that we can do except try not to take it personally.

Although it would be rare if we mind our own business, abide by the laws, and look respectable in appearance, any of us at any time is potentially subject to attention from law enforcement. If future Supreme Court decisions further erode the little that remains of the Fourth Amendment, or if (heaven forbid), the President declares martial law, we're all sunk.

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline

Thank you, Lancer1655!!!

TBoneTX, thank you very much for the explanation!

It's good to know these things, I had quite different view about all this. I'm sorry if I was kind of rude some posts ago, I thought the fact of being a bona fide couple and having everything right we had nothing to fear. Well, now I know, the world is not just roses. :unsure:

God bless we all. :star::luv:

Caroline (Brazil) and Phil (USA)

yPnbm4.png

2003i9szfhw0aa.jpg

f2MWm5.png

View my Timeline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline

Thank you for your classy apology, Lisa. To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security will soon have neither." Let's claim and exercise our rights while the U.S. Constitution still exists.

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: Aruba
Timeline

Way to instill fear among people TBONE ... sorry you are right about people having rights and such and i agree with that.

If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear.. if you act like you do have something to hide .. "go away" "come back wth a warrant" "not until my lawyer is here" then you have just opened the door that you have something to hide and then you begin the term "Probable Cause". If they come to talk they are there for a reason that they want to clear up maybe something they missed maybe something that looked funny that really isn't and they need to straighten it out. Maybe some stupid neighbor made a complaint about someone is working when they shouldn't. A few minutes of chit chat and showing evidence will clear it all up....

OR

they are there because that immigrant IS doing something they shouldn't be doing and they should be caught because it's people like that who are making it more difficult for EVERYONE on this site who want to be in the USA for their spouses or for whatever reason but do it the right and legal way.

as for me .. I'd rather spend a few moments answering a couple questions and telling someone my name than having to be hauled off locked in a room until they figure it out and run prints and stuff .. then having to wait hours for a lawyer that will show up just to tell them himself what your name is and where you were and were going and then they say well you fit a discription of someone we were looking for but it turns out your not that person so you can go .. and before you leave that lawyer hands you a bill which will be pricey because he had to come all the way down there ... it can get out of hand real quick.

but back on topic this was about IMMIGRATION and it's put on us as the pettitioners and the benificiaries to prove we are doing this legally and it's in our best interest to work "with" them not against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Didn't find the answer you were looking for? Ask our VJ Immigration Lawyers.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
“;}
×
×
  • Create New...