Submitting evidence to CO

[vuster 0]

Hello All,

My lawyer put together an evidence package that's bound by fasteners (divided up so it can fit thru the opening). The package has a Table of Contents showing where this-that-and the other things are. My fear is that the CO won't look at the table of content to find things. So, I'm thinking about separating everything, ie, pictures, emails, phone logs, etc., and drop the table of contents altogehter. What do you guys think?

thanks.

[toddandhien 2]

I skipped the ToC and used tabbed dividers. I labeled the tabs so that upon quick inspection, you could find what you were looking for. The CO never looked at the books I prepared but they were pretty usable and were good for reviewing with Hien before the interview so she was comfortable where to find all the info.

[Bernie C 24]

Hello All,

My lawyer put together an evidence package that's bound by fasteners (divided up so it can fit thru the opening). The package has a Table of Contents showing where this-that-and the other things are. My fear is that the CO won't look at the table of content to find things. So, I'm thinking about separating everything, ie, pictures, emails, phone logs, etc., and drop the table of contents altogehter. What do you guys think?

thanks.

I did both. In the front I included a TOC, and then I tabbed all the sections by date and type. For us it worked great but was only of use to us. The CO asked for specifc things and was not interested in having the whole package.

For example he asked: may I see some pictures - so we had pictures tabbed from each visit (Jan09, Apr09, Sep09 etc)

Then he asked to see flight tickets - they were all separated by date of visit (in this case he wanted to see September tickets, I think since the Jan and Apr tickets were already in the petition package).

He never looked at any email, hotel or restaurant receipts.

Also - I did not bind the papers but I put them all in individual plastic sleeves so they could be removed and replaced easily.

If everything is bound together and you remove the fasteners it only takes a little slip and papers are everywhere so I'm a big fan of using the sleeves and a flexible binder.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I did both. In the front I included a TOC, and then I tabbed all the sections by date and type. For us it worked great but was only of use to us. The CO asked for specifc things and was not interested in having the whole package.

For example he asked: may I see some pictures - so we had pictures tabbed from each visit (Jan09, Apr09, Sep09 etc)

Then he asked to see flight tickets - they were all separated by date of visit (in this case he wanted to see September tickets, I think since the Jan and Apr tickets were already in the petition package).

He never looked at any email, hotel or restaurant receipts.

Also - I did not bind the papers but I put them all in individual plastic sleeves so they could be removed and replaced easily.

If everything is bound together and you remove the fasteners it only takes a little slip and papers are everywhere so I'm a big fan of using the sleeves and a flexible binder.

I agree with this approach. The first time they are called up to the window, the consulate employee is going to ask for specific things in a specific order. Unless you're intending to force them to accept some documents they don't ask for (some people have done this with the timeline) then it won't matter how you've bound them - they'll need to take them apart to submit them.

Mr. Nam helped us sort each small packet of documents into a submittable bundle. For example, one bundle for the I-134 and supporting evidence, etc. He put a small paper label at the top of each bundle (so Phuong could quickly tell what was what), and used heavy "butterfly" clips to hold the bundles together. Phuong sorted them all into an accordion file. The only stuff that was somewhat unorganized was her evidence of a family relationship to her kids who were applying for K2's. That didn't matter because they called her into a secondary room to present that evidence.