Disheartening Boston Cititzenship Interview

[MIDUVIL 34]

While you may have felt interrogated by a Hispanic, I feel that the I.O. did his job. You didn't file taxes jointly, you work on a satellite above Earth, your hubby is under mommy's helm, and you travel to your home country any opportunity arises.

No, but seriously, the I.O. just did his job, and since you answered all the questions in a satisfactory manner, you'll get your approval in about a week or two, at the very latest. Find confidence in the fact that applicants who fraud the system have a really hard time passing such an interview, and that's the idea behind being subjected to interrogation.

She doesn't work on a satellite above Earth.

[Nicoco 26]

You really have to start filing jointly to avoid trouble during naturalization especially if your sposuse is going to apply for naturalization based on having been to a permanent residdent for three years and married to USC. You have to know that it is very rare for an USC to still live with his/her parents even after 18years. Unless you show that the other things you have jointly far outweigh not filing together. Also you have to know that even though your parents can claim you on their tax, you and your spouse can stil file jointly so filing seperate is not an excuse.

Yep this year should be fine.

[NickD 202]

Perfectly legal with the IRS for a married couple to file either jointly or separately, whichever gives you the best tax advantage. But when filing separately under the so-called marriage privilege, you need to provide both your husbands and your tax returns. IO should note you both have the same address. Easy enough to open a joint bank account, banks are begging for accounts if that is the problem.

Staying out of the country for over six consecutive months would be a problem, you are not even close to that. You should receive a letter in about two weeks requesting more evidence Let's see what happens.

[Wilerao59 10]

Wilerao .. sorry, but you are wrong. Yes, I can fully expect that EVERY USCIS officer and in fact EVERY PERSON should be kind, professional and humble. I refuse to expect or accept rudeness and crassness in anyone. I don't read where VenusAngel made "so many statements" which would lead anyone to believe her marriage to be false, and it is not up to you to define the terms of their marriage or relationship with family.

First of all, I'm not here to argue with you or anyone else; rather to express my opinions like everyone else regardless of you or anyone to be agreed with my opinions or not. This is a open public forum wherein everyone is welcome to express their opinions so long it's done in a civilized way which was exactly I did. If you don't like my opinions or don't agree with me then it's perfectly fine and okay but you to say that its not up to me to define the terms of OP's marriage or relationship then I think I should remind you that any kind of information on any public forum is open for judgement. Information are there to form a judgement. That's another fact that some might not like those kinds of judgements, but then they shouldn't come on a public forum to spill their information. We, viewers and members, do provide OUR OWN opinions ("judgements") whenever someone posts something on this kinds of public forum. Thus, you can not tell people what they should do and shouldn't so long everything is a civilized way.

Remind you, I didn't define the terms of OP's marriage or relationship; rather I expressed my opinions based on what information she provided over here about her interview experiences. Her situation certainly doesn't seem to be norm, which is why officer was more curious or suspicious about her marriage and relationship which made him to ask so many questions. Perhaps, OP's situation seems normal to YOU but it's certainly not a norm. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong in filing tax returns separately but when it comes to immigration matters then its a very important document, and officer just wanted to know why they filed separately instead of jointly. That's all. Also OP's extensive trips outside the US despite of husband is being dependent on his parents was another bummer even though there is nothing wrong in that. As I said that she would get approval soon once supervisor would review her application because there is nothing could make OP's application to be denied based on what she said about her interview experience. But you can not say that officer was unprofessional or not courteous. He was supposed to ask questions relating to the application which exactly he did....sometimes they do press in a hard way that doesn't mean they weren't courteous. And if OP believes that officer was not courteous and professional then she is free to file a complaint against the officer right away. I'm sure she wouldn't have complained about all this if her application would have been approved. This is a life, and there is never a thing like perfection or by-the-law, especially when it comes to USCIS. Been there, done that. Some officers are nicer than others, so does everything in the life.

At last, I think you should read initial posting of OP wholly to know whether or not she made "so many" statements or not. Plus, officer had not suspected her marriage/relationship nor he had asked so many questions from her if there seemed to be norm. Anyway, you are entitled to your views as I'm to mine. I'm not here to rubber-stamp someone nor to form a hullar-club; rather I'm here to express my opinions in a honest way so that OP could understand and be informative of why officer thought what he thoughts and what could happen next which could help her than badmouthing OP to feel myself better.

[blankmedia 41]

I've crossed the border thousands of times (literally) as I am a dual citizen and one thing I learned is that different CBP agents have different tactics to see how you react. Some of them act like the officer you talked about and other times they try to act buddy-buddy and then turn answers against me. Some play dumb, some act like they don't care. In the end it always turns out okay even if it seems like they have been out to get me. They just have these weird tactics to try to work on people. I suspect everything will turn out okay and the officer was trying to make you uncomfortable on purpose to see how you would react. Some people under pressure like that will just give up or confess to something they have been hiding. Although it may see ridiculous to you, if the officer has seen it happen before then they know it works and that becomes their method. Anyway, just a though.

Good Luck!

[little_dreamer 11]

I've crossed the border thousands of times (literally) as I am a dual citizen and one thing I learned is that different CBP agents have different tactics to see how you react. Some of them act like the officer you talked about and other times they try to act buddy-buddy and then turn answers against me. Some play dumb, some act like they don't care. In the end it always turns out okay even if it seems like they have been out to get me. They just have these weird tactics to try to work on people. I suspect everything will turn out okay and the officer was trying to make you uncomfortable on purpose to see how you would react. Some people under pressure like that will just give up or confess to something they have been hiding. Although it may see ridiculous to you, if the officer has seen it happen before then they know it works and that becomes their method. Anyway, just a though.

Good Luck!

Very very true!!! They do that as like a test...some intimidate, some are sweet and bubbly (like ours-thank god) and some are rude....some are just plain mean...I have heard so many horror stories of IO......our friend had one who was so mean and sarcastic.......he made our friend the wife (immigrant) cry...he told her to even 'hold it together or this interview will be over'....they are sick!! Too bad we cant report/omplain about them....they get paid to be asses....i still count my blessings that we had a sweet one!!!

[NickD 202]

An adjudication officer has every right to question us in regards to fraud, some are less tactful than others. Important thing is the outcome, key here is to be perfectly honest in all respects.

Unlike a non-documented immigrant working for a corporation farm, they have no rights whatsoever, even if they lose a limb in the process of doing their job. You have rights and can as high in the US courts as you want to. In our case, a simple call to our senators office was enough, but first in the practical sense, have to learn what that outcome is.

Unfortunately in this life, run into many so-called certified jerks, just have to learn how to deal with this.

Just reviewed the requirements to become an adjudication officer, quite minimal, high school education, six weeks training in Missouri and one week on the job experience. Due to over staffing, no adjudication officer jobs available right now. Sometimes wonder if you provided more than the required evidence, they demand proof you paid a ten year old parking ticket or watn a completely worthless additional joint utility bill as further evidence is done solely for the purpose of giving them more things to do to justify their existence.

[DC85 113]

I think the blame should be on people. I am wondering if each one of us filed a complain against these unprofessional officers, would they exist anymore!! I doubt it, trust me some of them they think that they control the peoples' life, and that is why you see some of them they do everything in the interview but being professional. To all of you who are saying they have the right to question everything, I agree but in professional way, please go over this quote from USCIS in regards of the how the IO should be.

So for me if I faced such a situation, I am not gonna think twice about filing a complain to the field office director, nobody should be scared to do so thinking that the officer might deny your application, which he can't cos your file will be reviewed twice.

2.6 Professional Service.

This section will first define professional service and then describe what this means in practice by explaining how to interact professionally with applicants.

(a) What is Professionalism ?

Your behavior should demonstrate that you are representing the U.S. Government and the people of the United States. Your actions will affect the applicant's perceptions of the entire Nation and its Government.

(b) What Does this Mean in Practice ?

Do: (1) Demonstrate in word and demeanor that conducting interviews is your first priority .

The most important element of your job is to conduct eligibility interviews. Therefore, your attitude should reflect the importance of the applications at hand and that conducting interviews is your top priority. If you approach the interview in a bored, frenzied, or distracted manner, your attitude will be conveyed to the interviewee. Similarly, you should never treat the interview as an interruption or a distraction.

(2) Separate the personal from the professional .

When you interact with applicants, always remember that you are a professional. Therefore, you should not allow your own personal feelings, beliefs, or experiences to lessen or diminish your professional demeanor.

(3) Maintain control of the interview .

In order to ensure that you obtain all of the information you need in an efficient and timely manner, it is important to maintain control of the interview. This means that you should keep the interview focused on the task at hand: determining the applicant's eligibility for the benefit being sought. You can accomplish this by steering the conversation to topics that pertain to eligibility, making sure that your questions shape the interview, and being alert, firm, assertive and businesslike.

(4) Stay under control .

If you allow an applicant to upset you or allow prejudices to influence you, you will lose control of the interview. If an applicant says something that upsets you, don't take it personally, remain calm, and do not respond in a similar manner. If you lose your control, the interview can quickly degenerate, and you will have lost the opportunity to obtain the information you need to make a decision.

(5) Dress appropriately .

Your dress should be neat and businesslike and reflect the serious nature of the interview. Neat grooming and good personal hygiene sends a message to the applicant that you are competent and take the process seriously.

(6) Maintain a professional work space .

As much as possible, your works pace should convey the importance and seriousness of the proceedings. Maintaining a neat and well-organized work space conveys respect for the applicant and the interview process.

(7) Keep your comments about the applicant focused on the applicant's eligibility for the benefit being sought .

The entire purpose of your job is to determine the applicant's eligibility for benefits. You should not discuss with the applicant sensitive matters that do not pertain to the application at hand.

(8) Provide efficient and effective service .

As an adjudicator, you must simultaneously balance two important goals: efficiency and effectiveness. You should process applications as efficiently as possible. At the same time, you must conduct effective interviews that provide you with enough information to make correct decisions. From an efficiency perspective, you should speak with your supervisor and review your performance work plan to understand how many interviews per day you are expected to complete. The most important way you can ensure effect iveness is by knowledgeably applying the laws, regulations, and policies that pertain to Adjudications while interacting with applicants courteously and professionally.

(9) Provide ethical service .

As a USCIS employee, you should display a level of judgment, integrity, and self-control that reflects positively upon you and the USCIS . With this in mind, you should understand the standards of conduct and the code of ethics that govern USCIS employees. [see also section 22 of the Employee Handbook. ] Your standards of conduct should always be consistent with these codes of ethics. It is also important to remember that our standards of conduct may not always be consistent with some of the applicant's cultural expectations. For example, some applicants may offer you gifts or gratuities because they believe it is culturally appropriate to provide such items to government officials, rather than because they are attempting to unfairly influence the outcome of the interview. Depending on the circumstances , you should explain that such activity is not acceptable. However, it is not necessarily a reason to deny the application. You should, however, bring the situation to the attention of your supervisor, no matter what you believe is the motivation, and follow his or her directions. In most cases, you will need to document for yourself what transpired, and how you and the supervisor resolved the incident.

Don't: (1) Don't make derogatory comments about any other person's race, religion, gender, nationality, or sexual orientation . Such comments are never acceptable.

(2) Don't drink, eat, smoke, chew gum, talk on the telephone, watch TV, or listen to the radio while conducting an interview . All of these actions suggest that you are not taking the applicant or the application seriously.

(3) Don't bully or belittle an applicant . While you should always closely question an applicant about his/her application, you should not do so in a bullying or belittling manner.

(4) Don't discipline applicant's children . In general, it is not acceptable for young children not applying for benefits to accompany the applicant during the interview. (Your local office policy may provide for exceptions in certain circumstances in this regard). If extraordinary circumstances exist, and children do attend the interview and misbehave you should not discipline them. It is appropriate to ask the applicant to control his/her children.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited January 29, 2013 by myafi1985

[little_dreamer 11]

I think the blame should be on people. I am wondering if each one of us filed a complain against these unprofessional officers, would they exist anymore!! I doubt it, trust me some of them they think that they control the peoples' life, and that is why you see some of them they do everything in the interview but being professional. To all of you who are saying they have the right to question everything, I agree but in professional way, please go over this quote from USCIS in regards of the how the IO should be.

So for me if I faced such a situation, I am not gonna think twice about filing a complain to the field office director, nobody should be scared to do so thinking that the officer might deny your application, which he can't cos your file will be reviewed twice.

and it says dont bully-------um they bully......big...time!!!!

[DC85 113]

and it says dont bully-------um they bully......big...time!!!!

and then you see some people here, the only concern they have is to defend the IO's, during my AOS, the officer that conducted the interview was very professional, even she was not smiling or humble. What I wanna say. Please when you face such a treatment, file a complain Don't be scared. And I think if you do so, he/she is gonna finalize your case quickly, because he/she doesn't want to be questioned by his/her director.

[CanadiaGirl 10]

For me the biggest red flag is the 'relationship' itself. Maybe it's me but I think it's time he be cut off from 'mommy' and start working for a living? To me it just doesn't 'seem' like a marriage in that regard. And maybe I'm wrong for feeling this way but how long is he really going to rely on his parents to pay for him? Maybe I missed something but the OP did say he gets a sizable amount from his parents so he doesn't work. If I was an officer I believe that I would think there's an issue with that 'relationship'. It would seem in some way suspicious.

Hopefully everything goes well and it's not my life mind you but I can with valid reason see why you were grilled how you were. Taxes aside your relationship and 'marriage' doesn't seem unified on a financial front. I would think if someone was getting taken care of by their parents that meant that, that person may not be with their wife. I am not obviously articulating how I feel about this properly.

I am sorry you got grilled, some of what was said was VERY unprofessional and uncalled for. But the questioning of the 'relationship' aspect I get and would question as well. You almost have to treat every case like it could be a potential fraud, especially when some evidence may indicate such.

[D N Medellin COL 75]

I was hoping my experience would serve as an example of an interview that did not come with a kind, humble or pleasant immigration officer. While reading the experiences of so many others, I almost came to expect an IO with these kind of characteristics, and was thrown off when that was not the case.

Thank you for all your responses, they've been quite enlightening. I did not realize that a joint filing was so important. I know many couples who keep their finances separate and we count ourselves in that category. We share expenses but have separate bank accounts. I have a job and my husband chooses not to work as he receives a generous allowance from his family. I submitted tax forms as married filed separately as he was a dependent of his family, which was fine by me. We may reevaluate that decision if it turns out that this may effect my naturalization application.

But the immigration officer seemed more concerned with the number of days I've been out of the country. I may have left the country a half dozen times for 2-3 days at a time in 2010 and 2011. The frequency of my visits increased in 2012 when my sister had a baby. I felt a desire to visit more often and see my niece grow up. I couldn't have been gone more than 70 days in the past three years. That's far below the minimum residency requirement for citizenship.

In any event, I hope this inconvenience resolves itself in the coming weeks...

With all due respect - "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck - its probably a duck". The officers look for exceptions and then try to drill down on the exception unfortunately the way you have set up house (not filing together, separate bank accounts,the USC is student on mamas dime, many trips out of country,etc., etc.) smacks the officer in the face. What else would you expect.

IMHO your approach and your circumstances, which you can control, needs to be tighter and given some thought.

Good luck!

[CanadiaGirl 10]

With all due respect - "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck - its probably a duck". The officers look for exceptions and then try to drill down on the exception unfortunately the way you have set up house (not filing together, separate bank accounts,the USC is student on mamas dime, many trips out of country,etc., etc.) smacks the officer in the face. What else would you expect.

IMHO your approach and your circumstances, which you can control, needs to be tighter and given some thought.

Good luck!

I agree.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Some people come from family money, and as such receive a sizeable amount from their family as their living stipend. If this is the case here (and it seems to be walking and quacking like a very wealthy duck), there are perhaps very good tax reasons for the husband to remain his parents' dependent. If this is the case, it has zero to do with cutting apron strings and much to do with maintaining family wealth. And as for him getting a "real" job, the husband is a student.

Not everyone's situation is like yours, or the perceived norm. Stop judging the OP for it. Nothing she posted has even a whiff of the fraudulent here, at least to me.

[scottgema 6]

Just my 2 cents

The questions about our country I found hilarious....there is a good chunk of America who would draw a blank response to them....even the 911 one.

Additionally the interviewer was unprofessional if they behaved the way the OP indicated. Like it or not you can be suspicious and ask additional questions without being sarcastic or rude. Being an ####### does is not a perk of being employed by the government and allowing it to happen helps no one.

Once you have your approval you should make sure you take time to file an official complaint against this man. This may not directly result in displinary action but it will start the wheels moving and maybe another brave sole will do the same and another and then it will be dealt with accordingly.

OR

His mom died that weekend and it was a one off situation where he brough his mood to work and should have simply stayed home. Making it a racist issue helps no one and accusing someone of being a racist will throw up the defence walls. Its much better to make them explain their behavior and if it is racially motivated that will come out in questioning.