Question about getting documents notarized

[YuAndDan 153]

Only thing that needs to be notarized is form I-134 for the visa interview at the consulate, that is all. That is what we did , and had no problems with Guangzhou, the hardest, nastiest consulate of the State Department.

hi. this was my exact question. i have read here on VJ that the I-134 needs to be notarized, but it does not say so on the form specifically or the instructions. i just called USCIS and they said not to fill out below my signature line and it can be completed by the consulate at my fiance's interview. i am not allowed to be at the interview so should i just sign like they said? or should i sign and have it notarized like VJ recommends? i don't want to screw this part up because everyone notes it is the one of the most important parts of his interview! please advise!!

aes

If you will be in the foreign country at the time of the interview, YOU can visit the consulate, and go to the US Citizen's section and do the signing in front of a consular officer, and they will notarize it there for you. Or you can just visit a large bank here before going there and get it notarized.

YOU the US Citizen need to sign it in front of a Notary, Consular officer at a consulate, or in front of an officer at USCIS.

[TimsDaisy 0]

Only thing that needs to be notarized is form I-134 for the visa interview at the consulate, that is all. That is what we did , and had no problems with Guangzhou, the hardest, nastiest consulate of the State Department.

hi. this was my exact question. i have read here on VJ that the I-134 needs to be notarized, but it does not say so on the form specifically or the instructions. i just called USCIS and they said not to fill out below my signature line and it can be completed by the consulate at my fiance's interview. i am not allowed to be at the interview so should i just sign like they said? or should i sign and have it notarized like VJ recommends? i don't want to screw this part up because everyone notes it is the one of the most important parts of his interview! please advise!!

aes

It most certainly DOES say so on the first page of the form's instructions. Re-visit www.uscis.gov, download a complete copy of the I-134 and read the instructions again carefully. It will tell you how to notarize the document when you are IN the US and when you are NOT in the US.

As for the attorney's advice to notarize everything . . . I worry about that because, as mentioned, it sounds like the attorney doesn't understand the I-129F process - which should be a HUGE red flag of warning and a signal to pay VERY CLOSE ATTENTION to what this attorney is doing with the case. It's also a bit disconcerting because an attorney should understand what "notarizing" actually means and what effect it has. There are plenty of documents in that package for which "notarizing" would be impossible and/or meaningless.

The I-129F instructions are clear about copies being acceptible and there is space on the I-129F to say that copies are true and accurate. Also, a short statement in the cover letter saying the same ("everything presented here is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and all originals are available upon request" yadda yadda) would be more appropriate than notarizing every blasted page.

I would recommend you have a chat with your lawyer and find out just how many I-129Fs he/she has processed for clients. If the answer is "not many, "none," or "well, I have extensive experience with employment visas and assylum issues," thank the attorney, don't pay them anymore and ask to get back what you can, and leave the office at once.

An incompetent lawyer will do FAR MORE HARM than good for your case. Time to start learning more and acting accordingly.

[Yodrak 7]

cleepa,

It seems excessive to me, also.

On the other hand, part of an attorney's job is to take every precaution to insure that the client's case goes as smoothly as possible. If they good and are experienced they have kept track of every little thing that they have seen gone wrong, and they take steps to prevent that problem from ever happening again to another client. Client's don't like problems when they are paying an attorney big bucks for the purpose of avoiding problems - witness the attorney complaints sometimes posted here at VJ.

So what may seem excessive to the client may just be the attorney doing what they are being paid to do - everything in their power to avoid a problem.

Yodrak

I recently spoke with a lawyer about submitting the petition for a K-1. She told me to go all-out as far as getting things notarized--everything from copies of receipts to letters of intent. This seems excessive to me, so I would like some feedback from other US citizen petitioners regarding what forms they got notarized, if any. Thanks in advance.

[cleepa 0]

The lawyer I spoke with deals strictly with immigration matters. She mentioned circumstances in several other K-1 visa petitions that she had handled, so I got the impression that she has done this before. At the end of the consultation though, she told me that she estimated there would be a 30% chance of my petition being denied, and that she would be happy to handle the appeal if necessary. I got the feeling that she was trying to scare me a little so that I would use her services. Before the consultation though, I read this forum extensively so that I could ask good questions, and I feel that I can handle the rest of the process on my own. I'm only out $50 for the consultation, so I don't feel too bad about it.

[Yodrak 7]

cleepa,

That 30% chance of denial sounds high to me. Either the attorney was trying to scare you or there's something about your case that you don't appreciate the consequences of.

Did you question the attorney about why that 30% chance of being denied?

Yodrak

The lawyer I spoke with deals strictly with immigration matters. She mentioned circumstances in several other K-1 visa petitions that she had handled, so I got the impression that she has done this before. At the end of the consultation though, she told me that she estimated there would be a 30% chance of my petition being denied, and that she would be happy to handle the appeal if necessary. I got the feeling that she was trying to scare me a little so that I would use her services. Before the consultation though, I read this forum extensively so that I could ask good questions, and I feel that I can handle the rest of the process on my own. I'm only out $50 for the consultation, so I don't feel too bad about it.

[TimsDaisy 0]

Yodrak - yes, attorneys need to make sure things go smoothly, but given the chance that the lawyer's office has a notary on staff and that she was probably hoping to get business, notarizing every page of the package would be a nice little fee item on the final bill. And as stated before, notarizing each page would not be the appropriate thing to do for much of the package. The lawyers advice doesn't sound like good advice to me - and it would cause me to be suspicious of the rest of her advice as well.

cleepa - you may be able to handle this filing on your own, now that you've had your consultation. As mentioned, from the information you gave us, it doesnt' seem like the prior denials will harm your K1 process at all. Unless the beneficiary has been ruled inadmissible, it doesn't seem like you'd need a waiver either. I also don't recall reading here that Japan is a high fraud country, thought I don't know much about that either way.

The 30% does sound high.

[Yodrak 7]

cleepa,

What was the "small error" that she couldn't just correct it or fill out a new I-94?

Yodrak

..... she was also denied entrance into the US because of a small error on the I-94 she filled out on in Canada. .....

[Yodrak 7]

Daisy,

Yes, it would. Certainly cleepa would want to understand how the attorney planned to charge for the case before hiring the attorney - fixed fee or time and expenses? notary fees included or a separate item?

I did not take cleepa's report of "all-out as far as getting things notarized--everything from copies of receipts to letters of intent" to extend as far as "every page of the package", but either way it is a lot of notarizing.

In any event think it would be nice to know what was said during the course of the consultation from the attorney's point of view before condeming her as incompetent or inexperienced, although that's not possible. I was simply trying to point out that there could be other explanations for the attorney's reported advice, and your thought of bill-padding is yet one more explanation to consider.

Yodrak

Yodrak - yes, attorneys need to make sure things go smoothly, but given the chance that the lawyer's office has a notary on staff and that she was probably hoping to get business, notarizing every page of the package would be a nice little fee item on the final bill. .....

[cleepa 0]

From what I understand, the problem with the I-94 was a question about 'have you ever been denied a visa for entrance into the US'. My fiancee was denied an E-2 work visa 3 weeks earlier, but misunderstood the question, thinking that it was asking 'Are you not allowed to apply for a visa for entrance to the US' (Her English is not 100%) She was traveling with her family and arrived in Seattle without any problems. She entered Canada a few days later, but ran into problems when they tried to return to Seattle. She was detained for 4 hours while the border agents accused her of lying intentionally and threatened her repeatedly with prison. On her passport they wrote a reference to THIS.

From what I understand, they didn't take away her travel visa, they just denied her entrance to the US at that time. I think this is why the lawyer expected red flags to go up when our petition goes in. I'll talk to my fiancee tomorrow to get a little more clarification.

[Yodrak 7]

cleepa,

There is no such question on the I-94. Might have been something they asked verbally?

I think I can see how misunderstanding may have been a problem, and the visa denial may have been the cause. And if a problem once, the combination may be a problem again in the future, exacerbated now by the denial of entry.

If you were uncomfortable with the first attorney that you consulted you might want to look for a 2nd opinion.

Yodrak

From what I understand, the problem with the I-94 was a question about 'have you ever been denied a visa for entrance into the US'. My fiancee was denied an E-2 work visa 3 weeks earlier, but misunderstood the question, thinking that it was asking 'Are you not allowed to apply for a visa for entrance to the US' (Her English is not 100%) She was traveling with her family and arrived in Seattle without any problems. She entered Canada a few days later, but ran into problems when they tried to return to Seattle. She was detained for 4 hours while the border agents accused her of lying intentionally and threatened her repeatedly with prison. On her passport they wrote a reference to THIS.

From what I understand, they didn't take away her travel visa, they just denied her entrance to the US at that time. I think this is why the lawyer expected red flags to go up when our petition goes in. I'll talk to my fiancee tomorrow to get a little more clarification.

cleepa,

What was the "small error" that she couldn't just correct it or fill out a new I-94?

Yodrak

..... she was also denied entrance into the US because of a small error on the I-94 she filled out on in Canada. .....