Randy W

From the I-864, I don't remember seeing that factor of three for the USC and spouse/child before - but the factor appears to be the same for either the petitioner's or the beneficiaries assets.

Isn't this the same 1/5th that applies to the USC's assets? That is, the assets must be an amount that will cover 5 years at the poverty line (or in a combination of assets plus income)?

The third link doesn't work, but just print the other two and take them with you.

A Certificate of Marriageability simply says that you are not married. As long as you AREN'T, it's not a problem. It still says the same thing.

B ) Toss in a blank © => ( C ) (C) => ( C )

There are SSA memos on thhis subject that you need to take with you - her work authorization is good for 90 days, and she may apply for an SSN up to about 14 days before it expires. I'll find them when I get home.

Hey! Congratulations! Great news!

Yes - just give them what they're asking for. If you want help, you might tell us what was on the slips/papers.

Yikes! Continental from Newark to Beijing ~12 hours, on a Boeing 777 Yes - they now have video on demand - everyone can watch anything they want. It's a fairly comfortable flight, although barely edible food.

Good luck, there. Let us know how the request turns out - I don't think we've heard of this (DOS FOI) before

You're pretty much right on the money, here. However, the conulates are a whole different ball game - you have no recourse, or anyone to file anything with as long as the case is there (except through the good-will of the consulate - no, I don't mean that as an oxymoron). You DO have access, however, once the case is back in the states (Freedom of Information, court action, etc.), but no guarantees that there will be anything helpful.

No worries

But I think you may be filing an I-130. The instructions tell you where to file it. It seems like the only confusion is with the term "stand-alone". There may be a reason relating to other types of visas there. Maybe someone else knows.

http://guangzhou.usembassy-china.org.cn/up...sheet_May07.pdf

Question # 2 - the letter was awkward - ditch it. Too much information there, like smitty says. Question # 4 I suspect you could have had better pictures - posed pictures don't necessarily help your case. Sounds like the interview was very awkward - work on her confidence. A common language is an issue with some VO's more so than others. Overall, though, I think you could have had a better VO

The "f" word is tossed around WAY too much - it is very possible to apply for a B2 without lying. You will probably be denied, since you have a K1 pending.

In question 6, they are asking for people with specific relations to you. The count is of (your) children. Not all of the people listed above will be your children. In question 8, they spell out each relation they want you to list. Then they ask how many brother and sisters your spouse has. Include natural, adopted, half and step brothers and sisters in the count. They DO NOT ask how many (total) relations you have listed. The relations they are asking about seem to be pretty well specified in each case - don't make things difficult on yourself.

She needn't be shy about requesting the interview in Chinese - as soon as she notices that she's not understanding the English, "My English no good - Putonghua, please" It can save a lengthy awkward moment.

Thanks for the update there - someone had posted about a memo, but I'd forgotten

It would be statistically valid to analyze elements present in denied applications, without using any information from the denial itself beyond the fact it was denied -what Guz has said about the denial itself notwithstanding. One could form a predictive equation on that. The degree of certainty would depend on the bell curve. Think medical risk factors. It's not hard to do this; getting a good sampling would be the toughest part. I don't recall how many samples would be needed to represent the population, but I think somewhere between 1 and 5 percent is typical. The less samples, the greater uncertainty in the number is all, but you still get a number out of it fwiw. . . . and then you'll be able to run the perfect scam. Getting a clear picture of even one particular case would be a major problem - it doesn't happen. Then isolating factors - they look at the overall picture - we will never get to look over their shoulders, or see what truly goes into an approval or a denial.

So nothing's been put in the k1 packet, prior to submission? Hmmmm.. If you really want to print the chat logs, use a laser printer that can handle 2-up output pages. Some will squeeze four pages onto 1. Does GUZ accept micro-fiche?

. . . and I can see the look on Wendy's face while she's totin' it! http://i36.tinypic.com/2m3g3uc.gif

People will do anything for a lot of money. Remember how easy it was for you to forge your 3,000 posts, Dylan? Unnecessary volume won't help you with GUZ, either. SOMEONE is supposed to look at all that stuff. If they have to hire on additional help to do that, it won't help your case.

I have more than 4,000 pages of chat logs, and additional 3,000 webcam screenshots. How do I print all of this? Not including E-mails, and snail mails. B) How would anyone look at all that? Why would you waste the ink and paper?

Thanks Randy. Thats what i figured. I didn't lie on any of my returns. Looks like I'll be writing a large Check this year $$$$$$ Yeah - I tried losing a lot of money in the stock market - THAT didn't even work.