INTERVIEW

[SheLikesME?]

The web site doesn't include everything that is specified in the P-4 documentation but the form they send out says to bring it. The revised OF-171 specifically says to bring it.

I think it best to follow Lee's advice here. Find a way to find them. So Lee this means for the CR1/2 we will need to track him down? My wife knows where he lives, or what city. What kind of proof does she need? I will get her to take care of this if I can, and I know what she needs for evidence of his whereabouts. Wonder about his child coming to USA? So far he says he is not interested in anything about her.

 

Thanks Lee and all.

 

Doug

[best is yet to come]

The web site doesn't include everything that is specified in the P-4 documentation but the form they send out says to bring it. The revised OF-171 specifically says to bring it.

I think it best to follow Lee's advice here. Find a way to find them. So Lee this means for the CR1/2 we will need to track him down? My wife knows where he lives, or what city. What kind of proof does she need? I will get her to take care of this if I can, and I know what she needs for evidence of his whereabouts. Wonder about his child coming to USA? So far he says he is not interested in anything about her.

 

Thanks Lee and all.

 

Doug

 

The P-4 packet for K-1/K-2 includes a letter to applicants that includes the following:

 

If you were married previously, please bring in documents containing the following information for your interview: your ex spouse’s name Date of Birth social security number (if applicable) last known address and phone number.

[tywy_99]

Who in hell would ever want to track down their EX! Some could never do it! Let's face it; amicable divorces are hardly ever heard of!

I have to be adamant on this point until I see proof that proof is inexcusably needed in the hands of the applicant at time of interview. To need it prior to the interview is preposterous!

I know it is listed on the bluesheet and I know of cases where it was requested via the bluesheet but I remain unconvinced that it is needed prior to the interview. It is only needed if the VO requests it, as I see it.

[LeeFisher3]

The web site doesn't include everything that is specified in the P-4 documentation but the form they send out says to bring it. The revised OF-171 specifically says to bring it.

I think it best to follow Lee's advice here. Find a way to find them. So Lee this means for the CR1/2 we will need to track him down? My wife knows where he lives, or what city. What kind of proof does she need? I will get her to take care of this if I can, and I know what she needs for evidence of his whereabouts. Wonder about his child coming to USA? So far he says he is not interested in anything about her.

 

Thanks Lee and all.

 

Doug

This was on the list for Lars wife, so CR-1 gets those instructions. Most people don't get asked for it, but they can and I know of one blue slip that showed up when the VO asked for it at the interview and it was not available.

[LeeFisher3]

Who in hell would ever want to track down their EX! Some could never do it! Let's face it; amicable divorces are hardly ever heard of!

I have to be adamant on this point until I see proof that proof is inexcusably needed in the hands of the applicant at time of interview. To need it prior to the interview is preposterous!

I know it is listed on the bluesheet and I know of cases where it was requested via the bluesheet but I remain unconvinced that it is needed prior to the interview. It is only needed if the VO requests it, as I see it.

A member has graciously offered to scan the document and send it to me and I will convert it to a PDF and get it to Don to update his files.

 

While I understand your skepticism, I have personally read the thing and can guarantee that it is on the March 2006 revision of the form, but you can read it for yourself when Don gets it posted.

[Yuanyang]

Who in hell would ever want to track down their EX! Some could never do it! Let's face it; amicable divorces are hardly ever heard of!

I have to be adamant on this point until I see proof that proof is inexcusably needed in the hands of the applicant at time of interview. To need it prior to the interview is preposterous!

I know it is listed on the bluesheet and I know of cases where it was requested via the bluesheet but I remain unconvinced that it is needed prior to the interview. It is only needed if the VO requests it, as I see it.

Ty, I fully agree with you. The problem is that GUZ apparently looks at most of the applications as fraud. I think it's wrong, unacceptable and a holdover from the Cold War era IMHO.

 

We had another reason to have someone contact the Ex: Lao po does not have full custody of daughter. That required the other parent's persmission for the child to leave the country and come to the USA.

 

Doug, daughter's father has never had anything to do with her since birth and doesn't care to; but that particular document I refer to above was specifically requested during her interview.

[SirLancelot]

Who in hell would ever want to track down their EX! Some could never do it! Let's face it; amicable divorces are hardly ever heard of!

I have to be adamant on this point until I see proof that proof is inexcusably needed in the hands of the applicant at time of interview. To need it prior to the interview is preposterous!

I know it is listed on the bluesheet and I know of cases where it was requested via the bluesheet but I remain unconvinced that it is needed prior to the interview. It is only needed if the VO requests it, as I see it.

A member has graciously offered to scan the document and send it to me and I will convert it to a PDF and get it to Don to update his files.

 

While I understand your skepticism, I have personally read the thing and can guarantee that it is on the March 2006 revision of the form, but you can read it for yourself when Don gets it posted.

 

Lee, you always offer very matter of fact and objective comments in your posts. I appreciate all your posts. However, in this matter, I also tend to agree with T99. While I fully concede that the revised OF-171 may request this info, if one doesn't have the info, then one doesn't have it. Like any other piece of info that is requested, if we don't have it or don't know it, we can't produce it. Just state the fact and tell it to GUZ as is.

 

I would simply tell GUZ that the divorced couple have not kept in touch since the divorce and his whereabouts are unknown.

 

Case in point, on my I-129F petition, it asks for the A# of any previous spouses I may have had and when (the date) and where I filed for her. In fact, I did petition for my ex-wife, whom I petitioned for over 10 years ago. Since our divorce, I had not kept in touch with her and I certainly don't have a record of her A# and I don't remember the exact date I petitioned for her over 10 years ago. The only thing I could offer them was the year in which I filed the original petition and what service center I petitioned at. I also gave them her maiden name and her name after marriage.

 

I stated exactly that in my I-129F petition. I was approved in 56 days with NO RFEs. So as you can see, I could only offer as much info as was possible given my situation.

 

I am of the belief that you just tell GUZ the truth. If they are divorced and there is a nortarial certificate of divorce, then that should be enough for GUZ if you explicitly tell them that the husband's whereabouts can't be ascertained as they no longer keep in touch.

 

I don't think it's necessary to bend over backwards for GUZ, especially if the request for info is very unreasonable. What if GUZ asked to see a video tape of the beneficiary and petitioner having sex, to prove they are indeed a legitimate couple intent upon marriage? Should we bend over backwards to fulfill that request as well?

 

In the case of YuanYang's:

We had another reason to have someone contact the Ex: Lao po does not have full custody of daughter. That required the other parent's persmission for the child to leave the country and come to the USA.

 

I would completely agree that the EX husband MUST be located so that he can offer permission for his daughter to leave the country. But in the OP's situation where no children are involved, I don't think it's necessary to prove or know of the whereabouts of the EX husband if his whereabouts are truly unknown.

Edited October 8, 2006 by SirLancelot (see edit history)

[david_dawei]

While I personally feel that Ty's point is the one I have (not needed till asked for), if one wants to be more prepared and have a 'kitchen sink' approach, they might take the time to get some proof their 'ex' is living in china.

 

SirL states the truism: be truthful.

 

But in the end, it's GUZs acceptance or rejection of evidence that matters. Till we get more members getting this request and can see what possible correlations exist (if any), I feel one simply must know their own case and be able to best distinguish what's needed for the interview...

[LeeFisher3]

While I personally feel that Ty's point is the one I have (not needed till asked for), if one wants to be more prepared and have a 'kitchen sink' approach, they might take the time to get some proof their 'ex' is living in china.

 

SirL states the truism: be truthful.

 

But in the end, it's GUZs acceptance or rejection of evidence that matters. Till we get more members getting this request and can see what possible correlations exist (if any), I feel one simply must know their own case and be able to best distinguish what's needed for the interview...

A scanned image is on it's way to Don to put with the P-4 documents.

 

There is a section to this letter that is in the P-4 packet titled Submit these items during your interview: (not the OF-171) that specifically instructs the beneficiary to bring in the info on the EX.

 

I noticed another requirement that is easy to fulfill that is there as well concerning Proof of petitioners residence, which is absurd in so many ways, but still it's there.

 

Ty's point is well taken, but the info on the EX is to be brought to the interview, perhaps after the document is posted he will believe that I am capable of reading and comprehending simple statements written in simple English, or not. But that still doesn't change the instructions given to the beneficiary by GZ.

[tywy_99]

Ty's point is well taken, but the info on the EX is to be brought to the interview,

perhaps after the document is posted he will believe that I am capable of reading

and comprehending simple statements written in simple English, or not.

But that still doesn't change the instructions given to the beneficiary by GZ.

 

Don't take it so personal, Lee.

 

There's a big difference between listing the ex-spouse's Name-DOB-Last Known Address

on a sheet of paper,and hunting down an ex-spouse for "proof of whereabouts."

 

In your post #6 to this thread, your suggestions make it sound like a "walk thru the park"

when in many cases it just simply isn't that easy.

Next, is your rebuttal to my post about P-4 document changes where once again you make

the worrisome seem so trivial. (Who's taking it personal now? )

 

Someone has pointed out the question asked on the OF-171. A simple statement as such, is

no need to worry over. Here, it becomes trivial. Just leave it blank if one doesn't know, or

fill it out to the best of ones knowledge. The "powers to be" aren't going to hang you for it!

There is some latitude and flexibility involved with these forms.

But to suggest running the four corners of China to obtain the "good graces" of the ex-spouse is a bit too much. I think most will agree with me on this, and it is only needed if the VO requests it on the rejection/denial slip and then it is only for a good reason.

I don't think they make these request on the sole premise that they don't like you!

Who is taking it personal now???

[david_dawei]

While I personally feel that Ty's point is the one I have (not needed till asked for), if one wants to be more prepared and have a 'kitchen sink' approach, they might take the time to get some proof their 'ex' is living in china.

 

SirL states the truism: be truthful.

 

But in the end, it's GUZs acceptance or rejection of evidence that matters. Till we get more members getting this request and can see what possible correlations exist (if any), I feel one simply must know their own case and be able to best distinguish what's needed for the interview...

A scanned image is on it's way to Don to put with the P-4 documents.

 

There is a section to this letter that is in the P-4 packet titled Submit these items during your interview: (not the OF-171) that specifically instructs the beneficiary to bring in the info on the EX.

 

I noticed another requirement that is easy to fulfill that is there as well concerning Proof of petitioners residence, which is absurd in so many ways, but still it's there.

 

Ty's point is well taken, but the info on the EX is to be brought to the interview, perhaps after the document is posted he will believe that I am capable of reading and comprehending simple statements written in simple English, or not. But that still doesn't change the instructions given to the beneficiary by GZ.

 

 

I don't doubt the read or the specific instructions at all... What's simply unclear is the frequency or situations it will be asked for. I understand the motivation (fraud avoidance) but it's ludicrious on a certain level. It will be interesting to see their answer in GUZSpeaks...

[LeeFisher3]

While I personally feel that Ty's point is the one I have (not needed till asked for), if one wants to be more prepared and have a 'kitchen sink' approach, they might take the time to get some proof their 'ex' is living in china.

 

SirL states the truism: be truthful.

 

But in the end, it's GUZs acceptance or rejection of evidence that matters. Till we get more members getting this request and can see what possible correlations exist (if any), I feel one simply must know their own case and be able to best distinguish what's needed for the interview...

A scanned image is on it's way to Don to put with the P-4 documents.

 

There is a section to this letter that is in the P-4 packet titled Submit these items during your interview: (not the OF-171) that specifically instructs the beneficiary to bring in the info on the EX.

 

I noticed another requirement that is easy to fulfill that is there as well concerning Proof of petitioners residence, which is absurd in so many ways, but still it's there.

 

Ty's point is well taken, but the info on the EX is to be brought to the interview, perhaps after the document is posted he will believe that I am capable of reading and comprehending simple statements written in simple English, or not. But that still doesn't change the instructions given to the beneficiary by GZ.

 

 

I don't doubt the read or the specific instructions at all... What's simply unclear is the frequency or situations it will be asked for. I understand the motivation (fraud avoidance) but it's ludicrious on a certain level. It will be interesting to see their answer in GUZSpeaks...

I'll let you guys read the document, it appears to be a definite shift in the process as far as required documents for the interview.

 

I agree many people are not asked for relatively significant things, but I am also aware of blue slips being given when the document was not available at the interview. We hear of people not being asked for any information for support, but would anyone suggest that someone's SO show up without them?

 

It doesn't need to be logical by any stretch of the imagination, if they ask for something to be brought to the interview you bring it. We're the ones wanting the visa and they tell us what hoops to jump through to get it.

[SirLancelot]

 

I agree many people are not asked for relatively significant things, but I am also aware of blue slips being given when the document was not available at the interview. We hear of people not being asked for any information for support, but would anyone suggest that someone's SO show up without them?

 

It doesn't need to be logical by any stretch of the imagination, if they ask for something to be brought to the interview you bring it. We're the ones wanting the visa and they tell us what hoops to jump through to get it.

 

Ok Lee, here is a question for you. If after even going through all your suggestion--asking the inlaws, hiring a private detective and such--you still are not able to find the EX, then what? Is the beneficiary just simply SOL then?

 

I can't see that happening. If the answer is you don't know the location of your EX, then that's the answer. You bring in that answer, nothing more.

[SmilingAsia]

When she is not bringing any kids, things maybe more optimistic.

 

Confidence and bright smiles are very important at the interview. Just tell the truth and make everything as clear as possible.

 

If she were at a loss and scared at the interview, they'll suspect it's scam and screw the whole thing up: residence of ex, SSN of petitioner's ex, siblings, cousins.......

[LeeFisher3]

Ty's point is well taken, but the info on the EX is to be brought to the interview,

perhaps after the document is posted he will believe that I am capable of reading

and comprehending simple statements written in simple English, or not.

But that still doesn't change the instructions given to the beneficiary by GZ.

 

Don't take it so personal, Lee.

 

There's a big difference between listing the ex-spouse's Name-DOB-Last Known Address

on a sheet of paper,and hunting down an ex-spouse for "proof of whereabouts."

 

In your post #6 to this thread, your suggestions make it sound like a "walk thru the park"

when in many cases it just simply isn't that easy.

Next, is your rebuttal to my post about P-4 document changes where once again you make

the worrisome seem so trivial. (Who's taking it personal now? )

 

Someone has pointed out the question asked on the OF-171. A simple statement as such, is

no need to worry over. Here, it becomes trivial. Just leave it blank if one doesn't know, or

fill it out to the best of ones knowledge. The "powers to be" aren't going to hang you for it!

There is some latitude and flexibility involved with these forms.

But to suggest running the four corners of China to obtain the "good graces" of the ex-spouse is a bit too much. I think most will agree with me on this, and it is only needed if the VO requests it on the rejection/denial slip and then it is only for a good reason.

I don't think they make these request on the sole premise that they don't like you!

Who is taking it personal now???

Here's the bullet points listed on the document

 

Submit these items during your interview:

Evidence of support.

Proof of Relationship

Proof of petitioner's residency in the United States

If you were married before ( Info on Ex's)

Children permission to go to

US

 

Now the first 2 items have been around forever and the last item is a good clarification of what has been vague in the past. Items 3 & 4 are now in writing.

 

Knowing people who have receive blue slips after being specifically ask for item #4 with that being the only thing required gives a pretty good indicator that it is significant for the interview. While people may not have complete information, having something is better than having nothing to give them.

 

Plus it is probably easier to try to chase this info down beforehand instead of doing it while holding a blue slip in their hand.

 

You might consider that a person taking the advice of not worrying about it until GZ asked for it might take it a bit personal if they are the ones receiving a blue slip.