Im confused.......

[tywy_99]

You can think about the interview like a court trial, with a few exceptions:

 

- you are not allowed to appear, only your SO. Therefore you don't even have "trained" counsel (except for the folks here on CFL!)

- the burden of proof is on her/him (in other words, guilty until proven innocent)

- the VO will have previewed your case, so knows what direction to take the case, whereas you are on the defensive

- a decision is often granted on the spot, with few checks and balances for impartiality

 

When you go to court, with very few exceptions, you are not told to bring a certain document -- only told to bring evidence you need to defend your case. That is the same here. You don't know much about the judge in your case, but he knows information about you before the questioning even begins.

 

It is much better to bring your full arsenal with you. And with your SO under the spotlight, he/she will feel better too knowing she has many more documents than he/she may need.

 

Good points all .... but you are allowed to make a pre-trial appearance before an "official of the court". That's ACH.

 

Now I know that there are those who disagree with me but I think it's really valuable to go to ACH, ask any specific questions, and just get a general look at your case while you, the well dressed, clean cut, smiling American ... are at the window. Actually seeing and speaking to you is a lot more powerful than your WLF trying to hand your passport over with hers on interview day. A lot of us believe that many cases are predetermined and the interview is just a final check or a rather unkind way for them to tell you that they need more time. At ACH there is probably still some wiggle room to rescue things if your case is going to go south temporarily. It also allows you to address complexities that your WFL may not be best equipped to handle if for nothing else but language skill.

 

We had a very complex K-2 Follow To Join case. I went to ACH and thrashed all the details out with the VO I spoke with. The interview was a slam dunk where the interviewing VO spent most of his time making sure my wife and daughter understood what they needed to do. It could very well have gone the other way had there not been several paragraphs in our records inserted by the VO at ACH. Lao Po may not have been able to explain the complexities. The interviewing VO may not have seen a case precisely like ours before.

 

In my opinion a reasonable kitchen sink tailored to your case, combined with practice interviews for your WLF, and your appearance at ACH, looking confident and reliable is the right mix for most people.

 

ACH is only an option if you can afford to be there, many cant

.............which brings us back to my previous post; just go with little or nothing and think the best!

 

disclaimer: I don't really endorse this nor do I recommend it. I am merely pointing out the possibilities and what an applicant can do if they feel lucky enough.

 

***

I suggest taking, at a minimum, the I-134 w/ employment letter-tax returns and plenty of photographs showing the two together. That seems to be what they look at the most of late. Of course that is subject to change when USCONGUZ sees this thread.

[Guest Rob & Jin]

You can think about the interview like a court trial, with a few exceptions:

 

- you are not allowed to appear, only your SO. Therefore you don't even have "trained" counsel (except for the folks here on CFL!)

- the burden of proof is on her/him (in other words, guilty until proven innocent)

- the VO will have previewed your case, so knows what direction to take the case, whereas you are on the defensive

- a decision is often granted on the spot, with few checks and balances for impartiality

 

When you go to court, with very few exceptions, you are not told to bring a certain document -- only told to bring evidence you need to defend your case. That is the same here. You don't know much about the judge in your case, but he knows information about you before the questioning even begins.

 

It is much better to bring your full arsenal with you. And with your SO under the spotlight, he/she will feel better too knowing she has many more documents than he/she may need.

 

Good points all .... but you are allowed to make a pre-trial appearance before an "official of the court". That's ACH.

 

Now I know that there are those who disagree with me but I think it's really valuable to go to ACH, ask any specific questions, and just get a general look at your case while you, the well dressed, clean cut, smiling American ... are at the window. Actually seeing and speaking to you is a lot more powerful than your WLF trying to hand your passport over with hers on interview day. A lot of us believe that many cases are predetermined and the interview is just a final check or a rather unkind way for them to tell you that they need more time. At ACH there is probably still some wiggle room to rescue things if your case is going to go south temporarily. It also allows you to address complexities that your WFL may not be best equipped to handle if for nothing else but language skill.

 

We had a very complex K-2 Follow To Join case. I went to ACH and thrashed all the details out with the VO I spoke with. The interview was a slam dunk where the interviewing VO spent most of his time making sure my wife and daughter understood what they needed to do. It could very well have gone the other way had there not been several paragraphs in our records inserted by the VO at ACH. Lao Po may not have been able to explain the complexities. The interviewing VO may not have seen a case precisely like ours before.

 

In my opinion a reasonable kitchen sink tailored to your case, combined with practice interviews for your WLF, and your appearance at ACH, looking confident and reliable is the right mix for most people.

 

ACH is only an option if you can afford to be there, many cant

.............which brings us back to my previous post; just go with little or nothing and think the best!

 

disclaimer: I don't really endorse this nor do I recommend it. I am merely pointing out the possibilities and what an applicant can do if they feel lucky enough.

 

***

I suggest taking, at a minimum, the I-134 w/ employment letter-tax returns and plenty of photographs showing the two together. That seems to be what they look at the most of late. Of course that is subject to change when USCONGUZ sees this thread.

 

[jim_julian]

ACH is only an option if you can afford to be there, many cant

 

OK ... I can understand it if, under extraordinary circumstances, your employer can't allow you to take time off at that particular timeframe. If the reason is that you can't afford the funds to make the trip then you need to seriously reconsider if you are ready to take on the responsibility of a wife who is likely, at first, to only have a limited ability to earn money.

 

Not a popular view point, I know ...

[Randy W]

ACH is only an option if you can afford to be there, many cant

 

OK ... I can understand it if, under extraordinary circumstances, your employer can't allow you to take time off at that particular timeframe. If the reason is that you can't afford the funds to make the trip then you need to seriously reconsider if you are ready to take on the responsibility of a wife who is likely, at first, to only have a limited ability to earn money.

 

Not a popular view point, I know ...

 

 

Nope - not at all. There are plenty of us who don't even make it to Guangzhou for the interview.

 

A good idea to be sure, but just not necessary if you can't make it for whatever reason.