Front-loading - is it ever a bad thing?

[Dakine 26]

I just gave them what they ask for nothing more nothing less. Our petition was approved.

"Most" all initial petitions are approved at the USCIS service center level. Doesn't take much to prove you met in the last 2 years.

Front loading is for the COs that sometimes won't look at proof of having a bonafide marriage at the embassy interview and denies or puts peeps on AR.

[TBoneTX 48,516]

Personally, I went "bare bones" and just sent in what the 129-F instructions tell us to, and the petition was approved the same week.

At embassy interview, fiancee can come "loaded for bear" with 10 Lbs of supportive evidence in her bag.

Just stick to what the USCIS requirements are, hand that over at the embassy, and fiancee can hold onto more numerous and detailed evidences that can save the day, if needed.

That's all well and good --- front-loading is really not intended for the USCIS stage, but to get as much evidence as possible to the consulate from the get-go.

TBoneTX will advise a HEAVILY front-loaded I-129F package, from (painful) personal experience with the notoriously difficult Guayaquil consulate in Ecuador.

Let it be stated loudly, clearly, and permanently: For Guayaquil, front-load the I-129F or I-130 petition with the KITCHEN SINK. Karen, why are you even asking about the wisdom of front-loading when I -- the default mouthpiece for all who have been 100% hosed by Guayaquil -- have spent so much effort telling you that front-loading (in combination with appearing at the FIRST interview) is the ONLY WAY TO HAVE ANY CHANCE OF SUCCESS IN THAT HELLHOLE? Do you really want to risk not front-loading, appearing at Guayaquil with armloads of evidence, having the CO not accept any of it, being kicked out after two minutes on his rationale that "not enough evidence was submitted," and going through their ####### 221(g) process? Has anyone here not read PDXBicycleBoy's review of Guayaquil, or the FULL "US Consulate in Guayaquil, Ecuador" thread in the Latin American subforum?

Stephen here is 100% correct, and itzallgood is 100% incorrect. Furthermore, be sure to include those testimonial letters from your people and your fiance's. See my recent original post in the "U.S. Consulate" forum regarding how (and why) to request such letters from your people. Do not submit your I-129F package without these!

[paciencia y fe 2]

hey all, i've been hard at work on putting together everything for the application. just wanted to make sure to post and say THANK YOU!! to everyone who replied. i really appreciate it! :-)

[JimVaPhuong 4,865]

It's clear that many people don't understand what "front loading" is, or what purpose it's intended to serve. Even after it was stated several times in this thread, anyone who used the phrase "My petition was approved" has clearly missed the point. Likewise for the people who said something like "Just bring a ton of evidence to the interview".

Everybody who files a petition for a K1 goes through one of the same two service centers, regardless of where your fiance/fiancee is from. It's pretty clearly understood what's needed to get a petition approved. Front loading has NOTHING to do with getting your petition approved!

There are a number of US consulates around the world where it is notoriously difficult to get a K1 visa approval. Many (most?) of these consulates formulate at least 90% of their final decision before the beneficiary even arrives for the interview. They form 9% of the remaining 10% of their decision when the beneficiary hands in their required documents, again, before a single question has been asked by the interviewer. That last 9% is usually reserved for the affidavit of support and supporting documents. In a very large number of cases, the consular officer has already decided that the visa is going to be denied, or at least delayed, and they have already prepared the corresponding notice to give the beneficiary. When they call the beneficiary to the window for the interview, all that remains is for them to sign the notice and give it to the beneficiary. The actual interview is a mere formality. More often than not, the consular officer is convinced that the relationship is a sham for immigration purposes. If they already have sufficient evidence to send the petition back to USCIS under 221(g), then the interview will be brief. If they need more evidence, like a contradictory answer or demonstration that the beneficiary lacks knowledge about the petitioner, then the interview will be long and brutal. In either case, the outcome is the same - the consular officer signs the denial slip without ever asking to see ONE piece of evidence in that armload of material the beneficiary brought to the interview. In cases where the prepared slip is not a denial, but a request for additional evidence, the consular officer is often asking for evidence that the beneficiary DID bring with them. However, they refuse to accept the evidence when the beneficiary offers it - the decision has already been made, and the notice has been prepared and signed.

And THIS is what front loading is intended to prevent...

Front loading gives the petitioner an opportunity to provide evidence which the consular officer might actually see BEFORE the interview, and that might be enough to convince the consular officer that the relationship may be genuine, in spite of what they might otherwise believe from the minimal documentation required by USCIS, and actually conduct a real interview with the beneficiary, maybe even asking to see additional evidence. Front loading also gives the petitioner a chance to address what would be common red flags at a particular consulate BEFORE the consulate has made their decision about the visa. Under 221(g), a consular officer may NOT deny a visa based on information which was known to USCIS when the petition was approved. Consular officers are not permitted to readjudicate the petition, so anything revealed in documents submitted with the petition must be accepted by the consular officer.

In short, front loading gives a beneficiary a fighting chance at a consulate where they are not just presumed guilty, but are convicted and sentenced before they even arrive for the interview.

[TBoneTX 48,516]

Front-loading gives a beneficiary a fighting chance at a consulate where they are not just presumed guilty, but are convicted and sentenced before they even arrive for the interview.

Meaning GUAYAQUIL.

JimVa's post merits being separated and permanently pinned.

Karen, I pray that you didn't take the "casual" way out, because you will almost certainly pay for it.