Front loading Debate

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I assume you're talking about John Quincy Adams, though it's not really certain whether he won or lost the popular vote. At that time, some states did not conduct a popular vote, and allowed their state legislatures to select the electors for the electoral college.

There were actually two other elections, aside from Bush Jr. and Adams. Rutherford B. Hayes won in 1876, though he was outpolled by Samuel J. Tilden. Benjamin Harrison won in 1888, though he was outpolled by Grover Cleveland. Both of those elections had controversy beyond there simply being a difference between the popular and electoral votes, especially in the case of Hayes. It's believed that the only reason the Democrats ceded the disputed electoral votes to Hayes was in return for a promise by the Republicans to remove federal troops from the southern states after post Civil War reconstruction.

I'm no fan of the electoral college system, and personally believe it's outdated. There's no reason we shouldn't be electing our president based on the popular vote.

As far as denials for the "wedding" question, there have also been cases where the applicant gave a non-specific but reasonable answer to the question and they were not denied. In those cases, I believe the CO was not pre-determined to deny the visa, so a reasonable answer was all that was needed. If the CO is pre-determined to deny the visa than ANY answer is going to be inadequate. Think about it this way - if Binh had answered that question by providing a notarized statement from the Pope indicating where and when the wedding would take place, would that have clinched the visa? I doubt it. The CO wasn't overly focused on the wedding plans during the interview, and that question just ended up being a bullet point on the denial sheet. Having a detailed answer for the question might have prevented the question from being listed on the denial sheet, but it wasn't ultimately the answer to that question that caused the denial - it was the strong suspicion by the CO that the relationship was a sham. Having a detailed answer to the wedding question wouldn't have changed the outcome. On the other hand, if the CO does NOT have a strong suspicion that the relationship is a sham, then he's not going to deny the visa if the applicant has a reasonable answer to the question.

[Greg_n_Lien 0]

FRONT LOADING, I have to say YES. I sent in an unreal amount of proof in the begining. There were several "red flags" in our case so we wanted there to be no question. It seemed to work well for us. Lien saw her pink slip sitting on the table when she entered for the interview, maybe there was a blue somewhere also, but we don't think so. I feel the CO had everything already laid out for him by front loading. He was able to decide before the interview. She was asked about 10 questions, giving her PINK and sent on her way. The questions were specific to the "red Flags", he just wanted to verify Lien was well informed.

SO FRONT LOAD FRONT LOAD FRONT LOAD

I also feel there is a certain amount of descrimination in cases. I think since I was born in the USA it is much easier for me than a naturalized citizen.

[WeatherEmperor 21]

Greg,

Congratulations on your CR1 visa approval. I am so happy for you. I hope you and your wife have a blessed life together

<CARRICK>

[Greg_n_Lien 0]

Greg,

Congratulations on your CR1 visa approval. I am so happy for you. I hope you and your wife have a blessed life together

<CARRICK>

THANK YOU VERY MUCH

She will be here in about 5 weeks!!! Finally!

[lindal24 1]

FRONT LOADING, I have to say YES. I sent in an unreal amount of proof in the begining. There were several "red flags" in our case so we wanted there to be no question. It seemed to work well for us. Lien saw her pink slip sitting on the table when she entered for the interview, maybe there was a blue somewhere also, but we don't think so. I feel the CO had everything already laid out for him by front loading. He was able to decide before the interview. She was asked about 10 questions, giving her PINK and sent on her way. The questions were specific to the "red Flags", he just wanted to verify Lien was well informed.

SO FRONT LOAD FRONT LOAD FRONT LOAD

I also feel there is a certain amount of descrimination in cases. I think since I was born in the USA it is much easier for me than a naturalized citizen.

If I recall correctly, I believe your "front loading" addressed your issues of concerns head on (front loading done correctly). In some other cases, this might not be the case and front loading may actually hurt their cases.

To those that will be filing petitions and considering front loading, just be weary of what you're including as you front load in your petition and whether that information may have the potential of biting you in the rear later...

[VinhBao MyTam 3]

I think the inportant thing about front loading is that the Interview Officer can read the supplied information very easy, and that our SOs understand the information as well as possible.

Our case was denied, no supposed red flags, just a butt head interviewer.

My SO was asked, "What was my job title at my former job", (1994) which was "Supervisor". She answered "sales". She thought the interviewer asked what type work the Company did, which was "Manufacturing of Sales Posters", which I had showed her many times while shopping, and she knew I was a supervisor many years. The information the interviewer had was that I was a Supervisor, and the Company name. Maybe if I had front loaded, "Supervisor at XXXX Company, (Manufacturer of Sales Posters) the Interviewer would have a better understanding of my SO's answer, and that she was well aware of what I did for a living.

My SO was asked, 2 times,"How many times I had sent money to her". Her answer was 5, which was correct, wire transfer at Christmas, and 4 Western Unions. I had not front loaded these copies, but my So supplied the copies at the Interview. I believe the Interviewer did not see the Wire trasfer, only the 4 Western Unions. On my second petion, I front loaded a COVER DOCUMENT which shows a downsized version of "All" money sent, Wire transfer and Western Union all on 1 sheet, and attached to copies.

On my second petition, I have tried to make the front loaded information as easy as possible for the Interview Officer to read at a glance.

Is the question about how many times money was sent common in HCM?

[luckytxn 2,263]

Is the question about how many times money was sent common in HCM?

I have never heard them have questions about ever. It is very common for us to send money to help them out and also our fiancees need money for many things to even go through this process. The consulate knows this.

[ScottThuy 140]

I have never heard them have questions about ever. It is very common for us to send money to help them out and also our fiancees need money for many things to even go through this process. The consulate knows this.

Me either... there have been alot of VJ members I can remember who wanted to talk about it at the interview, but in the scheme of things I cant see any positive to it.... everything someone says could be a positive can easily be flipped to a potential negative... The CO's know about it and likely dont care.... unless one is wiring over 1000's of dollars each month

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Well, in the post that VinhBao quoted, Bob g.'s fiancee was apparently asked about the money transfers twice at the interview. The issue, from what Bob g. gathered, was that his fiancee submitted the receipts at the interview, and the CO saw only the Western Union and not the wire transfer, so he thought her tally didn't add up.

I think this reinforces what Linda said back in June, with an additional caveat. If you frontload something, make darn sure your fiancee knows what you've frontloaded thoroughly. The additional caveat is that the same thing applies to any evidence submitted at the interview. Anything you give them is potential evidence against you, so make sure she knows what she's submitting, and if the CO get's something wrong (he didn't look closely enough at the evidence) then she should correct him. When Bob g.'s fiancee was asked about the money a second time she probably should have said "Five times. One wire transfer and two Western Union.". That would have prodded the CO to find the wire transfer receipt.

[Xinh_Will 1]

Agreed!!!

Last year there was the push to frontload to force info down the consulates throat... but IMO that does not happen since items that I had frontloaded.. were asked for in the blue slip... so the consulate will do what they want when it comes to evidence and documents...

If I had it to do over again, I would have requested the Lexis report before the initial petition... so I knew what to expect... I think the key to timelines as well as the rest is to be clear and concise... nobody wants to read a timeline that sounds like a lifetime channel mini-series...

I suspect that I was in AP at NVC because I frontloaded proof of my ex's domicle... so frontloading my file actually IMO cost me an extra month of waiting... at a minimum...

I'd be interested to hear your reasoning, Scott, because I was planning on doing the same thing you did under Jim's reasoning--Domicile has been different for nearly two years. My ex-wife has been and will be helpful if she can be-very amicable, such as it is(Not that I'd really want to get into it, but I'm more the bitter one). I've got emails from the end of the relationship in 09 showing her departure, mindset, and the finality of the relationship. She gave me copies of her DL with an issue date in march of last year, utility bill, and pay stub all at her new address/es. Plus I filed for divorce long before I met Xinh. And I do understand the importance of waiting as significant a time as one can, unlike you did, to submit after the divorce finalizes. But I'd want to show that the breakup is real, long standing, and unrelated to meeting the new SO.

[ScottThuy 140]

Just seeing the recent divorce can raise a flag at NVC, but for whatever reason, the fact that they called me and asked for her and was told were had nothing to do with each other was not enough to keep the CO off of our backs... I suppose you could attach a timeline of sorts along with your divorce decree explaining the overlap of the two relationships... in theory if that info is known to USCIS then the consulate cant hold it against you but theory and practice do not always match..

[Xinh_Will 1]

I hear ya, Scott. My ex has been at the IRS as a taxpayer advocate forever (and yes, it IS the smallest department at the IRS), so I've heard some bureaucratic nightmares from overzealous/clueless/power-mad tax examiners in my day. Sometimes logic really doesn't work. I think I'm still inclined to front load a bit in a timeline format. So, let me ask--how did you front load your ex-wife's address into the mix? Was it mentioned or just the documentation, and was it recent at the time of petitioning?

Just seeing the recent divorce can raise a flag at NVC, but for whatever reason, the fact that they called me and asked for her and was told were had nothing to do with each other was not enough to keep the CO off of our backs... I suppose you could attach a timeline of sorts along with your divorce decree explaining the overlap of the two relationships... in theory if that info is known to USCIS then the consulate cant hold it against you but theory and practice do not always match..

Edited June 6, 2011 by Xinh_Will

[ScottThuy 140]

I included a lease with my address and a credit card bill of hers with her address (I still had web access to one of her accounts and just printed one off)... I explained the documents in the cover letter listing the contents of the package...

[tanstaafl 1]

I want to start this topic because of all the recent and not so recent debate over front loading. So please anyone that has gone through an interview and if you have front loaded any red flags that you thought were red flags, please comment on this thread.

For those that did front load

1) What did you front load?

2) Did you get asked about any red flags you front loaded

3) Did you get a visa after the interview

4) Did you get a blue slip at the interview

5) If you got a blue slip at the interview did it ask for proof of the red flag you frontloaded

Questions for people that did not front load but did have evidence at the interview addressing what was thought of as a red flag

1) What did you feel were your red flags

2) Were you asked about your presumed red flags at the interview

3) Did the CO look at your evidence for the red flags

4) If the CO refused to look at your evidence were you given a blue slip requesting what you already had at the interview

5) After the interview if you were asked about the red flags and the CO looked at your evidence were you given a pink

6) If you were not asked about any red flags, and then still given a blue were the requests for evidence what you thought of as red flags, and did you have that evidence with you

I will be the first to add our experience with this post.

I did not front load. We were worried about my divorce with my wife being in prison so we had the evidence at the interview. We were asked by the CO about my ex wife, and where she lived, he refused to look at our proof where she was living (prison documents) The other red flag was my previous K1 petition filed almost two years prior, this never came up at the interview, and was not on our blue slip

Over all outcome of our case was denial, not based on any of our supposed red flags

I didn't front load the evidence addressing the red flags (the lawyer didn't tell me anything about this). The CO didn't even bother to look at any of the evidence she brought with her. She didn't even look at my wife the entire interview one bit. I think the result had already been made before the interview and the interview was just part of the process that had to be done. During the interview the CO focused primarily on my ex wife and why we didn't have kids from my previous marriage. After about 15 minutes, a white sheet was handed out asking for more documents.

Depending on the case, front loading evidence may help or hurt your case. In my case, front loading could do more harm than help.

[b_weeks 6]

1) What did you front load? 1 Trip to vietnam, although it was 6 weeks long. Introduced by sister. Pregnant at the time of interview (and filing).

2) Did you get asked about any red flags you front loaded?

3) Did you get a visa after the interview?

4) Did you get a blue slip at the interview?

The other thing about front-loading, or so I was told by my lawyer is: You cannot be denied based on information in your initial filing that has already been approved by the USCIS.

Now from my time here on the forum, here is what produce typical denials.

• 1 trip
  
• No Dam Hoi (Le Dinh Hom)
  
• Few pictures (wearing same clothes in many pictures)
  
• NO TIMELINE (This is a big one)
  
• 3 passport photos (I believe packet 4 only says 2. whatever the packet said, we provided 1 more as advised by lawyer)
  
• Little supporting evidence of ongoing relationship - SEE MY STICKY POST
  
• List of relatives already living in the US. (including aunts, uncles, cousins)