Please Advise ..... We are unable to sleep ....Our AOS interview messed up

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I have a feeling that the Lawyer involved knows much more about this case than has been posted.

So slagging her off may be jumping the gun.

Knowing nothing more than what the OP has posted in this thread, if I was an IO then I would have been suspicious of this case because of the previous marriage to an immigrant. If I was an immigration attorney with the same information then I would have suspected that a Stokes interview was a possibility, and I would have prepared my clients for this. If their attorney knows MORE than what the OP has posted, and did not prepare them for a possible Stokes interview, then the attorney dropped the ball.

The OP's attorney told them that the interview would be easy because they had been together a "long time" - about 1 1/2 years, and had a lot of evidence like a lease and bank statements. The attorney was obviously not expecting the Stokes interview. Afterward, their attorney told them that either of them had lied under oath, and the OP would have to leave the US.

No matter what angle I look at this from, it looks to me like the attorney blew it for not expecting and preparing for a possible Stokes interview, and has now abandoned her clients.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Please recommend us evidences. We have already given them following evidences.

Lease of apartment, Bank accounts together, Credit cards together, Tax document filled together, Pictures, Utility bills, Telephone Bills, notarized affidavit from my dad and friend about marriage, marriage certificate.

We took our greeting cards and picture album with us but IO did not see so we will add that thing.

Now what else we should submit. Your advice will be highly appreciated. We were planning to have kid but in this situation we are struck. I have heard even with babies they reject the case.

You have sufficient evidence of co-mingling of assets. What evidence do you have to show the development of your relationship? Have you taken any vacations together? What about holidays with family and friends? What about events you've attended together?

Affidavits are ok, but the IO will consider the source. They would expect a family member or friend of the immigrant would be willing to lie for them, so they tend to look on affidavits from those people with skepticism. The strongest affidavits come from disinterested third parties - people who are neither relatives nor close friends of either party - and who have respected standing in the community. Religious leaders, community leaders, police officers, elected officials, or anyone else who would not risk their reputation to lie for you. Affidavits from people like that have more credence with USCIS.

Having children together sometimes helps, but I suspect it would do no good at all in your case. Your wife has not convinced the IO that she has maintained a relationship with her children from her previous marriage. There's no reason they would expect that having children with you would prove the relationship was legitimate. She had children in her previous marriage, and they don't seem to believe that relationship was legitimate.

A good lawyer will help guide you through this. I don't know why I get the feeling you're trying to avoid hiring another lawyer.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

I have a feeling that the Lawyer involved knows much more about this case than has been posted.

So slagging her off may be jumping the gun.

Agreed. No one seemed to notice in this thread that the OP said he did meet the kids and that they went to the movies together - which did not happen (see opening post). So he did not remember (which is odd) and then made up a semi-detailed lie. I am positive the OP is not telling the whole story, and there is nothing we can do except advise to get a lawyer that will work with them.

Edited April 10, 2011 by Harpa Timsah

[mof 15]

Agreed. No one seemed to notice in this thread that the OP said he did meet the kids and that they went to the movies together - which did not happen (see opening post). So he did not remember (which is odd) and then made up a semi-detailed lie. I am positive the OP is not telling the whole story, and there is nothing we can do except advise to get a lawyer that will work with them.

Oh, it's been noticed...!

I think one of the first pieces of advice I received on this board was that lying during the interview can get you into big, big trouble. I do not remember where I read the advice, but I believe it stated that you are much better off simply admitting that you don't remember, rather than make up a story or even guess an answer. I am surprised that the OP would take such a chance, especially during a Stokes interview when it should be clear that the spouse will essentially receive the same questions. I understand that a moment of panic can cause many things to go wrong, but why not simple tell the truth: I don't recall.

Alas, none of that is helpful to the OP at this point and frankly, we are all assuming that this lie will result in a denial. As I understand it, no such decision has been mailed to the OP. Perhaps it is a better use of time for the OP to research a good attorney than to belabor the same point over and over?

OP, get all your ducks in a row so that you can act immediately should you be denied. Find a lawyer that is willing and able to work on your behalf. I certainly hope that you are no longer consulting with the lawyer who abandoned you.

Don't panic just yet - until USCIS truly denies you, you are basing all this on a hypothetically negative outcome. A state of panic usually prevents any clear and logical thinking - and I think that you need to have a very clear head to explain this to an attorney. In all detail.

Edited April 10, 2011 by mof

[Dakine10 5,452]

Knowing nothing more than what the OP has posted in this thread, if I was an IO then I would have been suspicious of this case because of the previous marriage to an immigrant. If I was an immigration attorney with the same information then I would have suspected that a Stokes interview was a possibility, and I would have prepared my clients for this. If their attorney knows MORE than what the OP has posted, and did not prepare them for a possible Stokes interview, then the attorney dropped the ball.

The OP's attorney told them that the interview would be easy because they had been together a "long time" - about 1 1/2 years, and had a lot of evidence like a lease and bank statements. The attorney was obviously not expecting the Stokes interview. Afterward, their attorney told them that either of them had lied under oath, and the OP would have to leave the US.

No matter what angle I look at this from, it looks to me like the attorney blew it for not expecting and preparing for a possible Stokes interview, and has now abandoned her clients.

I agree. Going forward, they need an attorney who is professional, prepared and competent. This attorney does not meet any of those criteria.

I don't think I have ever heard of an attorney insulting clients after a case.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Why did you think you needed a lawyer in the first place? Seems like a pretty straightforward case to me.

Please don't say these things.

We never know enough on here about a case to make that comment.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

It's called a "Stokes interview". The name comes from a Federal District Court case, Stokes v. INS, Nov. 10, 1976. That case established procedures INS (now called USCIS) must follow when fraud is suspected in a marriage based I-130 case in the New York district office. Those procedures include a separate interview of the petitioner and beneficiary. That procedure has been adopted, to some degree, at virtually all USCIS field offices and many US consulates, and is routinely referred to as a "Stokes interview".

Is it possible to have a second Stokes interview? Yes. Is it likely? No. They have sufficient evidence from the first interview to deny the adjustment of status and revoke the approval of the I-130.

Your lawyer is throwing you under the bus, and blaming you for getting run over. Fire her. Now. And hire another attorney who is willing to actually try to help you.

Do this . Now.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I have a feeling that the Lawyer involved knows much more about this case than has been posted.

So slagging her off may be jumping the gun.

That is possible.

But why then did the first attorney advise the OP they would be in and out of the office in 30 minutes?

Any attorney worth their salt would never say this. Especially if they were aware of the first marriage.

[worrieddoc 2]

Knowing nothing more than what the OP has posted in this thread, if I was an IO then I would have been suspicious of this case because of the previous marriage to an immigrant. If I was an immigration attorney with the same information then I would have suspected that a Stokes interview was a possibility, and I would have prepared my clients for this. If their attorney knows MORE than what the OP has posted, and did not prepare them for a possible Stokes interview, then the attorney dropped the ball.

The OP's attorney told them that the interview would be easy because they had been together a "long time" - about 1 1/2 years, and had a lot of evidence like a lease and bank statements. The attorney was obviously not expecting the Stokes interview. Afterward, their attorney told them that either of them had lied under oath, and the OP would have to leave the US.

No matter what angle I look at this from, it looks to me like the attorney blew it for not expecting and preparing for a possible Stokes interview, and has now abandoned her clients.

If we were prepared with stroke interview these days could be very different. We are thinking to change the attorney but we are waiting for any response from USCIS so that we could show to new attorney what is UCIS response. Now we dont have any response from USCIS except negtive response from our attorney.

[worrieddoc 2]

That is possible.

But why then did the first attorney advise the OP they would be in and out of the office in 30 minutes?

Any attorney worth their salt would never say this. Especially if they were aware of the first marriage.

You are right, I don't know why she made us feel like that. Might be she did not have enough experience? We were sure about approval and we were planing for vacations.

[worrieddoc 2]

I agree. Going forward, they need an attorney who is professional, prepared and competent. This attorney does not meet any of those criteria.

I don't think I have ever heard of an attorney insulting clients after a case.

Can any one advice me how to find competent attorney? we looked the add on yellow pages and went to her. Now how to find right attorney?

[worrieddoc 2]

You have sufficient evidence of co-mingling of assets. What evidence do you have to show the development of your relationship? Have you taken any vacations together? What about holidays with family and friends? What about events you've attended together?

Affidavits are ok, but the IO will consider the source. They would expect a family member or friend of the immigrant would be willing to lie for them, so they tend to look on affidavits from those people with skepticism. The strongest affidavits come from disinterested third parties - people who are neither relatives nor close friends of either party - and who have respected standing in the community. Religious leaders, community leaders, police officers, elected officials, or anyone else who would not risk their reputation to lie for you. Affidavits from people like that have more credence with USCIS.

Having children together sometimes helps, but I suspect it would do no good at all in your case. Your wife has not convinced the IO that she has maintained a relationship with her children from her previous marriage. There's no reason they would expect that having children with you would prove the relationship was legitimate. She had children in her previous marriage, and they don't seem to believe that relationship was legitimate.

A good lawyer will help guide you through this. I don't know why I get the feeling you're trying to avoid hiring another lawyer.

we presented a lot of evidences. bank statements from long time, Bills , Insurance , Pics which clearly show we used to be less fat etc and we gained weight over time etc

Till now Affidavit we had from parents and friends. It really good advice. Affidavit from unrelated people will be good I will try to get from her supervisors and colleague as they know me. I am not trying to avoid hiring a new attorney. It is crystal clear to me that I need different attorney. Should I wait for response from USCIS ?

Please advice me or tell me name of good attorney.

[Myopia 93]

Please don't say these things.

We never know enough on here about a case to make that comment.

Yea true.The outcome would have been the same evidently.

OP- Depending on where you are. You need an attorney with experience with Immigration. Particularly Adjustment denials. I wouldnt wait till you get the paper. I would look for one now and have at least a phone consultation

Edited April 12, 2011 by Myopia

[worrieddoc 2]

Oh, it's been noticed...!

I think one of the first pieces of advice I received on this board was that lying during the interview can get you into big, big trouble. I do not remember where I read the advice, but I believe it stated that you are much better off simply admitting that you don't remember, rather than make up a story or even guess an answer. I am surprised that the OP would take such a chance, especially during a Stokes interview when it should be clear that the spouse will essentially receive the same questions. I understand that a moment of panic can cause many things to go wrong, but why not simple tell the truth: I don't recall.

Alas, none of that is helpful to the OP at this point and frankly, we are all assuming that this lie will result in a denial. As I understand it, no such decision has been mailed to the OP. Perhaps it is a better use of time for the OP to research a good attorney than to belabor the same point over and over?

OP, get all your ducks in a row so that you can act immediately should you be denied. Find a lawyer that is willing and able to work on your behalf. I certainly hope that you are no longer consulting with the lawyer who abandoned you.

Don't panic just yet - until USCIS truly denies you, you are basing all this on a hypothetically negative outcome. A state of panic usually prevents any clear and logical thinking - and I think that you need to have a very clear head to explain this to an attorney. In all detail.

We were not expecting this interview. When we came home and Google this then we came to know about the name" stroke interview". We had thought that attornye is taking care of all things so before interview we did not done any research or studied forums which was a big mistake.

I dont know from where people are getting an idea that we lied. Please read my post again. since I met the kids long time ago and never met after that my wife forget. During that interview there were many moments when I was also blank.

We tried to explain this thing to attorney as well. As a doctor I know that in moment of Panic or stress our brain go blank. People forget their birthdays or even very basic informations. In the interview I never said I meet them very often or I meet them to many times.

[mof 15]

I dont know from where people are getting an idea that we lied. Please read my post again. since I met the kids long time ago and never met after that my wife forget. During that interview there were many moments when I was also blank.

From this: "I was so blank i could not remember how many times. she said what you did together . I was sweeting i said movies etc. My wife said I never met with them she forget/ went blank due to pressure. reality is that I meet once and it was not a long meeting"

You told the IO that you had gone to the movies with the kids - but it sounds like you didn't. Instead, you only met them briefly. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you and you meant that going to the movies was the brief meeting?

Is it possible that a language barrier contributed to this dilemma? If so, I would hope that USCIS applies a bit of leniency.