Could ya'll proofread this for me?

[RosaMystica7 0]

My parents have agreed to sign/have notarized a letter attesting to the fact that they met my fiance during his visit and that he stayed in their house. I don't have our names together on anything, even the hotel itineraries/reciepts only show my name... he didn't use a credit/ATM/debit card in my town... etc. etc. So in addition to his passport stamp, boarding passes, baggage stickers, hotel itineraries from our first 2 stays/hotel reciept from our 3rd stay, and 2 photos of us together we're going to include this letter that my parents will sign in front of a notary tomorrow. I'm not good with writing stuff like this, though... could ya'll please proofread this and tell me if it's good? Any suggestions, or changes I should make? Thanks!

(I replaced our last names with [last name] as I don't like sharing that on the internet. Won't be like that on the real letter, of course! )

____________________________________________

Sunday, November 19th, 2006

To whom it may concern:

We, Linda and Joseph [last name], the parents of Angela [last name], attest that her fiancé, Sinclair [last name], traveled to New York to visit her between the dates of 12/18/2005 and 12/31/2005. We met Sinclair and interacted with him throughout the duration of his entire visit. He resided in our house for the entire duration of his stay except for three times that he and our daughter stayed in a hotel: 12/21/2005 – 12/22/2005, 12/24/2005 – 12/26/2005, and 12/28/2005 – 12/31/2005.

Sincerely,

Linda and Joseph [last name]

____________________________________________

(As an aside, if you're curious about the broken up hotel dates... the 21st was my 21st birthday, so we went out to NYC... the 24th - 26th was to celebrate our first Christmas together... and the last hotel stay was a surprise - we got it at an awesomely discounted price because the jacuzzi a floor above us leaked into our room and made a huge mess. We loved the discount... we just made sure there wasn't a jacuzzi room above us the 2nd time around! )

[Alex+R 0]

Hehehe hotels huh? Aren't you guys Catholic?

IMO, this looks good. In

We met Sinclair and interacted with him throughout the duration of his entire visit.

cut out "the duration of" and "entire." "Resided" can just be "stayed."

I mean, for clarity. I've only got proofreading skills to check grammar and make things concise

[RosaMystica7 0]

Hey now, I'm just asking for the letter to be proofread. And "hotel" doesn't automatically mean much, other than the fact that we were sick of my parents being constantly over our shoulders and we wanted to get away from them. It started to get annoying to not even be able to have a little alone time without 2 pairs of eyes nearby. We even brought my N64 to the hotel with us. We forgot to re-set the channel when we left, I hope the next people figured that out when they couldn't get the TV to work... whoops.

Aaaaaaaanyway, back on subject. Thanks for the suggestion, here's the corrected version:

Sunday, November 19th, 2006

To whom it may concern:

We, Linda and Joseph [last name], the parents of Angela [last name], attest that her fiancé, Sinclair [last name], traveled to New York to visit her between the dates of 12/18/2005 and 12/31/2005. We met Sinclair and interacted with him throughout his visit. He stayed in our house for the entire duration of his visit except for three times that he and our daughter stayed in a hotel: 12/21/2005 – 12/22/2005, 12/24/2005 – 12/26/2005, and 12/28/2005 – 12/31/2005.

Sincerely,

Linda and Joseph [last name]

Edited November 19, 2006 by Angilla

[Alex+R 0]

You guys are cute. That version looks good to me. Maybe someone will come alone with more opinions...

[RosaMystica7 0]

Thanks!

[arwensun1965 1]

Why are you having to go and get a letter from your parents, a couple of photo's will do and the plane tickets, that is all my now husband and I had. I know we worry constantly about what we should have and whatnot but try not too. Good luck with the process.

Janice

[RosaMystica7 0]

It'll make my fiance and I feel better to have more than the 1 thing tying us directly together. The flight stuff proves he flew into JFK, of our two photos 1 was taken in the JFK AirTrain, the 2nd one was taken in a hotel out here which is good... the hotel itineraries/reciepts don't have his name on them though... so we'd like to have something more than that 1 photo showing that he came an hour east of JFK and stayed with me and my family. Plus the letter gives the hotel itineraries/reciepts a little more weight since the stays are mentioned in their notarized letter, even though the itineraries/reciepts don't have his name on them.

My parents don't mind at all and there's a notary right around the corner from us.

So I just need to know if the letter is good or if there's anything I need to take out/fix/add.

[motu 6]

Angilla:

I also do not think you need a letter from your parents if you have a few photos and boarding passes etc. (I did mine with a minimum of supporrting docs also.) ALso, your fiance is from France - not a high fraud country so don't worry too much. And lastly, I do not like the wording of the letter - unless your parents are lawyers Most people will write routinely that they met their daughter's fiance and know him to be a nice person and hope that they can marry and have a nice life or other words like 'normal' people use. My advice - don't worry about a letter and if you do get a 'normal' letter. Good Luck

[RosaMystica7 0]

Well... hmm... since I didn't get any other comments earlier the letter's been printed, signed, and notarized... maybe I'll just save it in case we get a RFE? But then the hotel itineraries/reciepts are pointless because they don't have his name on them - does that mean I shouldn't send the itineraries/reciepts, either, then? Then all I'd be sending is his boarding passes, passport stamp, baggage stickers, and 2 photos - 1 taken in the JFK AirTrain, one taken in a local hotel. That just doesn't feel like enough. But you're right, France isn't a high fraud country, so...

I feel better having the letter from my parents that tie the both of us together and give some credibility to the hotel itineraries/reciepts... but I don't want to give them un-needed info that could take them longer to adjudicate and give them questions to ask that they wouldn't have asked otherwise.

Then if I don't send the letter or the hotel itineraries/reciepts I guess I just shorten my answer to Q18 to, "Yes, my fiance came to New York to visit my family and I from 12/18/2005 - 12/31/2005" and that's it?

I had just finally felt comfortable with this petition and now I'm all confused all over again.

[Alex+R 0]

Well... hmm... since I didn't get any other comments earlier the letter's been printed, signed, and notarized... maybe I'll just save it in case we get a RFE? But then the hotel itineraries/reciepts are pointless because they don't have his name on them - does that mean I shouldn't send the itineraries/reciepts, either, then? Then all I'd be sending is his boarding passes, passport stamp, baggage stickers, and 2 photos - 1 taken in the JFK AirTrain, one taken in a local hotel. That just doesn't feel like enough. But you're right, France isn't a high fraud country, so...

I feel better having the letter from my parents that tie the both of us together and give some credibility to the hotel itineraries/reciepts... but I don't want to give them un-needed info that could take them longer to adjudicate and give them questions to ask that they wouldn't have asked otherwise.

Then if I don't send the letter or the hotel itineraries/reciepts I guess I just shorten my answer to Q18 to, "Yes, my fiance came to New York to visit my family and I from 12/18/2005 - 12/31/2005" and that's it?

I had just finally felt comfortable with this petition and now I'm all confused all over again.

I think you are fine. Send the letter, especially because it makes you feel better. The letter is straightforward, not lawyer-like, IMO. The point of the letter is to have your parents swear to USCIS that you're telling the truth in your petition, not for them to gush about how cute you guys are. Send all the info you were planning on sending. You're not overwhelming them, and there is no reason to shorten your stack of evidence just because less evidence *might* work. Do what will keep you from biting your nails nervously until NOA2 and send that package in!

[rebeccajo 14]

I think there's a more important letter you need to send and that would be one that answers the question about how you met.

Do a letter as an attachment to this question. Make it brief but include specifically how and when you met, and the visits since.

[RosaMystica7 0]

Thanks Alex+R! I would feel much better including it... and it's already printed, signed, and notarized anyway lol.

I think there's a more important letter you need to send and that would be one that answers the question about how you met.

Do a letter as an attachment to this question. Make it brief but include specifically how and when you met, and the visits since.

Q18 reads: "Has your fiance met and seen you within the 2 year period immediately receding the filing of this petition? Describe the circumstances under which you met. If you have not personally met each other, explain how your relationship was established" (bolding mine). So I'm not going to explain how our relationship was established as the question specifically says to say that only if we haven't met in person within the last 2 years. I would if I didn't worry that it could cause confusion. First, we met while he was a friar on a R1 visa. When I tell people that I sometimes get a response like, "Aren't those people supposed to not marry?" I say yes that's true but he left the friars in 12/2004, and they're still confused and tell me that they thought those people are never supposed to marry. Then I have to explain that he wasn't in final vows and was able to leave, and then they get it. So I'd rather not confuse the adjudicator like that, having the adjudicator think, "Friar, wait a minute, he's not eligible for marriage!" Second, the tail-end of his time as a friar is within the 2 year period... I don't want them to go asking for proof of it because I only have a tiny bit of proof that we knew each other while he was a friar.

If I mention more than one visit in Q18 won't they expect proof of more than 1 visit? I don't have sufficient proof for his October 05 visit, just his December 05 one... so I figure I'll only describe the December 05 visit and provide proof of it. They only need to know if we've met in person once in the last 2 years anyway, so I don't really feel like telling them more than they need to know. The more I tell them the longer it'll take them to go through my petition and the more questions I could raise in their minds that could lead to RFEs.

Or is it required that I tell them of all visits in Q18? I mean, I definately don't want to lie or anything like that. I just don't want to giving them additional information that I don't have to.

[kitkat1 5]

The question says:

Describe the circumstances under which you met

You don't have to explain how you established the relationship because you HAVE met in the previous 2 years. Most people put two or three sentences i.e. We were introduced by a mutual friend blah blah blah

Your goal is simply to provide evidence that you have met - it doesn't really matter if hotel bills don't show both names as hotel bills don't list the names of the room occupants.

Normal evidence of having met - copies of airline boarding passes, train passes, itineraries, hotel receipts, passport stamps, etc. You don't need proof of multiple visits - the requirement is to prove that you actually have met. I just don't see why a notarized letter is necessary, but I can't imagine it would hurt.

Edited November 20, 2006 by kitkat1

[RosaMystica7 0]

Thanks! So it's no problem for me to include info about his December 2005 visit but not his October 2005 one? I don't want to, like, lie or do something bad by concealing info... but... if I don't have to include it I definately don't want to.

The train tickets have no names either, and I don't have all of them. If I had all the train tickets I'd include them because they'd fit in, I could show the to/from train tickets that coincide with the dates on his boarding passes. It'd be especially good because the train station is in my town so the tickets DO say my town name. But I only have a few. Hmmm. I'll take a look at them again.

I just wanted the notarized letter because I feel like my evidence is flimsy, I have sufficient proof that he flew into JFK but only 2 pictures to concretely show that we were together - and one of those pics was taken in the JFK AirTrain. My parents didn't mind signing the letter and there's a notary right around the corner so I figured what the heck, might as well.

Edited November 20, 2006 by Angilla

[kitkat1 5]

You have to show proof that you have actually met each other. Once. Period. You're not lying when you don't show proof of multiple trips - you're following the instructions and providing the required information.

Question 18 requires you to describe how you met - intially, the first time, nothing more. You can add an extra sentence if it makes you feel better saying something brief and clear and to the point about the additional trips i.e. "We were introduced by mutual friends on xx xx xxxx. I went to visit him in his country on xxx. I returned to visit him again on xxx"

It won't hurt to use the letter - if it makes you feel better, do it.

p.s. train tickets don't normally show names so the adjudicator won't expect to see names - he's looking for proof that you have actually met.