My Interview Experience.

[Visitor User 236]

My interview experience:

 

Length: About 20 minutes. 

 

My Lawyer had already arrived early. My petitioner (USC Mother) and I arrived about 45 minutes before interview time.

 

I wore my signature suit and Tie. 

 

I was called on time. My lawyer instructed that my mom stays in the waiting room.

 

IO checked my ID. I took the Oath. From the start, IO said he was a little confused because my 2001 ETA 750 Labor Certification said EWI which was clearly an error from my then attorney. My lawyer explained to the IO that I entered on a B2 Visa. IO asked for proof and I showed him my original I-94 to satisfy that requirement and this was the only document he asked for. (Entry type would not have mattered since I was grandfathered into the 245i benefit which means EWI’s are also covered). We also had the Visa # stamp as well on my mother’s expired passport. 

 

IO then asked us to bring my father in because for some reason he thought my father was the sponsor (he is deceased). He only asked my mother her full name.

 

IO seemed fairly new so we had to clear some stuff up. My lawyer actually did all the educating part to the IO.

 

IO was wondering why I was using 245i if I had legal entry so my lawyer told him that I Overstayed my Visa and it was necessary for me to adjust under 245i if I wanted to do the AOS. 

 

IO asked my full name, current address and DOB. We had to correct the birth year on I-485 because it was a typographical error from USCIS. IO asked random few questions they were YES/NO and I got them all correct. He then asked for updated I-693 which I submitted to him. He then went off to check off the pages and did work on his computer. 

 

He gave me the standard white sheet which stated:

 

‘Your Case is being held for review’. IO said this was the normal process for everyone to run background checks. I think he had to get approval final from his supervisor. 

 

My lawyer who has 20 years of experience partially congratulated my mother and I and thought interview went well and was confident. Next morning, I woke up to ‘New Card is being produced’ which should be the 10 years and I should be eligible for Citizenship in 4 years and 9 months.

 

Edited March 8, 2019 by Visitor User

[USS_Voyager 1,971]

2 minutes ago, Visitor User said:

Next morning, I woke up to ‘New Card is being produced’ which should be the 10 years and I should be eligible for Citizenship in 4 years and 9 months.

 

Congratulations! 🎉 

Please apply for citizenship when the time comes and exercise your constitutional right to vote after you become a US citizen.

[Visitor User 236]

6 minutes ago, USS_Voyager said:

Congratulations! 🎉 

Please apply for citizenship when the time comes and exercise your constitutional right to vote after you become a US citizen.

Green Card holders can vote in local elections within jurisdiction right?

[little immigrant 800]

4 minutes ago, Visitor User said:

Green Card holders can vote in local elections within jurisdiction right?

NO

[USS_Voyager 1,971]

9 minutes ago, Visitor User said:

Green Card holders can vote in local elections within jurisdiction right?

No, don’t vote in anything. Too much risk. You can volunteer for a cause that alligns with your values. Do not vote until you become a citizen 

[Visitor User 236]

4 minutes ago, little immigrant said:

NO

I hear mixed answers. I did read some where that we could? 

[Visitor User 236]

1 minute ago, USS_Voyager said:

No, don’t vote in anything. Too much risk. You can volunteer for a cause that alligns with your values. Do not vote until you become a citizen 

Right, not worth the risk. I will stick to online polls LOL. 

[junkmart 320]

13 hours ago, Visitor User said:

My interview experience:

 

Length: About 20 minutes. 

 

My Lawyer had already arrived early. My petitioner (USC Mother) and I arrived about 45 minutes before interview time.

 

I wore my signature suit and Tie. 

 

I was called on time. My lawyer instructed that my mom stays in the waiting room.

 

IO checked my ID. I took the Oath. From the start, IO said he was a little confused because my 2001 ETA 750 Labor Certification said EWI which was clearly an error from my then attorney. My lawyer explained to the IO that I entered on a B2 Visa. IO asked for proof and I showed him my original I-94 to satisfy that requirement and this was the only document he asked for. (Entry type would not have mattered since I was grandfathered into the 245i benefit which means EWI’s are also covered). We also had the Visa # stamp as well on my mother’s expired passport. 

 

IO then asked us to bring my father in because for some reason he thought my father was the sponsor (he is deceased). He only asked my mother her full name.

 

IO seemed fairly new so we had to clear some stuff up. My lawyer actually did all the educating part to the IO.

 

IO was wondering why I was using 245i if I had legal entry so my lawyer told him that I Overstayed my Visa and it was necessary for me to adjust under 245i if I wanted to do the AOS. 

 

IO asked my full name, current address and DOB. We had to correct the birth year on I-485 because it was a typographical error from USCIS. IO asked random few questions they were YES/NO and I got them all correct. He then asked for updated I-693 which I submitted to him. He then went off to check off the pages and did work on his computer. 

 

He gave me the standard white sheet which stated:

 

‘Your Case is being held for review’. IO said this was the normal process for everyone to run background checks. I think he had to get approval final from his supervisor. 

 

My lawyer who has 20 years of experience partially congratulated my mother and I and thought interview went well and was confident. Next morning, I woke up to ‘New Card is being produced’ which should be the 10 years and I should be eligible for Citizenship in 4 years and 9 months.

 

Congratulations, and thank you for sharing your experience of having a lawyer present for the interview. I wish all the people in the forum who say that the lawyer can't do anything during the interview would read this.

[junkmart 320]

13 hours ago, USS_Voyager said:

No, don’t vote in anything. Too much risk. You can volunteer for a cause that alligns with your values. Do not vote until you become a citizen 

This is great advice, and something that my Mexican husband is doing while waiting for AOS. There are many pro bono attorney organizations that offer free legal aid to immigrants, like the central and south americans who are trying to seek asylum in the United States but are being turned away at POEs, that need volunteers, if that aligns with your values.

[dentsflogged 352]

35 minutes ago, junkmart said:

Congratulations, and thank you for sharing your experience of having a lawyer present for the interview. I wish all the people in the forum who say that the lawyer can't do anything during the interview would read this.

Technically, the lawyer can't though.  They can't answer for you. They can't correct your answer to the IO once you've said something.  In this case, we have 1 person's word that their lawyer "corrected" the IO on things which IMO if the IO was that new, they would presumably have been being supervised by someone else. 

At the end of the day, if someone feels more confident or comfortable taking a lawyer with them, I say do it, but my years of reading this site has shown one thing: taking a lawyer in a typical scenario doesn't do anything.  This particular OP has a complicated case and seemingly has had multiple lawyers and multiple mistakes happen on their file, so that could be one reason why it seemed this lawyer has helped being there.

[junkmart 320]

6 minutes ago, dentsflogged said:

They can't correct your answer to the IO once you've said something. 

I know they can't answer questions for you. But your statement above is simply not true. They can make their client aware of a mistake and give their client the opportunity to correct it. They can also "educate" the IO if he is not following procedures properly. Other's experiences have proved that they can and do.

Edited March 8, 2019 by junkmart

[junkmart 320]

13 minutes ago, dentsflogged said:

They can't correct your answer to the IO once you've said something.

True, but they can make the client aware that they made a mistake, which gives them the opportunity to correct themselves to the IO.

 

14 minutes ago, dentsflogged said:

In this case, we have 1 person's word that their lawyer "corrected" the IO on things which IMO if the IO was that new, they would presumably have been being supervised by someone else.

I personally know two more, and have read many more.

[dentsflogged 352]

2 minutes ago, junkmart said:

That's simply not true. Other's experiences have proved that they can and do.

That's not at all what I was told by an immigration lawyer when I specifically asked about interviews.   He said they can prep you and be there but all answers are 100% on you as the person being interviewed and it's my own responsibility to ensure I'm giving properly informative and correct answers. 

And more importantly, I'd question how much weight it really holds.  The person who is being interviewed is the one sworn in and they're the ones responsible for their answers. Just because a lawyer jumps in and corrects them on something, I have zero doubt that the IO will absolutely note the original answer and hold it in weight against the totality of other answers and evidence provided.   

I'm glad OP had everything go well and it was money well spent in their case, but on average across the forums I read for USA immigration, it seems from my reading that people using lawyers (or worse, Rapid Visa, shudder) has caused more problems than it solves. 

[junkmart 320]

1 minute ago, dentsflogged said:

That's not at all what I was told by an immigration lawyer when I specifically asked about interviews.   He said they can prep you and be there but all answers are 100% on you as the person being interviewed and it's my own responsibility to ensure I'm giving properly informative and correct answers. 

I was told otherwise by the two attorney's I interviewed.

 

2 minutes ago, dentsflogged said:

And more importantly, I'd question how much weight it really holds.  The person who is being interviewed is the one sworn in and they're the ones responsible for their answers. Just because a lawyer jumps in and corrects them on something, I have zero doubt that the IO will absolutely note the original answer and hold it in weight against the totality of other answers and evidence provided.

Agreed. It is up to the person being interviewed to actually correct themselves to the IO, the Attorney can just make the interviewee know that said something that contradicts what they put in the application. the burden rests with the interviewee.

[junkmart 320]

4 minutes ago, dentsflogged said:

I'm glad OP had everything go well and it was money well spent in their case, but on average across the forums I read for USA immigration, it seems from my reading that people using lawyers (or worse, Rapid Visa, shudder) has caused more problems than it solves. 

I can't disagree with this. In most cases, most people do not need an attorney. Some do cause more problems than good.