would it help to explain the age difference in the initial application??

[DreamsCatcher 0]

Hello everyone

This is really a wonderful site, I have reading a lot good info on it and it really helps a lot to do things lot easier. we are preparing to send the I-129F package, collecting all the documents, proofs and letters. The issue is there is 23 years old difference shes the USC which is older than me, but we have known each other for more than 5 years on the net before meeting. I have almost all her emails ( I also made prints of the main yahoo screens to show dates of email cuz its not suitable to print all the emails of 5 years)also the chat logs but not all of them , I have letters from her, gifts and my friends also wrote letters for me as she meet them here and we all went visiting many places and had dinner (there are pictures). Now I know such big age difference is a definite red flag (as I think) will it help to mention and explain that a head of a time in the petition to the USCIC (Nebraska) about how we are deeply committed in this relationship all these years and how we are not hiding such red flag corse there will be the evidence of ongoing relationship included in the package beside the meeting in person ones.

Thanks so much

Appreciate your help

[payxibka 10,044]

Hello everyone

This is really a wonderful site, I have reading a lot good info on it and it really helps a lot to do things lot easier. we are preparing to send the I-129F package, collecting all the documents, proofs and letters. The issue is there is 23 years old difference shes the USC which is older than me, but we have known each other for more than 5 years on the net before meeting. I have almost all her emails ( I also made prints of the main yahoo screens to show dates of email cuz its not suitable to print all the emails of 5 years)also the chat logs but not all of them , I have letters from her, gifts and my friends also wrote letters for me as she meet them here and we all went visiting many places and had dinner (there are pictures). Now I know such big age difference is a definite red flag (as I think) will it help to mention and explain that a head of a time in the petition to the USCIC (Nebraska) about how we are deeply committed in this relationship all these years and how we are not hiding such red flag corse there will be the evidence of ongoing relationship included in the package beside the meeting in person ones.

Thanks so much

Appreciate your help

No not really, if it is a concern the age issue will be dealt with at the consulate level. The only real item to deal with at the initial filing stage is that you have met within the last two years and provide good solid evidence of that (photos, passport stamps, itineraries, lodging receipts, etc..). I would not suggest overloading your application with 5 years of e-mails (or any e-mails for that matter) save all that for the interview as well because that more like evidence of a continued relationship.

[Meriem_DZ 37]

I am 13 years older than my husband. I never mentioned the age difference anywhere. I did not want to draw attention to it. He was prepared to address it at the consulate level if asked. No one said anything about the age difference, in fact he was not even asked one question by the consulate officer about anything. Our evidence did the talking.

Good luck.

Meriem

Edited October 11, 2006 by Meriem_setif

[MaryandMian 1]

You do not need to send any documents or anything about the age difference at this time. When it gets to the interview stage at the consulate it will be addressed then. At that time have your proofs and letters and ongoing evidence like phone records, emails, etc to show that you have a legitimate relationship. Good luck on your journey.

Mary

[mybackpages 0]

The age difference is shown in the intial petition with the biographical sheets. USCIS will not deny a petition based on this difference. The only reason an age difference is a red flag is that it often occurs in fraudulent cases. At the consulate level you will ned to be prepared to show you are a legitimate couple if the age difference is a question asked.

Good luck. I wouldn't worry so much about age difference on paper, but building solid evidecne that you have a legitimate and strong on going relationship.

[Jenn! 918]

I think it IS a good idea to address this issue in the original petition. Consulates operate in different ways. For instance, an older USC woman with a younger male beneficiary is a common scenario in Morocco. Many of these cases are not approved at the interview, but rather, are sent back to the U.S. because the consulate questions the validity of the relationship. There have even been instances where it would appear that the consulate has made up its mind even prior to the interview, refusing to look at any evidence.

Granted, Morocco is unique. However, if I were in the situation, I would want any possible red flags to be addressed in my original petition for the reason stated above.

[payxibka 10,044]

I think it IS a good idea to address this issue in the original petition. Consulates operate in different ways. For instance, an older USC woman with a younger male beneficiary is a common scenario in Morocco. Many of these cases are not approved at the interview, but rather, are sent back to the U.S. because the consulate questions the validity of the relationship. There have even been instances where it would appear that the consulate has made up its mind even prior to the interview, refusing to look at any evidence.

Granted, Morocco is unique. However, if I were in the situation, I would want any possible red flags to be addressed in my original petition for the reason stated above.

I would respectfully disagree, as the G5 clerk adjudicator does not have the time, experience or the benefit of a face to face interview where they can review additional documents of a continued bona fide relationship. If you look at the petition application, the only burden of proof required is having met in the last two years. It is straight forward and I would suggest not complicated it further at this stage.

[Jenn! 918]

I think it IS a good idea to address this issue in the original petition. Consulates operate in different ways. For instance, an older USC woman with a younger male beneficiary is a common scenario in Morocco. Many of these cases are not approved at the interview, but rather, are sent back to the U.S. because the consulate questions the validity of the relationship. There have even been instances where it would appear that the consulate has made up its mind even prior to the interview, refusing to look at any evidence.

Granted, Morocco is unique. However, if I were in the situation, I would want any possible red flags to be addressed in my original petition for the reason stated above.

I would respectfully disagree, as the G5 clerk adjudicator does not have the time, experience or the benefit of a face to face interview where they can review additional documents of a continued bona fide relationship. If you look at the petition application, the only burden of proof required is having met in the last two years. It is straight forward and I would suggest not complicated it further at this stage.

Well, I can agree to disagree. But I want to emphasize that all consulates are different, and what may be appropriate for one will not be for another. The Middle East/North Africa is unique. An attachment addressing certain red flags would not be for the benefit of the adjudicator of the I-129F, but rather for the consulate when they receive the file.

[I'm Gone 60]

The birth certificates will explain it.

[payxibka 10,044]

I think it IS a good idea to address this issue in the original petition. Consulates operate in different ways. For instance, an older USC woman with a younger male beneficiary is a common scenario in Morocco. Many of these cases are not approved at the interview, but rather, are sent back to the U.S. because the consulate questions the validity of the relationship. There have even been instances where it would appear that the consulate has made up its mind even prior to the interview, refusing to look at any evidence.

Granted, Morocco is unique. However, if I were in the situation, I would want any possible red flags to be addressed in my original petition for the reason stated above.

I would respectfully disagree, as the G5 clerk adjudicator does not have the time, experience or the benefit of a face to face interview where they can review additional documents of a continued bona fide relationship. If you look at the petition application, the only burden of proof required is having met in the last two years. It is straight forward and I would suggest not complicated it further at this stage.

Well, I can agree to disagree. But I want to emphasize that all consulates are different, and what may be appropriate for one will not be for another. The Middle East/North Africa is unique. An attachment addressing certain red flags would not be for the benefit of the adjudicator of the I-129F, but rather for the consulate when they receive the file.

Exactly, that is why you bring that documentation with you to the interview rather than muddy the water upfront. If it is in fact a problem, would you not rather defend the information face to face with the ultimate decision maker rather than defend it via snail mail with a processing clerk? As you said, each consulate is different and the servcice center adjudicator does not know what "hot buttons" Morroco has vs Rio vs Sydney. By including in the original submission you are opening yourself up for problems that may not even be a concern of the CO. Come to the interview prepared to answer any potential red flags you have thought of, don't by previous action give them a "freebie" reason for potential denial.

[Jenn! 918]

I think it IS a good idea to address this issue in the original petition. Consulates operate in different ways. For instance, an older USC woman with a younger male beneficiary is a common scenario in Morocco. Many of these cases are not approved at the interview, but rather, are sent back to the U.S. because the consulate questions the validity of the relationship. There have even been instances where it would appear that the consulate has made up its mind even prior to the interview, refusing to look at any evidence.

Granted, Morocco is unique. However, if I were in the situation, I would want any possible red flags to be addressed in my original petition for the reason stated above.

I would respectfully disagree, as the G5 clerk adjudicator does not have the time, experience or the benefit of a face to face interview where they can review additional documents of a continued bona fide relationship. If you look at the petition application, the only burden of proof required is having met in the last two years. It is straight forward and I would suggest not complicated it further at this stage.

Well, I can agree to disagree. But I want to emphasize that all consulates are different, and what may be appropriate for one will not be for another. The Middle East/North Africa is unique. An attachment addressing certain red flags would not be for the benefit of the adjudicator of the I-129F, but rather for the consulate when they receive the file.

Exactly, that is why you bring that documentation with you to the interview rather than muddy the water upfront. If it is in fact a problem, would you not rather defend the information face to face with the ultimate decision maker rather than defend it via snail mail with a processing clerk? As you said, each consulate is different and the servcice center adjudicator does not know what "hot buttons" Morroco has vs Rio vs Sydney. By including in the original submission you are opening yourself up for problems that may not even be a concern of the CO. Come to the interview prepared to answer any potential red flags you have thought of, don't by previous action give them a "freebie" reason for potential denial.

Believe me, I do see your point. But I don't think you are familiar with the procedures at some of these consulates. I have seen cases that are returned by the consulate before the beneficiary is allowed to present any evidence.

[jasal 0]

I think it IS a good idea to address this issue in the original petition. Consulates operate in different ways. For instance, an older USC woman with a younger male beneficiary is a common scenario in Morocco. Many of these cases are not approved at the interview, but rather, are sent back to the U.S. because the consulate questions the validity of the relationship. There have even been instances where it would appear that the consulate has made up its mind even prior to the interview, refusing to look at any evidence.

Granted, Morocco is unique. However, if I were in the situation, I would want any possible red flags to be addressed in my original petition for the reason stated above.

I would respectfully disagree, as the G5 clerk adjudicator does not have the time, experience or the benefit of a face to face interview where they can review additional documents of a continued bona fide relationship. If you look at the petition application, the only burden of proof required is having met in the last two years. It is straight forward and I would suggest not complicated it further at this stage.

Well, I can agree to disagree. But I want to emphasize that all consulates are different, and what may be appropriate for one will not be for another. The Middle East/North Africa is unique. An attachment addressing certain red flags would not be for the benefit of the adjudicator of the I-129F, but rather for the consulate when they receive the file.

Eveyone has a good point. The folks at USCIS don't need all the extra paperwork to look through and addressing the age difference isn't necessary at this level. However, it is necessary at the next level and with some consulates such as the one in Guangzhou, China, if you haven't already addressed every issue with them through the original package that they read from the USCIS, then many times they won't even allow you to give them additional evidence of any kind. They have been known to pre-judge the case and have already made up their minds BEFORE they ever lay eyes on the person at the interview. There are countless times where a pile of evidence wasn't even looked at during the interview simply because the VO at the consulate had already judged the case on what they received in the original package from USCIS. Some folks have been blue slipped and other white slipped because of this and they were never allowed to present additional evidence. So I'm all far making the original package speak to as many issues and people as possible because with some consulates you may not have an additional chance to address them.

[payxibka 10,044]

Believe me, I do see your point. But I don't think you are familiar with the procedures at some of these consulates. I have seen cases that are returned by the consulate before the beneficiary is allowed to present any evidence.

Care to cite specifics? Must have been for technical reasons because I can't returning a petition for reasons outside the scope and purview of the adjudicator.

[Caladan 19]

I'm not sure what sort of evidence could explain an age difference, to be honest. (It's not like explaining a meeting location or a relationship timeline. ) They're looking for proof of having met in two years + some evidence of a bonafide relationship, something which applies regardless of the age difference. It would be a red flag even if you put in a line saying 'I know it's normally a red flag that she's older than I am, but trust me, we love each other.'

[Jenn! 918]

Believe me, I do see your point. But I don't think you are familiar with the procedures at some of these consulates. I have seen cases that are returned by the consulate before the beneficiary is allowed to present any evidence.

Care to cite specifics? Must have been for technical reasons because I can't returning a petition for reasons outside the scope and purview of the adjudicator.

You can browse the MENA forum and find many examples. Many 221g's doubting the validity of the relationship, and no, not for technicalities. I think we've all concluded that it is not correct procedure what they are doing, but they are doing it nonetheless. See jasal's post as well about China. This is a consulate specific issue, so if you're going through England, no one would ever suggest addressing red flags in the I-129F.