Ning25

So my wife got her tourist visa today, my moms sick so we are going to visit.

How long can she be in the USA? We plan to be there as long as possible, but we also don't want to ruin or delay her immigrant visa. Is the time limit really 3 months or 6? I hear separate things. Will she have to leave the country to stay 6? Is it per year or for the life of the tourist visa? Theoretically could she come the last 3 months of this year, and then the first 6 of the next? This would be great because she could stay 9 months with me and then we take an extended vacation and her visa should be done for immigration by then. Is this possible?

Also if I start her immigration visa while we are there will this at any way harm her? I want to be the most cautious I can be. Thanks!

She is lucky to have the B 2 so must use it correctly for the best outcome. The length of time she is allowed to stay in the USA is determined at the POE based on the responses to a few questions. If the officer thinks she is using the visa to reside in the USA she could lose it. Spending 9 months in the USA could be very risky.

Of course they will know there is a petition pending.

Ok but what ever terms you want to use or analogy you like,to say some stamp is required is simply wrong. A translated document will have a stamp if someone puts one on the doc but that has nothing to do with the required procedure.

You say I alluded to some hidden requirements? No. This is exactly my statement :

There is no stamp required to be a certified translator. In Thailand you can pay a translator and they will use a stamp because they think it looks good but they know nothing of the actual requirements of the U S embassy. There is nothing wrong with doing this if people just want to pay more money per page because they like to see some colored stamp with a persons name they cant read on it.

The embassy has accepted many times including in my own case a simple statement made by the person that does the translation that indicates they are fluent in both languages. This is signed and dated whereupon it becomes the " certified " translation. The certification is no more than that. No stamp nor anything further. So an acceptable certified translated document does not have to have a stamp on it.

I think Karee and I said this in previous posts but Karee did it three sentences.

I did not mean to imply, and I certainly did not say, that you could take a document in need of translation to a notary, nor to a PE.

What I did say, was that in the same way that a notarized document will get a Notary stamp, and the same way that a reviewed and approved Engineering document will get the reviewing PE's stamp, a translated document will get a translators stamp.

Since receiving your reply, you have prompted me to check what we have for our documents, and that stamp bit is not entirely correct, it does not come from the translator. As it turns out you can have the translation done by anyone, but the translation stamp is affixed and signed by a single (gov.?) authority, after reviewing and approving the translation. That is what we have on our documents that are sitting in an overnight envelope in the US, waiting for a IV bill receipt to be added to them.

Ning, you allude to additional requirements of the US Embassy, would you mind expanding on that. If indeed there are further requirements, what precisely are they?

Ok but what ever terms you want to use or analogy you like,to say some stamp is required is simply wrong. A translated document will have a stamp if someone puts one on the doc but that has nothing to do with the required procedure.

You say I alluded to some hidden requirements? No. This is exactly my statement :

There is no stamp required to be a certified translator. In Thailand you can pay a translator and they will use a stamp because they think it looks good but they know nothing of the actual requirements of the U S embassy. There is nothing wrong with doing this if people just want to pay more money per page because they like to see some colored stamp with a persons name they cant read on it.

The embassy has accepted many times including in my own case a simple statement made by the person that does the translation that indicates they are fluent in both languages. This is signed and dated whereupon it becomes the " certified " translation. The certification is no more than that. No stamp nor anything further. So an acceptable certified translated document does not have to have a stamp on it.

I searched around and could not find answers regarding this issue if it even is one. My wife who has her 10 year green card will file her N-400 this coming November 2014, I'm not worried about her residency here as she has not left the country for nearly 18 months and pays taxes and we have joint acccounts etc.

My concern is myself as I am out of the country alot, sometimes for months at a time, taking care of business in 'her homeland' as she is unable to return much.

Question: will my absence be of a concern during the interview? Is there a possibilty the Office can claim our marriage is not valid as I'm not always here? But I must make a living and support my wife it just so happens that I'm gone alot. Everything is normal, should I be concerned?

This only comes up if you bring it up. What you are doing seems to be what many do in the course of life in the USA. You are a legitimate married couple and that's all that matters.

(1) I can not say for sure, because my documents have not even been sent, let alone reviewed and approved, but, I view it as something like a notary public, or Professional Engineers stamp. The stamp IS the certification with the signature.

Like I said, my docs have not been reviewed yet, but I can not see anything else they could want. I hope.

(3) They are probably ignoring you because THEY don't know what you are talking about. If it is like I say above, then as far as they are concerned, they already sent what you are asking for with the translation, any further communication is asking for trouble!

That last bit there is my opinion, Thai's seem to clam up rather than try to clarify a situation.

I will be curious if someone tells you different though... I will have to get on my horse and quickly find the cert. for my docs!!!

You are wrong in many ways here. A notary isn't required simply because they don't do translations and never have anything to do with the content of a document. They verify signatures only.

An engineer would never be used and would not stamp anything outside of the discipline they are trained in.

There is no stamp required to be a certified translator. In Thailand you can pay a translator and they will use a stamp because they think it looks good but they know nothing of the actual requirements of the U S embassy.

I'll be soon submitting an application for a US Visa for my wife.

Below is copied and pasted from the Instructions regarding translation of foreign language documents.

Any foreign language document must be accompanied by a full English translation that the translator has certified as complete and correct, and by the translator’s certification that he or she is competent to translate the foreign language into English.

I submitted Thai language documents for translation to English via email. They were promptly translated and hard-copies mailed and soft-copies emailed to me. I paid by bank transfer. No problem. The translated docs are stamped, "Certified complete and correct translation" and signed by the translator.

I subsequently (repeatedly) asked, via email, for the "translator's certification", but I get no response.

(1) What exactly is the "translator's certification?" Is this similar to a business license?

(2) Is the United States Citizen Immigrant Services really strict about seeing a copy of the translator's certification?

(3) Why are they ignoring my email? I used what appears to be a very large translation company in BKK.

I printed out the homepage of the translation company's website. Can this suffice as proof of their validity?

This idea of certification is wildly misunderstood. The certification is simply a statement by the person that did the translation indicating they are competent in both languages.

Karee is correct.

The government couldn't care less whether your income is permanent or temporary - as long as the bottom line figure on your tax return is at least 125% of the poverty level. And they'll have no way of even knowing unless you tell them

I'm not sure why you're even asking this question if your income last year was $43K. Did you report all of that on your taxes? Does $43K show up on your taxes? If so, then you're absolutely fine!

If not, then you're still absolutely fine because really, all they care about is that you're at least at or above their minimum figure.

I know to us, we would look at that and say, "Okay, you're slightly above the poverty level, but still, that's not really enough for two people to live on so we think there's still a risk your fiance will become a charge of the state." That's how normal people would look at it. But that's not the way the government looks at it.

The government looks at it like this... "The law requires that your income is at least $XXXXX. And yours is $XXXXX plus $0.01 - so you qualify."

You can send W2s from this year if it makes you feel more comfortable. And I would do so if your reported income from last year is really close to the poverty level. But if your reported income last year is comfortably above (and by comfortably, I would say $2,000 or more) the 125% of the poverty level for two people it's really not necessary.

But when they look at your tax transcripts, there's nothing there that will say 'this portion of her income is stable and secure, this other portion is very risky and unstable.' They won't know that unless you tell them. So don't tell them! All they'll see is your total income, and all they care about is that that number is above the poverty level. Although, if it's really close to it, it wouldn't hurt to send this year's W2's.

Perfect. Is there comfort in this? Only if its understood. So as I said this all comes down to a tax transcript that should be easily obtained and submitted.

Relax...take a deep breath...

no need to speculate on tax fraud because she wants some comfort

on their financial qualification.

Different people can worry over different things...

Heck, every other week there is someone worried over "black ink" or "blue ink"?

"Staple" or "No staple"?

No need to think you are Dr Phil or that I need you to tell me when to breath.

Also no need to twist what I said. You, inserted tax fraud I suppose because you need to add some drama while saying she needs comfort.

I said early on that she indicates she understands she MEETS the minimum requirement. That should " comfort " her but it doesn't seem to be enough. Any indication of additional income will help but it sets the stage for USCIS to need to ask about that income and if the taxes are paid. Or do you think this wont come up? How do your comfort the OP on this issue? Do you think she will be ok just handing them a few paychecks that may indicate a possible income of either 43K or $43? Maybe you and the OP can read Jon Yorks post.

I don't need a lecture about anything I do from you and see no need for you to become the worry police. Blues, blacks and staples is what you come up with?

Could you at least give a list of worthy worry items so we can check them off as they happen?

I am a SHE, not "he".

Insert gender of choice.

Really? In that case I would be perfectly fine

So, I will prepare all possible fin docs for the interview, but will instruct my fiance' to only give them precisely what they ask for.

You, not your fiancé, will supply the required 134 form and any tax info required which is at least the most recent tax year filing with all supporting docs OR a transcript which is better in my opinion.

He stated $43K at the top of the post.

Yes and then $ 43 so which one do you choose when giving important advise? Too busy to add the K so throws in a $ ? I don't know anymore than what I read.

Did he ever acknowledge paying taxes on the entire amount?

If he knows the minimum standard & meets it what is the reason for the questions? Could it be what the tax info will reveal?

These income issues are very important to the success. A few paycheck stubs may not be the proof that is required which is exactly why the tax info is requested.

The OP states that even though he meets the minimum he still worries that they wont accept that income as sufficient. Why?

Are you saying, they will only consider my permanent minimal income, which is my most recent?

Or the last year number of $43 will be also taken into account?

I think what I said is clear but it takes into consideration that you paid the taxes on your entire income. If that is true than whatever that number is should do. Your steady income is above the minimum standard anyway so I don't see a problem.

" The last year number of 43 " ? You mean you made just 43 dollars last year?

My sustainable income from permanent part-time job is rather small - under $2K per month, which is only a little higher than the minimum for the Affidavit. So, to sponsor my fiance' I only have monthly paystubs for that amount.But my annual income last year was actually $43K, since I am doing temporary projects for several companies, but I can't guarantee that part of my earnings. Will the consulate officer only consider the minimal, unchangeable part of my income, which I will be able to confirm for the date of the interview (plus the paycheks copies, I was receiving for my projects through the year 2014)? Or the 2013 annual income number will be also taken into consideration? I am going to enclose the projects paychecks, showing that I am still with those companies, that helped me to earn $43 K last year.

Though the unchangeable part covers the poverty guideline for 2 people($19,662) and even exceeds it a little, I still worry they might think that is not enough

Please, share your experience, guys.

Use your income tax transcripts as proof of your income whatever the source is. Your most recent income is the most important. Your know income is high enough as you know so there shouldn't be a problem. The U S govt sets the standard. You just have to meet it to qualify.

Dear all,

I have a quick question. I plan to change my legal name when I go through naturalization. As we all know after legal name change, lots of accounts need to be changed accordingly, SSN, bank account, etc.

Based on what I read on Social security website, and bank website, they all require a certified copy of legal name change.

My question is that for whoever go through legal name change during your naturalization, can you ask for multiple certified copies of your legal name change on the day you oath? or you have to contact your local court later on to get multiple certified copy of your legal name change in order to change you SSN, bank, credit card, etc.

Please advise and share your name changing and other related information change process, Thanks a bunch!

Quick answer. Court house.

Yes, Myself and my USC husband and my 3 children are going. We live too far away to make 2 trips.

This is simple. Just take the kids and explain. The officer will understand and do what is required. They aren't going to really interview kids anyway. I did this with my 11 year old daughter.

My i129F was approved first. As far as CR1 being a better choice, i believe that would apply for most people, however, the cost of going to visit my wife every few months is by far more expensive than the extra $1000 I will pay for going the K3 route.

The timing of either petition is about the same anyway. We spent the money thinking the same as you but found out different. Hopefully your case will somehow move forward faster but other than a little more processing at NVC its the same.

For those who are contemplating or have filed the k3 visa it DOES exist. My wife just interviewed at the consulate today and I am thrilled to say it has been approved! I have been stuck at NVC with the I-130 since June and I was preparing myself for the bad news that the consulate would tell her at the interview that the K-3 was no longer valid, however, they went ahead and approved it today.

Do not give up hope and don't believe when people say it doe not exist. It doesn't hurt to pursue it and in some cases like mine it actually works.

Good luck to all of you.

Its true that people can pursue the K 3 but they would be far better off to get a CR1.

Dear Firends

i have some Q about my problem . i get my visa and i am going to travel to US after 1 week i am IR1 visa but lately but now i have problem with my wife . my Q is can i change the green card mailing address so i can get my green card in the new address and how to change it ? by the uscis web site while i pay 165 $ ? or fill form AR-11 ? is there is any problem to change green card mailing address with uscis ? sorry for alot of Q .. thanks

Find the address change info on USCIS web site. Use only that to affect the change. Make sure you have your new address on file at your local post office and put your name in your new mail box.

Sometimes the CO doesn't ask to see documents and hence the applicants won't show what's not being asked of them. It is precisely because the CO didn't even bother to see material evidence that I'm wondering if the CO relied on her mother's facial and bodily expressions, possibly anxious and fearful emotions and incoherent answers to the questions asked. Otherwise business deals, title deeds etc. are strong evidence to home ties. How do you easily move or ignore these things and why would you? From personal experience I can tell you my mother also owns a business and brought similar evidence that the OP listed and had no trouble getting her tourist visa in the first attempt. My mother cannot just easily move or ignore her business and why would anybody do that when it's profitable?

I understand totally what you have said about presenting the evidence. I wasn't given the chance either but in many cases I helped with after I gained more experience I help the people develop methods to do so. In every case the tourist visa was granted with one exception.

I completely disagree that it is her body language ect. She never had a chance from the beginning because as in most of these cases the decision is made long before the person steps up to the window which is exactly why she was denied twice before. I am sure she applied the same way both times. The OP said she never had a chance to present anything.

Business deals may amount to many things. If they were that important why would she leave at all? Banks move money around the world every day. I do it myself. The OP said her mother belongs to organizations. Who knows what that means? Money that is owed to her? How much? Does anyone really believe that? Or care if its ever paid back? I have loaned money to people and never saw it again so don't know what the value of that would be when it comes to proving she must come back?

Should we assume your mother is from France? If so it a much different country compared to Kenya as far a the incidence of fraud. Of course your mother could have decided to stay then sold her business or have someone operate it for her. I have seen people right here on V J do just that. Someone I know from Thailand did exactly that. Her business made a very good profit as well.

I owed three businesses in Thailand. Still own the land free and clear there. Would have had to leave behind a 8 year old during my trip to the USA. I had considerable cash in a Thai bank. None of that mattered at all. I was denied just as the OPs mother was. My husband was allowed in the embassy where he was able to speak directly to several embassy officers. The only thing that changed was the level of understanding we gained and my husbands motivation to bring myself and my daughter to the USA to become citizens.

Yes, you are correct that regardless of the evidence presented, there is no guarantee of a visa outcome. Having said that, COs don't reject visas on a fancy, there is always a reason for denial. You also bring up a good point that not only the quantity and quality of evidence matters, but how one presents oneself to the CO. Is your mom too worried or anxious during the interview? Does she look at the CO in the eye when she speaks? Despite being trained to deal with cultural differences, COs do expect visa applicants to be at least coherent and look them in the eye when talking to them. In American culture, it's very important to look in the eye of the person you're talking to or else the person can interpret you as lying, faking or having no interest. Maybe this is really the only thing your mom needs to address, be confident in her interview because the evidences you listed appear to be solid for a successful tourist visa. There is no harm in attempting to get a tourist visa again if she is unwilling to permanently move to the U.S.

If what you say is correct why didn't they even look at the evidence she had? The denials were based on the inability to convince the CO that she would return based on the info on the application.

There is little in the written evidence that would result in an approval if it is banking, money owed, organizations, business deals that are the strong points because they are all easily moved, changed or ignored. Remember the O P said they never even looked at it on the other TWO attempts.

This case will have to be centered on her ability to present her ownership of a business, The contracts in place along with supporting evidence that indicate the depth of those contracts and the timing of them. Whatever she has that would be very hard to just leave behind.

The most important aspect will be how she will actually present that evidence. It wont be at the window as was the case in the other two attempts. They allowed her to come to the window as a courtesy only.

It seems to me that regardless of the evidence she provides, it is not guaranteed that she will get the visa, it is still left upto the CO to decide her fate. I've been involved in the entire process for my mom's visa (except going to the embassy on her behalf) and this seems to be case in her situation. I don't have a success story on the B2 visa category, but I've had a F1 visa, Greencard and became a citizen this year.

1) I don't think the problem lies in the evidence she provides. I think her interviewing skills may not have been great to articulate her motives and intentions for coming to the U.S. From what she told me, the CO didn't even look at her evidences which were plenty (Bank statements, title deeds, business deals and statements of money from those who owe her, organizations that she belongs to, family e.t.c)

2) It feels like the only way for my mom to come to the U.S would be if I petition for her, is this thinking correct? This is why I needed U.S citizens to respond. What other ways can my mom visit the U.S without a petition? She does not want to come live here permanently at the moment due to her business/government contract, but she wants to visit, meet, and spend sometime with her grandchildren.

These cases are really decided before the person ever steps up to the window. It sounds like she carried the evidence with her so they had decided the case already based on what was submitted in the application therefore the evidence wasn't important. She tried the same methods twice with the same results each time.

I doubt its her interview skills simply because these officers are used to people that are nervous ect. In fact the officers are trained to be patient with people.

You keep asking U S citizens to respond and we are. The advise of those who may not be citizens could just a valuable but if you want to reject it its as always up to you.

If she is to succeed she must change the way she approaches the application. Her previous denials aren't supposed to affect other attempts but I think they do unless she changes the way she does the application.

Two inappropriate posts violating the Terms of Service have been removed and one post edited to remove inappropriate comments. Please keep a civil tone when responding to posters whether you agree with them or not or whether you appreciate their participation or not. Any further inappropriate or rude responses will also be removed or edited.

Moderator's hat off . . .

Happy Chic is correct , and yes, I am a US citizen.

You may wish to consider that a non-US citizen who has successfully gone through the process of requesting, obtaining and using a visitor's visa to the US is probably a much better informed source than a US citizen who has never used or had reason to use a visitor visa. Being a US citizen does not give you an automatic edge or insight into how the Consular and Immigration processes works. Most US citizens have absolutely no idea how they work. Having personal experience of your own or from a close family member going through the process, counts. Visa Journey is based upon personal experiential knowledge and that is what our members are offering to you. If you do not wish to accept the free, qualified advice, then you are certainly free to consult with a paid, qualified professional.

The reason the Consular officer asked about your status in the US was to help determine the risk factor involved in granting your mother a visitor visa. A US citizen is able to sponsor a parent to the US, so if the parent is visiting the US, a citizen can apply for a family sponsored visa and there is a chance that the 'visitor' will never actually leave the US, but will use a visitor's visa as a short-cut to by-pass the correct immigration process. This is frowned upon but since the visitor may have a legal right to immigrate, the Consular office may or may not grant a visitor visa, depending on other risk factors.

A green card holder can also sponsor a parent but it is unlikely a visitor will be able to stay in status for the long waiting time involved in waiting for a visa to become available. If the officer does not feel the applicant has sufficient ties to their own country, the innate attitude of Consular Officers and USCIS is to believe that this individual will be an immigration risk for overstaying their visa, and a denial is the most usual response.

That is why the Consular Officer asked about your status in the US. You are considered a motivating enticement for your mother to decide not to return to her home country and to remain in the US, either legally or illegally. Grandchildren are an even stronger 'enticement'. Without strong ties to their home country which counter-balance the enticement to remain in the US - which include economic, financial, property ownership, employment, investments, familial responsibilities, etc., it is unlikely that the applicant will be granted a visitor's visa. Is it fair? No, but the Consulate officers are not concerned about being fair to foreign citizens. They are concerned about protecting US citizens from risky foreign nationals and threats (real or perceived) to the US. The preponderance of the evidence falls upon the visitor to prove they are financially self-reliant, (will not end up costing US taxpayers money if they visit the US), will not violate US laws and outstay the time allowed their visa, and have greater incentive to return home after their visa than they have enticement to remain in the US.

Your mother's new responsibilities as an employer with employees may be considered sufficient incentive to ensure her return home after a visit - or it may not.

This is incredibly clear, correct advise from possibly the MOST respected member of VJ with amazing experience in every aspect of immigration. This member took the time to give this advise which should studied at length to gain the most insight possible.

I don't have the body of experience that Kathryn has but did attempt the B 2 type visa during which my husband was advised by officers at a U S embassy which revealed exactly what Is spelled out above during the eight times he was inside the US embassy. I then entered the USA on a K 3 which led to me becoming a US citizen. Kathryn was kind enough to advise us about some aspects that were very helpful.

I have been a member of V J long enough to have helped about 35 people with B 2 visas alone. I am at a loss about what you expect members to do for you without you rejecting the advise.

Happy Chic,

Thank you for your insight. My mom got a government contract and she became an employer this year. This actually makes her even more reluctant to go to the embassy to try for a B2 visa. I'm a US citizen which means I can petition for my mom to come live here permanently, but she does not want to do that due to her current commitments. What evidence will she need to prove that her stay will be temporary? How have other US citizens dealt with such a situation?

Thanks!

She doesn't need to prove she will be here temporarily. The length of stay is determined at the POE by the officer.

Again she has to prove beyond a doubt that she MUST return to her country. Her inability to do so is exactly why she was denied in the past. If she cant make some adjustment to indicate she must return she can expect the same result. Her govt contract for example may help. You say she is an employer so she must operate some business. This could be used as proof she must return as another example.

US citizens don't have anything to do with tourist visa applications other than to provide advise. That's exactly what we are trying to do here which how we deal with B 2 visas. There is some very good advise here from other members but she will need a plan to succeed that should be void of emotion.

Thanks for your input. I was a student, then greencard and now citizen. I know the rules in regards to proving sufficient ties. However, I don't understand: Spending time with your grandchildren whom you haven't met before while on a short visit not work. It's called visiting family. Having citizenship hurts her chances? How when she's now eligible to come for a permanent stay if I petition for her? That reasoning doesn't make sense to me. If you can live permanently why are you denied a visa for a short visit? Finally, not all US embassies are the same. We can pretend that they're, but they aren't.

" I am really in need of her for a short stay to assist me with the kids ". That is your statement. That's not visiting family; its becoming a nanny.

If you don't want to accept the advise or info just have her apply again. Its simple to do as she must know. She has been denied several times already so she must know how the process works. Since you know the rules just explain them to her as you must have done before.

You must know the difference between a tourist visa and the other types of visas so you must know the answer to your other question about the denials. In one case she is asking for residence while in the other she is asking for a limited visit.

Of course all embassies are not the same but she may not be able to choose one so what else can she do? It isn't the address of the building that affects to outcome.

Hi everyone,

I have a question hopefully someone with great insight can help me. My mom applied for the B1/B2 visa several times in the past and was denied. I was a greencard holder then but now I'm a US citizen. I know I can petition for her to come but that would take approximately 12-18 months.

I'm really in need of her to come for a short stay and assist me with the kids. I have no other family in the US and I'm a fulltime student. What should I do in order for her to come? Do you think me being a citizen increases her chances for the B1/B2 visa this time around? The embassy she has been going to is in Nairobi - Kenya and it hasn't been easy. She is very reluctant to go there again, but I really do need her.

Thanks for any insight!

You have to understand you have nothing to do with her application for a visa. Your legal status here in the USA has zero to do with her visa.

If for example she tells them she is coming to the USA to provide child care she will be denied. That is considered work which she can not do.

The only way she will ever be granted a visa is if she is able to prove beyond doubt she must return to Kenya. Indicating she has a daughter and grandchild that needs care offsets any other info.

It isnt the location of the embassy that is the problem; rather understanding the law and rules.