Self Filing or Immigration Lawyer

[Son of Clyde]

Chris,

It seems very rare that a lawyer would attend a client's fiancees interview.

I'm sure the lawyer will not be paying the airfare and hotel reservations.

I did use a lawyer but he never mentioned ever attending a clients interview.

He said in all his years of practice only one application was lost and the success rate is extremely high of obtaining the visa without a hitch.

I  used his services because I didn't want to make any mistakes but I ended up doing much of the legwork myself. He didn't go out of his way to secure translations, I did all that and obtained all the proofs for him. He advised me of what was missing and I obtained the missing information.

I agree with jb that it is fairly easy, but I also use a CPA for my taxes.

[Chris Parker]

So,,, Chris;

Please expand on what you feel are those "hot button" issues that will cause the CIS officer reviewing a case to excerise the file 13 option with some documents?

Having spent many hours cooling my heels in the waiting area of the CIS building, sat through the AOS interview, and witnessed first hand the attitude of the USCIS officers, I have my own ideas, but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the subject.

In my opinion, it is the personal differences between you (age, education, marital history, travel experience), or the lack thereof if you are near identicals, and the circumstances surrounding how you met each other and decided to get married that trigger suspicions and skepticism.  Furthermore, you should understand that it is not illegal to discriminate in matters of immigration, and in fact the immigration laws and regulations are essentially discriminations against non-citizens.  You are asking for a special favor and benefit when you asking your government to be allow someone to immigrate for you.  Regarding these discretionary decisions, it isn't what you see when you are there for the interview, as by that point the decision to appove or deny the application has mostly already been made before you came; rather, at that point, their decision just needs to be confirmed by your brief presence, answers to some simple questions, and showing of basic documents.

Regarding mishandling of the file or case, realize that most high-risk cases are probably required to get some amount of mishandling, at least to discourage or prevent an unknown ineligible from obtaining the benefit.  If your wife moved out on you and tried to get a new work permit by herself, you'd want the Service to at least give her a hard time about it, wouldn't you?  She can think then that if she goes to the office after 90 days by herself to apply in person for the work permit, she has a possible risk of getting taken into custody and deported if the Service somehow knows what she did.  If she did nothing wrong, however, it is just the hassling people around that is part of the immigration business.

You probably know what the "hot button" issues are for you when you explain your current relationship or marital situation to a third party.  You can't avoid some level of prejudice or disbelief from other people, but you can learn how to effectively disprove them.  Persistence of the marriage in good faith despite difficulties and obstacles is the ultimate test you must prove to USCIS.  My point about lawyers is to use them to say as little as possible about yourself when the eligibility is the only issue to be determined and the amount of discretion allowed to the officer is limited, but to avoid using them when discretion is the primary issue and you must say as much as possible about yourself and minor mistakes can be easily excused.

I trust this explanation answers your questions suitably.

 

CP

[Chris Parker]

[user=130]Son of Clyde[/user] wrote:

It seems very rare that a lawyer would attend a client's fiancees interview.

I  used his services because I didn't want to make any mistakes but I ended up doing much of the legwork myself. He didn't go out of his way to secure translations, I did all that and obtained all the proofs for him. He advised me of what was missing and I obtained the missing information.

There are lawyers at the embassy helping with interviews.  The irony is that when I was there with the fiancee, the consular officer allowed me only to make a statement and then move away.  Quite frankly, the mere fact I was there was probably much more help than if a lawyer had been paid to be there.

However, when referring to interviews, I was speaking more about the adjustment of status interviews (another discretionary decision), where use of lawyers is more prevalent.  I would recommend *against* having a lawyer or translator or any other third party present at a marriage-based visa or status adjustment interview.

CP

[Bruce]

Chris - which interview were you supposed to go to without notice?  How did you eventually clear things up?  Any details on the circumstances would be appreciated, especially if it is the AOS interview.  Right now I am in the AOS interview vacuum, not knowing when our interview will be.

[jb]

I trust this explanation answers your questions suitably.

Actually, my first hand experience was in the San Antonio, TX,  USCIS office.  It was there that I saw (first hand) Mexicans getting the red carpet treatment while non-hispanics were being shuffled aside.  Our CIS case officer was a hispanic female who had some personal problems, specifically,I think, with the K-Class visa process, and with white folks in general.  In our case, there was no large age difference, we are both of the same race, my wife speaks very understandable English, no lack of travel experience on either of our part, (my wife had already been to the USA on two seperate previous occasions as a guest speaker at two different American Universities), nor was there a big difference in our educational backgrounds.  In short, on paper we should appear to be a pretty good match.  Yet there were dozens of delays, lost fingerprints, a million excuses about security background checks, etc., it was only by being a persistant pain-in-the-a$$ that we were finally able to overcome all the hurdles to get the unconditional green card.

Overall I'd have to say my experience with the CIS left a very disagreeable taste in my mouth.  Not something I'd like to ever do again.

[Bruce]

JB - I hope my wife and I are not unduly hassled.  Right now according to the BCINS service center adjustment of status processing (I-485 forms) for the lower New York region is:August 26, 2002.  So, they are approximately 2 1/2 years behind in this region of the USA. 

[Chris Parker]

Chris - which interview were you supposed to go to without notice?  How did you eventually clear things up?  Any details on the circumstances would be appreciated, especially if it is the AOS interview.  Right now I am in the AOS interview vacuum, not knowing when our interview will be.

The adjustment interview waiting period is a true vacuum in the sense that there is no way for you to write or call to find the date of the interview, even if it has already been scheduled and the appointment sent out (in practice, I believe the interviews are scheduled by the more efficient offices as the adjustment applications are initially filed, but not sent out until a certain number of days before the appointment).  My best advice to you is that the U.S. Postal Service is the eyes and ears of the immigration service throughout the adjustment processing period, and I believe the appointment notices get sent by the Service with instructions to destroy them rather than deliver them under certain circumstances.  The best way to check the status and health of the pending adjustment application is to receive an employment authorization or advance parole document, as the approval of such confirms that your adjustment application is still pending and approvable as of the date of issuance of the document.  With hindsight, I'd stagger these applications at 6 month approval intervals to keep tabs on the primary adjustment application, but that is sometimes difficult to do and can be expensive.

It was the AOS interview that we missed.  Regarding our situation, you are not allowed to reschedule the interview except on or before the interview date, so if you miss it, you can't reschedule it after the fact.  After the missed interview, the application goes into a "pending denial" status, where it is not yet denied but can no longer be approved, although it is still "pending" for purposes of authorizing a period of stay, but not for granting of new interim benefits such as employment authorization or advance parole.  Our case was a little more comforting in the fact that we departed the U.S. unknowingly just after this purported "missed interview" and returned using advance parole (the officers inspecting us were really angry and stressed out about something, but told us nothing of what had happened), and we discovered the problem during the period of stay authorized (co-incidentally) by the parole stamp. 

Resolving the issue was actually simpler than you might imagine.  While you can't reschedule the interview or otherwise reopen the application (except in limited circumstances, and usually not the best idea for this kind of application), this does not preclude filing another I-485 with fee with the Service.  That is how we resolved the issue and eventually obtained approval of adjustment.  It was possible because the Service did not yet deny the case or move the case into deportation proceedings.  If it had entered the immigration court system, then an immigration judge would (upon application for relief) first consider approving adjustment of status before considering the deportation charges of the Service.  For some people, that is an unavoidable process they have to go through, depending on how and when they discover what happened and how the Service chooses to deal with them after the fact.  That's how mean they can be if they just can't believe the papers you are sent them to get the I-129F or I-130 approved or the statements or behavior you made at the adjustment interview.  Be thankful to see them and ignore their rudeness because it is just a test of your patience. 

The moral of the story is to use a lawyer to prepare the I-129F petition is my advice if you have the resources or any doubts about doing a (rare) once in a lifetime thing yourself, since I'm sure a less properly prepared I-129F which raises any questions or doubts about the commitment and integrity of the relationship then could only have worsened the situation later.

CP

[Chris Parker]

Overall I'd have to say my experience with the CIS left a very disagreeable taste in my mouth. Not something I'd like to ever do again.

The beauty of the system is you are never supposed to do it again, so you should be able to live through it once.

[Chris Parker]

In short, on paper we should appear to be a pretty good match. Yet there were dozens of delays, lost fingerprints, a million excuses about security background checks, etc., it was only by being a persistant pain-in-the-a$$ that we were finally able to overcome all the hurdles to get the unconditional green card.

"Too good to be true reaction" by the officer, and perhaps some racial prejudice involved as well (which is okay by immigration law).

And let me also guess, "too cheap to even pay a lawyer to prepare the I-129F needed to bring the love of his life to the U.S.A. safely and properly."

That's the administrative discretion reasoning they used, in my opinion. 

CP

 

[jb]

the U.S. Postal Service is the eyes and ears of the immigration service throughout the adjustment processing period, and I believe the appointment notices get sent by the Service with instructions to destroy them rather than deliver them under certain circumstances.

I wouldn't go so far as to wear that tinfoil hat, the U.S. Postal Service is not involved with not delivering mail, remember, destruction of the mail is a Federal offense, punishable by jail time. That's a very serious accusation there. Quite the contrary, mail sorting and delivery is pretty much automated now-a-days, if the mail piece is of the proper size and properly addressed, with the proper postage, it gets fed into the system and given a barcode which contains the delivery information right down to the sequence in which the letter carrier delivers his route. So it is basically not touched by human hands until the letter carrier sticks it into your mail box at your house.

Besides, have you ever had a conversation with a postal clerk or letter carrier?  These are PS level 4's and 5's, many times just minimum wage casual labor,  they are good honest people, but I don't think they could be trusted to carry out  a sophisticated conspiracy as you suggest.

I was going along with some of your thinking until you revealed yourself to be a conspiracy theory buff.  Just t'ain't so, my friend.

[Bruce]

Chris, thanks for telling us what happened in your case and how you resolved it.  We already have an I-131 to travel back to Russia this summer - so I know the BCINS received our packet.  The problem as I mentioned above is that I'll probably have to wait much longer than most of you can imagine before we get an AOS interview (perhaps two more years).  So, I guess I'll just stay on top of the mail the best I can. 

[wxman]

Being a federal employee, I would have to say there is no conspiracy to throw mail away, etc. Sure there are some who steal the mail, or don't deliver the mail, but supervisors do not go around and tell their employees to throw away immigration letters, etc. As was stated, the system is almost fully automated. The problem with slow response times, is simple, the lack of personnel. When a federal employee retires, due to the budget deficit, they are not filling positions to replace these people right away. In fact they now usually hold the postions open for 6 to 12 months, depending on the agency. The USCIS has hired more people, but they are generally field employees. Those behind the desk that do the paperwork have been reduced. In fact, some times when someone behind the desk retires, they tranfer that vacany to hire a field person. It is only going to get worse. Most agencies for the next few years will see a reduction in spending (in general 5% or more), so that means there will be even less people working. 

[jb]

It is my observation that the USCIS is interested in expediting two classes of immigrants, the intelligencia, and the labor class.  Anyone who could come to the USA and fill a mid-level job, in other words; take a good paying job away from an American would be considered less than desirable.

And let me also guess, "too cheap to even pay a lawyer to prepare the I-129F needed to bring the love of his life to the U.S.A. safely and properly."

This comment also caught my eye, to discriminate because of this would be an affront to our legal system.  As Americans we are allowed by law to do whatever we wish, or feel competent to do, for ourselves.  This is known as "Per Se Representation", I'm sure there's a lawyer in the crowd that could explain it better than I can, but it is a basic right we enjoy.  You just can't represent someone else without having a Law License, no matter how well you know the law.

I think you are giving way too much credit to the CIS for creating these delays, since the agency is supposed to be fee driven, no tax dollars at risk here, these are just simple worker bees in an over burdened system with too many cases to review on any given day.  Plus the fact that they are government employees, civil servants with way too many coffee breaks and all the bank holidays and a very generous vacation benefits.  I'm surprised they actually ever get any work done as it is.

[Chris Parker]

I wouldn't go so far as to wear that tinfoil hat, the U.S. Postal Service is not involved with not delivering mail, remember, destruction of the mail is a Federal offense, punishable by jail time.  ... So it is basically not touched by human hands until the letter carrier sticks it into your mail box at your house.

Besides, have you ever had a conversation with a postal clerk or letter carrier? These are PS level 4's and 5's, many times just minimum wage casual labor, they are good honest people, but I don't think they could be trusted to carry out a sophisticated conspiracy as you suggest.

My basis for that conclusion stems first and foremost from the published policy of the U.S. Postal Service at 39 CFR 259.1(a): "The Postal Service cooperates with Federal Agencies whenever the overall costs to Government will be reduced. Assistance in a number of special projects and programs is provided when the knowledge and abilities of postal employees are helpful."

So, while anyone would think what you said above is true, remember that matters of immigration and postal services involve with the same U.S. federal government 100%.  Approval or denial of adjustment of status is a matter of national security.  The postal letter carrier is doing casual inspections for immigration service in context of his daily routine, and delivering the adjustment appointment notice for them according to their instructions.  Investigations supporting the immigration service's work on a benefit application are a classified government matter, and the letter carrier and Postal Service is therefore prohibited from even admitting its role in this process (but it should be obvious when you consider the situation and circumstances).  Finally, as adjustment is a discretionary decision, it is not illegal to deny the benefit for a classified reason or a wrong reason or even no reason at all, and the Postal Service's role in not delivering the letter is not to upstruct the law (immigration benefits are civil benefits, BTW) but rather to follow the directions of the sending federal agency, and it isn't a conspiracy but rather the orderly administration and enforcement of the law.

CONCLUSION: This isn't illegal tampering with the mail, because it is the same federal government that mailed the letter also chose to recall and destroy the letter rather than have it delivered.  The postal letter carrier is the U.S. government's employee and agent, and I say they work as the eyes and ears of the immigration service because of their daily role in the local community and serving the notice to appear.

CP

PS: Non-permanent residents are not protected by the Privacy Act.  I am absolutely certain that some of our long delayed mail letters were cut open and inspected by (or for) the immigration service before being re-sealed with tape and delivered to us, and this is 100% legal to do because the non-permanent resident named as an addressee doesn't have the legal protection, and in any case it was done in the context of an ongoing investigation concerning national security.  USCIS isn't so dumb as you would think. 

[Chris Parker]

This comment also caught my eye, to discriminate because of this would be an affront to our legal system. As Americans we are allowed by law to do whatever we wish, or feel competent to do, for ourselves. This is known as "Per Se Representation", I'm sure there's a lawyer in the crowd that could explain it better than I can, but it is a basic right we enjoy. You just can't represent someone else without having a Law License, no matter how well you know the law.

I think you are giving way too much credit to the CIS for creating these delays, since the agency is supposed to be fee driven, no tax dollars at risk here, these are just simple worker bees in an over burdened system with too many cases to review on any given day. Plus the fact that they are government employees, civil servants with way too many coffee breaks and all the bank holidays and a very generous vacation benefits. I'm surprised they actually ever get any work done as it is.

The problem is USCIS application processing is not part of the legal system.  The people affected are also neither Americans nor permanent residents, and they have no legal right to obtain a visa or permanent resident status, just eligibility to apply.  You don't have to have a lawyer prepare your I-129F, but how you chose to prepare and file your I-129F petition is material to the exercise of discretion concerning the bona fides of the marriage considered in certain later immigration applications (notably, adjustment of status). 

However, you are right, USCIS application processing costs the U.S. taxpayers $0 because the agency is fully funded by user fees, per an Act of Congress, which also limits Congress's influence over how it administers the law with its own funding.  And also because it is self-funded, it has outright chosen to understaff itself in offices where more people are needed and overstaff itself where too many people are already working, in order to create a legitimate backlog consistent with its investigative requirements.  I think USCIS employees, however, are some of the hardest working federal employees, given the broad discretionary authority they are exercising and the huge demand for their services.  Some of these people come into work at 6/7AM and work non-stop all day!

CP

 

[wxman]

"Plus the fact that they are government employees, civil servants with way too many coffee breaks and all the bank holidays and a very generous vacation benefits. I'm surprised they actually ever get any work done as it is."

Maybe in some agencies it is like true. I know the vast majority with professional degrees, do not have it like that.  I love it when people think we have such great benefits, but if you ever saw the benefits we got, you would not be too impressed.

 

[Admin]

[user=229]Chris Parker[/user] wrote:

There are lawyers at the embassy helping with interviews. The irony is that when I was there with the fiancee, the consular officer allowed me only to make a statement and then move away. Quite frankly, the mere fact I was there was probably much more help than if a lawyer had been paid to be there.

This demonstrates how variable is the process. When Olya and I went to the interview (Warsaw), the interviewer was looking down as we approached and informed Olya that he would conduct the interview in English "because he believes that all married couples need to be able to communicate." When I responded back to him in English that she speaks very little English, but I would be happy to translate for him, his focus became centered on me. He asked me 10 times the number of questions he asked Olya - and those he asked her, I translated for the two of them.

Needless to say, we were granted a visa - but it was definitely NOT the interview I had expected.

- Dan

[Marc Dayton]

www.back-together.com  I have used him for 10 years his prices are low.

[douglasbushman]

Hi,

Having a lawyer is a total waste of money. I have been helping couples since 1994 and offer another option.

My web site is: http://www.back-together.com

In fact I became my own client in 2002 and married the women of my dreams named Natalya from Tver, Russia.

See us together in the photo

[Chris Parker]

Having a lawyer is a total waste of money. I have been helping couples since 1994 and offer another option.

My web site is: http://www.back-together.com

While I think what you are doing is a great idea, unfortunately it is probably also illegal because the immigration service has specifically designated the preparation of immigration forms as a form of legal representation.  They have specifically disallowed unlicensed, uncertified, unaccredited people from preparing immigration forms for the public, except in the very limited circumstances described in 8 CFR 292.1.  I think you could get be charged by the DHS Office of General Counsel and/or your state bar association with unauthorized practice of law for what your business does.  Do you actually sign your name at the end of the forms as the preparer?

CP

 

From 8 CFR 1.1 (definitions for immigration purposes):

(i) The term "practice" means the act or acts of any person appearing in any case, either in person or through the preparation or filing of any brief or other document, paper, application, or petition on behalf of another person or client before or with the Service, or any officer of the Service, or the Board. 

(j) The term "representative" refers to a person who is entitled to represent others as provided in Sec. 292.1(a) (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and Sec. 292.1(b) of this chapter. 

(k) The term "preparation," constituting practice, means the study of the facts of a case and the applicable laws, coupled with the giving of advice and auxiliary activities, including the incidental preparation of papers, but does not include the lawful functions of a notary public or service consisting solely of assistance in the completion of blank spaces on printed Service forms by one whose renumeration, if any, is nominal and who does not hold himself out as qualified in legal matters or in immigration and naturalization procedure.

 

[jb]

Practicing law without a license is a very serious offense in the State of Texas.  I don't know how the Fed's view this, but I suspect Chris Parker is right about this.

The forms are not so difficult if you can read and follow instructions.  The important parts are the supporting documentation, good quality photos showing both of your faces clearly, remember, she will have supplied passport style photos which will be affixed to the visa, in the pictures of the two of you together she must look like the same girl.  If she's changed her hair color, for example, you could be denied if she's not easily recognizable.  Documents which need translation need to be clear, understandable, and certified by the translator, and getting everything organized in the proper format and not forgetting to dot all the i's, and to cross all the t's.

I do believe the CIS agent who will adjudicate the case will appreciate neatness and attention to detail, if you make his or her job easier the file will be handled more swiftly.  Office supply stores will carry all the things you will need to submit a complete packet.  

This is not rocket science, just due diligence to the forms is all a man needs to do.

[Son of Clyde]

I know someone who is going after a famous law firm that advertises on television, because he thinks they are not licensed to practice law in every state they represent. Their offices are in NYC however they have clients all over the US.

 

My first immigration attorney charged a flat fee of $500.00 but he is never at his office and practices 7 other types of law. He is the one who called Ukraine twice and said he couldn't get through, gave up and left my case on the back burner for over a month. When I phoned him he was in court, at a funeral or on vacation. 

[Rvrwind]

Tourboguy wrote:
Question one.  Is having an immigration lawyer worth it.   I am assuming that for most of us the money is not all that big an issue and that we would like to get our gal here ASAP or sooner.    Can I get some comments about the value of a lawyer to help with the issues.

I don't know for sure if the US is the same as Canada or not, but it has been my experience that hiring a lawyer does not hold any wiegh with the CIC or INS. Things will not proceed any faster and at the end of it all your just out a lot of pocket cash for nothing.

If you just need help filling out the paperwork there are a number of freelance operators that can help you for far less than a lawyer will cost & get the same results.

RVR

Canadian Cowboy

[wxman]

RVR,

You are right. Hiring a lawyer does not speed up the process one bit. I hired a lawyer to make it easier for myself and my fiance. He filled out all the forms for us, has set up medical exams, and will handle all the packet 3 and 4 stuff and wl set up appointment for embassy interview so that my fiancee will only have to show up with everything already filled out. All she has to do is get police record, and passport photos. Plus someone locally will be there in Kiev to calm her nerves, etc. I could have filled out the forms, they are not hard, but I hired on for our convenience, mainly to make it easy for her.

[Son of Clyde]

wxman this is part of the reason I hired an attorney.

I received my NOA1 quickly, he mailed the applications on March 7, they were received at the VSC March 10 and the NOA was dated March 15.

Sure, this is not rocket science but how many of us understand the Russian/Ukrainian language and customs? I would have never thought her son's last name would be spelled differently or how detailed the forms had to be.

The attorney seemed to know VSC like the back of his hand and gave me information I would never have thought of asking about. Like the time they lost a clients application or things they overlook on the forms. He knows because he sees this every day.