Experiences with different interview styles

[msv5450]

I'm preparing for my upcoming asylum interview these days. I have heard of two major interview styles and it is up to the officer's discretion how to conduct the interview.

I know for a fact that asylum officers do not receive the asylum applications until the morning of the interview, after the applicant has checked in. Many Officers will take time before calling the applicant in to review the file. Other Officers will barely skim the file before calling in the applicant, figuring that they will first get the oral testimony and then go back and review the file. Here are two common scenarios that I have heard.

1) The officer had barely skimmed through your asylum statement and affidavits. He started off by asking you the questions that are on form I-589. Then, you were asked to tell your story in a chronological order and state your reasons for fear of persecution. Basically, the officer did not care to read your declaration or your attorney's brief and he was interested in hearing your oral testimony. The officer had no clue on how to lead the interview and that's why he mostly relied on asking I-589 questions.

2) Contrary to case 1, the officer had thoroughly read your declaration and even marked up the important parts. You were asked detailed and unexpected question by the AO that were geared towards either clarifying questionable parts of your story or forcing you to make a mistake or inconsistency that would lead to your denial.

Which one of the above styles was more applicable to your own interview experience? Do you think the officer was familiar with your case or he knew nothing about it and you had to explain every single detail from the beginning?

 

[nss2009]

i felt like the asylum officer did not read my statement and in the first 45 minutes to an hour started asking me about the info on the i-589 and other questions to check if i disqualify for asylum like having another citizenship or the ability to obtain one because my mom had 2 citizenships, also they keep the envelopes you used to send your application to check when the application was sent if you used USPS

i noticed also that the office had my application to my visas on his screen and was comparing answers , a week after the interview the officer called me to email him a translation of a document , i felt like he had to make a decision and didn't want to refer my case to the immigration court .

 

[msv5450]

i felt like the asylum officer did not read my statement and in the first 45 minutes to an hour started asking me about the info on the i-589 and other questions to check if i disqualify for asylum like having another citizenship or the ability to obtain one because my mom had 2 citizenships, also they keep the envelopes you used to send your application to check when the application was sent if you used USPS

i noticed also that the office had my application to my visas on his screen and was comparing answers , a week after the interview the officer called me to email him a translation of a document , i felt like he had to make a decision and didn't want to refer my case to the immigration court .

So, do you think the officer did not prepare a set of questions before the interview based on reading the material that you submitted?

Why would the date of USPS mail be important?

 

[zman44]

I was called in over 1 hr late to my interview. I was the only one in the waiting area. From the way the interview went, I'm pretty sure the AO used that time to get a little familiar with my case, but then she pretended she didn't know anything. After she swore me in, her first question was, "tell me, what was happening in January 20XX." I was dumbfounded. It caught me completely off guard because I really thought she was going to start asking specific questions or going over the 589 application instead of just giving me the floor to talk about a random date several years back.

I stammered a little and asked for a bit of clarification. She then said, "just in general, where were you and what was happening with your life." It took me a moment to collect my thoughts and think back year by year to get to the exact date she was asking about. I then started going off on a series of very difficult and devastating events that had happened in my life shortly before and during that time. So it was no coincidence she asked about that month in specific. After that she started leading the interview more as a conversation than a question/answer format, only asking some questions when appropriate for extra details or clarification. She "seemed" to be all over the place going back and forth between dates, places, people, etc, a couple times I had to correct her, she would ask the same question in different ways, or would revisit certain events we'd already talked about just to make sure my answers were the same, so she was definitely looking to make sure my story was consistent. I don't believe she was necessarily trying to trick me or force me to make a mistake though.

My interview lasted probably close to 1:45 hrs. During the first hour or so the AO barely looked at me, and she was constantly writing notes down all over the 589 application, on a separate piece of paper, and looking at different things on her computer as well. Whether because she believed my story by this point, or because I finally started to break down in tears, it wasn't until the last 30 min or so of the interview when she stopped writing down so much and started to pay attention and look at me more.

My advice: Learn your story, events, dates, names, everything forward and backwards. Read over your application daily. Don't think that just because your story is true you're going to be able to recall random events and dates on the spur of the moment. It's a very stressful and nerve-wrecking situation.

 

[nss2009]

So, do you think the officer did not prepare a set of questions before the interview based on reading the material that you submitted?

Why would the date of USPS mail be important?

no he did not prepare any questions . i was asked why i am applying for asylum and the rest of the questions were based on my answers. it did't seem he looked at the statement i sent .

the USPS question does not apply to the majority of asylum seekers. but it did matter in my case because i sent my application 2 days before the one year deadline but it was received by the asylum office about a week after the deadline. so the envelope was an evidence that i filed for asylum within one year of last entry , i was expecting to be grilled about it but he only stated the date on the envelope without any further questions about the filing date .

 

[timkh]

In my case I had an interview with asylum officer that lasted 3,5 hours. He started my interview at 8 am, so he beforehand told me that he thoroughly read my story. First, he started with asking standard i-589 questions, then step by step started to ask about what happened to me in X country and why I'm afraid to return to X country. Between his questions he could ask one and jump to another and ask the same question, but in different ways. Since everything that I wrote in my case was real and I didn't need to memorize so I answered to his questions confidently. Before finishing the interview, he thanked my lawyer for precise asylum case and thanked me for answering all his questions.

 

[msv5450]

In my case I had an interview with asylum officer that lasted 3,5 hours. He started my interview at 8 am, so he beforehand told me that he thoroughly read my story. First, he started with asking standard i-589 questions, then step by step started to ask about what happened to me in X country and why I'm afraid to return to X country. Between his questions he could ask one and jump to another and ask the same question, but in different ways. Since everything that I wrote in my case was real and I didn't need to memorize so I answered to his questions confidently. Before finishing the interview, he thanked my lawyer for precise asylum case and thanked me for answering all his questions.

Did he at any point suddenly ask you to recount all the events that happened in Feb 20XX? Or were the questions asked in a Chronological order?

 

[msv5450]

I was called in over 1 hr late to my interview. I was the only one in the waiting area. From the way the interview went, I'm pretty sure the AO used that time to get a little familiar with my case, but then she pretended she didn't know anything. After she swore me in, her first question was, "tell me, what was happening in January 20XX." I was dumbfounded. It caught me completely off guard because I really thought she was going to start asking specific questions or going over the 589 application instead of just giving me the floor to talk about a random date several years back.

I stammered a little and asked for a bit of clarification. She then said, "just in general, where were you and what was happening with your life." It took me a moment to collect my thoughts and think back year by year to get to the exact date she was asking about. I then started going off on a series of very difficult and devastating events that had happened in my life shortly before and during that time. So it was no coincidence she asked about that month in specific. After that she started leading the interview more as a conversation than a question/answer format, only asking some questions when appropriate for extra details or clarification. She "seemed" to be all over the place going back and forth between dates, places, people, etc, a couple times I had to correct her, she would ask the same question in different ways, or would revisit certain events we'd already talked about just to make sure my answers were the same, so she was definitely looking to make sure my story was consistent. I don't believe she was necessarily trying to trick me or force me to make a mistake though.

My interview lasted probably close to 1:45 hrs. During the first hour or so the AO barely looked at me, and she was constantly writing notes down all over the 589 application, on a separate piece of paper, and looking at different things on her computer as well. Whether because she believed my story by this point, or because I finally started to break down in tears, it wasn't until the last 30 min or so of the interview when she stopped writing down so much and started to pay attention and look at me more.

My advice: Learn your story, events, dates, names, everything forward and backwards. Read over your application daily. Don't think that just because your story is true you're going to be able to recall random events and dates on the spur of the moment. It's a very stressful and nerve-wrecking situation.

Thank yoy.
This is helpful
Can you share your timeline too?

Imagine the asylum based on sexuality. Obviously a big question that you'd be asked is how your self-discovery and then coming out experience. This is something taht naturally took place in one day and there are lots and lots of events that contributed to your sexual identity over the years. If the officer hasn't bothered to read your statement of he has taken cursory look at it, do you suggest that I give a very detailed response and recount all the events that were involved and I have written in my statement or should I be very concise and only talk about the first coming out experience?
I want to be thorough and persuasive but I don't want to bore the officer as well.

 

[Romeo77]

I'm preparing for my upcoming asylum interview these days. I have heard of two major interview styles and it is up to the officer's discretion how to conduct the interview.

I know for a fact that asylum officers do not receive the asylum applications until the morning of the interview, after the applicant has checked in. Many Officers will take time before calling the applicant in to review the file. Other Officers will barely skim the file before calling in the applicant, figuring that they will first get the oral testimony and then go back and review the file. Here are two common scenarios that I have heard.

1) The officer had barely skimmed through your asylum statement and affidavits. He started off by asking you the questions that are on form I-589. Then, you were asked to tell your story in a chronological order and state your reasons for fear of persecution. Basically, the officer did not care to read your declaration or your attorney's brief and he was interested in hearing your oral testimony. The officer had no clue on how to lead the interview and that's why he mostly relied on asking I-589 questions.

2) Contrary to case 1, the officer had thoroughly read your declaration and even marked up the important parts. You were asked detailed and unexpected question by the AO that were geared towards either clarifying questionable parts of your story or forcing you to make a mistake or inconsistency that would lead to your denial.

Which one of the above styles was more applicable to your own interview experience? Do you think the officer was familiar with your case or he knew nothing about it and you had to explain every single detail from the beginning?

I didn’t get the chance to express my self officer new he will refer my case to judge before I sit he slammed chair when he start interview he slammed paperwork in table his main questions was deadline after one year and before marriage and 90 percentage questions was before 15-20 years ago was asking me name of doctor 15 years ago and what time I visit doctor some crazy questions totally xxxx me up I told mine translator to stop and I took over I would say interview went bad I argue with him so many times and during interview officer told me to not rise voice on him my one time I look my lawyer he was behind me he legs was shaking like he was nervous my conclusions is I didn’t have any chance with this guy I would say it easier to get power ball win than grant from this guy whe he types on computer like he knocking door I don’t think this guy gave anyone grant or any relief totally mad guy least I can say I didn’t back down in one moment I saw he back down and feel bad but I guess his job was to xxxx me up how much he can least I know and he knows even is cold xxxxxxxxx I was telling true and he can see so much pain in my eyes never proper myself for interview because I speak true and trying to not remember what happen to me otherwise I can go crazy and be mentally unstable if I would read all my documents my advice to anyone if you not harm don’t even try to gain asylum speak from hart and don’t be scare you have small chance practically zero to get granted after one year deadline at interview with immigration officer

 

[msv5450]

I didn’t get the chance to express my self officer new he will refer my case to judge before I sit he slammed chair when he start interview he slammed paperwork in table his main questions was deadline after one year and before marriage and 90 percentage questions was before 15-20 years ago was asking me name of doctor 15 years ago and what time I visit doctor some crazy questions totally xxxx me up I told mine translator to stop and I took over I would say interview went bad I argue with him so many times and during interview officer told me to not rise voice on him my one time I look my lawyer he was behind me he legs was shaking like he was nervous my conclusions is I didn’t have any chance with this guy I would say it easier to get power ball win than grant from this guy whe he types on computer like he knocking door I don’t think this guy gave anyone grant or any relief totally mad guy least I can say I didn’t back down in one moment I saw he back down and feel bad but I guess his job was to xxxx me up how much he can least I know and he knows even is cold xxxxxxxxxx I was telling true and he can see so much pain in my eyes never proper myself for interview because I speak true and trying to not remember what happen to me otherwise I can go crazy and be mentally unstable if I would read all my documents my advice to anyone if you not harm don’t even try to gain asylum speak from hart and don’t be scare you have small chance practically zero to get granted after one year deadline at interview with immigration officer

That's usually how it goes if you do not have a good excuse for applying after one year deadline or you cannot logically justify visiting your country before applying for asylum or having other red flags such as claiming to be gay while you have a clear history of heterosexual relationships for years.

There are rare cases that a certain applicant has a history of applying for asylum in the past while they were in status. They got NOID instead of referral and they filed I-589 after losing their status. They still get another interview again but the AO will refer them to IJ without spending too much time

The interview with the AO will be a formality and they just refer you to court. Even at court the IJ knows you're not eligible for asylum and he will only determine whether your case is qualified for withholding of removal, which requires a higher burden of proof than asylum.

What's your timeline?

 

[Sm1smom]

I didn’t get the chance to express my self officer new he will refer my case to judge before I sit he slammed chair when he start interview he slammed paperwork in table his main questions was deadline after one year and before marriage and 90 percentage questions was before 15-20 years ago was asking me name of doctor 15 years ago and what time I visit doctor some crazy questions totally xxxx me up I told mine translator to stop and I took over I would say interview went bad I argue with him so many times and during interview officer told me to not rise voice on him my one time I look my lawyer he was behind me he legs was shaking like he was nervous my conclusions is I didn’t have any chance with this guy I would say it easier to get power ball win than grant from this guy whe he types on computer like he knocking door I don’t think this guy gave anyone grant or any relief totally mad guy least I can say I didn’t back down in one moment I saw he back down and feel bad but I guess his job was to xxxx me up how much he can least I know and he knows even is cold xxxxxxxxx I was telling true and he can see so much pain in my eyes never proper myself for interview because I speak true and trying to not remember what happen to me otherwise I can go crazy and be mentally unstable if I would read all my documents my advice to anyone if you not harm don’t even try to gain asylum speak from hart and don’t be scare you have small chance practically zero to get granted after one year deadline at interview with immigration officer

Your post has been edited. Use of profanity or curse word is a violation of the TOS of this forum. Endeavor to keep your posts clean.

 

[Romeo77]

That's usually how it goes if you do not have a good excuse for applying after one year deadline or you cannot logically justify visiting your country before applying for asylum or having other red flags such as claiming to be gay while you have a clear history of heterosexual relationships for years.

There are rare cases that a certain applicant has a history of applying for asylum in the past while they were in status. They got NOID instead of referral and they filed I-589 after losing their status. They still get another interview again but the AO will refer them to IJ without spending too much time

The interview with the AO will be a formality and they just refer you to court. Even at court the IJ knows you're not eligible for asylum and he will only determine whether your case is qualified for withholding of removal, which requires a higher burden of proof than asylum.

What's your timeline?

I think buddy you are xxxxxxxxxxxxx or you already gain asylum or you just here to giving people lessons I am not claiming I am guy and my story is not even similar to those my point is this asylum officers trying to refuse almost every claim that is my experience when you going there and don’t have a chance because someone decided already they will recommend you to judge and is not true you can’t get asylum after one year deadline you can get asylum if you have normal person to interview you

 

[nss2009]

I didn’t get the chance to express my self officer new he will refer my case to judge before I sit he slammed chair when he start interview he slammed paperwork in table his main questions was deadline after one year and before marriage and 90 percentage questions was before 15-20 years ago was asking me name of doctor 15 years ago and what time I visit doctor some crazy questions totally xxxx me up I told mine translator to stop and I took over I would say interview went bad I argue with him so many times and during interview officer told me to not rise voice on him my one time I look my lawyer he was behind me he legs was shaking like he was nervous my conclusions is I didn’t have any chance with this guy I would say it easier to get power ball win than grant from this guy whe he types on computer like he knocking door I don’t think this guy gave anyone grant or any relief totally mad guy least I can say I didn’t back down in one moment I saw he back down and feel bad but I guess his job was to xxxx me up how much he can least I know and he knows even is cold xxxxxxxxx I was telling true and he can see so much pain in my eyes never proper myself for interview because I speak true and trying to not remember what happen to me otherwise I can go crazy and be mentally unstable if I would read all my documents my advice to anyone if you not harm don’t even try to gain asylum speak from hart and don’t be scare you have small chance practically zero to get granted after one year deadline at interview with immigration officer

is this in NYC asylum office?
based on data they have the highest percentage of denial/court referral

 

[msv5450]

Is it recommended to bring notes with yourself to the asylum interview? Would it have a bad impression on the officer that the applicant needs to remember his own story based on notes? Will the AO keep your notes as evidence?

 

[BetterWorld]

Is it recommended to bring notes with yourself to the asylum interview? Would it have a bad impression on the officer that the applicant needs to remember his own story based on notes? Will the AO keep your notes as evidence?

No clear answer for that. It depends on AO how he looks at it;' Guy is well prepared OR Guy doesn't know his stuff well'