Lawyer attendance

F

foreverafter

Registered Users (C)
I applied N-400 through a Lawyer , just wondering what the Negatives and positives of having the Lawyer attend the interview with me!!!


Your thoughts please, Thank you.
 
foreverafter said:
I applied N-400 through a Lawyer , just wondering what the Negatives and positives of having the Lawyer attend the interview with me!!!


Your thoughts please, Thank you.
Click to expand...

I don't see any negatives, except for the fact that your wallet is thinner for no reason, I don't think a lawyer was necessary.
Positives, I don't see any either, especially if the case is a straight clear case with no complications.
 
Well the negative is that the officer would think: "this guy needs hand holding?" :) (Just being a comedian...). It would make no difference. The lawyer can't help you answer the test questions. However, if there are red flags on the application, it could help having the attorney there.
 
Will the officers be more cautious as they might think that you have brought the lawyer and therefore you may have some complications?

On the other hand, lawyers might personally know many of the officers as they would be frequently visiting the local DO and that might help too.

But again, if your case is straight forward, then all these don't matter.
 
I had a disorderly conduct charges before even I got my GC, and was dismissed, no arrest, just a sitation ticket with court apperiance date.

The only problem with the court disposition letter is that they had my family name error; I attached the disposition letter and an affirmations letter from the lawyer who represented me in court stating that there was an error from the court part when they typed the disposition letter.


That is all, no other complications. What do you guys think ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you need peace of mind, take the lawyer along. It is unlikely that you will have major issues based on what you have written..
 
Positive: if an officer tries to trick you into something that they should not, a lawyer would intervene and help you out.
It happens to my husband when the interviewing officer pressured him to sign a waiver of his right to sue CIS if no decision was made on his case within 120 days from an interview. The officer told him that they would deny his application (no reasons whatsoever to deny it) if he did no sign the waiver. If there were a lawyer the officer would not dare to lie and pressure him in any way.
Negative: costs
 
zaraza said:
the interviewing officer pressured him to sign a waiver of his right to sue CIS if no decision was made on his case within 120 days from an interview. The officer told him that they would deny his application (no reasons whatsoever to deny it) if he did no sign the waiver. If there were a lawyer the officer would not dare to lie and pressure him in any way.
Negative: costs
Click to expand...

WOW!!! First time I hearing it? Is this even legal??? (of course it must be "legal" if the officer suggested it). But still. Does it not look slimy and threatening to do something like that?!!

So did your husband get this N-400 approved? (I'm assuming the lawyer prevented him from signing the waiver).

Is this a common occurrence? Could someone please tell me? What should one do if such a thing were to happen at the interview?

Thanks.
 
zaraza, I just saw in your signature that your husband did finally get this oath letter. But, after the dreaded name check wait for one year. Do you think the name check was possibly a result of his refusing to sign the waiver?
 
JoeF, I agree with you. (Always appreciate the clarity in your thoughts/words).

BUT, sounds like the immigration officer had his/her way by not approving after the interview and making the applicant go through a "name check". It could of course be argued that is possible even without any of this waiver business? But doesn't it sound a little to coicidental though? Like to know your thoughts on this. Thanks.

I would want to do exactly what you suggested, but the risk of getting screwed by the officer later would certainly make me think twice. Of course, the officer can still screw the applicant even after signing the waiver. Who knows? This is just hell.

Anyway, just curious what you think about this.
 
My case is very straightforward. Other than 3 minor traffic tickets that are all over 7 years old I have nothing in my application that requires scrutiny. I arrived in a fiancee visa, got married, filed for GC, got GC and now I'm applying for citizenship, still married to the USC on the original fiancee visa.

Had I spent any time out of status, or switched statuses in an unusual way, or had some criminal history that was serious/recent enough to potentially be a problem, then I'd think about getting a lawyer.

If at any time I had done something that made me deportable then I'd DEFINITELY have a lawyer. (And would probably choose to not beomce a USC just so that I stay under the radar....)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top