Old passport for travel verification

T

tabaliya

Registered Users (C)
Hello all,

I recently got a new passport but all my travel stamps at POE in different places are in the old passport.

Should I be taking the old passport to the interview? Do they examine each and every stamp to verify the dates of travel in the last 5 years in the passport?

AP
 
Take your old passport. Different IO do different things, some check the stamps, some don't. In my case I missed many of the stamps because I didn't get the passport stamped, so some of my trips in the N-400 didn't have proof in the passport. I mentioned this to the IO and there was no problem.
 
MartinAub said:
And your answer differs from mine in what way?
Click to expand...

I seriously don't know what the tone of your question is. Are you just curious, or offended by my reply? I just don't get it. You just answered Yes, which is good to answer the first part of the OP question about taking the old passport. However, the OP was also asking if they review all the stamps, and you didn't answer that question with your one syllable reply. That's what prompted me to add my 2 cents, my personal experience and what I have read in the forum.
 
The second part of the question is irrelevant because (as you observed)
- Not all countries stamp passports
- Some countries only have entry stamps
- Some countries have entry and exit stamps
- A lot of times stamps are unreadable

If the IO likes to spend time on this, he/she will. Though to have a reliable chain of events based on stamps isn't going to happen. At best, they will have previous visas related to the US. Though you need to apply for a visa to visit Australia, you still get only a flimpsy stamp in the passport (based on citizenship and entitlement for the online visa). A business visa for Mexico isn't affixed to your passport. If you drive into MX, chances are good you won't get a stamp at all.

Further (in my case) I never get a stamp entering the Schengen countries.
Even my wife (US citizen) doesn't always get stamps when travelling with me as once the EU IO sees my passport, we usually get waved through and they don't even look at hers.

So, the concusion is that if the IO wants to see them, they can - does it help - hardly.

Why spend more then 3 characters on something that may or may not happen and has no conclusive use with the exception of spot checking?

The "yes" to bring the passport was a completely sufficient answer, in addition, there is nothing one can do "after the fact" if stamps are unreadable or missing, thus why worry?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huracan said:
I seriously don't know what the tone of your question is. Are you just curious, or offended by my reply? I just don't get it. You just answered Yes, which is good to answer the first part of the OP question about taking the old passport. However, the OP was also asking if they review all the stamps, and you didn't answer that question with your one syllable reply. That's what prompted me to add my 2 cents, my personal experience and what I have read in the forum.
Click to expand...


I agree with Huracan ; your answers seems to carry an unplesant undertone. You posted you answer- do you expect us to just be satisfied with it and therefore end the discussion. What's your problem?????????
 
MartinAub,
I totally agree with you that your three letter response (post #2) answered the OP's question. However, I think what ticked people off was you questioning (post #4) Huracan on why he responded (post #3) with a much detailed answered.

MartinAub said:
The question was answered completely. Has nothing to do with attitude.
Click to expand...
 
Not to worry.
As I wrote, I only asked where the difference was.

Whilst I agree that he (kindly) added more detail to the answer, it didn't change the result.

It's like explaining why 2+2=4 and actually adding a lot of stuff (no pun intended) to a simple subject makes research not easier as one may have to browse through the whole thread to find possible exceptions. If there isn't something that invalidates, questions, revises a previously clearly answered question, what's the added value?

A fact won't change because of the number of confirmations.

Thus my question about where the difference is, was warrented and I never disputed his reply in any way, I rather confirmed it. However, neither my posts after his answer nor the rather unqualified responses from ohio1960 add any value to the original question.

Simple matter of logic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top