34.a, Declaration of how we met

[Ash.1101 1,755]

This was my 34.a:

Declartion of meeting in Person in regards of question '34.a' of the I-129F.

PETITIONER NAME
PETITIONER ADDRESS LINE 1
PETITIONER ADDRESS LINE 2

United States Department of Homeland Security

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

USCIS
Attn: I-129F
2501 South State Highway 121 Business
Suite 400
Lewisville, TX 75067

34.a of the I-129F: I, <PETITIONER>, met <BENEFICIARY> online near June 01, 2010, and then met in person at San Antonio International Airport on May 23, 2013. <BENEFICIARY> stayed in San Antonio from May 23, 2013 until May 27, 2013. <BENEFICIARY> has visted and stayed with me, <PETITIONER>, at my home on July 11, 2013 to July 15, 2013, October 17, 2013 to October 21, 2013, December 22, 2013 to December 26, 2013, April 10, 2014 to April 14, 2014, July 17, 2014 to July 21, 2014, November 24, 2014 to November 29, 2014, and April 13, 2015 to April 18, 2015 as of the date signed.

(Signature)

(Print name)

Had no problems. I more so just listed where we initially met (online), where we met in person (Airport), and the subsequent visits afterwards.


Also, note that if you put you met online, regardless of a game or not, you can get hit with an RFE asking for more information about where you met on the internet. My fiance and I also met an online game, we expected a RFE because we just put we met online, but we didn't get one. At the interview when my fiance was asked where we met he said online on World of Warcraft and the interviewer just laughed and said he got that a lot lately lol.

[Unidentified 2,930]

Hi guys. I was working on the declaration of how my fiancé and I met, and was just wondering if it looked okay and/or needed anything fixed. So if anyone could help me out, it'd be very helpful!

Some will say to keep it short but I believe yours is fine. They do want to see more than the date of your actual meeting etc. They want to see some thoughts and emotion behind what you're saying.

Sure a lot of people get away with sending in the bare minimum with the I-129F but I believe that with more evidence and slightly longer "how we met" than 3 sentences shows more that you're a genuine couple

[mehogany 0]

This was my 34.a:

Had no problems. I more so just listed where we initially met (online), where we met in person (Airport), and the subsequent visits afterwards.

Also, note that if you put you met online, regardless of a game or not, you can get hit with an RFE asking for more information about where you met on the internet. My fiance and I also met an online game, we expected a RFE because we just put we met online, but we didn't get one. At the interview when my fiance was asked where we met he said online on World of Warcraft and the interviewer just laughed and said he got that a lot lately lol.

Ahh, I thought we should have included that. Okay. Thank you! And lol, we met on MapleStory and League of Legends. xD.

[Ted & Janine 31]

I have a friend that explained to me the various functions of the USCIS. I had no idea what goes on in the inside. Actually, it is a very complex process. He worked for the old INS and has contacts with previous coworkers that made the transition. He gave me some pointers.

This part only deals with the declaration. First, your case is assigned to one adjudicator and he/she will be in charge and be responsible for it from start to finish. This includes sending different parts to various departments and agencies for cross-checking. The declaration is only one piece of the puzzle. He said to put myself in their place. The first and foremost thing that he/she will try to determine is if this is a true bona fide relationship. He suggested to put in line 34a the date, how we met, and "see attachment". Some adjudicators like to get a feel for the couple and a short story is a nice touch. Others may only glance at it but just really pay attention to what is on the actual petition, especially if they are backlogged.

Side note: As stated before, front-loading a petition for high-fraud and high-risk countries can be beneficial. However, other countries it can actually hurt. Example: If you put all of your pictures, chat, emails, etc in the petition and they give you an RFE for more of any of those... you have nothing left. Best policy is research.

[Ted & Janine 31]

Some will say to keep it short but I believe yours is fine. They do want to see more than the date of your actual meeting etc. They want to see some thoughts and emotion behind what you're saying.

Sure a lot of people get away with sending in the bare minimum with the I-129F but I believe that with more evidence and slightly longer "how we met" than 3 sentences shows more that you're a genuine couple

Exactly

[AT & JP 1]

I had a question about this!! So, on the I-129f and on the K-1 guide here on VJ, it says to state how we've met in the past 2 years. Originally I wrote about how my fiance and I first met, forever ago in 2003 became friends, talked again in 2011, became an item in 2012 and since then have visited on and off, but I thought I had to scrap all that since I reread it and figured they only want the most recent stuff. So it's totally acceptable for me to mention how we first met and became an item, etc? I have our supplement available at this link here if you have a second to review it!

With the examples given here I'm now thinking that what I wrote is perfectly acceptable, except that at the bottom, I will list all of the times we've visited each other, which is a total of 7 times. Just the dates & locations probably.

Thanks for your help

[KayDeeCee 4,892]

I have a friend that explained to me the various functions of the USCIS. I had no idea what goes on in the inside. Actually, it is a very complex process. He worked for the old INS and has contacts with previous coworkers that made the transition. He gave me some pointers.

This part only deals with the declaration. First, your case is assigned to one adjudicator and he/she will be in charge and be responsible for it from start to finish. This includes sending different parts to various departments and agencies for cross-checking. The declaration is only one piece of the puzzle. He said to put myself in their place. The first and foremost thing that he/she will try to determine is if this is a true bona fide relationship. He suggested to put in line 34a the date, how we met, and "see attachment". Some adjudicators like to get a feel for the couple and a short story is a nice touch. Others may only glance at it but just really pay attention to what is on the actual petition, especially if they are backlogged.

Side note: As stated before, front-loading a petition for high-fraud and high-risk countries can be beneficial. However, other countries it can actually hurt. Example: If you put all of your pictures, chat, emails, etc in the petition and they give you an RFE for more of any of those... you have nothing left. Best policy is research.

USCIS adjudicators do not decide if the relationship is bona fide or not. That is what the Dept. of State and the CO at the K-1 visa interview determine. They are the ones that issue visas. The I-129F petition does not even require proof of relationship.

[Berty 74]

Mine was 2 sentences long. I don't even think they were technically full sentences. I just used the lines that were available on the I-129 itself. Your original seems like overkill honestly.

It might depend what country the beneficiary is coming from. Just as you are sometimes advised to front-load your petition when from a higher fraud country, it may help to have more details about your meeting. Since you don't seem to have your profile/timeline set up fully it's hard say from that regard.

I sort of cringed hearing how long some of these meeting explanations are. There is no way anyone needs 6 paragraphs unless there is some extreme circumstance in play.

Ours was a number of years ago now, but exactly this, honestly, in all respects (actually I think ours was three or maybe four sentences long. Shock!). The UK is a safe country; I mean the long explanation's been typed now so it might as well be included in its entirety, but it's honestly not needed.