Which Visa is easiest and best, K-1, K-3 or CR-1 for my situation?

[pushbrk 12,103]

52 minutes ago, Corgent said:

Yours was the timeline that made me decide to submit my I-129F, and I received similarly fast approval. It certainly can't hurt to try.

It's a trick worth trying.  Just don't expect a K3 visa out of it.

[Catseal 268]

13 hours ago, Jimmyzr1 said:

No, we did not change her name yet because I was worried about messing up documents with the 9a visa and report of marriage. But now I have to get everything changed after I get the affidavit and ROM forms back from her in the Philippines in a few days. I’m just trying to figure out how and when to change her name on various different documents, not to mess up those filings as well as I-130 and US filings as well...

If she did not change her name when you got married and therefore has no U.S. marriage certificate with the new name, wouldn't that mean she has to go about changing her name through the legal route in her country for name change? Because if you file I-130 with her new name, and her current passport shows the old but you don't have a marriage certificate that shows her new name, what would you give as official proof of the new name?

It seems to me she would need to start with changing her passport in accordance with whichever requirements her country has for legal name change, and then once she has the new name, everything else can be amended. 

[Chancy 6,233]

10 hours ago, Jimmyzr1 said:

I don’t want to have to wait, if possible, to file the i-130 application for her ROM to go through, so she can change her name on her passport and other documents, that could be a long delay in getting the i-130 started.

 

You may file the I-130 as soon as you have the Utah marriage certificate AND evidence that you spent time together in person after the wedding ceremony.  You may file the petition with your wife's married name.  No need to wait for any of her IDs to be changed.

 

Your wife's passport will be required at NVC stage after petition approval.  Best to renew her passport in her married name ASAP.  To do so, she will need at least the ROM transmittal record.  No ROM, no married name on passport.  She must have the new passport in time for her visa interview if she wants to use her married name immediately after she arrives in the US.  Her visa, green card, and SSN card will list the name that is listed on her passport.

 

Other than her NBI clearance (which must list all her names), the US embassy in Manila will not mind if all her other IDs and documents are still in her maiden name at the time of her interview.

 

[Jimmyzr1 34]

2 hours ago, Chancy said:

 

You may file the I-130 as soon as you have the Utah marriage certificate AND evidence that you spent time together in person after the wedding ceremony.  You may file the petition with your wife's married name.  No need to wait for any of her IDs to be changed.

 

Your wife's passport will be required at NVC stage after petition approval.  Best to renew her passport in her married name ASAP.  To do so, she will need at least the ROM transmittal record.  No ROM, no married name on passport.  She must have the new passport in time for her visa interview if she wants to use her married name immediately after she arrives in the US.  Her visa, green card, and SSN card will list the name that is listed on her passport.

 

Other than her NBI clearance (which must list all her names), the US embassy in Manila will not mind if all her other IDs and documents are still in her maiden name at the time of her interview.

 

Thanks so much for this advice!

Thanks for all of the help, everyone who commented.

[HRQX 4,145]

23 hours ago, mam521 said:

If the marriage isn't "complete" until a visit, how is the certificate date valid?

On 1/10/2022 at 2:55 PM, Jorgedig said:

Sounds like something they will have to define in a memorandum sometime in the near future.

The DOS Foreign Affairs Manual is already quite clear: https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM010208.html "For the purpose of issuing a visa to a “spouse,” a proxy marriage that has been subsequently consummated is deemed to have been valid as of the date of the proxy ceremony. A proxy marriage consummated prior to the proxy ceremony cannot be considered a valid marriage for visa adjudication purposes unless it has been consummated subsequently."

[mam521 1,723]

1 hour ago, HRQX said:

The DOS Foreign Affairs Manual is already quite clear: https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM010208.html "For the purpose of issuing a visa to a “spouse,” a proxy marriage that has been subsequently consummated is deemed to have been valid as of the date of the proxy ceremony. A proxy marriage consummated prior to the proxy ceremony cannot be considered a valid marriage for visa adjudication purposes unless it has been consummated subsequently."

Yes, but how do you verify the proxy marriage has been consummated?  Just because one flies to a spouse's country doesn't mean much.  It's rather unfair to those couples who've gotten married in person and have gone through the process.  If a marriage isn't consummated until 18mo after, the process takes no less than 6mo, that immigrant crosses the border as an IR because the 2yr marriage rule, according to the certificate but not by the validity according to the consummation rule.  It would make more sense for the immigrant status to be deemed conditional for 2 years upon arrival since no one can verify that consummation.  

[Lemonslice 4,552]

3 minutes ago, mam521 said:

Yes, but how do you verify the proxy marriage has been consummated?  Just because one flies to a spouse's country doesn't mean much.  It's rather unfair to those couples who've gotten married in person and have gone through the process.  If a marriage isn't consummated until 18mo after, the process takes no less than 6mo, that immigrant crosses the border as an IR because the 2yr marriage rule, according to the certificate but not by the validity according to the consummation rule.  It would make more sense for the immigrant status to be deemed conditional for 2 years upon arrival since no one can verify that consummation.  

That's your opinion.  Books say otherwise for now, I don't see them changing that any time soon.  

[Boiler 43,425]

You show evidence of being in the same place after the marriage occurred.

 

 

[HRQX 4,145]

On 1/10/2022 at 2:44 PM, Jorgedig said:

you are legally married, which is why you are NOT eligible for the K-1 now.

Looks like a loophole may exist on that front per the FAM: https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM010208.html "A proxy marriage that has not been subsequently consummated does not create or confer the status of “spouse” pursuant to INA 101(a)(35). For IV cases, a party to an unconsummated proxy marriage may be processed as a nonimmigrant fiancé(e). A proxy marriage celebrated in a jurisdiction recognizing such marriage is generally considered to be valid; thus, an actual marriage in the United States is not necessary if the applicant is admitted to the United States under INA provisions other than as a spouse."

 

Also see:

Edited January 12, 2022 by HRQX

[SalishSea 16,769]

49 minutes ago, HRQX said:

Looks like a loophole may exist on that front per the FAM: https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM010208.html "A proxy marriage that has not been subsequently consummated does not create or confer the status of “spouse” pursuant to INA 101(a)(35). For IV cases, a party to an unconsummated proxy marriage may be processed as a nonimmigrant fiancé(e). A proxy marriage celebrated in a jurisdiction recognizing such marriage is generally considered to be valid; thus, an actual marriage in the United States is not necessary if the applicant is admitted to the United States under INA provisions other than as a spouse."

 

Also see:

Perhaps, but in practice I wouldn't risk it, as they may be deemed to be "too married" for a K-1, like others who have had non-legally binding local ceremonies.

[pushbrk 12,103]

10 minutes ago, Jorgedig said:

Perhaps, but in practice I wouldn't risk it, as they may be deemed to be "too married" for a K-1, like others who have had non-legally binding local ceremonies.

Exactly.  There really is such a thing as too married for a K1, but not married enough for an immigrant visa.  This is one of those cases.

[top_secret 2,061]

I recently saw a reported case of the "consummation" issue being brought up in an actual case.  In that CR-1 case at US Embassy Manila, the Filipino consul conducting the pre-interview document check was unfamiliar with Utah online marriages when checking the marriage certificate.  Upon having it explained to her, the Filipino consul just said "oh so it's a proxy wedding" and then asked for evidence of a meeting.  The woman had copies of her husbands passport stamps and boarding passes of him subsequently visiting her in the Philippines.  The Filipino consul conducting the pre-interview document check carefully checked the dates and typed something into the computer.  The American consul conducting the actual interview didn't raise the issue at all and the visa was promptly issued.  Everything worked just fine for them but I have no idea how it would have played out if she didn't have proof of the meeting on hand when she arrived for her interview.

[pushbrk 12,103]

On 1/13/2022 at 5:26 AM, mam521 said:

Yes, but how do you verify the proxy marriage has been consummated?  Just because one flies to a spouse's country doesn't mean much.  It's rather unfair to those couples who've gotten married in person and have gone through the process.  If a marriage isn't consummated until 18mo after, the process takes no less than 6mo, that immigrant crosses the border as an IR because the 2yr marriage rule, according to the certificate but not by the validity according to the consummation rule.  It would make more sense for the immigrant status to be deemed conditional for 2 years upon arrival since no one can verify that consummation.  

In actual practice, USCIS equates evidence of being together in person as evidence of consummation.  It really is that clear cut.  That's all the evidence they ever have that any marriage has be consummated.  Nothing to SEE here. LOL

 

[mam521 1,723]

5 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

Nothing to SEE here. LOL

 

Eeewwww 😂 

[Daisy.Chain 317]

You could meet your wife in a third country. It does not need to be a long visit, just a documented one.