How to prove ongoing relationship?

[giftedunlimited 2]

Some advice given out here is to not include text messages in your application. I have an ongoing relationship thats LDR and communication is mostly via text and face time.

Does meeting in person in the last 2 years satisfy the requirement for ongoing relationship?

 

Thanks

[TBoneTX 43,072]

You're asking two different questions.  

Personally meeting in the last 2 years is mandatory for the USCIS petition.

Bona fide relationship is proved at the consular phase, after petition approval.

You have no timeline, so you'll need to tell us your beneficiary's country of residence.

 

Depending on your beneficiary's country of residence, "front-loading" of the USCIS petition is helpful.  This means that you'd not only include airline tickets, hotel reservation receipts, copies of passport stamps, et al., but also a few (or more) photos of yourselves together during each visit, and a few (or more) representative letters or texts spanning the time of your relationship.

 

Avoid (like the plague!) any correspondence in which you playfully refer to yourselves as "husband" or "wife"; these will kill your I-129F petition and certainly any chance at the K-1 visa.

 

Awaiting your answer regarding the country.

 

 

[giftedunlimited 2]

We originally met in the Philippines over 3 years ago and our relationship consists of mostly text/facetime. We met in person again at the beginning of the year in the U.S.

 

Thanks

[Mike E 11,723]

9 minutes ago, giftedunlimited said:

We met in person again at the beginning of the year in the U.S.

Where is the alien fiancé(e) now?

[giftedunlimited 2]

Just now, Mike E said:

Where is the alien fiancé(e) now?

Back in the Philippines.

[TBoneTX 43,072]

The Philippines is just about the only developing country where the U.S. consulate metaphorically hands out visas like candy.  I see no need for you to include more than a couple of texts and a few photos together.  Your recent meeting satisfies that requirement.

 

When you file the I-129F petition, read carefully, interpret literally, and answer completely and accurately.  In addition, become an "A" student of the entire immigration process.

[TBoneTX 43,072]

Addendum for clarity:  "no more than a couple of texts/photos in addition to hard proof of meeting (airline tickets, passport stamps, shared hotel reservations...)."

[Mike E 11,723]

1 minute ago, giftedunlimited said:

Back in the Philippines.

Since you haven’t filed I-129F yet, you should have married when you were together and then filed I-130. 

[giftedunlimited 2]

Just now, Mike E said:

Since you haven’t filed I-129F yet, you should have married when you were together and then filed I-130. 

Nah she was on a travel visa. I think that poses more problems.

[Mike E 11,723]

6 hours ago, giftedunlimited said:

Nah she was on a travel visa. I think that poses more problems.

It doesn’t. 

[Highmystic 234]

14 hours ago, Mike E said:

Since you haven’t filed I-129F yet, you should have married when you were together and then filed I-130. 

Is the married route still longer timeline but less money and bypass some other things with the I129F ?   My wife, (Philippines) did not want to go the "married" route due to a short time we had known each other and would have looked "pushy".  But since the OP has a few years under the belt, I'd agree that the I130 would be a money saver. And the wife would have a lot of her stuff waiting at the airport, right? 

 

[Mike E 11,723]

2 hours ago, Highmystic said:

Is the married route still longer timeline

it is now the shorter timeline 

https://www.visajourney.com/timeline/stats.php?history=90

 

https://www.visajourney.com/timeline/irstats.php?history=90
 

 

2 hours ago, Highmystic said:

 

but less money and bypass some other things with the I129F ?

less money and faster path to gc. 
 

IMO most K-1 couples the ones who can afford K-1 

2 hours ago, Highmystic said:

 

 

My wife, (Philippines) did not want to go the "married" route due to a short time we had known each other and would have looked "pushy".

pushy to whom?

 

One can make the counter argument that K-1 shows lack of commitment.  

 

 

2 hours ago, Highmystic said:

. And the wife would have a lot of her stuff waiting at the airport, right? 

 

What stuff?

[Vulpis 24]

7 hours ago, Mike E said:

pushy to whom?

What OP’s wife likely believed is that the short time both of them were together would have been a potential red flag to USCIS adjudicators. 
 

that concern is what drove me and my fiancée towards the K-1 pathway versus getting married and doing CR-1. We dated IRL for less than a month while she was visiting the US before we proposed to each other and just knew each other as video game buddies beforehand. We simply thought the circumstances and the timeline would have raised too many eyebrows 

[IWander 581]

On 2/20/2023 at 5:30 AM, Highmystic said:

Is the married route still longer timeline but less money and bypass some other things with the I129F ?   My wife, (Philippines) did not want to go the "married" route due to a short time we had known each other and would have looked "pushy".  But since the OP has a few years under the belt, I'd agree that the I130 would be a money saver. And the wife would have a lot of her stuff waiting at the airport, right? 

 

If that is considered "pushy" what would you call the people who got married online in Utah having never met?

[jp1000 23]

7 hours ago, IWander said:

If that is considered "pushy" what would you call the people who got married online in Utah having never met?

Are people really doing this without having actually met? That seems like a terrible idea..