Need advice. Non-US citizen (Japan resident) engaged to active duty member (stateside)

[Ana Hussa 0]

We’ve been dating for more than 3 years and have spent half of our relationship physically together and half doing long distance.

 

1. To make the whole process as easy as possible, we’re planning to have him come to Japan and get married online via the Utah thing and use it for our CR1 visa application. Is this a viable route? We’ll be physically together during this time. We’ve thought about getting married at the local Japanese city hall, but it involves way more processes and documents since we’re both not Japanese nationals. Also, we’re aiming to have all of our marriage documents easily obtainable in the US in case we need them in the future.
2. He’ll only be in Japan for a couple of days. What do we need to knock out in terms of legal processes while he’s here?
3. After getting married, will I be able to get on base on my own even if he’s not stationed in Japan?

 

Thanks!

[OldUser 11,091]

Marrying online when you are together at same physical location can look odd for USCIS.

Why not put some effort and get married normally, like most couples would? If process is too difficult, why can't you go to your home country or other country nearby with easier rules?

Nothing stops you from marrying online, it just seems unusual when you are in same location. The less unusual things, the better for immigration.

Edited Friday at 02:17 AM by OldUser

[TBoneTX 48,675]

Thread is moved from the CR-1 Case Progress subforum to the CR-1 Process forum.

[pushbrk 14,160]

19 hours ago, OldUser said:

Marrying online when you are together at same physical location can look odd for USCIS.

Why not put some effort and get married normally, like most couples would? If process is too difficult, why can't you go to your home country or other country nearby with easier rules?

Nothing stops you from marrying online, it just seems unusual when you are in same location. The less unusual things, the better for immigration.

Being married as suggested by the OP, "looking odd" is not a reason for denying a petition.  They've already spent quite a bit of time together in person.  Evidence they were together during the proxy marriage is all that is required to satisfy USCIS in this situation.  By now USCIS has seen this hundreds of times.  I say go for it.

[OldUser 11,091]

57 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

Being married as suggested by the OP, "looking odd" is not a reason for denying a petition.  They've already spent quite a bit of time together in person.  Evidence they were together during the proxy marriage is all that is required to satisfy USCIS in this situation.  By now USCIS has seen this hundreds of times.  I say go for it.

Petition can be indefinitely stuck in processing, not necessarily denied.

Legally, OP can choose this route, but it can raise some eyebrows at USCIS / DOS. IMHO, it is a lot clearer just to get married at court house etc like 99% of couples would do.

Edited Friday at 10:59 PM by OldUser

[pushbrk 14,160]

5 minutes ago, OldUser said:

Petition can be indefinitely stuck in processing, not necessarily denied.

Legally, OP can choose this route, but it will raise some eyebrows at USCIS / DOS

I've seen no evidence of this. What I HAVE seen is RFEs because the necessary evidence of consummation was not included with the petition. To the OP, in your situation, you must submit clear "primary evidence" that the two of you were together in the same place for the proxy ceremony....OR....that you were together in the same place between the date of the ceremony and the date the petition was filed.  I've seen this be successful many times, either way.

 

Primary evidence would be passport stamps and/or boarding passes showing you were both in country on a certain date. (date of ceremony or later date as indicated above)  Photos are secondary evidence. Include that too, along with similar evidence of previous time spent together in person.

Edited Friday at 11:03 PM by pushbrk

[OldUser 11,091]

15 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

I've seen no evidence of this. What I HAVE seen is RFEs because the necessary evidence of consummation was not included with the petition. To the OP, in your situation, you must submit clear "primary evidence" that the two of you were together in the same place for the proxy ceremony....OR....that you were together in the same place between the date of the ceremony and the date the petition was filed.  I've seen this be successful many times, either way.

 

Primary evidence would be passport stamps and/or boarding passes showing you were both in country on a certain date. (date of ceremony or later date as indicated above)  Photos are secondary evidence. Include that too, along with similar evidence of previous time spent together in person.

Here is recent data point:

 

 

 

There seems to be a change in policy - https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20251017-RecognizedMarriages.pdf

 

My understanding is, now it is mandated that proxy marriage is recognized in the country where it was celebrated. E.g. Japan should recognize it as legal marriage too, not just Utah state.

 

Things got a lot more complex, and could get more problematic with immigration policies being updated very frequently in the last year.

 

I highly recommend @Ana Hussa to get married physically in the country they can legally marry instead of attempting proxy marriage, especially if both are in same physical location.

Edited Friday at 11:17 PM by OldUser

[pushbrk 14,160]

20 minutes ago, OldUser said:

Here is recent data point:

 

 

 

There seems to be a change in policy - https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20251017-RecognizedMarriages.pdf

 

My understanding is, now it is mandated that proxy marriage is recognized in the country where it was celebrated. E.g. Japan should recognize it as legal marriage too, not just Utah state.

 

Things got a lot more complex, and could get more problematic with immigration policies being updated very frequently in the last year.

 

I highly recommend @Ana Hussa to get married physically in the country they can legally marry instead of attempting proxy marriage, especially if both are in same physical location.

Context is king here.  The case from Reddit was two months ago.  Not sure of the actual date, but the filing date was certainly prior to the date of the new memo linked in your post.

 

Here's a quote from an RFE sent October 22, 2025 (after the date of the linked memo) that describes what is needed at this time.  Of course this petition was filed months prior.  The couple was together but failed to provide evidence.  The RFE response will include the required/requested evidence.

 

1. PROXY MARRIAGE
Based on the evidence submitted, it appears that the marriage between Noah Marriott and  (names deleted) was virtual. Furthermore, it appears that the married parties were not physically together in the
same location for the wedding ceremony. For a virtual marriage where both parties are not physically together
at the time of marriage to be recognized for immigration purposes, the marriage must be valid in the
jurisdiction which issued the marriage certificate and consummated after the marriage ceremony, but before
filing the Form I-130 petition.

Edited Friday at 11:36 PM by pushbrk

[pushbrk 14,160]

1 hour ago, pushbrk said:

Context is king here.  The case from Reddit was two months ago.  Not sure of the actual date, but the filing date was certainly prior to the date of the new memo linked in your post.

 

Here's a quote from an RFE sent October 22, 2025 (after the date of the linked memo) that describes what is needed at this time.  Of course this petition was filed months prior.  The couple was together but failed to provide evidence.  The RFE response will include the required/requested evidence.

 

1. PROXY MARRIAGE
Based on the evidence submitted, it appears that the marriage between Noah Marriott and  (names deleted) was virtual. Furthermore, it appears that the married parties were not physically together in the
same location for the wedding ceremony. For a virtual marriage where both parties are not physically together
at the time of marriage to be recognized for immigration purposes, the marriage must be valid in the
jurisdiction which issued the marriage certificate and consummated after the marriage ceremony, but before
filing the Form I-130 petition.

Replying to myself to add the exact language from the current field manual regarding proxy marriages.

 

The laws of the place of celebration govern the validity of the marriage.^[65] Each jurisdiction’s civil authorities set their own requirements for authorizing a marriage, including any requirements regarding the location of the parties and the officiant. A virtual marriage is valid for immigration purposes if it is valid in the state or country that issued the marriage certificate, and it does not violate the public policy of the United States or a state where the petitioner resides, or where the couple will reside. For the marriage to be valid for immigration purposes, the parties also must consummate the marriage after the ceremony if the parties were not physically together for the ceremony.^[66]