Meetng in person within 2 years

[HeatDeath 430]

If your I-129 was mailed within two years of your meeting, but the NOA1 was delayed (through no fault of your own) until after 2 years after your meeting, and the NOA1 filed date is after 2 years after your last meeting, you have a major problem. When an adjudicator sits down to look through the file (which no one has yet) and sees the gap in the dates, you will be denied out of hand, for simple failure to have met in the past two years.

Make an InfoPass appointment NOW, and bring all the evidence you have that shows that the package was mailed, received, and the check cashed prior to 2 years after the meeting. That way they will hopefully change your NOA1 date, or at least add a note to your account correcting the filing date. You need to get on this. It could be a serious problem!

Edited February 7, 2010 by HeatDeath

[jundp 191]

I cannot fathom not seeing someone for almost 2 years and marrying them. I would encourage another visit if not to support your own case, but to make sure you truly can live with the person. We dated 5 1/2 years and had 8 visits, many for just shy of six months at a time to ensure we were going down the right path. It is not that either of us ever had any questions from day one but I'm so thankful nonetheless to have had all that time together to insure there was no doubts by either party.

While I fully agree with you that I personally couldn't imagine having married my husband after only one time of meeting in person, it is not possible for everyone to do this. We were lucky because we both had the financial means and the VWP to meet more often. It's not always that easy for people to do this.

[`joanne 0]

If your I-129 was mailed within two years of your meeting, but the NOA1 was delayed (through no fault of your own) until after 2 years after your meeting, and the NOA1 filed date is after 2 years after your last meeting, you have a major problem. When an adjudicator sits down to look through the file (which no one has yet) and sees the gap in the dates, you will be denied out of hand, for simple failure to have met in the past two years.

Make an InfoPass appointment NOW, and bring all the evidence you have that shows that the package was mailed, received, and the check cashed prior to 2 years after the meeting. That way they will hopefully change your NOA1 date, or at least add a note to your account correcting the filing date. You need to get on this. It could be a serious problem!

The USCIS case status said they received the I-129F last 17th of Nov 2009. The requirement says "met within 2 years immediately receding the filing of the petition"(timeframe should be Nov 17, 2007 to Nov 17, 2009), it doesn't say "met within 2 years when NOA1 was received". Though it wouldn't hurt making an InfoPass appointment and ask about the matter just for peace of mind, IMHO, it would be just a waste of time...

Edited February 7, 2010 by `joanne

[HeatDeath 430]

Joanne, you're exactly right. The important question is when the NOA1 was issued. If the "Received Date" on the NOA1 matches the date they sent it, more or less, and is within 2 years of their meeting, everything is fine. If it is not, immediate action needs to be taken before a USCIS adjudicator gets to the file and compares the dates.

[NVC FAN :( 18]

Agree you should be fine with the dates. I however believe in my heart for ph there needs to be more than just 1 in person meeting. if you want to test the embassy and you are a very patient person of time then dont worry about it

gl

[K and L 27]

Joanne, you're exactly right. The important question is when the NOA1 was issued. If the "Received Date" on the NOA1 matches the date they sent it, more or less, and is within 2 years of their meeting, everything is fine. If it is not, immediate action needs to be taken before a USCIS adjudicator gets to the file and compares the dates.

With the 19/11 check cashing, they can prove that even if the NOA1 was issued in February, USCIS had it at such a time that they HAD met in the two years prior to receipt. USCIS can't cash the check if they haven't received it!

[HeatDeath 430]

With the 19/11 check cashing, they can prove that even if the NOA1 was issued in February, USCIS had it at such a time that they HAD met in the two years prior to receipt. USCIS can't cash the check if they haven't received it!

That cashed check is very important. It's their primary proof, along with the USPS delivery confirmation (if they ordered it and still have it) that the filing was received within 2 years of the meeting. The screenshot, unfortunately, means almost nothing. Give me 20 minutes and I can make you a screenshot showing the USCIS website saying anything you want .

What concerns me is that if the "Received Date" on the NOA1 they've just received is more than 2 years after the meeting, that that may be the date the adjudicator looks at to determine if the couple had met within 2 years of filing. I don't know which dates the adjudicator looks at to determine the filing date. If the only filing date the adjudicator has access to is the late "Received by" date on the NOA1, then that will cause a denial, which will have to be appealed.

They can, thank G-d, prove that they filed in time. My concern is that they may have to. It would be far easier to deliver that proof to an IO at an InfoPass meeting before adjudication takes place. If they wait until an adjudicator denies it before they take steps to fix this (which the cashed check should allow them to do) then that may cost them nontrivial amounts of money, and will definitely cost them nontrivial amounts of time.

Edited February 7, 2010 by HeatDeath

[SuperDuper! 230]

K1 visas in the Phils is so easy get. As long as no suspicious situations. Few k1 visas in the Phils is denied in my knowledge. Mine took 3 months of process. ^^

Agreed. Manila hands out more k1/spousal visas per month than anyone else. The CO's are very good about pre-approving genuine appllcations/relationships. OP: Just ignore the Buzzkill types who like to rain on parades here. You will be fine.

Edited February 7, 2010 by Hopp

[HeatDeath 430]

Agreed. Manila hands out more k1/spousal visas per month than anyone else. The CO's are very good about pre-approving genuine appllcations/relationships. OP: Just ignore the Buzzkill types who like to rain on parades here. You will be fine.

Yeah, the one meeting thing doesn't bother me. I'm sure the embassy interview will go fine. I am, however, a little worried about your petition as it stands. That needs to get approved before the embassy even hears about you. And this date issue could be a problem, depending on what the "Received Date" on your late NOA1 says, What does it say?

[SuperDuper! 230]

Yeah, the one meeting thing doesn't bother me. I'm sure the embassy interview will go fine. I am, however, a little worried about your petition as it stands. That needs to get approved before the embassy even hears about you. And this date issue could be a problem, depending on what the "Received Date" on your late NOA1 says, What does it say?

I'm thinking that the postmark sets the date in question here, not when USCIS clerk gets around to opening the packet and actually doing some work on it.

[HeatDeath 430]

I'm thinking that the postmark sets the date in question here, not when USCIS clerk gets around to opening the packet and actually doing some work on it.

The "Received Date" on the NOA1 is USCIS's official opinion of when they received the packet. This date is usually several days before the "Notice Date", which is when the NOA1 was issued. The NOA1 does not record the postmark date from your packet, so I suspect that one of these two dates, probably the "Received Date", is what the adjudicator uses to determine the filing date, and that this date, therefore, must be within two years of the date of the couple's last meeting. We know, from the OP, that the NOA1 "Notice Date" is in February, well after 2 years after the couple's last meeting. If the "Received Date" is also outside the 2 year window, and if, as I suspect, the "Received Date" is the date the adjudicator uses, the OP could be facing a denial.

If the postmark date is the one used by the adjudicator, everything is fine. If the "Received Date" is the one used, and is correct, then everything is also fine. I hope the USCIS adjudicator has access to the correct postmark date. But that's the problem. None of us, including the OP, know for sure. It's an element of uncertainty I would be very uncomfortable with if it was my I-129F petition.

An InfoPass appointment would allow the OP to find out for sure, and to present the necessary evidence to correct the date, if correction is needed.

From everything I've read here, I trust USCIS about as far as I can throw the California Service Center. If they sent me an NOA1 months late, and the date on it mattered for something as fundamental to the approval as whether I had filed within 2 years of meeting my fiancee, I would be very careful to make sure they had the dates correct, and would be very proactive if there was the slightest chance that their losing my file for 2-3 months was going to screw up my petition to that degree.

I agree with others, that the OP cut things rather close by filing so close to the end of the 2 year window after their last meeting, and that the lack of more recent meetings MAY make things more awkward at the interview. But those issues are alll way down the road yet. The petition has to be approved first, and for that to happen, USCIS's official opinion must match the reality that this petition packet was mailed and received with 2 years of their last meeting. If their opinion is currently wrong, OP must schedule an InfoPass meeting to correct that opinion.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Post with screen shot revealing personal details (ie case number) removed for privacy. The rest of the post is returned below:

Waitingurl:

(Vanessa&Tony @ Feb 7 2010, 08:24 AM) *

Are you SURE that the notice you just received was NOA1? Because it sounds like it should be NOA2 given your timeline. If it was the NOA1 it would say on it "receipt" and ignore the date on that, is there a "we received your petition on ####"

I hope that the notice you have is the NOA2 (notice of approval) otherwise you MIGHT encounter a problem. I hope you took a screen shot of the online status showing when it was actually receivied. I would think though that you would not have received NOA1 because I have heard of people simply having their cases returned because they didn't have the "met in the last 2 years" requirement. *fingers crossed* for you

I took a screenshot of our online status, just in case we need it later on

thank you :-)

Edited February 8, 2010 by Kathryn41