Where is requirement for proof of relationship?

[pushbrk 12,569]

I guess my experience is very unique and that is why I see a notarized document as so much more reliable than passport stamps. In our case my fiance traveled to the US all the time on business ... every month for years. She has many passport stamps that she could show from about 1 to 2 years ago that were in fact from a time before we met. The passport stamp proves that she traveled to the US. Now I can see that if I were a adjudicator that I would assume that we met but to me the notarized document is more substantial evidence.

I can also see why 99% of those petitioning would look at a passport stamp as very strong evidence because it is rare for most people to know of anyone who travels that many times in and out of the US. My finacee has a 10 year visa that expires in September. That's how long she has been traveling back and forth.

Then by all means send the notarized document. At the same time, bear in mind that its value in the process is derived primarily from your own unique circumstances. It's still not required for you or anybody else and its certianly not a revolutionary new idea for general use.

In other words, your unique circumstances don't relate closely to most others, so your solution doesn't either. To assert otherwise is a bit like saying, I have three legs, so all people should start wearing three legged trousers.

Edited February 11, 2010 by pushbrk

[baron555 934]

I guess my experience is very unique and that is why I see a notarized document as so much more reliable than passport stamps. In our case my fiance traveled to the US all the time on business ... every month for years. She has many passport stamps that she could show from about 1 to 2 years ago that were in fact from a time before we met. The passport stamp proves that she traveled to the US. Now I can see that if I were a adjudicator that I would assume that we met but to me the notarized document is more substantial evidence.

I can also see why 99% of those petitioning would look at a passport stamp as very strong evidence because it is rare for most people to know of anyone who travels that many times in and out of the US. My finacee has a 10 year visa that expires in September. That's how long she has been traveling back and forth.

\Why not just send in pictures of you two at a recognizable place if you need to send extra proof.

Your "discovery" that a notarized letter may help some folks and will NOT hurt all folks is nothing new to this forum.

Do whatever you want and whatever you need to get your petition approved. That is really what we all want.

But to suggest that a notarized letter has more weight than a government issued passport stamp is not good information; it is not. You can easily copy one of your SO's multiple stamps as your "proof of meeting" and it will be as accepted as they accepted mine for the one trip I took when I visited my SO in the country where we met.

Thanks for the notary suggestion but that is all it is, just one more suggestion. Good luck.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Gary ... Does your secretary know that she is breaking the law when she acknowledges signatures for your friends that she does not know? Why would you subject her to that? Notaries have gone to prison for this ... in addition to paying fines and losing their job.

Do you realize that if a friend of yours asked you to arrange for your secretary to sign a deed for him with the wrong date that someone could be losing their house or property because she did not witness the signature on the proper date?

My notary is one of my good friends ... she will not acknowledge even my signature unless I am in front of her.

Yes. She trusts me. Plus I am not going to drive 2 hours to Montpelier each time I need something notarized, nor am I going to drive to the bank to do it. I do most of my work from my home office. Someone needs to get over it...whatever it is. I am saving the planet by cutting down on driving. People that pull visa frauds are breaking the law. People that opull visa frauds would think nothing of falsifying a notary stamp. You are kidding, right?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Jim: I like the way you are thinking about this. It seems to me that the notarized letter along with just a few other things like a passport stamp would be sufficient to prove that the couple were together. The couple would then have many more months to prepare the evidence for the relationship. If I put myself in the place of a adjudicator I would not want to face my supervisor if someone appealed or objected to an RFE triggered by evidence that included a notarized document showing that the couple were together.

I am having fun thinking about this topic ... maybe its because I am snowed in with this blizzard. I think the title of the document I would have notarized would be "Testimony that we appeared together in front of a Notary".

Isn't that what we have been saying? I sent passport stamps, ONE photo, and boarding passes for ONE trip, though I had many trips before filing. I guiess I could have sent notarized documents also, but I didn't need them. I did not send ANY evidence of relationship, I took all of that to the interview. We were never asked a single question in the entire process I-129f to AOS for three people. None.

So, yes, with passport stamps and photos, your notarized document will get your petition approved. Your notarized document ans $1 will get you a cup of coffee of the McDonald's value meal also.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Gary ... Does your secretary know that she is breaking the law when she acknowledges signatures for your friends that she does not know? Why would you subject her to that? Notaries have gone to prison for this ... in addition to paying fines and losing their job.

Do you realize that if a friend of yours asked you to arrange for your secretary to sign a deed for him with the wrong date that someone could be losing their house or property because she did not witness the signature on the proper date?

My notary is one of my good friends ... she will not acknowledge even my signature unless I am in front of her.

I will also add, as some others have, that this is not the time to see what you can get away with. Try out the new rope, as Pushbrk puts it. This is the time to go along and do like everyone else does to get approved as soon as possible and have as little aggravation in your life as possible. The adjudicator CAN deny the petition and the denial may opr may not stand up to tn appeal...if you have a lot of money and time to pursue and appeal...go for it and let us know how it works for you.

You are getting some advice here from some very experienced people tht have helped a lot of people get visas successfully, smoothly, quietly and without incident. every so often we get the (I don't have to do this" kind of guy here and they never last long. The government can mess with your life big time. They have the ability to play the game MUCH better than you. Be careful and follow the experience of a lot of people who are trying to help you and giving good advice.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

So big deal the guy wants to do something "different" to prove the timing of his last face-to-face with his woman.

He's not suggested anything illegal, immoral or fattening.

I think it's kind of creative myself. Sure has created a great deal of knicker-wadding though.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

So big deal the guy wants to do something "different" to prove the timing of his last face-to-face with his woman.

He's not suggested anything illegal, immoral or fattening.

I think it's kind of creative myself. Sure has created a great deal of knicker-wadding though.

Right, hey do what you want. I assure you there is no knicker wadding here. My wife is here. There is no need to proe the timing of your "last" face to face meeting, only one time in the last two years, doesn't matter which one, doesn't matter if more than one.

But you are free to be as creative as you like. Good luck.

[TJM 0]

Yes. She trusts me. Plus I am not going to drive 2 hours to Montpelier each time I need something notarized, nor am I going to drive to the bank to do it. I do most of my work from my home office. Someone needs to get over it...whatever it is. I am saving the planet by cutting down on driving. People that pull visa frauds are breaking the law. People that opull visa frauds would think nothing of falsifying a notary stamp. You are kidding, right?

Gary: We clearly have a different opinion about the legitimacy of notarized documents and if you check with the US Immigration you will see that they hold the use of notarized documents in high regard. They require that signatures be notarized on many of their most important transactions and they prosecute notaries that commit fraud to ensure that notarized signatures can be relied on as much as possible. Maybe Alla is aware of the court case where US Immigration and Customs prosecuted a notary who is facing 20 years in prison because he helped foreigner's immigrate illegally into the US. They obviously place a tremendous value in the use of notaries ... my question continues to be ... since notarized documents are used by US Immigration is it possible that they would take the position that a notary could be used to prove conclusively that the two people were together.

Despite your low regard for the dependency of notaries the US government including USCIS relies of them heavily. They clearly understand their value. Even if you believe a notary stamp is no more reliable than a visa/passport stamp what would you rather have if you were looking for proof that two people were together ... a visa stamp that proves one of the parties was in the same country as their partner ... or ... a notarized document that proves the two parties were in the same room at the same time. Yes it is possible that the notary could be committing fraud and it is possible that the customs agent could be committing fraud but clearly the notarized document showing that the petitioner and the fiancee signed the same document at the same time in the same place is much more valuable.

Thanks for your interest in this topic ... even though we don't agree about the legitimacy of notaries we both care enough about the K1 process to take the time to explore and debate the issues.

[Nik+Heather 121]

If I put myself in the place of a adjudicator I would not want to face my supervisor if someone appealed or objected to an RFE triggered by evidence that included a notarized document showing that the couple were together.

Just so you know, those adjudicators probably don't ever get reprimanded for being too cautious about something, and believe me, if I knew how to get them reprimanded (or whatever) for fake RFEs, I sure as hell would, along with a whole army of people from the AOS forums!

And if they don't get called on issuing RFEs against things which are FACTUAL (ie: Your medical (dated April 28, 2009) was more than 12 months ago), they certainly will never get in trouble for RFEs based on things which are purely a judgment call. As it's a judgment call, you'll never get USCIS to say one way or the other. The leave themselves open for a lot of interpretation - intentionally..

[TJM 0]

I will also add, as some others have, that this is not the time to see what you can get away with. Try out the new rope, as Pushbrk puts it. This is the time to go along and do like everyone else does to get approved as soon as possible and have as little aggravation in your life as possible. The adjudicator CAN deny the petition and the denial may opr may not stand up to tn appeal...if you have a lot of money and time to pursue and appeal...go for it and let us know how it works for you.

You are getting some advice here from some very experienced people tht have helped a lot of people get visas successfully, smoothly, quietly and without incident. every so often we get the (I don't have to do this" kind of guy here and they never last long. The government can mess with your life big time. They have the ability to play the game MUCH better than you. Be careful and follow the experience of a lot of people who are trying to help you and giving good advice.

Gary ... this is the 4th time I have had to point out that I have intended all along to take the advice of people who have already been through the ropes. I am using visa stamps ... photos .. airline documents and more. I have said from the beginning that I am intrigued about the idea of using notarized documents and the reason for my question was to see if it was possible to streamline the process for future VJ members. I am not resisting the advice of anyone nor do I intend to only rely on a notarized document in the future unless the USCIS would formally take that position. They ask for certain important transactions to be notarized so they clearly see the value of using a notary ... since so many government agencies and financial institutions rely on notaries I just thought it was possible that the USCIS might go on record and state that this was a very reliable way to prove two people had met.

I don't know where anyone got the idea that I was not following the recommendations of the VJ members and since I have pointed this out many times I don't know where the hostility comes from. I am sorry if I am aggravating anyone.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Gary: We clearly have a different opinion about the legitimacy of notarized documents and if you check with the US Immigration you will see that they hold the use of notarized documents in high regard. They require that signatures be notarized on many of their most important transactions and they prosecute notaries that commit fraud to ensure that notarized signatures can be relied on as much as possible. Maybe Alla is aware of the court case where US Immigration and Customs prosecuted a notary who is facing 20 years in prison because he helped foreigner's immigrate illegally into the US. They obviously place a tremendous value in the use of notaries ... my question continues to be ... since notarized documents are used by US Immigration is it possible that they would take the position that a notary could be used to prove conclusively that the two people were together.

Despite your low regard for the dependency of notaries the US government including USCIS relies of them heavily. They clearly understand their value. Even if you believe a notary stamp is no more reliable than a visa/passport stamp what would you rather have if you were looking for proof that two people were together ... a visa stamp that proves one of the parties was in the same country as their partner ... or ... a notarized document that proves the two parties were in the same room at the same time. Yes it is possible that the notary could be committing fraud and it is possible that the customs agent could be committing fraud but clearly the notarized document showing that the petitioner and the fiancee signed the same document at the same time in the same place is much more valuable.

Thanks for your interest in this topic ... even though we don't agree about the legitimacy of notaries we both care enough about the K1 process to take the time to explore and debate the issues.

I DID check with USCIS. USCIS does not require ANY of the papers or documents in the visa process to be notarized. You will not need to notarize anything from petition to green card. I promise. Maybe those are not important documents? They used to require notaries for several documents, but not anymore. They determined it made no difference.

Your argument is not with me, I really couldn't possibly care less. You asked and as a fellow VJer that has been there, done that and has a few T-shirts to prove it, I gave my opinion and further asked the opinion of a high placed USCIS official. What I would rather have is not important, I do not make the decision. I told you what worked for me and what has worked for thousands of others. I never said your notarized documents are "bad", I only say that from what I have been told by a USCIS supervisor and an adjudicator is that it would be a bad idea to try to use that as your ONLY documentation. FWIW, Passport stamps won't work for your ONLY documentation either. But you have no need to worry, you have passport stamps and photos. (Also it does not matter WHERE you meet, it does not have to be in her country or yours, you just have to meet in person...somewhere, anywhere) It does not matter how you get there, many suggest airplane boarding passes...good stuff, but a train ticket is just as good, or a receipt for the gas you bought in canada while visiting your Canadian fiancee. (they don't stamp your passport going to Canada, yet no small amount of Canadian fiancees get here) But if you think a gasoline reciept alone will do it, you are wrong. If you rthink a photo alone will do it, you are wrong. It is a body of evidence that you have met.

Presented with a passport stamp, a photo and a notarized document I would never question you had met in person. There is NO WAY, not even possible, I would believe you had ever been together if a notarized document was the ONLY thing you presented. WHY? Because it is something you COULD fake easily yourself (and with your fiancee and a friend who is a notary) And it is exactly what I would expect from someone that DID NOT have other proof they had met because they never really met. Instant RFE from me!

Remember, the USCIS adjusdicator just sends an RFE asking for more evidence, it would be the fraudster that doesn't respond with apporpriate proof. The adjusdicator would have no trouble denying a petition for no response to an RFE.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Is it just me, or is there now enough hot air in this thread to remake "Around the World in Eighty Days"?

[TJM 0]

I DID check with USCIS. USCIS does not require ANY of the papers or documents in the visa process to be notarized. You will not need to notarize anything from petition to green card. I promise. Maybe those are not important documents? They used to require notaries for several documents, but not anymore. They determined it made no difference.

Your argument is not with me, I really couldn't possibly care less. You asked and as a fellow VJer that has been there, done that and has a few T-shirts to prove it, I gave my opinion and further asked the opinion of a high placed USCIS official. What I would rather have is not important, I do not make the decision. I told you what worked for me and what has worked for thousands of others. I never said your notarized documents are "bad", I only say that from what I have been told by a USCIS supervisor and an adjudicator is that it would be a bad idea to try to use that as your ONLY documentation. FWIW, Passport stamps won't work for your ONLY documentation either. But you have no need to worry, you have passport stamps and photos. (Also it does not matter WHERE you meet, it does not have to be in her country or yours, you just have to meet in person...somewhere, anywhere) It does not matter how you get there, many suggest airplane boarding passes...good stuff, but a train ticket is just as good, or a receipt for the gas you bought in canada while visiting your Canadian fiancee. (they don't stamp your passport going to Canada, yet no small amount of Canadian fiancees get here) But if you think a gasoline reciept alone will do it, you are wrong. If you rthink a photo alone will do it, you are wrong. It is a body of evidence that you have met.

Presented with a passport stamp, a photo and a notarized document I would never question you had met in person. There is NO WAY, not even possible, I would believe you had ever been together if a notarized document was the ONLY thing you presented. WHY? Because it is something you COULD fake easily yourself (and with your fiancee and a friend who is a notary) And it is exactly what I would expect from someone that DID NOT have other proof they had met because they never really met. Instant RFE from me!

Remember, the USCIS adjusdicator just sends an RFE asking for more evidence, it would be the fraudster that doesn't respond with apporpriate proof. The adjusdicator would have no trouble denying a petition for no response to an RFE.

Gary: Thanks for asking and I will assume that they will not just accept one item of proof even if it is very reliable evidence.

When they told you they don't rely on notarized documents they must have been talking about only the information we submit as petitioners. If you or anyone else wanted to appeal something and you wanted the USCIS to send you information from your file that you submitted they then would require that your signature was notarized (or that you must submit a sworn declaration that was taken under penalty of perjury). You can see that if someone else asked for your information that you would want it protected and this is when they protect you by insisting that you have your signature notarized. As long as we are submitting info to them they don't need evidence that we are who we say we are. When they need positive proof of who you are they rely on a notary. (See form G-639)

Thanks again

[john_and_marlene 162]

I haven't been able to find 3 legged pants for sale--not even online. Where can we get them?

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

When Gary is talking about 'no notarized documents from petition to green card', I believe he's talking only about USCIS, and primarily if the case is relatively routine. At the consulate stage, it's a whole 'nother ball game. Many consulates routinely require notarized documents before they'll approve a visa application. The one nearly all consulates would need to have notarized is the 'quit claim' required for derivative minor children. The consulate in my wife's home country routinely asks for a "timeline of relationship", signed and notarized by the petitioner.

As I said before, the subject of using notarized documents as proof of meeting has come up before on this forum, and it's always resulted in a debate. I've never really understood why it causes so much contention, and frankly find some of the arguments against it to be laughable. I understand and agree completely with the argument that a notarized document is insufficient as sole evidence, but I think the same is true of virtually ANY single piece of evidence. What I don't understand are arguments that including a notarized document along with the 'regular' evidence is somehow bad, or might actually make things worse.

For example, the argument that a USCIS adjudicator might presume the relationship is a setup because the couple went to the extraordinary length to get a document notarized - something they say no 'normal' couple would do in the course of a legitimate relationship. This is completely ludicrous. In Gary's interview, the VSC director actually suggested submitting a ransom-style photograph of the couple holding a dated newspaper! Does this sound like something a 'normal' couple would do if they weren't specifically thinking of evidence for a visa petition?

The same applies at the consulate stage. Anyone who has dealt with a high fraud consulate knows you are already expected to submit evidence that goes far beyond what any 'normal' couple would do, including preparation and submission of notarized documents. I think it's delusional to believe you're going to get a visa out of one of these consulates if you aren't thinking about the visa process while you're together with your fiancee, and still have an opportunity to collect the evidence you'll need. I've seen too many cases where US citizens went to meet someone in person, had a whirlwind romance and got engaged, and didn't start looking into a visa petition until after they returned to the US. They're stunned when their fiancee gets slapped down at the interview for lack of evidence.

I also can't fathom how anyone could contend that a notary stamp is easy to forge without also acknowledging that a rubber visa stamp is probably even easier to forge, especially when a photocopy of the visa stamp is being submitted. At least with the notarized document you would be submitting the original, since USCIS generally requires originals of signed documents. I think it's also a stretch to imply that a notarized document wouldn't be trusted because it may be possible to find a notary who is willing to risk their license, and possibly even criminal charges, for applying their stamp to a document when they didn't actually witness the signature. Why would a notary stamp be universally accepted as proof that a signature is valid for nearly every type of document where such proof is required, but would be suspect for something as mundane as proving two people actually met each other? And yet, photocopies of boarding passes, visa stamps, and photos (which don't require a signature of any kind, and cannot be reliably verified) are more reliable evidence? Give me a break!

To anyone considering adding a notarized document to their collection of evidence that they have met their fiancee, I say go for it. I defy anyone to provide any evidence whatever that it's ever harmed anyone's case.