Complicated Love Story - Help!

[SunShowers87 0]

Right, this denial actually makes sense. I see what you mean about them being strict, but in this particular case, the petitioner was not able to give any Photographic evidence of them together, due to the father's cultural aversion to taking photos of his unmarried daughters. Therefore, the petitioner was only able to prove that he had traveled to Iran, with his passport stamps and itinerary, but he wasn't able to prove that he had been in physical contact with the beneficiary.

I know photographs are usually secondary evidence unless they are time-stamped, but I think if they go in partnership with the itinerary/passport stamp, etc etc, and notarized letters of friends/family who witnessed us together...plus the fact that I have a print-screen print-out of the photos in Microsoft Office Picture MAnager, with the date embedded in the photo clearly shown....

Otherwise I will try to go visit him in Febrary, and we will wait to start the application then. (I already do have my ticket bought). We were planning not to do that, however, since I am trying to find another job...the State laid everyone off last month, so I am trying desperately to get hired. I have a very promising interview coming up on Monday, and if that goes well, I'm a little wary about asking for time off in February, so soon after being hired.

Otherwise, I'd be back to see him in a hearbeat, no questions asked...

[SunShowers87 0]

Right, this denial actually makes sense. I see what you mean about them being strict, but in this particular case, the petitioner was not able to give any Photographic evidence of them together, due to the father's cultural aversion to taking photos of his unmarried daughters. Therefore, the petitioner was only able to prove that he had traveled to Iran, with his passport stamps and itinerary, but he wasn't able to prove that he had been in physical contact with the beneficiary.

I know photographs are usually secondary evidence unless they are time-stamped, but I think if they go in partnership with the itinerary/passport stamp, etc etc, and notarized letters of friends/family who witnessed us together...plus the fact that I have a print-screen print-out of the photos in Microsoft Office Picture MAnager, with the date embedded in the photo clearly shown....

Otherwise I will try to go visit him in Febrary, and we will wait to start the application then. (I already do have my ticket bought). We were planning not to do that, however, since I am trying to find another job...the State laid everyone off last month, so I am trying desperately to get hired. I have a very promising interview coming up on Monday, and if that goes well, I'm a little wary about asking for time off in February, so soon after being hired.

Otherwise, I'd be back to see him in a hearbeat, no questions asked...

[pushbrk 12,894]

I know photographs are usually secondary evidence unless they are time-stamped, but I think if they go in partnership with the itinerary/passport stamp, etc etc, and notarized letters of friends/family who witnessed us together...plus the fact that I have a print-screen print-out of the photos in Microsoft Office Picture MAnager, with the date embedded in the photo clearly shown....

As you were typing your response, I opened a few photos in the same program and the ones that came from my newest camera that were directly uploaded from the memory card to my laptop, do show what camera model was used and the date taken when you click on the properties of the photo opened in MS Ofc. picture manager. A screen print would be as good as you can get. If you read some of the other decisions, they do mention accepting "film dated" photos. This MIGHT work. If you're going in February anyway, I think I would get everything ready and file when you get back. Up to you though.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

EXIF information in a digital photo is not always included by every camera, and it's abundantly easy to edit after the photo was taken. It was intended to be useful to photographers for organizing their photos, and not as a means to reliably determine the date a photograph was taken.

The requirement for "film dated" photos is archaic, but there was a time when that method would have been a little more reliable. Before digital photo editing technology existed, it would have been difficult to change the date that was burned onto the film by the camera. However, even at that time, if you had a negative that was not film dated but had access to a dark room then it would have been relatively easy to add a date when making the print. It would also have been considerably less expensive than jumping on a plane to make another trip.

If you can provide adequate primary evidence that the petitioner and beneficiary were in the same place at the same time then USCIS will more or less take your word for it that the photos were taken at that time. Without the primary evidence, the photos mean absolutely nothing. Under 8 CFR 103.2, the evidence provided must establish eligibility. If it doesn't then a presumption of ineligibility exists which is the petitioner's burden to overcome. Chapter 11.1 of the AFM says that primary evidence must, on it's face, establish the fact in question. Secondary evidence makes it more likely that the fact in question is true, but does not do so on it's face. Adjudicators use their discretion when considering secondary evidence, which includes considering it's source. Secondary evidence manufactured by the petitioner is the least credible source.

[Aztec&Taino 144]

EXIF information in a digital photo is not always included by every camera, and it's abundantly easy to edit after the photo was taken. It was intended to be useful to photographers for organizing their photos, and not as a means to reliably determine the date a photograph was taken.

The requirement for "film dated" photos is archaic, but there was a time when that method would have been a little more reliable. Before digital photo editing technology existed, it would have been difficult to change the date that was burned onto the film by the camera. However, even at that time, if you had a negative that was not film dated but had access to a dark room then it would have been relatively easy to add a date when making the print. It would also have been considerably less expensive than jumping on a plane to make another trip.

If you can provide adequate primary evidence that the petitioner and beneficiary were in the same place at the same time then USCIS will more or less take your word for it that the photos were taken at that time. Without the primary evidence, the photos mean absolutely nothing. Under 8 CFR 103.2, the evidence provided must establish eligibility. If it doesn't then a presumption of ineligibility exists which is the petitioner's burden to overcome. Chapter 11.1 of the AFM says that primary evidence must, on it's face, establish the fact in question. Secondary evidence makes it more likely that the fact in question is true, but does not do so on it's face. Adjudicators use their discretion when considering secondary evidence, which includes considering it's source. Secondary evidence manufactured by the petitioner is the least credible source.

Jim, I am a fan of your intelligent posts!

But this is precisely the OP's problem. She has evidence that she was in France, but her fiance (the beneficiary) does not have any proof that he was in France (other than their pictures). He did not keep his train tickets, does not have receipts for purchases made with his credit card, or anything. Since he has his special status in Italy, he was able to travel to France without getting a stamp in his passport. I think the OP would, quite honestly, be "risking" a denial if she were to send her packet as it is.

OP, lying about seeing him in your latest trip to Italy is a definitely NO NO because if you lie there would be serious penalties for both of you. Also, by waiting to see him again and collect solid evidence of your meeting you could continue to gather evidence of your continued relationship (phone calls, chats, letters, e-mails, etc.) which would be useful for your interview. Also, let's remember that the beneficiary is from Ivory Coast and while I do not have any specific knowledge of that country, we do know from other VJ members that some African consulates are very difficult to overcome, therefore the more solid evidence the OP can gather and collect now (even before sending the petition) the better of she will be down the road.

Best wishes!

[pushbrk 12,894]

EXIF information in a digital photo is not always included by every camera, and it's abundantly easy to edit after the photo was taken. It was intended to be useful to photographers for organizing their photos, and not as a means to reliably determine the date a photograph was taken.

The requirement for "film dated" photos is archaic, but there was a time when that method would have been a little more reliable. Before digital photo editing technology existed, it would have been difficult to change the date that was burned onto the film by the camera. However, even at that time, if you had a negative that was not film dated but had access to a dark room then it would have been relatively easy to add a date when making the print. It would also have been considerably less expensive than jumping on a plane to make another trip.

If you can provide adequate primary evidence that the petitioner and beneficiary were in the same place at the same time then USCIS will more or less take your word for it that the photos were taken at that time. Without the primary evidence, the photos mean absolutely nothing. Under 8 CFR 103.2, the evidence provided must establish eligibility. If it doesn't then a presumption of ineligibility exists which is the petitioner's burden to overcome. Chapter 11.1 of the AFM says that primary evidence must, on it's face, establish the fact in question. Secondary evidence makes it more likely that the fact in question is true, but does not do so on it's face. Adjudicators use their discretion when considering secondary evidence, which includes considering it's source. Secondary evidence manufactured by the petitioner is the least credible source.

I think the bottom line is the most likely result of filing now, even with the screen shots mentioned is a petition denial that may well be overturned upon appeal. However, the couple will be united in the USA several months sooner if they wait until after the next trip to file with clear primary evidence of meeting.

[SunShowers87 0]

So just to follow up....we realized that back in April, my fiance had popped his arm out of its socket (I know, ick), and I had to take him to the emergency room in the city where I was living. I had filled out the paperwork for the address, etc. He is in France right now again for a week, and said he would go to the hospital next week and see if he can get a copy of the records.

Would this be sufficient?

[Robert de Bonda 3]

So just to follow up....we realized that back in April, my fiance had popped his arm out of its socket (I know, ick), and I had to take him to the emergency room in the city where I was living. I had filled out the paperwork for the address, etc. He is in France right now again for a week, and said he would go to the hospital next week and see if he can get a copy of the records.

Would this be sufficient?

This puts him in the same place as you within 2 years of submitting the I-129F Petition. Even better if your name appears on the documents that you filled out for the hospital.

Go for it!!!!

[pushbrk 12,894]

So just to follow up....we realized that back in April, my fiance had popped his arm out of its socket (I know, ick), and I had to take him to the emergency room in the city where I was living. I had filled out the paperwork for the address, etc. He is in France right now again for a week, and said he would go to the hospital next week and see if he can get a copy of the records.

Would this be sufficient?

Probably. The combination of your primary evidence of being in France and his hospital bill during the same time from a French hospital will probably work. Make sure you add a brief explanation of the evidence.

In another thread you worried about the affidavit of support. Just to clarify, that's not needed until the interview stage.

[MochiKamo 93]

I've wondered about the possibility of holding dated material such as newspapers to demonstrate that the picture was not taken prior to that date. Would that be too silly?

I'm going to Tokyo next week so I'm going to gather some more evidence in case of a RFE.

[Fandango 1,439]

I've wondered about the possibility of holding dated material such as newspapers to demonstrate that the picture was not taken prior to that date. Would that be too silly?

I'm going to Tokyo next week so I'm going to gather some more evidence in case of a RFE.

I'd just take a pic in front of a cinema which shows the current releases, but that's just me.

[Aztec&Taino 144]

So just to follow up....we realized that back in April, my fiance had popped his arm out of its socket (I know, ick), and I had to take him to the emergency room in the city where I was living. I had filled out the paperwork for the address, etc. He is in France right now again for a week, and said he would go to the hospital next week and see if he can get a copy of the records.

Would this be sufficient?

If the medical record and report clearly show his name, date, and place, I would think it might work. Remember that any document submitted to USCIS that is not in English needs to be accompanied by a translation.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

But this is precisely the OP's problem. She has evidence that she was in France, but her fiance (the beneficiary) does not have any proof that he was in France (other than their pictures). He did not keep his train tickets, does not have receipts for purchases made with his credit card, or anything. Since he has his special status in Italy, he was able to travel to France without getting a stamp in his passport. I think the OP would, quite honestly, be "risking" a denial if she were to send her packet as it is.

Understood. I was mainly addressing the suggestion of using the EXIF information from the photo as evidence of when the photo was taken. I was making the point that the EXIF information was less reliable than the photo image itself because it's easier to edit. I also explained that USCIS will tend to believe your secondary evidence if you provide believable primary evidence, and disregard your secondary evidence if you don't have the primary evidence.

I've wondered about the possibility of holding dated material such as newspapers to demonstrate that the picture was not taken prior to that date. Would that be too silly?

I'm going to Tokyo next week so I'm going to gather some more evidence in case of a RFE.

No, not silly. Others have done exactly that. It can be a little creepy because people might look at you as if you're posing for a ransom note.

All of this boils down to how much weight the adjudicator is willing to give the evidence. In the days of PhotoShop and photo-realistic computer graphics, there will never be any guarantee that a photo has not been fabricated or doctored to appear to show something that isn't real. If you have primary evidence that strongly indicates that the photo could be real, then the adjudicator is not likely to question it. If you don't have that primary evidence, then the photograph will usually not be presumed to either establish that the proposed fact is true on it's face (as required by the AFM), or establish that the petitioner is eligible (as required by US law).

It's possible to get irrefutable evidence, as long as you know in advance that you're going to need it and prepare for it. Trying to get that evidence after the fact is difficult. How many people sit in a restaurant or stroll down the street with their fiancee thinking "Someday I'm going to have to prove beyond a doubt that this really happened"?

I knew on my third trip to Vietnam that I would be filing a fiancee visa petition when I returned. I knew because we planned a large formal engagement ceremony and party for that trip. I brought some of the documents I knew my fiancee would need to sign with me, such as her G-325A and her letter of intent. I also knew we'd be spending a day in Ho Chi Minh City before I returned, which is where the US consulate is located. I already had all of the regular evidence people usually collect - boarding passes, stamped passports and visas, hotel receipts, local transportation tickets, and lots of photos. Just to clinch the deal, we decided to get our letters of intent notarized at the US Citizen Services office at the US consulate. It's not necessary to get the letters of intent notarized, and it's certainly not necessary to get this done at a US consulate, but I figured USCIS would never question a certification from a US consular officer that indicated we both identified ourselves, and were in the same room at the same time. I pointed out the notarized letters of intent on the first page of the attachment for question 18.

[pushbrk 12,894]

Understood. I was mainly addressing the suggestion of using the EXIF information from the photo as evidence of when the photo was taken. I was making the point that the EXIF information was less reliable than the photo image itself because it's easier to edit. I also explained that USCIS will tend to believe your secondary evidence if you provide believable primary evidence, and disregard your secondary evidence if you don't have the primary evidence.

Exactly, which begs the question, "Why send the secondary evidence in the first place?" My answer is that the secondary evidence of meeting is really evidence of a bona fide relationship, not evidence of meeting. Send it. It serves a purpose but not usually the purpose of evidence of meeting in person.

Lots of petitions are approved without any photos of the couple together. Including some evidence of a bona fide relationship with the petition, can help get the interviewing Consular officer thinking positively in the moments before the interview. In some cases, this is critical.

[Aztec&Taino 144]

I wonder what the OP will decide to do now that she has been given several explanations and courses of action?