Declaration of Consummation

[SteveInBostonI130 3,432]

13 hours ago, HalgiS said:

Not explicit details. More so outlining marital relations/consumption happened while together. I’ve seen this mentioned on quite a few websites and guides. 

 

Typically a cover letter for the entire I-130 that shows the list of attachments, including the boarding passes and photos is sufficient.  For example:

• Evidence of being together after the Zoom marriage: boarding passes for flight xx//xx/xx to xx/xx/xx, 2 pages
• Evidence of being together after the Zoom marriage:  photos from xx//xx/xx to xx/xx/xx, 5 pages

[Sukie 1,459]

I think many of us think of "consummation" in terms of definition #3.  As far as USCIS is concerned, it merely means to have fulfilled the requirements to have been in the same place at the same time.

 

consummate

 

kŏn′sə-māt″

transitive verb

1. To bring to completion or fruition; conclude.
2. To realize or achieve; fulfill.
3. To complete (a marriage) with the first act of sexual intercourse after the ceremony.

 

Sukie in NY

[top_secret 2,410]

In our case we included a very brief narrative about a few key moments in the development of our relationship as part of our cover letter.  Details like how we came to know each other, how long we have been communicating, when and where we first met, when and where I met her family, when and where we spent time together, when and where I proposed, and why we chose to get married when and where we did.  It was only a couple of paragraphs and nothing explicit.

 

I have heard of only one instance where the topic of '"consummation" of a Utah online marriage has been directly been raised in a CR-1 case.  In that particular case, a pre-interview counsel/document checker (not sure of their title) was unfamiliar with Utah online marriage process and questioned the beneficiary about it.  Upon having it explained, the pre-interview counsel/document checker concluded that it was a proxy marriage and asked the beneficiary if she had proof of meeting after the marriage.  The beneficiary had photocopies of her husband's passport stamps with her.  The pre-interview counsel/document checker looked at the dates on the stamps and everything was fine.  '"Consummation" was satisfactorily proven by a photocopy of passport stamps in that specific  case.

[BLC 112]

I promise, USCIS does not want to know about if and when you ‘did it’, if that’s what you mean. They just want to know you’ve physically been in each other’s presence after marriage.  

[HalgiS 0]

Thank you all for the replies. For sources, there is a multitude of websites that talk about it, including a VJ partner that has an article on it. But it seems in practice it’s different. 

[pushbrk 12,870]

2 hours ago, HalgiS said:

Thank you all for the replies. For sources, there is a multitude of websites that talk about it, including a VJ partner that has an article on it. But it seems in practice it’s different. 

Agree with all the above quote except the affidavit.  What affidavit, saying what, and from whom?  Third party affidavits about your relationship are useless, at best, and make you look desperate, at worst.  They can hurt, and really don't help.  My other nit to pick with it is the use of the word "proof".  You can provide evidence, not proof.  They are not the same thing.

[roughlyworried 5]

2 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

Agree with all the above quote except the affidavit.  What affidavit, saying what, and from whom?  Third party affidavits about your relationship are useless, at best, and make you look desperate, at worst.  They can hurt, and really don't help.  My other nit to pick with it is the use of the word "proof".  You can provide evidence, not proof.  They are not the same thing.

not to hijack the post, but this is something that has actually been concerning me. My wife’s best friend for some reason called me boyfriend instead of husband in her affidavit (even though she knows we are married)  and we missed it. I’m actually really concerned it maybe a problem for us leading to potentially a denial, but I have no idea of the implications.

[pushbrk 12,870]

2 minutes ago, roughlyworried said:

not to hijack the post, but this is something that has actually been concerning me. My wife’s best friend for some reason called me boyfriend instead of husband in her affidavit (even though she knows we are married)  and we missed it. I’m actually really concerned it maybe a problem for us leading to potentially a denial, but I have no idea of the implications.

I think your post, actually does have relevance to the OP's topic.  As for your own concern, please note I used the term "useless".  I doubt anybody will ever take the time to read the affidavit.  If they do, I wouldn't worry about it. 

[roughlyworried 5]

17 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

I think your post, actually does have relevance to the OP's topic.  As for your own concern, please note I used the term "useless".  I doubt anybody will ever take the time to read the affidavit.  If they do, I wouldn't worry about it. 

That’s comforting. Just made me think when you said it can be damaging.

 

 Actually you might have more knowledge of this than me. Since it was in Chinese, is it common for them to use nan pengyou sometimes when referencing a partner/husband? I was under the impression it’s not, but that’s a little detail to add. 

Edited February 13, 2023 by roughlyworried

[pushbrk 12,870]

9 minutes ago, roughlyworried said:

That’s comforting. Just made me think when you said it can be damaging.

 

 Actually you might have more knowledge of this than me. Since it was in Chinese, is it common for them to use nan pengyou sometimes when referencing a partner/husband? I was under the impression it’s not, but that’s a little detail to add. 

My ex and I used Laopo and Laogong, which do not mean husband or wife, either.  No distinction in Mandarin between me/my/mine or you/your/yours either.  If the Chinese original said Laogong, it would properly be translated to boyfriend or sweetheart.

 

[roughlyworried 5]

1 minute ago, pushbrk said:

My ex and I used Laopo and Laogong, which do not mean husband or wife, either.  No distinction in Mandarin between me/my/mine or you/your/yours either.  If the Chinese original said Laogong, it would properly be translated to boyfriend or sweetheart.

 

Her friend actually used nan pengyou, so I think it does specifically mean boyfriend.

[pushbrk 12,870]

3 minutes ago, roughlyworried said:

Her friend actually used nan pengyou, so I think it does specifically mean boyfriend.

My Mandarin is minimal.  I know more insults than compliments.  Still, I wouldn't worry about it. If she knew you before marriage, it's natural and appropriate to call you boyfriend.