Must apply for I-751 or Apply for N-400 instead?

[johnandmhel 3]

My wife and I realized her GC expires next year on 1/30/19.

 

However, technically, she can apply for Naturalization three months before her three-year anniversary of entry into the USA which in her case will be about 2/8/19 as she arrived in the USA on 5/8/16.

 

So it seems that we stupidly have to apply for two things:

 

1.  Removing Conditions on Residency (I-751 Form) on or about 11/1/18 this year as it should be filed three months before her GC will expire.  She gets back a Receipt Notice that shows she's in process and to show that (in addition to) with her GC after it expires on 1/30/19. 

This costs $695 plus the $80 for Biometrics.

 

2.  Then in mid-February, we want to apply for her Citizenship (N-400 Form) and that requires another $595 plus $80 biometrics again.  Biometrics twice?  We already paid for them when she did her Adjustment of Status from K-1 to CF1 (her current status on her GC).  I guess they want to make sure she is her again and again!

 

The crazy thing is that I was told today by CIS that the processing for I-751's is between 15 to 17 months and I would imagine the processing for the N-400's (Citizenship) is less so she will get her Naturalization Certificate before ever getting her Conditions on Residency adjudicated! 

QUESTION:  Is there some way that we can just forgo having to apply for the I-751 and just go directly to the N-400 for Citizenship?  I'm guessing no as government always wants to make life difficult (currently my 2017 tax return refund got messed up as someone data entered my last name wrong!) so even though there will just be a period of about a week and half or two weeks where she would be technically illegal (i.e. period of 1/31/19 to 2/08/19 and then we would mail in the N-400) we still need to keep her legal throughout the whole time that it she's in process for both the I-751 and the N-400. 

 

If I end up having to pay and file for both, then I still want to have the meeting (if there is one)  to adjudicate the removal conditions of residency even if she already has her citizenship by that time!  I will have paid about $780 for it and I would like to at least have lunch with the adjudicator! (kidding)

 

Is there something I'm missing here or is this sounds about right?

 

*** Thank you for all who can give good sound advice and thoughts.  Live long and prosper. ***

 

 

John

[Dashinka 24,489]

Simply put, no, your wife cannot forego applying for the I751 since she is currently a conditional resident and has to prove that the conditions can be removed.  The N400 does not prove that conditions can be removed.

 

Btw, I think you have to check the dates you quoted, the N400 can only be filed under the three year rule three years less 90 days from her 3rd anniversary of becoming an LPR.  If her two year GC expires on 1/30/19, she would not be able to file the N400 until 90 days prior to 1/30/20.

 

Good Luck!

Edited April 11, 2018 by Bill & Katya

[cyclone27 710]

Sadly you will have the cough up twice. 

[tsabbas 47]

Yes, sadly conditions have to be removed before she is eligible for citizenship. We're going through the process now too! But I think you might be misinterpreting the residency required for citizenship. She has to be a legal permanent resident for 3 years, not just living in the USA for 3 years. She can apply 90 days before the 3 year anniversary of the resident since date on her green card. 

Edited April 11, 2018 by tsabbas
Wrong spelling

[johnandmhel 3]

Thanks Bill & Katya, Cyclone27, and tsabbas,

 

That's what I thought (have to file both forms and biometrics)  and now more bad news for the wife == that she needs to wait longer to become a USC.  Someone once told me that the magic date was the date of her arrival in the USA as the clock starts counting then as she's admitted with the intention of becoming a LPR (as is the case with a K-1 as the intent is to marry and change status to CF1 or CR1 (I've heard both) so it shouldn't count AGAINST YOU that the clock starts ticking from another date. 

 

As the way Bill & Katya explains it (N400 can only be filed under the three year rule three years less 90 days from her 3rd anniversary of becoming an LPR) that means the date of her GC says she's a RESIDENT SINCE 1/30/17 is really the magic date and wipes off the map all that time from 5/8/2016 when she arrived in the USA to 1/29/17 (a difference of 267 DAYS or 8 MONTHS AND 22 DAYS)!  Arrrrghhhh!!!!

 

So instead, it means that she would be able to apply for citizenship on/after 11/30/19 as this would be three months before her third anniversary of GC RESIDENT SINCE DATE. 

 

Somehow I feel this is not right though as it makes it unfair for those who get their initial two-year GC much later than those who get faster.  If someone gets their two-year green card in under six months,  then he or she is doing much better than someone who took a year to get it towards getting their citizenship.  The clock only starts ticking with the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD as opposed to the DATE THEY ARRIVED IN THE USA.  The latter though is FAIRER as that ENTRY DATE TO THE USA cannot be fault of government as can be the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD in being slow to process.

 

So what's your thought on that? Am I making sense or is this probably the immigration policy of a more democratic country other than ours?

 

Best and then some,

 

John

 

[cyclone27 710]

One of the advantages of  CR1 over K1 or adjusting. On entry a CR1 or IR1 is a resident on entry date. 

[Dashinka 24,489]

22 minutes ago, johnandmhel said:

Thanks Bill & Katya, Cyclone27, and tsabbas,

 

That's what I thought (have to file both forms and biometrics)  and now more bad news for the wife == that she needs to wait longer to become a USC.  Someone once told me that the magic date was the date of her arrival in the USA as the clock starts counting then as she's admitted with the intention of becoming a LPR (as is the case with a K-1 as the intent is to marry and change status to CF1 or CR1 (I've heard both) so it shouldn't count AGAINST YOU that the clock starts ticking from another date. 

 

As the way Bill & Katya explains it (N400 can only be filed under the three year rule three years less 90 days from her 3rd anniversary of becoming an LPR) that means the date of her GC says she's a RESIDENT SINCE 1/30/17 is really the magic date and wipes off the map all that time from 5/8/2016 when she arrived in the USA to 1/29/17 (a difference of 267 DAYS or 8 MONTHS AND 22 DAYS)!  Arrrrghhhh!!!!

 

So instead, it means that she would be able to apply for citizenship on/after 11/30/19 as this would be three months before her third anniversary of GC RESIDENT SINCE DATE. 

 

Somehow I feel this is not right though as it makes it unfair for those who get their initial two-year GC much later than those who get faster.  If someone gets their two-year green card in under six months,  then he or she is doing much better than someone who took a year to get it towards getting their citizenship.  The clock only starts ticking with the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD as opposed to the DATE THEY ARRIVED IN THE USA.  The latter though is FAIRER as that ENTRY DATE TO THE USA cannot be fault of government as can be the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD in being slow to process.

 

So what's your thought on that? Am I making sense or is this probably the immigration policy of a more democratic country other than ours?

 

Best and then some,

 

John

 

I guess technically, a person is living here out-of-status until they get the GC which to me is why they start counting from that date.  Of course in the case of a K1, the out-of-status period is forgiven when the adjustment is filed.  One thing to think about, say someone comes here on a student visa (or any other non-immigrant visa) and they marry a USC three years or more after their legal arrival, should they be immediately eligible for naturalization?  The only way to avoid the ROC step would be to be married more than two years before the GC is issued, then the GC would not be conditional, but the person would still have to wait three years before they can attempt to naturalize.

 

One other thing to think about is that the ROC and N400 are separate, even though the ROC has to be approved prior to gaining citizenship, a person does not have to wait for approval of the ROC before submitting the N400.  In our case we filed the ROC in December 2016, and the processing times slowed down completely right around that point, we were looking at 15 months or more for the 10yr GC, so we filed for naturalization when the window opened and we had a combined I751 interview first and then my wife had her N400 interview immediately afterward and both were approved.  This happened yesterday almost three years and five months after my wife’s (at that time fiancé) arrival.

 

Overall, the ROC step is a burden with its own cost, but I guess we can only blame those that came before and abused the marriage based visas.

 

Good Luck!

[geowrian 22,337]

6 hours ago, johnandmhel said:

That's what I thought (have to file both forms and biometrics)  and now more bad news for the wife == that she needs to wait longer to become a USC.  Someone once told me that the magic date was the date of her arrival in the USA as the clock starts counting then as she's admitted with the intention of becoming a LPR (as is the case with a K-1 as the intent is to marry and change status to CF1 or CR1 (I've heard both) so it shouldn't count AGAINST YOU that the clock starts ticking from another date. 

The clocks starts from the moment you become an LPR. This is consistent whether you become an LPR at POE on an immigrant visa or via having AOS approved. Unfortunately, whoever told you it was something else didn't know what they were talking about.

 

6 hours ago, johnandmhel said:

Somehow I feel this is not right though as it makes it unfair for those who get their initial two-year GC much later than those who get faster.  If someone gets their two-year green card in under six months,  then he or she is doing much better than someone who took a year to get it towards getting their citizenship.  The clock only starts ticking with the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD as opposed to the DATE THEY ARRIVED IN THE USA.  The latter though is FAIRER as that ENTRY DATE TO THE USA cannot be fault of government as can be the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD in being slow to process.

Maybe, but this is current law and has been the case for decades. Is it "fair" that somebody who applied for a K-1 visa in mid 2016 only waited a few months whereas those doing it now are waiting 8-10+ months? And to be blunt, that's more serious as that's separation. The same for spouses who spent years apart whereas others were fortunate to only have to wait several months either due to luck or good timing.

 

The fact is immigration is not fair. It's stressful. It's expensive. But we go through it anyway.

[NYCruiser 423]

21 hours ago, johnandmhel said:

Thanks Bill & Katya, Cyclone27, and tsabbas,

 

That's what I thought (have to file both forms and biometrics)  and now more bad news for the wife == that she needs to wait longer to become a USC.  Someone once told me that the magic date was the date of her arrival in the USA as the clock starts counting then as she's admitted with the intention of becoming a LPR (as is the case with a K-1 as the intent is to marry and change status to CF1 or CR1 (I've heard both) so it shouldn't count AGAINST YOU that the clock starts ticking from another date. 

 

As the way Bill & Katya explains it (N400 can only be filed under the three year rule three years less 90 days from her 3rd anniversary of becoming an LPR) that means the date of her GC says she's a RESIDENT SINCE 1/30/17 is really the magic date and wipes off the map all that time from 5/8/2016 when she arrived in the USA to 1/29/17 (a difference of 267 DAYS or 8 MONTHS AND 22 DAYS)!  Arrrrghhhh!!!!

 

So instead, it means that she would be able to apply for citizenship on/after 11/30/19 as this would be three months before her third anniversary of GC RESIDENT SINCE DATE. 

 

Somehow I feel this is not right though as it makes it unfair for those who get their initial two-year GC much later than those who get faster.  If someone gets their two-year green card in under six months,  then he or she is doing much better than someone who took a year to get it towards getting their citizenship.  The clock only starts ticking with the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD as opposed to the DATE THEY ARRIVED IN THE USA.  The latter though is FAIRER as that ENTRY DATE TO THE USA cannot be fault of government as can be the DATE ON THE GREEN CARD in being slow to process.

 

So what's your thought on that? Am I making sense or is this probably the immigration policy of a more democratic country other than ours?

 

Best and then some,

 

John

 

These regulations are in place due to the fact of immense marriage fraud of people way before us even filing....unfortunately......

While our system here is insanely bureaucratic and confusing, it is MUCH better than countries in the Middle East, Switzerland etc