Bizarre Request to produce Divorce decree for a Marriage that never existed

[us-citizen 2]

10 minutes ago, Timona said:

 

Currently 1.5+ years. There's a sub on Reddit..R/FOIA. 

 

 

Not sure why people always throw this suggestion out immediately but your congressman's duty isn't immigration and most times, they get the same reply as the one you got. 

 

On Rediit, this suggestion as well as "get a lawyer" is rampant. I've always wondered what people write on their notice to the congressman. I once asked someone on Reddit to share and they refused. Seen cases where someone's case just got submitted and he want spouse in US ASAP/ spouse is in AP and you write to your congressman. Is your congressman supposed to overrule security checks just to get your wife to US? Baffles me.

 

 

 

Before oath, they ask you to verify the data on the N400. Unless USCIS was mailing N400 like cupcakes without you attending oath, I don't see how this wasn't caught by them or why you didn't immediately fix it. Regardless, as soon as you saw it those years ago, you should have fixed it. 

 

How did you get your intital GC? 

My apologies, but I already answered this question.

Let me expand on that: from what I recall, 25 years ago nobody asked me anything. They just issued the certificates after the oath (it must have been hundreds of us at that ceremony), and on we went. I might have been so excited to be a Citizen that I only noticed that "Widowed" thing way on the way home or even later

[smilingstone 180]

17 minutes ago, us-citizen said:

I might have been so excited to be a Citizen that I only noticed that "Widowed" thing way on the way home or even later

 

So you did see the mistake 25 years ago and didn't think to act on it until now? 

[us-citizen 2]

9 minutes ago, smilingstone said:

 

So you did see the mistake 25 years ago and didn't think to act on it until now? 

It just never was an issue of any kind before. So, it was a typo I thought, so what? Never bothered me. And I only need to act on this now because this issue came up for the first time in 25 years, first time ever

[NorthByNorthwest 352]

2 minutes ago, us-citizen said:

It just never was an issue of any kind before. So, it was a typo I thought, so what? Never bothered me. And I only need to act on this now because this issue came up for the first time in 25 years, first time ever

 

If I were in your shoes I'd just respond to the RFE with a signed affidavit stating pretty much everything you mentioned in this thread, noting in the very first sentence that you've never been married, that the CoN is a typo that you are trying to get fixed - that's pretty much all you can do within the RFE timeline. Whether that will be good enough is a different question, but if you don't respond the petition will be denied anyway, so you have nothing to lose here. Unfortunately this will likely add time to your process no matter what you do...

[yuna628 9,677]

23 minutes ago, us-citizen said:

It just never was an issue of any kind before. So, it was a typo I thought, so what? Never bothered me. And I only need to act on this now because this issue came up for the first time in 25 years, first time ever

Unfortunately, I understand why you may not have thought it was important to correct it at the time... but at some point it was going to become a big problem especially as you are trying to marry someone and get the USCIS involved in it. It's their error, but you're going to have to now fight with them and go through the process to correct this, before you can proceed to do what you want to do. If you don't respond to it, it will be denied... but trying to correct this mistake will be taking a very long time. You'll likely need to reconsider your previous plans, soon you start working on this the better.

[Family 4,006]

1 hour ago, NorthByNorthwest said:

 

If I were in your shoes I'd just respond to the RFE with a signed affidavit stating pretty much everything you mentioned in this thread, noting in the very first sentence that you've never been married, that the CoN is a typo that you are trying to get fixed - that's pretty much all you can do within the RFE timeline. Whether that will be good enough is a different question, but if you don't respond the petition will be denied anyway, so you have nothing to lose here. Unfortunately this will likely add time to your process no matter what you do...

Excellent suggestion. Add a request for additional time to provide evidence of USCIS error , include

1. copy of FOIA submission. 
2. Copy and receipt notice of new N-565 application to correct error.

[Romeo and Juliet 4]

24 minutes ago, Family said:

Excellent suggestion. Add a request for additional time to provide evidence of USCIS error , include

1. copy of FOIA submission. 
2. Copy and receipt notice of new N-565 application to correct error.

AFAIK there is no such thing as "request for additional time" in case of Request for Evidence, or is there? Who knows? That was only possible during COVID.

[Family 4,006]

7 minutes ago, A citizen said:

AFAIK there is no such thing as "request for additional time" in case of Request for Evidence, or is there? Who knows? That was only possible during COVID.

Pre COVID they routinely granted extensions, for the asking ..for reasons such as delay beyond applicants control ( ex getting a foreign country document or a domestic entity with long turnaround time for document production. 

‘Granted , I don’t have current hands on experience, but I believe a worthwhile effort.

[KMG 126]

3 hours ago, Timona said:

Not sure why people always throw this suggestion out immediately but your congressman's duty isn't immigration and most times, they get the same reply as the one you got. 

 

On Rediit, this suggestion as well as "get a lawyer" is rampant. I've always wondered what people write on their notice to the congressman. I once asked someone on Reddit to share and they refused. Seen cases where someone's case just got submitted and he want spouse in US ASAP/ spouse is in AP and you write to your congressman. Is your congressman supposed to overrule security checks just to get your wife to US? Baffles me.

 

Because their job is to serve the public, for a variety of reasons. Should I be contacting them 9 months into my process?  No.  3 years later with no answers? Absolutely!  Not to override security checks, but some people are being treated according to the law during this process.  

[Romeo and Juliet 4]

2 hours ago, NorthByNorthwest said:

 

If I were in your shoes I'd just respond to the RFE with a signed affidavit stating pretty much everything you mentioned in this thread, noting in the very first sentence that you've never been married, that the CoN is a typo that you are trying to get fixed - that's pretty much all you can do within the RFE timeline. Whether that will be good enough is a different question, but if you don't respond the petition will be denied anyway, so you have nothing to lose here. Unfortunately this will likely add time to your process no matter what you do...

This case seems like it could be pushed through this way, or maybe not..., and it could drag on (while they are refusing to correct "Widowed" on one side, and their other side demanding a Divorce/ Death Certificate). Looks like a closed loop. Or could become one. For many months and years.
Maybe a better way is just to marry and file for a CR-1 visa? Any opinions on that? Then the chances (with CR-1 and then with IR-1 possibly) are much better even if the Immigration drags this case indefinitely?

[OldUser 6,719]

8 minutes ago, A citizen said:

This case seems like it could be pushed through this way, or maybe not..., and it could drag on (while they are refusing to correct "Widowed" on one side, and their other side demanding a Divorce/ Death Certificate). Looks like a closed loop. Or could become one. For many months and years.
Maybe a better way is just to marry and file for a CR-1 visa? Any opinions on that? Then the chances (with CR-1 and then with IR-1 possibly) are much better even if the Immigration drags this case indefinitely?

How would one prove they were free to marry? Same issue will arise with divorce / death certificate when trying to get spousal visa.

 

Was OP ever married? At the time of naturalization were they married, widowed, divorced or single? Naturalization say may state incorrect information, but what was the real marital status?

Edited September 6 by OldUser

[Romeo and Juliet 4]

14 minutes ago, OldUser said:

How would one prove they were free to marry? Same issue will arise with divorce / death certificate when trying to get spousal visa.

 

Was OP ever married? At the time of naturalization were they married, widowed, divorced or single? Naturalization say may state incorrect information, but what was the real marital status?

OP said Single in the OP

[Romeo and Juliet 4]

16 minutes ago, OldUser said:

How would one prove they were free to marry? Same issue will arise with divorce / death certificate when trying to get spousal visa.

 

Was OP ever married? At the time of naturalization were they married, widowed, divorced or single? Naturalization say may state incorrect information, but what was the real marital status?

Why do they even have "married, widowed, divorced or single" on a Certificate of Naturalization? I find it rather silly..., LOL

[SalishSea 17,842]

1 hour ago, Romeo and Juliet said:

This case seems like it could be pushed through this way, or maybe not..., and it could drag on (while they are refusing to correct "Widowed" on one side, and their other side demanding a Divorce/ Death Certificate). Looks like a closed loop. Or could become one. For many months and years.
Maybe a better way is just to marry and file for a CR-1 visa? Any opinions on that? Then the chances (with CR-1 and then with IR-1 possibly) are much better even if the Immigration drags this case indefinitely?

Marriage will not solve this problem. If the record shows that the OP is "widowed," he will be required to provide a death certificate as evidence of current marriage being legal.

[SalishSea 17,842]

2 hours ago, Romeo and Juliet said:

Why do they even have "married, widowed, divorced or single" on a Certificate of Naturalization? I find it rather silly..., LOL

For precisely this reason.  To establish marital status as the time of naturalization, as that impacts a citizen's eligibility to petition others.