Dashinka

Not submitting all the required evidence with the I129F is fairly common. As to the K1 phase, not proving the relationship is real is another common reason. Good Luck!

You need to wait at least 4 more days right?

Wildfire reconstruction…

New information to me especially for those entering on a CR1/IR1, essentially nullifying 90 day early filing. Though I would think one could argue an Involuntary Separation for the 90 or so days. Thanks for the education. One to add to the knowledge bank like the issue that can occur when someone files electronically the minute the window opens.

Curious as to why a 90 day early filing for a spousal visa (IR1/CR1) would not fall under the Involuntary Separation exception.

How so? USCIS allows for 90 day early filing which opened for the OP in late May 2025 based on an IR1 entry date of 8/26/2022. By the time an interview occurred, the OP would have passed 3 yrs.

Looks like it. I would still wait until you receive notice your initial filing was withdrawn before submitting a new one. Good Luck!

Ok, now I am confused. Given the date 8/26/2022 when you got your GC and filing under the 3 yr rule, you can file after 5/28/2025. You filed 6/24/2025, so what is the problem?

If it were me, I would create a statement, and take it with him to the interview unless there is a way to establish paternity prior. He can explain the situation to the IO as they are reviewing his N400, and they can decide if the child should be added to the form. He might also want to get a consult from a good immigration attorney as this is not a common situation. Good Luck!

If you did not meet the marital union requirement with your initial filing, how do you meet it now?

I would qualify this to be the "suspected" biological child of the OP's spouse. Until this is established, the relationship is just a friend. How would the OP's spouse prove a biological relationship at this point? The only option I see is a DNA test since the father is not listed on the BC.

The executive order is not a blanket ban on Muslim's getting visas, but rather restrictions based on the uncooperative nature of several governments some of which are leading Muslim majority countries. Tunisia is not on the list. This might be helpful. Good Luck!

A lot of people have relationships with non-biological children, should they be listed? Like I mentioned, sure if he can establish paternity before filing the N400 do it, might be hard in a war zone, but what if he lists her and it turns out she is not her biological child? As long as the OP maintains good records he should be fine.

I disagree if he has solid date evidence establishing when paternity was definitively established relative to the N400 submission. I am sure he won't be the first person that naturalized and then found out about a child, or definitively established paternity of a child from a past relationship after the N400 process. Denaturalization would be more about knowing about a definite biological child and not listing them. If the OP's spouse does wait, and the paternity is established fine, but personally I would not let it hold me up.

Long periods of "Refused" or "Administrative Processing" is fairly common in Pakistan. I would say the fact that they requested your passport back is a positive sign, but it is hard to guess how long things will take. Good Luck!

Since paternity has not been definitively established, putting them on the N400 doesn't really seem right. He can always file for an I130 later for her once paternity has been established, and she is either 18, or her adoptive parents allow her to go. Just make sure he keeps a good record of the date when the paternity is established. Good Luck!

Interesting article, and the comments are pretty good as well. Finally, an Unbiased and Objective Climate Science Report The recent report released by Energy Secretary Chris Wright on the climate impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the U.S. has caused quite a stir in the climate science arena. “Outrage,” “pushback,” and “criticized” are the words used in many of the headlines about it. To better gauge the overall opinion of the report, two journalists from the Associated Press asked members of the climate science committee if they believed that it accurately portrayed the current “mainstream view of climate science.” https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2025/08/16/finally_an_unbiased_and_objective_climate_science_report_1129196.html

It is not clear to me, was the visa application denied at the consulate or was the I129F petition denied at USCIS? You mentioned the case was showing denied at the USCIS site which implies it was the I129F that was denied. The OP needs to clarify at what stage of the process the denial was decided.

Yes, passport and GC. If there are name differences between the passport and GC, she may also want a copy of the marriage certificate. Good Luck!

Probably not a bad idea to have his wife attend if nothing more than to show her support of her spouse's naturalization. As to documents to bring, this should not be necessary, but better to have them and not need them. Good Luck!

I assume she is filing a new I485 ASAP. What is not clear to me is the status of the children. Are their cases completely separated, or are they tied to the mother.

Not a really great analogy, as if a speeding driver is caught, then they face the consequences. The analogy some wanted here is the police letting the speeding driver go without any consequences. Certainly the pendulum has swung from our wide open borders, to a more controlled system, and officers are now actually enforcing the laws. Not really sure that is a bad thing.

Makes perfect sense, but instead we get "progressives" in favor of killing a great many abled bodied people on both sides. So tell me, which side of the political aisle are warmongers? The Ukraine War Was Always Going To End This Way Ukraine’s current borders are a relic of Soviet propaganda, invented by Premier Nikita Khrushchev in 1954 as part of an effort to make the Warsaw Pact look like a diverse coalition of strong states. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, those fictional borders were made “real,” leaving Ukraine with a Soviet nuclear arsenal, Russia’s Black Sea fleet, and control of the ports of Sevastopol and Odessa. The situation this created was obviously untenable. Under pressure from the United States, Kiev returned the nuclear arsenal and the Black Sea fleet to Russia, and signed a long-term lease agreement giving Moscow control over the warm-water port at Sevastopol. But it left Ukraine itself with an indefensible territory and millions of Russian inside its borders. As Mario Loyola explained in these pages three weeks before Moscow launched its invasion in February 2022, Ukraine in 1991 wasn’t really a viable state: “It wasn’t at all clear that Ukraine would be strong enough to maintain both political independence and territorial integrity given the weight of vital Russian interests involved.” As long as Ukraine stayed in Russia’s orbit, it could control its territory. But, as Loyola writes, “the moment it definitively broke away from Moscow in 2014, it immediately lost control of those areas that were most vital to Russian interests, and nobody with an even minimal sense of Russian and Ukrainian history can pretend to have been taken by surprise.” As it now stands, Ukraine can have political independence or territorial integrity, but it cannot have both. That was true in 2014, it was true in 2022 before the Russian invasion, and it is true today. It’s not parroting Russian propaganda to say that Ukraine will have lasting peace and stability only with an adjustment of its borders, it’s simply a statement of historical fact. If Ukraine wants to be oriented toward Europe and politically independent of Russia, then its borders will have to be adjusted. https://thefederalist.com/2025/08/18/the-ukraine-war-was-always-going-to-end-this-way/

Long read, but worth it. Zohran Mamdani’s Fantasy Island Such fatalism might be disappointing, but it’s hardly surprising. If New York has gotten more right-wing in the era of street fights, lockdowns, equity purges, rotting public services, and migrant hotels, the city’s much more numerous liberals have polarized in the other direction. Take, for instance, the reported 63 percent of New York City Democrats who support Mamdani’s policy of arresting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who often visits New York for the opening of the U.N. General Assembly each September. Netanyahu’s capture is a titillating left-wing fantasy, speaking to a widely held expectation of a different politics creating an entirely new city and world. The fantasy runs aground fairly quickly. What crime would the city charge Netanyahu with? How would the NYPD even transport Netanyahu to the Hague? The United States is not a member of the Rome Statute and thus is outside the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, meaning Mamdani and most city Democrats seek to defy the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution and enforce laws and treaties that have no status on American soil. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/zohran-mamdanis-fantasy-island

This might be helpful. A little old, but someone that dealt with a similar issue. Good Luck!