Rekyrts

Depends on the FO. Some so, some do not.

As noted, not too irregular. I know waiting can be a pain though; hope you folks see some positive movement soon!

I agree.

That's a toughie... they think she committed fraud or misrepresented something. Do you know what exactly they are referencing?

I don't think that is necessary.

It's a great way to start to responsibly give kids a good start too. Some cards allow you to add your kids when they are 14, which gives them 4 years of AU credit history when they turn 18. They don't even have to have the cards in their possession. Banks do know to filter for AU-boosted scores in their decisioning, but adding someone as an AU helps them establish credit; do make sure the account(s) they are being added to are positive tradelines, because they inherit the good and bad (if any).

Great advice... @Scandi, I couldn't agree more with you and @OldUser. Credit is so important, especially for newbies to the country, and not enough is said about it. it is something I am very passionate about. My generation is the one that sold its creditworthiness for a few T-shirts on campus! My advice is for immigrants to take the same amount of time they use to learn about immigration to learn about credit. Building and maintaining good credit saves a LOT. Also, some creditors are better than others, and it pays to be as picky as you can be. Also, do NOT lie on credit applications, especially about status. Several companies provide preapprovals, which, while not 100% guarantees, come pretty close: Amex, Capital One, Discover etc. Using credit cards should not equate to carrying debt, and savvy use can actually make you money by way of Cashback and points. If one is tempted to spend more than they have, it's better to use a debit card or cash IMHO. Teaching my kids about the importance of credit is one of the ways I hope to influence them in the long run.

It takes a while for a credit report to be generated, and for that to happen, one needs a few accounts reporting to one's file. So, for immigrants, one of the best ways to do that is to become an AU on, say, established spouse's accounts. Opening up an account at a local bank (credit unions are great) and then following up with a secured credit card are great intro steps to jumpstarting one's credit file. Opening up the account allows the bank to have your SS#, and then there shouldn't be too much of an issue with them then reporting the secured account to the bureaus. Once that happens, one can find other creditors. Of course, this is all moot if one cannot budget and use credit in a responsible manner (i.e paying off statement balance to zero monthly).

Great info... one slight correction: the Chase 5/24 rule applies to new accounts opened, not inquiries. Indeed, it is very nuanced. Amex can be generous, CapOne is a tri-puller, Synchrony is bi-polar... good to know what lenders do what. Credit literacy is so key for immigrants... and, really, Americans as a whole. Re: the early question, creditworthiness is a bit more than a score. For example, a 750 with a thick file (several years of diverse credit with responsible usage) and good income beats, say, a 780 with a thin file (few accounts) and low income. And how can someone with with a thin file get a high score? Not too hard, and it does apply to immigrants... having a new spouse or child added as an AU to an established account allows them to legally develop a credit history.

I do not gives you any built-in advantage over someone without kids. If you sense you have a difficult case -- or simply like the surety of legal advice (and really, when it comes to USCIS, who could blame you?) -- I would start with the link posted above. I would definitely check the statutory requirements first and familiarize yourself with them, because a lot of them can't be overcome/bypassed, lawyer or no lawyer. Also, as someone who truly believes in the overall value of legal representation in life, I will state that naturalization is he one step that DYI is quite possible when the case is starightforward.

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!

Condolences...

I try to be nice to civil servants, but that's wild. Sadly, quite believable....

I agree with the idea that it makes sense to be over-prepared.

Just saw this: https://www.newschannel5.com/news/tn-secretary-of-states-office-sent-out-14-000-letters-asking-voters-to-prove-citizenship-ahead-of-election

Silliness. Don't sweat it. My only concern would be if some rambunctious DMV employee registered him in error prior to naturalizing without him knowing. It has been known to happen. For that reason, I'd probably go above and beyond and send something trackable saying he didn't register to vote till (date post-naturalization). Interested to hear what others suggest.

The simple answer is both conditions must be met. She must be married to a USC for 3 years AND have had her green card for 3 years (I'm purposely avoiding muddying the waters with the 90-day early filing allowance). So, using the data you provided, January 2026 is when you would have satisfied both conditions. The date you would use is the "residence since" date on the physical green card; the previous time in a previous status would not count.

I have found that with government agencies, it is sometimes a good idea to gently prompt them with their own policies. Thankkfully, a lot of the relevant policy manuals are online. For example, the one that deal with this seems to be: https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0110212075 I remember having to deal with SSA a while back, and being turned away because the staff onsite didn't know of an Emergency Message that had just been piblished the week before. So, I found the relevant policy, emailed a regional supervisor (explained the issue, and really didn't complain too much about the overworked onsite staffers who perhaps missed the policy update), and got a phone call that afternoon inviting me to come over and get the changes made. They should know this stuff, and I shouldn't have had to show it to them, but hey...

I agree with this. I suggest learning all 100.

Both. And yes, a lot of people file for citizenship based on marriage while on the I-751 to be adjudicated; search for "combo interview" on this site for some great feedback on how to navigate that. Good luck!

I celebrate with OP, but I do find it a tad disconcerting. Who is it easier for? It's one thing if the IO suggests it, but if an applicant decides to go one route, and has everything in order, why make the applicant change it? *sigh* there goes my cynical mind again...

Having dealt with USCIS/INS over a few decades, simply put, I have learned to do my own due dilligence. I've never had to deal with something like this, but I have had to deal with their errors. USCIS has mistakenly conferred citizenship a lot of times before. As such, I would never assume that it couldn't happen again. For me, it's not about the cost, but about protecting your rights. All that craziness the IO was asking? The names? The country you didn't visit? For me, that just underscores how off the wall the interview was. I would think the easiest way to rescind/NOIR an approved petition seems to something like this. I think the previous suggestion of doing a FOIA is fantastic. Easily DIY, and should answer any major questions. If my oath ceremony preceded the 5-yr mark by a day, I would absolutely make sure it was corrected.

This makes sense to me. I *think* that, at this point, it's a fairly easy fix.

This is all so very weird. The The thing about the country and middle name is so off.

Personally, I would not leave my immigration wellbeing up the the hope that USCIS corrects the mistake it itself (via its staff) made. The way I look at it is thus: The law says 5 years USCIS staff do not have the discretion to override that Based on this (and assuming my layman's interpretation is correct), I would proactively speak to an immigration attorney and reach out to the FO via traceable mail. There is no way I would leave it as-is. Even though OP did nothing wrong (IMHO), it doesn't erase the problem.