Rekyrts

Yes, the background checks take different times... that makes sense. And then, having lived in different countries, high risk, etc. But once cleared, I would think everyone gets to the interview line evenly? Thanks for the clips!

🤣 Very, VERY fair point.

You might be fine. But yes, the IO can interview on your entire immigration file, and one should prepare accordingly.

That's not good at all. The online portal is supposed to be a failsafe.

This needs to be stickied. Would save a lot of folks the cost of blood pressure medication.

Where did you hear this?

Great discussion. Your willingness to be open really helps this community.

You most likely won't need your spouse. My advice? If possible, have him there.

This thread and something my dad told me made me start digging. He and my mom filed together for naturalization, but she qualified about a year and half before he did. The attorney they used missed it, and the IO missed it. It wasn't until oath day that it was caught. My dad said it was a mini-disaster. They stopped the ceremony, pulled him out of line to a room and started deliberating. My mom was terrified. It took them an hour to figure things out. My dad was early by like a month, so he had to wait. My mom declined to take the oath that day, so they did get to take the oath together. USCIS told him that it was ultimately his responsibility to make sure he was eligible. This was the example my source used: a federal judge has the authority to perform an oath ceremony. If said judge took a few of his/her foreign-born friends and did a ceremony during a party, the ceremony is meaningless, unless these friends had met the lawful requirements AND were examined by USCIS prior). Same applies to the notorious 10yr vs 2yr error. If an immigrant somehow naturalizes because they got a 10-yr green card in error (without doing the required ROC), the naturalization is void. Said person wouldn't be denaturalized, because they did not legally naturalize.

The language that my source used was "revoke" and not denaturalization; I don't know enough about the legal difference in the terms to say much on either. My understanding is that legally, these people did not qualify for naturalization in the first place, so no one had the power to naturalize them. They simply were not American citizens, even though they went through the process. As such, they were still LPRs (except for the one person, who had an issue with that... that had to be fixed first). So, they were not denaturalized. Denaturalization is a complex legal process looking to strip citizenship from someone who otherwise qualified for it. The common example is someone who meets the requirements but lies about their history as a war criminal. He/she/they would be denaturalized. That's my understanding. The two folks consulted with attorneys and concurred, and went through an abbreviated process to correct the problem.

Don't know the "why" of it, just that the allowance is made. In addition to the excellent stuff already provided by others, here seems to be an overarching guidance from the same manual (8 FAM 403.4-5): https://fam.state.gov/fam/08fam/08fam040304.html. A U.S. citizen born in the U.S./territory/possession cannot request only city/state on a U.S. Passport, but a foreign-born U.S. citizen can. Happy to be corrected if I am interpreting that incorrectly.

Good advice. I would ensure that the date is shifted. After this was discussed, I did some digging from someone in the know; this person brought up three similar cases that happened in the last two decades that this person had access to (absolutely scary that this happens). The one was a paperwork error (transposed dates dating back to green card; something about European dates) and two that were due to a "glitch" in the system. - In two of the cases, they were caught by an audit; the applicants were reverted to green cards and immediately re-naturalized (there was paperwork re-done). - The one applicant had passed away. They were not prosecuted for false claims since these were due to USCIS error, BUT USCIS/INS didn't apologize for said errors. They had to be re-naturalized because, per law, they were not citizens. Thus. I'd concur (to the person who you were advising): re-schedule. As with everything immigration, the ultimate oversight for our individual cases really depends on us. Same concept for folks who get 10-yr green cards instead of 2-yr ones in error. If not fixed, we end up holding the bag, even though it wasn't our fault.

Your choice. I was reading the DOS Passport manual a while back; IIRC, they allow individuals to choose between City or Country of birth.

Congrats!

I am sure OP would find someone happy to sit in with little prior knowledge... for a price.

Agreed.

https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship/find-study-materials-and-resources/study-for-the-test

That would be the day. If you natuarlize, your minor kids become citizens on that day.

I agree. I went through all the prep, and while I won't call the approval underwhelming, it was a tad anticlimactic.

Depends on the FO. Different FOs work at different speeds.

Interesting that they checked/scanned passport and CON. They really need both? So happy for her! It's the "little" things that count.

Congrats!!!

In theory, your credit reports would show that you are an AU on the account... if you want to give USCIS that info.

That's wild. Really unusual I'd say...

Typically, the answers won’t change immediately. For example, President Biden will be president till January. Your senators and reps will still be in office 2 days after the election, regardless of the result.