Imperium

You need a lawyer, or someone competent to help with the process, if you cannot manage to get even the name of the visa applicant correct for the medical.
 
You have enough issues coming from Pakistan, these problems you created just make them worse.

Generally, a previous U.S. passport is sufficient evidence for a DS-11.
 
After this ordeal is over, file N-600.

@Imperium Yes passed test in December 2022

You can request a later date....after your planned trips.

B is next to impossible with an overstay, not to mention current NIV appointment time of at least (176 days in Chennai to 589 in Mumbai).

B is next to impossible with an overstay, not to mention current NIV appointment time of at least (176 days in Chennai to 589 in Mumbai).

D3 is the NIV waiver, whether the Consulate would even consider a visa in this situation is another matter.

I think doing WoM for both may add complexity to it. Strategically, I would file WoM first and get the ROC moved out of the way. It will help push the N400. I do not think N400 will take long after that. Once you have an interview, if there is a delay, invoke your right under 8 U.S.C Section 1447(b)  by depriving USCIS of jurisdiction. It is their worse nightmare.
 
Most foundamental difference in WoM and Action under Sect 1447(b) is the WoM draw sustenanace from APA and forces an employ to work. While Sect 1447(b) is precisely for naturalization delays AFTER an interview. WoM grant Court and CIS concurrent jurisdiction, while Sect 1447(b) deprives USCIS of jurisdiction once District Court recieves your case.
 
Since WoM seeks to remedy administrative delay , In my modest openion, WoM for an ROC is the best tool. Tactically, you are trying to caliberate legal pressure on USCIS that is enough to add urgency to your case. Chosing RoC alone gives your case more traction because of an undisputed delay, unlike the N400.

I think doing WoM for both may add complexity to it. Strategically, I would file WoM first and get the ROC moved out of the way. It will help push the N400. I do not think N400 will take long after that. Once you have an interview, if there is a delay, invoke your right under 8 U.S.C Section 1447(b)  by depriving USCIS of jurisdiction. It is their worse nightmare.
 
Most foundamental difference in WoM and Action under Sect 1447(b) is the WoM draw sustenanace from APA and forces an employ to work. While Sect 1447(b) is precisely for naturalization delays AFTER an interview. WoM grant Court and CIS concurrent jurisdiction, while Sect 1447(b) deprives USCIS of jurisdiction once District Court recieves your case.
 
Since WoM seeks to remedy administrative delay , In my modest openion, WoM for an ROC is the best tool. Tactically, you are trying to caliberate legal pressure on USCIS that is enough to add urgency to your case. Chosing RoC alone gives your case more traction because of an undisputed delay, unlike the N400.

I am relying on the WOM mass producing YouTube Fellow who stated action on both I-751 and N-400 can be demanded iONE WOM filing…especially as they are indeed interdependent…
 
Tagging DIY Masters of WOM , for correction if I am off : @igoyougoduke and @Imperium
 
 
 

WoM is a waste of time for N-400. Too soon and the defense can argue that it depends on I-751.
 
You are approaching 2 years for I-751. When Congress added conditional residency, it was never their intent that USCIS would take years to adjudicate. WoM this now.
 
Granted, it was never the intent of Congress that  naturalization take more than 3 months: hence the 90 day early filing because Congress felt it was unfair to make applicants with simple cases wait a day over their 3/5 year anniversaries as LPRs. Congress did give INS 120 days to deny or oath a case. And USCIS is gaming the system now.
 
WoM I-751, get it approved.
 
Then 30 days later WoM N-400.

Noooooooo!!!
 
WoM now.

USCIS processing time are just as good as your trash is worth the price of gold. just saying those numbers are completely made up junk 

Yes you can file them together in one WOM if you have filed 751 and n-400 and both are pending 

Exactly.
And to add, When I assisted someone a year ago, AUSA told him that you should have reached out to us before filing the suite. In ref to my earlier post about sending a Demand Letter to local USA.
 
Here is a precedent where 5th Cir ended the controversy over examination aka "interview."  Walji v. Gonzales, 500 F.3d 432 (5th Cir. 2007)
When the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("CIS") does not grant or deny an application for naturalization 120 days after the required examination of the applicant, the applicant may ask a U.S. district court to adjudicate the application. 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b). Does the 120 days begin to run after the application interview or after the background investigation is complete? The district court held the latter and dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Reviewing the record de novo, we reverse and remand.

Your english dont seems to support that you have attended college, however, that is beyond the scope of our discussion. It appears that somewhere along the way, you have violated your F1 status. You then sought AOS through marriage to USC, and eventually divorcing your wife. You then applied for Naturalization and now IO, while looking back, questions the intent of your marriage.
You should request your Afile and see what is in there. I do not believe an IO will simply ask an applicant to withdraw an N400 just because they wrongfully answered couple questions. 
 

Your english dont seems to support that you have attended college, however, that is beyond the scope of our discussion. It appears that somewhere along the way, you have violated your F1 status. You then sought AOS through marriage to USC, and eventually divorcing your wife. You then applied for Naturalization and now IO, while looking back, questions the intent of your marriage.
You should request your Afile and see what is in there. I do not believe an IO will simply ask an applicant to withdraw an N400 just because they wrongfully answered couple questions. 
 

Your english dont seems to support that you have attended college, however, that is beyond the scope of our discussion. It appears that somewhere along the way, you have violated your F1 status. You then sought AOS through marriage to USC, and eventually divorcing your wife. You then applied for Naturalization and now IO, while looking back, questions the intent of your marriage.
You should request your Afile and see what is in there. I do not believe an IO will simply ask an applicant to withdraw an N400 just because they wrongfully answered couple questions. 
 

Your english dont seems to support that you have attended college, however, that is beyond the scope of our discussion. It appears that somewhere along the way, you have violated your F1 status. You then sought AOS through marriage to USC, and eventually divorcing your wife. You then applied for Naturalization and now IO, while looking back, questions the intent of your marriage.
You should request your Afile and see what is in there. I do not believe an IO will simply ask an applicant to withdraw an N400 just because they wrongfully answered couple questions. 
 

Your english dont seems to support that you have attended college, however, that is beyond the scope of our discussion. It appears that somewhere along the way, you have violated your F1 status. You then sought AOS through marriage to USC, and eventually divorcing your wife. You then applied for Naturalization and now IO, while looking back, questions the intent of your marriage.
You should request your Afile and see what is in there. I do not believe an IO will simply ask an applicant to withdraw an N400 just because they wrongfully answered couple questions. 
 

Sec 208; asylum procedure requires that an applicant for asylum appear for an interview with an asylum officer at one of the nationwide asylum offices. If approved, he will refer the case to Sup AO for recommended approval. If a case is denied by an AO, the applicant is issued NTA and refered to an IJ. Alternatively, if ICE catches someone, and they claim fear of return to CoO, they file an asylum application before an IJ (defensive) and that subjects them a one year bar. That is how they end up in IC. US Asylum system is broken, outdated and inconsistent with the global procedures.

Yes, completely agree, it should be much more streamlined, so laws would need to change.  Of course that is a problem in our current political environment. 

Long way to see light, congrats.

I agree. It is already losing traction. Given the surge of refugee admission, it is likely that delays will occur more often, thus, creating a need for one to know their options, for awareness purposes, if not litigating Pro Se,.
However, I do believe we should have a seperate thread on Pro Se litigation. Many of us often get nailed down by ICE into EOIR. Though I have never considered BIA/EOIR to be intimidating, I am of the openion that many other do. Litigation/legal research competency gave one skill to navigate high waters of APA/WoM and action under 1447(b). There are technicalities that one must know and how to navigate them with out losing precious times and hard earned money.