br9k

Neutralization - sounds intimidating. 

It is sufficient to cover only the 3 years required. However, "best practice" suggests covering 5 years anyway, even if it includes the period you did not live in the US. 

I think I understand the original question. The question is - if during the last 60 months the person have resided in the US for 30 months or more, but the initial date of those 60 months falls in the middle of a stay abroad - can this period of time be used to qualify for naturalization. Or must the initial date of the 60 month qualifying period occur during the time the person is in the US. 

In this case it makes a difference of waiting 2 months (until accumulating 30 months in the US) and waiting longer (until accumulating 30 months in the US and also so that the 60 months ago would fall on a time when the person is in the US).

IANAL, YMMV, but nothing in the rules says the initial date of the 60 month (5 year) period must be in any particular place. It talks only about cumulative time spent in the US and outside.

That said, given your residency history and the fact that USCIS has quite a bit of discretion in these decisions (and also given some of the reports of other applicants from Pakistan, which tends to get quite a bit more scrutiny) I would try to err on the side of caution. Consider, that if your application gets stuck in the "background check land" for a few years, you'll have to spend a lot more time here to continue maintaining residence. 

I will guess that when you come for an interview, you will meet one slightly surprised USCIS officer. My bet is on a system error/duplicate letter (given that your status online still says you are in line to be scheduled for an oath). Barring that - perhaps a signature is missing on one of the documents, and you need to sign it in person.

I wouldn't necessarily think anything sinister (but I may be wrong, of course).

Thats def. not USCIS, but also highly unusual for a government department to mail a "current resident", in particular Dept. of State. 

27 minutes ago, NeedMoreCoffee said:

One of the lucky ones! Congratz!

Perhaps that's to balance out having to live for over 6 months without an actual green card, with only a stamp in a passport. Which, in turn, resulted in countless hours my wife (and I, when we traveled together) spent at the CBP secondary coming back from abroad. 

Aaaaand - it's back now. Glitchy. 

5 hours ago, NeedMoreCoffee said:

About your green card... i dont think you will be getting it. They told me since they approved both the I-751 and N-400, they wont be sending me the PRC. i just have to wait for the Oath. it may be the case for you too. but who knows. Some get it. some dont i guess

We had a combo interview, and received a new permanent green card in about 3 days. At the same time, oath notice was mailed. So -  permanent green card is very possible. 

IMO any of those are fine, but I would use the name at the time of the divorce, to match the divorce certificate, which is the one document USCIS requires.

You are not supposed/expected to know further life history of any of the ex-spouses, past the point of divorce with your current spouse. 

Letter in the today's mail. But it was sent before status rolled back, so still dubious.

We might try to get an infopass, I guess.

Anyone that is currently in "we scheduled you for an oath" state - could you please check and report if there is any change in the online status?

So, we had online case status change to "Oath notice was mailed" a few days ago, and oath notice image appeared in the online application documents folder (although actual letter did not arrive in the mail yet).

Then, yesterday, online case status rolled back to "Oath ceremony will be scheduled" (shows on egov.uscis.gov/casestatus). 

Anyone experienced this before? System glitch? Oath rescheduling? 

Any experience with missing oath invitation letter? We have a copy in the uscis online account, but the physical letter did not arrive yet (a bit past expected time), so it's possible usps lost it. Will they admit to the oath with a printed copy of invitation?

When I applied for the green card 20some years ago, there was no letter or anything else for that matter that would tell me about the selective service. Fortunately, I had an attorney handle my application then. After the case was over, I came to his office one last time, to discuss something. Just as I was getting ready to leave, he pulled out of his desk a small postcard, shoved it towards me and said "fill this and mail out, will be important in 5 years". If not for that - I would have had no idea. 

Perhaps things are different now, but back then there was exactly zero information about the need to register with the selective service given out by (then)INS. 

In any case, as correctly noted above, those over the age of 31 y/o are excused from registration, and selective service website even conveniently provides a standard form letter to print out and bring to the USCIS.

As far as I understand, as an applicant you are supposed to list all your actual children. In particular, as a woman, it may be difficult to argue that you did not know a certain child existed. 

My original post was about children of a spouse of an applicant, that were not legally adopted by the applicant. 

1 hour ago, Ms Per said:

I was wondering about this too.. I have a daughter from my ex and we are not married, and she is not living with me,I am not sure if I should put her on the list since he is not my husband's daughter?

Are you or your husband the N400 applicant? If it's you - you should list all your actual children. If it is your husband - your child isn't really under any category listed on the N400, so IMO can be left off. 

What would be the point of a new green card? You'd have to bring it to the oath ceremony, where it would be taken away. 

Also to close the loop here - quick interview today, officer told us at interview that he will approve the case "in a few days". Later in the day online status changed to "new card being produced" and "oath will be scheduled" for I751 and N400 cases respectively.

Incidentally, the officer that conducted our interview was also the one that stamped my spouse's passport (in lieu of a missing extension letter) back in October 2018. I wonder if he got our case because he "touched it" back then, or this is simply a coincidence. 

FWIW, today at N400 interview spouse asked whether we should have put my children (from the previous marriage) on the N400 application. The officer replied that since they are not her children, they don't need to be on the form.

As always, YMMV, but that's our data point. 

To close the loop - we had a naturalization interview today. While there was no notice from USCIS that it would be a combined interview, it was indeed a combined interview anyway (as we expected).

We spent a total of about 10 minutes talking to the officer together, at which point the interview proceeded to the citizenship portion.

At interview got a paper stating that "the case cannot be decided today". Several hours later I751 case status online changed to "a new card is being produced" (and N400 to "oath will be scheduled"). 

Very much expected collection of responses  

FWIW, I came here legally, and followed the rules to become a USC many moons ago. I did this not because I feel that this is some "moral imperative" (it hardly can be, considering the lessons of history of this country, or indeed the world, as a whole), but because it was the best path for me.

Those who "got on the bus" first get to set their (arbitrary) rules for those who want to get on next. That's just how it is. There is no need to sugarcoat it or pretend that there is a greater degree of fairness or justice in doing so. It's a (mostly misguided, and thinly veiled) attempt at protectionism. It also does not work, but human nature is not about to change.

I think on this forum the only answer you can reliably get is "I got mine"  

FWIW - I feel that anyone that wants to live anywhere should be able to do so, legally. Immigration is, by and large, not a "zero sum" game. It's good for everyone (but it will, in short to medium term, inevitably, create the usual human tensions and bring out the worst in some). Less artificial controls and more simple, welcoming, immigration laws would be better for all of us. After all, if no one is "illegal", we would not have to be dealing with what we deal now. 

I believe tax transcripts are required only for the marriage-based "3 year rule" N400 applicants.

That said, USCIS may want to see proof of taxes paid (no tax delinquencies), and that's why many bring their tax returns/transcripts to the interview regardless of the rule under which N400 is applied for. It may be worth getting any transcripts that can be acquired relatively easily (i.e. by applying and/or printing online).

Curious, but not very specific. I've dealt with a number of state and federal agencies in 20 years, changed jobs, and did plenty of other things that may have depended on the citizenship status. If the other party cared at all, they asked for a passport (or other proof of status).

That is not to say that visiting an SS office is a difficult thing to do, of course. But I really would be interested in seeing one specific example of where it made a difference (i.e. someone in a real life situation where they did not update their SS status, and were impacted in some way). 

What's that update of citizenship status for Social Security? (I've been a US citizen for close to 20 years now, never updated anything at the SS, never even visited an office since I got my original SS card 30 years ago). Perhaps it's something I should look into.