Jump to content

randomstairs

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    726

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by randomstairs

  1. randomstairs
    File at least 5 years (3, if N-400 is based on marriage to a US citizen) after the end of your probation and the proceedings. If you don't have the tickets try asking the pertaining court if they can provide you with a copy of the record. If they can't, you can still use that statement as the evidence. Other than that I think you're fine.
  2. randomstairs
    I see. Interesting. I would strongly advise you to naturalize first, and change the name only after that. I've seen countless cases, on these forums and elsewhere, where applicants can't naturalize in a reasonable amount of time on the account of requesting to change their name. Some cases are going for years, with the applicant being in the dark about any progress. All because they requested to have their name changed before the Oath. Given the current dynamics in the immigration system, it seems extraordinarily risky to proceed with it. You can always do it as a citizen.
  3. randomstairs
    I'm not sure I understand the reasoning here. You want to change your name because another country drops it from documents issued there? Why would the "mismatch" be an issue? Are you concerned about USCIS not liking the mismatch? I wouldn't worry about it, since you're obviously all but finished with the process. BTW: If you're a GC holder, the US is your only home country.
  4. randomstairs
    That's fair, in the light of the current administration.
  5. randomstairs
    I'd say it's even better to file (electronically) by yourself. I've come across cases where the lawyer didn't file electronically, prolonged the whole process, and even failed to properly communicate with a client. If it's a simple case, as yours seems to be, electronic filing is the fastest, safest, and cheapest option.
  6. randomstairs
    I don't think the "certified copy" is even the official instruction. From what I remember, that's something printed on that flyer(https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/guides/G-1151.pdf), but is in fact not an actual requirement. Many people, including myself, were worried about the "certified" part, but I've never heard anyone getting an RFE because of it. The cynic in me suspects that this "instruction" is a tactic for discouraging immigrants from naturalizing.
  7. randomstairs
    You'll need a lawyer for that. What was the basis for the inadmissibility?
  8. randomstairs
    Where NOT explicitly stated, write the "given name" first, as in "Jane Doe." In many forms the last name comes first, but that would be specifically instructed. Given name = First name. Surname = Last name.
  9. randomstairs
    It could've got finalized (decision made) but because it's not current yet the approval is still pending, so they closed it. Just guessing.
  10. randomstairs
    Probably, yes. The I-140 step may take a lot longer than it seems, depending on the country where you were born (citizenship doesn't matter).
  11. randomstairs
    Are you also born in Canada? Once the approved I-140 is sent to the NVC it's hard to tell how long it will take to get the visa number and for the consulate to schedule the interview, especially in the current climate.
  12. randomstairs
    Elon Musk may turn USCIS into whatever Twitter has become.
  13. randomstairs
    Are you talking about the receipt # or the I-94 number? Unless the form has changed, the I-94 # is a series of numbers. It's different on every new I-797. How do you know the correct number? Sorry if I'm not understanding something basic here. I'm not sure if the current I-797A will be needed, but it's likely. If you know the printing error, simply mention that to the new employer and they can make a note of it and include it in the application package. The error should be then corrected by USCIS together with the approval of the new application.
  14. randomstairs
    The new employer can file a new H1B case, yes. You'll get a new I797 form if approved. How do you know that there's a printing mistake?
  15. randomstairs
    Was your Form I-360 approved or not? What is the attorney saying?
  16. randomstairs
    Unless you are not IN FACT only visiting the US while actually residing abroad, as seems to be the case here.
  17. randomstairs
    For start, you shouldn't refer to a foreign country as "home." Your home is in the US, or you are seriously violating the LPR status.
  18. randomstairs
    If you formally state that you weren't living in the US permanently during that year, the actual dates notwithstanding, you violated the continuous residence requirement. That would be technically true even if you were physically present in the US the whole time. As an LPR you are required to permanently reside in the US, but you are stating here that this wasn't the case.
  19. randomstairs
    The public charge applies to those seeking to become LPRs, not to current green card holders. So, that's not gonna affect you. There's no requirement to apply for naturalization, nor to be approved for it if one applies. This, too, isn't gonna be an issue for you. As long as you don't stay abroad for too long, you'll be fine. If you've already filed the new N-400, it may be a good idea to wait for the citizenship, this time around - just so you don't miss it again.
  20. randomstairs
    That's not a serious argument. Are unlawful non-citizens not subject to the US jurisdiction? If so, then how can the US even enforce its laws against them? Do they have the diplomatic immunity? I read it somewhere on the internet: her own Twitter ("now X") feed.
  21. randomstairs
    That's not a serious challenge. The wording is unambiguous: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
  22. randomstairs
    Candance Owens who promotes extreme antisemitic conspiracy theories? That Candace Owens?
  23. randomstairs
    Irrelevant?
  24. randomstairs
    This might be a ToS violation. You can't just accuse someone of lying about the most fundamental aspects of their lives just because you don't like them. Unless you provide strong evidence for Harris's not being born in the US, this is blatant slander, and, at the very least, inflammatory language.
  25. randomstairs
    It is an outlandish idea because it proposes amending the 14th Amendment, which provides for a lot more than just the birthright citizenship. In fact, it may be one of the most fundamental parts of the post-Civil War Constitution.
×
×
  • Create New...