CarlHamilton

Go to setting and uncheck the box that says you want to receive these.

i am afraid because my english is not very good but i will try Thanks you so much.

sorry about that.. 

I have no idea what you're trying to say.  I think the English part of the interview will be a bigger problem than your travels.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.  I think the English part of the interview will be a bigger problem than your travels.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.  I think the English part of the interview will be a bigger problem than your travels.

The word you're looking for is "statute."  Michelangelo's David is a statue. 

It is my understanding that the exception to the residence requirement only applies to families of those overseas with the military or as government employees, those overseas on government orders, not those who are voluntarily overseas:
 
Exceptions
Section 316 paragraphs (b), (c), and (f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act allows for certain exceptions to the continuous residence requirement for those applicants working abroad for:
The United States government, including the Military Contractors of the United States government A recognized American institution of research (List of Recognized American Institutions of Research and Other Recognized Organizations (PDF, 104 KB)) A public international organization An organization designated under the International Immunities Act

How long do you plan on staying out of the states? Did you get a reentry permit?
 
Since you decided to reside and work outside the US you basically already abandoned your US residency. 

Maybe someone else can explain this to you better than I can, you keep on talking about “365 days”, I don’t know how else to tell you that is not calculated in annual periods but on a continuous basis.

Welcome to Visajourney.  You got the right answer 30 posts ago, but someone will always try to add to it until it's beaten to death/becomes confusing.  

That won't be the case.  They automatically get green cards.  Citizenship comes later (could be automatic if you become a citizen before they turn 18, but that's a different story). 

It has to be their natural parent.  And if they qualified for citizenship through a US parent they wouldn't need an immigration visa, they would be issued passports directly. 

That won't be the case.  They automatically get green cards.  Citizenship comes later (could be automatic if you become a citizen before they turn 18, but that's a different story). 

It's not that random.  Spokane, WA is not a busy office.  Your mileage will be different in LA. 

It does include professional associations.  Hence "ANY" association, club, etc.  When in doubt, disclose.  It won't change anything, unless your associations are a national security threat (probably not the case with accountants, maybe lawyers :))

Why? 

If the passport expires, it can still be used as proof of citizenship: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/requirements/citizenship-evidence.html
 
"Always err on the side of caution" is a pretty dumb reason to part with $1170. 

It does include professional associations.  Hence "ANY" association, club, etc.  When in doubt, disclose.  It won't change anything, unless your associations are a national security threat (probably not the case with accountants, maybe lawyers :))

It does include professional associations.  Hence "ANY" association, club, etc.  When in doubt, disclose.  It won't change anything, unless your associations are a national security threat (probably not the case with accountants, maybe lawyers :))

You guys should re-read the moderator's last comment in this thread.  It's over.  Thank God!
 

As a US citizen you have to use your US passport to exit and enter the US. 

This is the least of the inaccuracies in the article, but it does reflect the author's understanding of immigration law (or lack thereof).  The concern appears to be about the "public charge" definition, although you wouldn't know it from the article itself.  Changes to this have been percolating for months, and have been discussed here, but they would NOT apply to citizenship applications, because there is no public charge bar to naturalization.  As for the effect on visas and adjustment of status applications, the devil is in the details, and the details aren't public yet.  If and when the proposed changes move forward, a notice of proposed rulemaking will be published in the Federal Register and there will be a 90-day period for public comment.  We can hopefully get a more thorough media analysis of it at that point, although I'm not holding my breath.  In the meantime, keep calm and carry on.   

Unemployment benefits are different because you pay unemployment insurance from every paycheck so it's your money, not public funds.  In any case, there is no public charge bar to naturalization. 

The Hill is basically summarizing another article from NBC (linked to in the second paragraph).  This is a longer but equally ill-informed piece built around the example of a Haitian gentleman who used a fake passport to obtain his green card. Reading about it made me think of George Costanza.  "Was that wrong?  Should I not have done that?"