coloradoman

The new “task force” is looking into cases where immigrants that had deportation orders applied for GCs under a false identity and later naturalized. A legal name change is not even in the same ballpark, especially since you had it changed years AFTER becoming a resident

41 minutes ago, robhostein said:

So this Denaturalization Task Force I've been hearing about has me just a bit concerned.

 

I became a citizen back in April, this year. At the time of my interview, the subject of my name was a bit of an issue because my legal name didn't match my IDs. That's because back in 2010, I got a court order approved to change my birth name. But I didn't change it on my IDs, I left them unchanged and continued to use my birth name. Even in 2015 when I decided to renew my green card (which was already expired for over a year), I still kept it in my birth name as I sent in the renewal application. 6 months later, new green card arrived in my birth name.

 

Now, fast forward to last year, when I was putting together my N400 application. I knew the name thing would be serious. Like, right, this is the N400. The big one. The application to become a naturalized citizen. There's absolutely no mucking about here. So using all the little bits of common sense that I had, I figured, the part where it asks what my current legal name was, I had to put down the name that I chose on that court order from 2010. And so I did. Where it asks of any other names I used in the past, I put down my birth name. Current name on green card, my birth name. And of course, I attached a copy of the court order.

 

But hold on, not only was my legal name from 2010 not on my renewed green card from 2015, but I also put down on the N400 application that I wanted to change the spelling of my currently legal name by a couple letters. Not the whole thing, just a couple letters.

 

Now you would think that all of this would be a little suspicious to an immigration officer. And you'd be right, it was, because at the interview, I was asked a ton of questions about my name, and what my intentions were with changing my name. A lot of questions. In fact, most, if not all of the interview, was focused on my name. I thought for sure, my application was going to be denied right then and there.

 

But for some reason, the interviewing officer gave me an approval at the end of the interview. I was stunned, but happy, nonetheless. Couple months later, oath ceremony.

 

So you've read my story. Do you think I have anything to fear from this Denaturalization Task Force?

No. You didn't misrepresent anything, at least not from what you're telling us. Unless you made false statements and lied to USCIS, there are no grounds for denaturalization.

1 hour ago, afrocraft said:

Those waiting time estimates are practically useless. Pay them no attention.

Seconded. When I had my interview and oath, the system still showed another 8 months until case completion. 

24 minutes ago, USS_Voyager said:

My bad. That's fine still. they will mail you the approval notice. 

 

No they won't. They'll just send you the scheduling notice for the Oath.

Does France allow dual citizenship or would you have to petition the French government first if you don’t want to lose your citizenship there (like I had to in Germany)? If the latter is the case, that would add to your timeline. Just a heads up.  

28 minutes ago, JeanneAdil said:

i just attended a wedding in Buffalo and a bunch of us decided to see Canadian Niagara Falls

We walked across the border

on the return,  3 of us were pulled aside for questioning

before i even got out my US passport (born here)  the border guard said i "looked too Canadian"   whatever that means

we carried on a serious and sometimes funny conversation after that with him explaining that "after the 9/11 incident and the men coming into the US thru Canada,  there is more security and more questions"

and we had walked thru same station just hours before 

 

I use to leave college after a late night out (while in college) and drive up to Canada for breakfast with no passport 

but those days are over

Sometimes it's plain amazing what these border people cr@p out to their own fellow citizens. Talk about profiling!

2 hours ago, Tara & Rohit said:

Calling to follow up with a request is one thing for sure. But I think we can all agree that wasn't the case this time. And they certainly wouldn't call a number they don't have record of

Just wanted to clear up with the misconception that USCIS never calls, as erroneously stated by someone earlier in this thread.

It's not true that USCIS never calls. They called me from the local field office (no caller ID) to confirm my oath appointment because I had requested a certain month. But my phone number was on the N-400 application.

I traveled internationally the day after my interview and two more times before taking the oath. No big deal. You just have to disclose it on the oath letter. 

16 hours ago, Duke & Marie said:

Let’s face it, who gets married just 2 months after meeting someone? 

I did. Going on 4 years now and never looked back

OP, welcome to VJ! I am from Germany, but with a Hungarian last name

I have a question for you. Have you considered visiting your fiance in the U.S. before permanently moving here? As a Hungarian citizen, you are in the fortunate position that you can visit the U.S. with just your passport and no visa required (it's called Visa Waiver Program). How about flying to America with him in November and spending Thanksgiving and/or Christmas together? Not only would that make for great evidence of the relationship, but you would actually SEE for yourself what you're about to get into. It's very different over here than it is in Europe. The visa costs a good chunk of change. Whether you file in November or not has no bearing on this. See it for yourself first and create relationship evidence by doing so.

Just a friendly piece of advice from someone who almost moved back home...

12 hours ago, LotsOfForms said:

If that is the case then yes a non issue. I did not know that was the case. A non frequent flyer here!

Thanks for the useful information.

No problem. Yes, the US passport works just fine at the automated gates both at Heathrow and Luton. However, a UK citizen might be required to use their UK passport for entry.

On 9/5/2019 at 9:16 AM, LotsOfForms said:

This is what I was getting at. If you have had no issues doing this then I guess authorities don't have an issue with it.

Great, thanks for the clarification.

But isn't this really a non-issue anymore since the UK allows USCs to use the automated passport control? I am a dual USC/German citizen and have always waited in long lines with my wife, who is only a USC. Last time we went back in May, and were both able to use automated passport control (she with her US passport, I with my German EU passport). They told us on the plane back then that this had just been made available for USCs.

Hmmm... withdraw and re-submit but lose a couple days vs. potentially losing a few months and $700+ if your application gets denied for not meeting residency requirements?? Looks like a pretty straight shot to me.

... and you really HAD to submit it the day of (or even 30 minutes early)??

She will enter and leave Mexico on her Mexican passport, and enter the U.S. on her U.S. passport. Not sure why Mexican authorities have asked for her Green Card in the past, possibly just to make sure that she won't be turned down at the border here. In that case, she can just show both passports to satisfy the documentation requirement.

In any event, as a Mexican citizen, it would be ridiculous for her to get a visa to her home country, and it might actually be illegal for her to enter Mexico on a U.S. passport while being a Mexican citizen (same thing over here, she can't enter the U.S. on her Mexican passport).

1 hour ago, Hypnos said:

USCIS is a poorly run federal agency. This has been my opinion for years, and is not based solely on this.

 

They made a similar mistake in the processing of my green card. In 2012 I filed a concurrent widower I-360 and I-485 in April. At the time, processing times were ~3-4 months at Dallas for family-based I-485 (which a widower petition still counts as, since widow/ers remain immediate relatives of a US citizen). Sure enough, I get my interview at Dallas for June. When I go to that interview, the first thing they tell me is that they do not have jurisdiction over my I-360 and so the interview cannot continue. I tell him that I am very sure he does, but they're adamant, and wind up sending my I-360 off to VSC. It took literally months of negotiating with the CIS Ombudsman and a lawyer experienced in the niche area of widow/er immigration lawyer before USCIS agreed to return my applications to Dallas. But then as a final mistake, instead of sending them back to Dallas, they instead sent them to the Houston field office instead. Cue another 6 weeks of Ombudsman intervention before they eventually sent them to Dallas, where I got my second interview and was approved instantly, as would have been the case nine months previously had they known what they were doing.

 

How can I be sure they erred when they sent my I-360 and I-485 to VSC? Because last year I filed a FOIA for a copy of my complete alien file, and buried deep in there was a memo from VSC stating plainly that since my I-360 and I-485 were concurrently filed as a family-based application, they should have been adjudicated by the field office and not sent to VSC, exactly as I and the Ombudsman had told them many months before. And this is not to make it all about me, I am very aware of how unimportant I am in all of this, it's just to highlight that this is not my first rodeo when it comes to USCIS errors. And of course, that error itself had the knock on effect of making it nine months later until I could file for naturalisation, which I require for employment since I'm trying to become a cop in Texas.

 

I have seen so many horror stories posted here about USCIS mistakes, sometimes very basic ones that should have at worst been caught by a supervisor, but were not. The US immigration system need a complete root-and-branch overhaul of all its operations, and has done probably for decades now. But since that would cost $$$ and it only really negatively impacts immigrants, it's obviously not a priority for anyone, and so we continue to kick this can down the road, again, and again, and again.

 

This thought has not been lost on me. All I can think of over these past few days is how much of a fool I was to not wait 1-2 days after the eligibility date, and that all likelihood I would have my oath letter in my hands already had I done that. That is why I posted this thread, as a cautionary tale to encourage people not to make the same mistake I did. Now that being said, I still filed within the 90 day period and by the letter of the law was unfairly denied, but if I could do it all over again I would obviously not file until a couple of days after.

I understand your position, and how it must feel to be in a USCIS predicament yet again. And for what it’s worth, it’s always easy for someone on the outside to give great advice after the fact. I just don’t like getting personal with people. I have had such a great experience with USCIS in the context of my N400 that I cannot support name calling of people that are just trying to do their job - some better, some worse. 

Enough with the smart talk. If you need any support filing a service request (that option is not that obvious), PM me and I’ll be glad to help. It worked for me several times to successfully push back Oath Ceremony appointments, and every time I sent one I either received a personalized email or a phone call from my field office. They do read those and are pretty good at responding. At least here in Denver. 

...and if that fails, go get the sledgehammer out. 

1 hour ago, afrocraft said:

He has grounds to be pissed. Hundreds of dollars in fees plus a year's wait time is no small commitment. People should realize that USCIS does not grant citizenship; they merely confirm your eligibility for said citizenship. 

Funny. So you came to this country to make your position known that, just because someone couldn’t wait a couple of hours and potentially lost $725 in application fees, they can just call people names? Funny understanding of “Land of the Free”. 

And in response to your other comment, a naturalization certificate is actually issued by USCIS (it actually reads “...such person is admitted as a citizen of the United States of America”, signed by the director of USCIS). Perhaps it’s a good idea to take a moment to actually read what’s printed on yours (that is if you have one, not sure when looking at your timeline).

So unless you feel that there’s some other authority that can make an immigrant a citizen, I’m sure there’s plenty of people here that would like to know.

Unless you were just being “misunderstood” again. 

22 minutes ago, Going through said:

Likely @Hypnos will get this decision overturned in the end.  Unfortunately he's faced with this hassle, though.

I agree. The thing that bothers me though is the demeaning way of him talking about USCIS. I get it, they're not pleasant to deal with, they make mistakes, take an awful lot of time, are not very transparent and every time I had to deal with them, I dreaded it too.

But from someone who actually followed his journey all the way through the end, I can't help but sense some form of entitlement on the OP's end. "Trained chimps". Is that what the OP is going to think of the person that will administer the oath one day and enable him/her to actually pursue his/her career goals? As long as they make you a citizen, fine, but if not, eff them? Becoming a citizen should be a little more than just getting a piece of paper that you need for a passport or to get the job you want. The OP had their share in this situation as well. I don't believe that making as much noise as you can is the way to get you where you want in this situation.

25 minutes ago, afrocraft said:

You misunderstood. I meant to say, Stop and think. Consider the facts first.

 

Better?

I didn't misunderstand. You phrased your comment poorly. And clearly so if you feel the need to put your comment into perspective.

It's not always someone else's fault. Consider that.

24 minutes ago, Going through said:

You had mentioned  "it strikes me as odd that somebody would know to the minute when they become eligible.  Just the fact of counting 31 and 30 day months to get the exact date sounds like too much work to do"

 

Just mentioning what I did earlier, as it's probably not as odd as you may think, especially in the cases of those planning their career goals.

That was actually @Eric-Pris, not me. 

1 minute ago, afrocraft said:

Stop, please. This is getting embarrassing. Read OP again. The Received Date was on the day he became eligible. He still got denied.

I suggest you refrain from telling people to “stop”, just because you don’t agree with their opinion. I don’t agree with yours either and am not trying to shut you up. 

7 minutes ago, Going through said:

Some people are in more of a "rush", or "keep track to the minute" to get citizenship due to a job offer/career plans that entail being a citizen to be eligible for it, as one example.

While I can appreciate that rationale, I fail to see what difference it makes to file pretty much right on the hour vs. later in the day. Except that you're taking an unnecessary risk for your application to be denied.

6 minutes ago, afrocraft said:

But they shouldn't penalize people who apply according to the rules. If someone chooses to stay up late to file, what's that to you?

What rules do you keep referring to??? The date that the application is RECEIVED is the date that matters. And if you cut it too close by filing at 2 AM, without knowing where the acceptance server is located, you're not going by any rules except your own ones.

2 minutes ago, afrocraft said:

It does recognize your local time. That's not hard technically. It won't let you submit a second before the window opens, local time.

So if I happen to be in Europe, when the clock turns midnight and it's still 6 PM on the East Coast and 3 PM on the West Coast, and I file my application because the system lets me, you're saying that I have a right for it to be approved just because it was already past midnight for me?

8 minutes ago, afrocraft said:

So USCIS should make it clear in the application instructions what clock they use. That's what a competent organization would do, no?

Perhaps you want to tell them at your next visit.