BugsBurger

USCIS policy manual doesn't require GC/PR to have been procured via marriage to be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. One could have become a PR via E26 and be eligible for naturalization in 5 years, OR they could be married to a USC the day after they got their E26 PR and be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. Point is, how one got their PR is immaterial to eligibility for Nats under the 3-year rule if they're married to a USC. OP's friend's gotcha is that their now USC spouse wouldn't have been a USC for at least 3 years if they naturalized in 2021, and in this case they'd be eligible in 2024 even under the 3-year rule. Please consult the policy manual and go over the Naturalization Eligibility Tool -- https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/learn-about-citizenship/naturalization-eligibility-tool

College, grad school or medical residency out of state, in a particular area of specialization, is as beyond control as US Armed Force deployments, or employment. One can always choose not to work away from spouse, or even quit US Armed Forces. Flipping burgers in a state on the other side of the country is employment related, but doubt that could be dressed as involuntary separation. Similarly, a po-dunk 1-2 year cert widely available from any community college across the US, wouldn't be a strong exemption, but highly selective college and post-grad programs would be a strong case. Crucial point is, is there sufficient and well-presented evidence to make the case that the couple continues to be in a healthy marriage, but living apart for a reasons other than break down of the marriage, marital woes, etc. Seems like the OP made the case in their favor.

The OP was ungracious in victory, but USCIS indeed does care about "life circumstances" and IO didn't go against their requirements.

Consult USCIS Policy Manual for "involuntary separation" https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-g-chapter-2 and "involuntary separation, even if prolonged, does not preclude naturalization" https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-319/section-319.1 as a direct reg citation.

College, grad school or medical residency out of state, in a particular area of specialization, is as beyond control as US Armed Force deployments, or employment. One can always choose not to work away from spouse, or even quit US Armed Forces. Flipping burgers in a state on the other side of the country is employment related, but doubt that could be dressed as involuntary separation. Similarly, a po-dunk 1-2 year cert widely available from any community college across the US, wouldn't be a strong exemption, but highly selective college and post-grad programs would be a strong case. Crucial point is, is there sufficient and well-presented evidence to make the case that the couple continues to be in a healthy marriage, but living apart for a reasons other than break down of the marriage, marital woes, etc. Seems like the OP made the case in their favor.

College, grad school or medical residency out of state, in a particular area of specialization, is as beyond control as US Armed Force deployments, or employment. One can always choose not to work away from spouse, or even quit US Armed Forces. Flipping burgers in a state on the other side of the country is employment related, but doubt that could be dressed as involuntary separation. Similarly, a po-dunk 1-2 year cert widely available from any community college across the US, wouldn't be a strong exemption, but highly selective college and post-grad programs would be a strong case. Crucial point is, is there sufficient and well-presented evidence to make the case that the couple continues to be in a healthy marriage, but living apart for a reasons other than break down of the marriage, marital woes, etc. Seems like the OP made the case in their favor.

The OP was ungracious in victory, but USCIS indeed does care about "life circumstances" and IO didn't go against their requirements.

Consult USCIS Policy Manual for "involuntary separation" https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-g-chapter-2 and "involuntary separation, even if prolonged, does not preclude naturalization" https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-319/section-319.1 as a direct reg citation.

USCIS policy manual doesn't require GC/PR to have been procured via marriage to be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. One could have become a PR via E26 and be eligible for naturalization in 5 years, OR they could be married to a USC the day after they got their E26 PR and be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. Point is, how one got their PR is immaterial to eligibility for Nats under the 3-year rule if they're married to a USC. OP's friend's gotcha is that their now USC spouse wouldn't have been a USC for at least 3 years if they naturalized in 2021, and in this case they'd be eligible in 2024 even under the 3-year rule. Please consult the policy manual and go over the Naturalization Eligibility Tool -- https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/learn-about-citizenship/naturalization-eligibility-tool

USCIS policy manual doesn't require GC/PR to have been procured via marriage to be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. One could have become a PR via E26 and be eligible for naturalization in 5 years, OR they could be married to a USC the day after they got their E26 PR and be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. Point is, how one got their PR is immaterial to eligibility for Nats under the 3-year rule if they're married to a USC. OP's friend's gotcha is that their now USC spouse wouldn't have been a USC for at least 3 years if they naturalized in 2021, and in this case they'd be eligible in 2024 even under the 3-year rule. Please consult the policy manual and go over the Naturalization Eligibility Tool -- https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/learn-about-citizenship/naturalization-eligibility-tool

John Q. Khosravi https://www.jqklaw.com/

Man's an academic, and a practicing immigration attorney. Nice person, with a strong understanding of the law.

Yes, and the same is true under the 5-year rule, too. Suggestion was merely that if the OP is eager to apply sooner, they can under the 3-year rule. Of course, there are grievous offenses that would outright disqualify the petitioner, and may even yank their PR status, or a frequent pattern of immoral behavior, even if resulting charges are dismissed, etc., that would result in a denial.

3-year rule has a 3 year lookback of "established good moral character" requirement.

USCIS policy manual doesn't require GC/PR to have been procured via marriage to be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. One could have become a PR via E26 and be eligible for naturalization in 5 years, OR they could be married to a USC the day after they got their E26 PR and be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. Point is, how one got their PR is immaterial to eligibility for Nats under the 3-year rule if they're married to a USC. OP's friend's gotcha is that their now USC spouse wouldn't have been a USC for at least 3 years if they naturalized in 2021, and in this case they'd be eligible in 2024 even under the 3-year rule. Please consult the policy manual and go over the Naturalization Eligibility Tool -- https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/learn-about-citizenship/naturalization-eligibility-tool

The OP was ungracious in victory, but USCIS indeed does care about "life circumstances" and IO didn't go against their requirements.

Consult USCIS Policy Manual for "involuntary separation" https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-g-chapter-2 and "involuntary separation, even if prolonged, does not preclude naturalization" https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-319/section-319.1 as a direct reg citation.

Thanks for input @BugsBurger
Regardless of whether OP applies under 3 or 5 year rule, the DUI probation was completed in 2022. And it still may be a problem for good moral character.
I think a lawyer should be consulted to understand if that's a problem, and if it is, whether 2 years of probation are "good" years or "bad" years for the purposes of good moral character.

The OP was ungracious in victory, but USCIS indeed does care about "life circumstances" and IO didn't go against their requirements.

Consult USCIS Policy Manual for "involuntary separation" https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-g-chapter-2 and "involuntary separation, even if prolonged, does not preclude naturalization" https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-319/section-319.1 as a direct reg citation.

USCIS policy manual doesn't require GC/PR to have been procured via marriage to be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. One could have become a PR via E26 and be eligible for naturalization in 5 years, OR they could be married to a USC the day after they got their E26 PR and be eligible for naturalization under the 3-year rule. Point is, how one got their PR is immaterial to eligibility for Nats under the 3-year rule if they're married to a USC. OP's friend's gotcha is that their now USC spouse wouldn't have been a USC for at least 3 years if they naturalized in 2021, and in this case they'd be eligible in 2024 even under the 3-year rule. Please consult the policy manual and go over the Naturalization Eligibility Tool -- https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/learn-about-citizenship/naturalization-eligibility-tool