Rekyrts

I do not gives you any built-in advantage over someone without kids. If you sense you have a difficult case -- or simply like the surety of legal advice (and really, when it comes to USCIS, who could blame you?) -- I would start with the link posted above. I would definitely check the statutory requirements first and familiarize yourself with them, because a lot of them can't be overcome/bypassed, lawyer or no lawyer. Also, as someone who truly believes in the overall value of legal representation in life, I will state that naturalization is he one step that DYI is quite possible when the case is starightforward.

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!

Condolences...

I try to be nice to civil servants, but that's wild. Sadly, quite believable....

I agree with the idea that it makes sense to be over-prepared.

Just saw this: https://www.newschannel5.com/news/tn-secretary-of-states-office-sent-out-14-000-letters-asking-voters-to-prove-citizenship-ahead-of-election

Silliness. Don't sweat it. My only concern would be if some rambunctious DMV employee registered him in error prior to naturalizing without him knowing. It has been known to happen. For that reason, I'd probably go above and beyond and send something trackable saying he didn't register to vote till (date post-naturalization). Interested to hear what others suggest.

The simple answer is both conditions must be met. She must be married to a USC for 3 years AND have had her green card for 3 years (I'm purposely avoiding muddying the waters with the 90-day early filing allowance). So, using the data you provided, January 2026 is when you would have satisfied both conditions. The date you would use is the "residence since" date on the physical green card; the previous time in a previous status would not count.

I have found that with government agencies, it is sometimes a good idea to gently prompt them with their own policies. Thankkfully, a lot of the relevant policy manuals are online. For example, the one that deal with this seems to be: https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0110212075 I remember having to deal with SSA a while back, and being turned away because the staff onsite didn't know of an Emergency Message that had just been piblished the week before. So, I found the relevant policy, emailed a regional supervisor (explained the issue, and really didn't complain too much about the overworked onsite staffers who perhaps missed the policy update), and got a phone call that afternoon inviting me to come over and get the changes made. They should know this stuff, and I shouldn't have had to show it to them, but hey...

I agree with this. I suggest learning all 100.

Both. And yes, a lot of people file for citizenship based on marriage while on the I-751 to be adjudicated; search for "combo interview" on this site for some great feedback on how to navigate that. Good luck!

I celebrate with OP, but I do find it a tad disconcerting. Who is it easier for? It's one thing if the IO suggests it, but if an applicant decides to go one route, and has everything in order, why make the applicant change it? *sigh* there goes my cynical mind again...

Having dealt with USCIS/INS over a few decades, simply put, I have learned to do my own due dilligence. I've never had to deal with something like this, but I have had to deal with their errors. USCIS has mistakenly conferred citizenship a lot of times before. As such, I would never assume that it couldn't happen again. For me, it's not about the cost, but about protecting your rights. All that craziness the IO was asking? The names? The country you didn't visit? For me, that just underscores how off the wall the interview was. I would think the easiest way to rescind/NOIR an approved petition seems to something like this. I think the previous suggestion of doing a FOIA is fantastic. Easily DIY, and should answer any major questions. If my oath ceremony preceded the 5-yr mark by a day, I would absolutely make sure it was corrected.

This makes sense to me. I *think* that, at this point, it's a fairly easy fix.

This is all so very weird. The The thing about the country and middle name is so off.

Personally, I would not leave my immigration wellbeing up the the hope that USCIS corrects the mistake it itself (via its staff) made. The way I look at it is thus: The law says 5 years USCIS staff do not have the discretion to override that Based on this (and assuming my layman's interpretation is correct), I would proactively speak to an immigration attorney and reach out to the FO via traceable mail. There is no way I would leave it as-is. Even though OP did nothing wrong (IMHO), it doesn't erase the problem.

I agree.

Unfortunately (per my understanding), that is not how it works. People can and do suffer from USCIS mistakes, so really, it's on us to make sure we know the rules and make sure we do not benefit from inadvertent mistakes. I'm happy to be coorected, but my understanding is that the general provision is 5 years. Period. Not 4 years and 11 months. Improperly obtained immigration benefits have been reversed, including citizenship. I feel for the poster, but if I were that poster, I would REALLY endeavor to get that fixed ASAP.

Got ya. Yes, if the IOs are doing that, cool. But the suspicious part of me wonders if an IO could also skip what they considered to be easy questions...

Ah. Makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. Still don't like the idea of the IO having the ability to skip. Why allow it? I like the idea of 10 random questions... but read them as presented.

Fair! I hear you. There is something about allowing interviewers to select the specific question that makes me a little uncomfortable for applicants.

Congratulations! I have always been curious: so they can select the civic questions to be asked? I had assumed they had a program that selected them randomly.

Correct me if I am wrong, but could it be that they have been married less than the three years required? Happy to be corrected if I'm off base, but I would assume being married kess than three years would trigger a "too early" denial, correct?

How long have you been married, @Hmmehanna?