S2N

Husband just entered the US via Miami. Tried to use MPC, but it was down at MIA this AM apparently. Asked him reason for the trip (“to go to a wedding”, we’re going to one this weekend) and how long he was staying and sent him on his merry way with no fuss. No questions at all about the pending I-130.

Actual trends are on average 14.5 months right now. I think we’ve started saying 13-17 to account for speediness and slowness. It was trending towards being in the 11 month range that was seen 3 years ago, but March 2024 threw a wrench in it because that was the last month before increased fees so we don’t know realistically how long it’s taking them to process consular cases. April will throw another wrench in it because that’s when they started giving the $50 online filing discount. Most of the I-130 data posted online tracks paper I-130s. Those were already more heavily waited towards AOS cases, but with the discount the main reason to file paper now is if you want to concurrently file all the same forms. Meaning we’re probably going to be flying blind as to approval trends except for anecdotes for the next few months.

Not who you asked, but my husband wasn’t asked anything about the pending I-130 when he entered at the end of April. They asked why he was here (“vacation”) and if he was staying with family (“yes”) and nothing else in the MPC line. Highly recommend it if they’re returning MPC nationals. In his case it also probably helps that it’s very obvious he doesn’t speak English so they tend to give him the answers he just has to agree with them if they’re true.

Reading through all the posts, the only one that I see where there were issues other than an employee not following policy, was an adult applying for federal employment where they need something that triggers in SAVES, and in that case the government was fine if they applied for an N-600. USCIS wouldn’t have the authority to overrule a valid passport in this case per their AAO. That is a definitely a valid reason, and parents should be aware of it. Personally, I’d let the child pay for it as an adult in college. I don’t see any real benefit to it, even as someone working in the federal space. I know you never said it was required for proof of citizenship, but it was claimed if it expired someone would be left without proof and that the CoC would be needed. That’s not true. Needing it for a SAVES trigger when completing SF-85/85P/86 is a reason that might appeal to some people, but by the time a child with derivative citizenship today applies for a federal job it’ll probably be a different system and might not be required then. To me, a social security clerk not doing their job in 60 years and the potential that in 30 years my kid might need to pay for one as a condition of federal employment aren’t reasons for me to pay $1385 now. They might be for some people. We just need to be realistic about what the benefits and costs are.

Was going to edit, but found the DCSA doc here: link Looks like the old A number was how they were able to do it for my naturalized coworkers as that would have triggered SAVES. CoC would probably be needed for this. For US born do it through SSA, which is where I was getting tripped up. Happy to admit I’m wrong on this point. That’s something for parents to consider if it’s worth the costs. I’d personally wait to see if the child wanted to go into federal service in college before paying.

Yes, there are some federal jobs that might, but having gone through the federal employment process many times, they normally just confirm with SSA. Work with many naturalized citizen coworkers who have a TS or TS/SCI; none of them have ever been requested to provide physical proof of citizenship, though they have been asked for passports to verify travel history. We’re talking edge cases here, and edge cases aren’t a good reason to suggest someone needs to pay $1385 when they can pay $135 and largely have the same benefits except maybe some federal jobs after they become adults.

That’s not true, though. The Department of State issuing a passport is definitive proof of US citizenship even in derivative citizenship cases, and claiming otherwise is factually incorrect. You can renew a passport with an expired passport within the last five years, and if you have derivative and let it lapse for more than five years, you can request DoS search its files to show proof of having issued a passport and you can then apply to renew it with their record search as proof of citizenship. Same if it’s lost. travel.state.gov makes it clear. All of which is cheaper and quicker than an N-600. I get that people might want an N-600 because it makes them feel safer, but there’s not been one example given of an actual use case where the claimed federal government benefit lists a CoC in preference to a passport. If people want to get one that’s completely fine, but they should know what the facts are and what the government itself claims. —SSA: their website lists passport above CoC when changing status —Passport: initial one can be obtained without a CoC, be renewed within 5 years of expiration with an expired passport, and if lost or outdated can conduct a search of passport records and reissue —Employment: I-9 lists passport; most federal jobs do not require physical proof of citizenship and just confirm via SSA these days (you file OF-306 and they do it that way) — State ID: states accept passports as proof of U.S. citizenship for Real ID purposes Voting: not sure which states require this and not a passport, but if that’s the case it’d be rare. I’m more than happy to admit I’m wrong if someone can provide an example of a specific federal government benefit that lists a CoC as being accepted as proof of citizenship but passports not being accepted. Not anecdotal experiences of individual employees not knowing what’s on the government’s own website. If we’re going to be telling people that it is highly suggested to pay over $1000 we need facts of where the government prefers it. So far I can’t find a single example of the government ever claiming that other than vague language on a USCIS FAQ that is easily refuted by looking up the benefits,

Just to use SSA as an example, they list a passport on the list of things they accept for proof of change in citizenship status higher than a CoC: link Passport is also accepted as definitive proof for form I-9, Real ID, and basically every government benefit I have ever encountered someone needing, and while the law review article cites the FAQ, it doesn’t provide the full context of the FAQ saying it’s optional if you have a passport, and then listing examples of where it might be needed. In those examples, the relevant government webpages all state they accept passports as proof within the U.S. the FAQ is also inconsistent with the AAO ruling I linked to earlier. Newish to the sponsoring a spouse world, but been involved with immigration world for a long time, and I don’t know anyone who has ever been asked to show a naturalization certificate or citizenship certificate if they have a passport. It’s conclusive evidence of citizenship per both BIA and USCIS AAO. Many people want one to be safe, and that’s their choice, but it’s factually wrong to state that a passport issued by DoS is not conclusive proof of citizenship. Whether the costs are worth the benefits a personal choice, not a legal necessity. Anyway, someone should split this thread. Edit: saw @Dashinka’s linked post after this. The states where it’s needed to register to vote or one of the federal jobs where it’s needed make sense; though most federal jobs confirm citizenship via SSA these days. Both of those are fairly rare use cases, though.

Probably worth splitting this to another thread, but just scanning the article it seems to assuming that DHS SAVE is an accurate database. From personal experience with my mother, it’s not, and her US passport was the only record of her naturalization after losing her naturalization certificate as USCIS had no data stored on it within the databases and had to do a manual record search. I’m personally biased in favor of trusting State more to get it right than USCIS, since I’ve had nothing but positive interactions with them. Meanwhile USCIS lost my mother’s naturalization records. I’d personally feel much safer if my kids only had a passport than only had a CoC because I have more faith in DoS to keep their records up to date.

Thats an example of an initial passport issuance after parent naturalization. Once a passport is issued that is evidence of citizenship and the record of its issuance in a file search would be sufficient. You’d need the same evidence for a CoC after parent naturalization as the standard is the same unless you previously got a passport, in which case the passport would be proof. If you got a CoC first the CoC would be proof for the passport. They’re legally equivalent. Is there any evidence of State not accepting its own free file search records as proof of citizenship after initial issuance? That’s the question here.

I just linked to the USCIS administrative ruling stating the opposite, which also references the legally controlling BIA ruling. Anecdotal evidence is great; and many people file N-600 because they don’t understand the law and want to be safe, but as a matter of law a passport or record of a passport having been issued is legally equivalent to a citizenship certificate, and this is recognized by DOJ, DHS, and DoS. Edit: Here is where State discusses how to get a passport if you’ve lost one and have no other proof: file search at the bottom

Incorrect. This was actually the case I was thinking of. The Secretary of State has authority to make definitive judgments on citizenship status. One of the ways he he exercises that authority by issuing passports (all passports are issued under his authority.) Based on BIA precedent, the issuance of a passport is conclusive proof of citizenship. USCIS does not have independent authority to make a contrary determination if the Secretary of State has ever issued a passport, even per there own internal ruling, and they must follow the State Department on this. Individuals might want a citizenship certificate in case they lose a passport, but it’s costly, takes time, and ultimately it’d be cheaper and quicker to get a replacement passport after losing one since the State Department will conduct a free search of passport records issued after 1994 and considers that sufficient proof of citizenship to reissue. Before 1994 it costs $150, which is still cheaper than a citizenship certificate.

Department of State is not part of DHS. They have independent statutory authority. Not all that important here but it’s important to note because in many cases their determinations outweigh DHS. USCIS and CBP are both part of DHS. Yah, pretty sure we’ve had this discussion before: some CBP officers are sticklers on that and it ends up working out fine (your case.) Some endorse as CR-1 and USCIS screws up and the person has to file an I-90. Others are happy to endorse as IR-1 if the marriage certificate is in their system or if you have it on you, and in these cases USCIS almost never screws up. It doesn’t hurt to ask. I just wouldn’t make a big deal about it if they say no.

Just saw an I-130 approval after K-3 come in for Texas Service Center with a PD of 9/25/24 on one of the I-130 discords. K-3 filed in April 2025. No expedites filed or anything else that would make them jump the line. The one thing I’ve seen consistent in all the supposed “K-3 approvals” is they were originally routed to Texas. Why TSC would be acting in a different way than the rest of USCIS is beyond me, especially since I-130 is all electronic now and they share cases. That’s a hard case to explain otherwise, though (assume the discord user didn’t omit anything.)

CBP almost always endorses, but if they don’t remind them to. If they forget to endorse it you go to a deferred inspection site and they can fix it there.

Correct, but most of the stories of them making mistakes are from when CBP notes CR-1 and they don’t bother double checking. Like I said, not an end of the world thing either way, since it’s easy to correct, but removing opportunities for human error is always positive if it can be done.

It’s a free form to fill out and fairly simple. Just takes a while (current processing time is 21.5 months) and you’d be using the visa in the passport/ADIT stamp until they reissue. You’d probably have to get USCIS to reissue an ADIT since it will be more than a year. They typically mail it to you after reaching out to the contact center, but it might be in person. See link So an inconvenience but not the worst one. That’s why it’s best to ask CBP to note IR-1 as the class of admissions so theres less room for screwup, but also not the end of the world if they don’t.

It was at 11 months a few years ago so not out of the question necessarily. They’ve been processing approximately one month every 2-3 weeks since the change in administrations in January until you hit March 2024. They’re about to finish March 2024 and move to April. 26 weeks left in the year/2.5 weeks per month =10.4 months processed by 12/31. That’d put January as having December approvals. At 3 weeks/month that would put us as being processed in January 2026. I think it’s overly optimistic, but there’s a mathematical basis for it if they keep up the pace.

Your son is entering the U.S. to live with you, correct? If so the second CBP endorses the visa he’s a U.S. citizen and you can apply for his US passport. You would follow the travel.state.gov instructions for child citizens. A US passport is definitive proof of U.S. citizenship and you do not need to file any other form or deal with USCIS ever again unless you want a citizenship certificate (form N-600) I see no benefit to the N-600 other than unlike a passport it doesn’t expire. A passport is quicker and cheaper and the State Department has explicit statutory authority to definitively determine citizenship status. Applying for a passport is all you need to do. Others prefer a citizenship certificate to have proof they never need to renew. End of the day it’s up to you. AOS would not be applicable because he would gain citizenship automatically as an action of the law itself.

If there’s any errors you spot you can upload the additional answers sheet with your correction (part 9 of I-130; page 12 of the PDF) as unsolicited evidence making a correction. You’d select “Additional Information” or whatever is closest to that in the drop down. Worst case they ignore it and you get an RFE. Best case they review it and skip the RFE. Immigration officers have done AMAs on Reddit that they usually review all unsolicited evidence before deciding to issue an RFE. Sometimes they will reject early if there’s an error. Other times it’s an RFE more than a year later.

The only service center where there’s even anecdotal evidence of K-3 working to speed up is Texas, fwiw. Even there I’m not entirely convinced.

Current last name. Peoples’ last names change because of previous marriage or adoption so it’s common to have this question on marriage applications.

January 2024 is on the late end of average processing at this point. They’re approving late March 2024 on average and they’re about to move to April. The ones from before that are typically the more complex cases. OP — what is the country and are there any anticipated red flags?

You would just request NVC schedule for Naples. You can send them the message yourself.

@TBoneTX was graciously telling me to stop before I stuck too many feet into my mouth. Best of luck and keep us updated.