In my case, the IO checked "uscis will mail you a written decision". In my mind, I thought, well, the IO will simply take my file to the supervisor for review, and then I would get a letter in less than a month. I guess I was wrong.My ESC No. is ESC*002080XXX.
scoomara and nyc_newbie, were your applications recommended for approval or did you get "decision cannot be made at this time" checked off? scoomara, if you don't receive an oath letter within 120 days of your interview, you can file a WOM under 1447(b). 1447(b) is a legal provision, stating that a decision on a case must be made within 120 days of the interview.
Hi Vorpal,
This is where the tick mark is on my N-652. It further states "At this time, it appears that you have established your eligibility for naturalization. If final approval is granted, you will be notified when and where to report for the Oath Ceremony"
Hi Vorpal,
My interview was on April 17th, 08 at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan. If you look at my previous posts my case is a bit complicated. I'm not sure if they are doing additional checks or it is sitting on some desk.
The thought that my file may be just sitting on someone's desk unattended for almost 3 months now is what pisses me off. I wish the IO had requested me to go look for the receipts or something because even requesting a DMV record on me will just confirm what I said and brought to the interview. I also know that no matter how many background checks they might perform on my record, they won't find anything simply because there is nothing else.
That's why this waiting game can become so frustrating!
I have made 2 infopass visits already, one in May and another in June and you are right Vorpal, the official line is "the IO has 120 days to make a decision on your case". They won't even bother to get into details about it.
Since 90 days will be coming up soon, I'll definitely make another infopass.
Do you know if they will respond differently to my infopass inquiry at 90 days?
As far as I can remember, and I think I remember everything from that interview, the IO spent way too much time asking about the tickets and criticizing the certificates of disposition from the courts (saying they were not enough evidence and that they lacked enough details). We still went through my application and confirmed all the information I had filled in and at no point did anything else in my application become an issue.Were there any complications with your case? Again, I highly doubt they care about checking your driving record, so I'd exclude that from the list of possibilities.
Considering that 90 days is only 30 days away from the deadline by which a decision in your case must be made, they will most likely open a service inquiry on your case. I've seen the 90 day timeframe pop up in various threads on this board, and it seems to be the minimum reported time elapsed from the interview when the IOs will actually give you a response other than "we have 120 days". I honestly hope that your and scoomara's oath delays are fluke occurrences and not a sign of things to come for NYC.
As far as I can remember, and I think I remember everything from that interview, the IO spent way too much time asking about the tickets and criticizing the certificates of disposition from the courts (saying they were not enough evidence and that they lacked enough details). We still went through my application and confirmed all the information I had filled in and at no point did anything else in my application become an issue.
The only thing I noticed was that the IO seemed moody from the get go. If I remember correctly, she didn't even say hi to me when she came to get me from the waiting room and I found that very odd. So, it's very likely that my case may be unique in the sense that I probably caught an IO who was having a bad day, or just "one of those" IOs you don't want handling your case.
I'll peg my hopes on the 90 day timeframe and hope that they'll open a service request on the case when I make the infopass visit.
I think you are exactly right. You should have seen her face when she was asking about the tickets! I was like WTF! All these because of speeding tickets??? It's not like I was caught driving 100 MPH. One ticket was 65/55, the other was 56/55 (reduced by the traffic police officer) and the other one was 46/30.It's quite possible that someone is purposely jerking you around.
I think you are exactly right. You should have seen her face when she was asking about the tickets! I was like WTF! All these because of speeding tickets??? It's not like I was caught driving 100 MPH. One ticket was 65/55, the other was 56/55 (reduced by the traffic police officer) and the other one was 46/30.
In fact the last thing she asked me at the end of the interview when she was getting ready to escort me out was whether I had any other document that I wanted to show her especially regarding those tickets! And I calmly said no. I thought she was going to give me a RFE but she didn't. Another thing, towards the end of the interview, I remember her asking "were you ticketed for driving too slow?" and I was like what's that all about? All the evidence in front of her said 'speeding' and she's asking me whether I was ticketed for driving too slow? And then I realized it was most likely a trick question and she was probably trying to see if she can build a "good moral character" case against me. So I simply said I was ticketed for 'driving above the speed limit' hoping that that was clear enough.
So yes, she did seem a little obsessed with the tickets and like you said, I had the same feeling that she was getting a little too personal about it.
I'll give it a shot and see whether they'll let me speak to a supervisor about the case because honestly, I didn't think the IO was even making any effort to be professional during the interview and that may very well be the reason why I'm still here waiting.
I think my case is more of an exception rather than the norm. I understand most IOs don't bother with traffic tickets unless of course they are DUI related. So in all likelihood, you'll be just fine.Sorry did not read the earlier posts. Same here in DC DO some IOs are sticklers and some are very lax. I have had my share of traffic tickets (if I only knew they would come back to haunt me some day). My interview is on the 3rd. Guess I will shoot a prayer and go see what happens.
Hi Everyone,
This is the first time I'm posting so I'm not sure if there is a better thread to ask this question. My friend Arif just had his naturalization application denied without prejudice. The reason for the denial is that Arif got his green card through marriage - the problem is that Arif got a divorce from his wife (the person who petitioned for him) prior to his adjustment of status was fully adjudicated. During the adjustment of status interview Arif was married. Arif and his wife got a divorce about two years later. About four/five months after the divorce Arif received his green card. Now USCIS says that since he divorced BEFORE his adjustment of status was adjudicated he never properly received his green card and therefore can't naturalize. Arif is currently married to another woman who he already filed an I-130 petition for. I have a few questions:
1. Since his naturalization application was denied without prejudice - what does this mean for his current status? Will he have problems when he looks to renew his green card?
2. Does he have a winnable argument against USCIS at a hearing if he makes an equitable argument that there was unreasonable delay by USCIS in processing Arif's adjustment of status application? Arif can prove bona fide marriage to the petitioner wife and his ex-wife will do what ever she can to help. Is there any winnable argument here?
Any advice/tips would be greatly appreciated!
JH
I just google Garden City and it's in LI. So how do you guys get there without a car?
What train/bus go there?
How big is it compared to Federal plaza?
I just google Garden City and it's in LI. So how do you guys get there without a car?
What train/bus go there?
How big is it compared to Federal plaza?