My interview....I can't believe it!!!

goro said:
Thanks again. I guess while I wait for "final decision" letter I'll have to try as much as possible. This is bureaucracy! This is not what this country was built on. It was built on God, freedom and rights, not on bureaucracy.
Click to expand...

There is nothing you can do. USCIS has to be strict about this 90-day rule. If they allow one day difference, then it become 89-day rule and those who filed 2 days early will satrt to complain about beuracracy and then it bcame 88 day-rule. Eventually there is no rule at all
and everyone can file right after becoming permanent resident --- or even before that.

If you complain that USCIS should have just returned your package at the beginning with out cashing yoru check, then you have a point. But you have to face the reality that USCIS has no
resources to do a careful and through screening at that point either. If they decide to do that
application will either go up 100%
 
WBH said:
USCIS has no
resources to do a careful and through screening at that point either.
Click to expand...
It's not a lack of USCIS resources but a lack of procedures being followed since the initial processing is supposed to catch applicants who have applied too early.
 
WBH said:
There is nothing you can do. USCIS has to be strict about this 90-day rule. If they allow one day difference, then it become 89-day rule and those who filed 2 days early will satrt to complain about beuracracy and then it bcame 88 day-rule. Eventually there is no rule at all
and everyone can file right after becoming permanent resident --- or even before that.

If you complain that USCIS should have just returned your package at the beginning with out cashing yoru check, then you have a point. But you have to face the reality that USCIS has no
resources to do a careful and through screening at that point either. If they decide to do that
application will either go up 100%
Click to expand...

I think you meant the 90-day rule will become 91-day rule then 92-day rule :cool:
 
Bobsmyth said:
It's not a lack of USCIS resources but a lack of procedures being followed since the initial processing is supposed to catch applicants who have applied too early.
Click to expand...

They should build that kind of verification check into the application form. This at least works
for those who filled teh form electronically first
 
I have a basic question for goro. Looks like u calculated to the level of when the package will be sent and delivered in the first place. Why bother to be that granular in your planning. A day here and there, may be even a month wouldn't have made a difference in the grand scheme of things. I don't think USCIS will bend rules to accommodate the one-offs.

You are where you are, you might just wait and reapply, knowing that a small error sometimes does cost some money. Its like having an accident and paying deductible for your car, even though you had only a small judgment error.

Just trying to play it down, its not end of the world, you may still get it in due course. Sometimes things happen the way they happen.

my two cents,
cheers
 
gc_man said:
I have a basic question for goro. Looks like u calculated to the level of when the package will be sent and delivered in the first place. Why bother to be that granular in your planning. A day here and there, may be even a month wouldn't have made a difference in the grand scheme of things. I don't think USCIS will bend rules to accommodate the one-offs.

You are where you are, you might just wait and reapply, knowing that a small error sometimes does cost some money. Its like having an accident and paying deductible for your car, even though you had only a small judgment error.

Just trying to play it down, its not end of the world, you may still get it in due course. Sometimes things happen the way they happen.

my two cents,
cheers
Click to expand...

Yeah but it's their error, not mine; would you want to pay for someone else's error? It's like having an accident where you pay for what other person who's liable. This happened to me as well by the way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Everywhere I looked on the web it says that they review the application at Lockbox and reject it even if it is one day earlier. I didn't find any information related to what happens when application gets one day earlier on uscis website though. If anyone finds any info on their website, please share the link.
 
goro said:
Yeah but it's their error, not mine; would you want to pay for someone else's error? It's like having an accident where you pay for what other person who's liable. This happened to me as well by the way.
Click to expand...

USCIS clearly alwready says there is no refund if application is declined. For their sake, it does not make difference whether the ineligibility is due to one day too early application
or any other reasons. Otherwise everyone will demand screeening to be as through as
kick out any ineligibel applicants and is USCIS accomodate that, then what is teh point of
interview later etc?

But no matter what, I doube any USCIS will examine your file more carefully than yourself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bobsmyth said:
According to a USCIS stakeholder meeting last year, the lockbox review process should reject an applicant who has not met eligibility requirements.

'Rejecting naturalization applications because the applicant had not been a permanent resident for the required eligibility period is one of the criteria that the Lockbox reviews when accepting applications."

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=249f44ee95dea210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=c8b95fae4be5e210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD
Click to expand...

Yes, that is the established procedure, but it's not mandated by law, and their decision to cash the check doesn't entitle the too-early applicant to any refund or other remedy.
 
Adjudicator's Manual:
Note:
Persons applying under section 316(a) or 319(a) of the Act may file a naturalization application up to 90 days prior to the completion of their required period of residence. (See section 334(a) of the Act)
Click to expand...

Law:
Sec. 334. [8 U.S.C. 1445]

(a) An applicant for naturalization shall make and file with the Attorney General a sworn application in writing, signed by the applicant in the applicant's own handwriting, if physically able to write, which application shall be on a form prescribed by the Attorney General and shall include averments of all facts which in the opinion of the Attorney General may be material to the applicant's naturalization, and required to be proved under this title. In the case of an applicant subject to a requirement of continuous residence under section 316(a) or 319(a) , the application for naturalization may be filed up to 3 months before the date the applicant would first otherwise meet such continuous residence requirement.
Click to expand...
So, original 3 months in the law is interpreted as 90 days by USCIS. You fit under 3 month statue if you consider calendar months, but did not fit under 90 days interpretation (where they have artificial 30-day months). Well, you could apply with a motion to reconsider saying their policy contradicts the law and is therefore arbitrary and capricious. Try that. Most likely their policy would stay as it is.

BTW, we are talking about changing 90-day policy to 3-calendar-month policy for everybody, not just for you, because 90-day policy looks to be an incorrect interpretation of what Congress has said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks to everyone for your advices. I will submit my case to USCIS Ombudsman tomorrow with link to Stakeholders meeting and the law itself.
 
Several days. But deadline for appeal will happen earlier than motion to reconsider is reconsidered. I am not sure your deadline for appeal will be 30 days since the denial of motion to reconsider. Also, do not be in a hurry. Anyway, motion to reconsider will be reconsidered by the same authority as before, and appeal by superior authority. You require policy change, not just reconsideration of your case. That is probably local office would not do - too little power.
 
raevsky said:
You fit under 3 month statue if you consider calendar months, but did not fit under 90 days interpretation (where they have artificial 30-day months).

Well, you could apply with a motion to reconsider saying their policy contradicts the law and is therefore arbitrary and capricious. Try that. Most likely their policy would stay as it is.
Click to expand...
The statute mentions 3 months as well as 90 days (8 CFR 334.2). There's nothing in the law that implies it to mean calendar months, so it's clear that 3 months is 90 days. It's not some "artificial" date made up by USCIS, neither does it contradict the intention of the law.
Suggesting to file a motion to reconsider is ludicrous not to mention a waste of time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually, a difference between appeal and motion makes sense for those who fill the form I-290B (other than naturalization decisions).
For naturalization decisions you use form N-336 instead, and there is not difference between motion or appeal.

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Forms/M-...ns Appeals Information Chart Customer Use.pdf

1. An N-400 that is denied by the National Benefits Center (NBC) will have information provided with the Denial Notice on the steps to motion/appeal. An N-336 may be used for a motion/appeal of the denial. No fee is required.
2. An N-400 that is denied by a Field Office will have information provided with the Denial Notice on the steps to motion/appeal. An N-336 is used for a motion/appeal of the denial. A fee is required
Click to expand...

The process looks like this:
If USCIS denies the application, the applicant may request a new hearing on that decision with the local USCIS office by filing form N-336. He or she should be interviewed by a different USCIS officer – usually one with more experience than the first – several months later and allowed to submit additional evidence in support of the application.

If USCIS denies the naturalization application again, the applicant has a right to full review of that decision in the US District Court. A federal judge may then conduct a full-blown trial to determine whether the applicant qualifies for naturalization.
Click to expand...

So, BIA is not involved, and USCIS policy could be changed by court only.
 
Bobsmyth said:
Total nonsense. An appeal does not require a change of USCIS policy.
Click to expand...

If alleap eventually go to some federal court even supreme court and cour decide it is just 3 calendar month, then policy change by USCIS is mandatory
 
The statute mentions 3 months as well as 90 days (8 CFR 334.2).
Click to expand...
That is absurd. CFR is not a statue, that is agency's policy. What I mean is CFR is not an act of Congress, that is agency's regulation.

There's nothing in the law that implies it to mean calendar months, so it's clear that 3 months is 90 days.
Click to expand...
The law clearly says 3 months. Agency probably misinterprets the statue.
It's not some "artificial" date made up by USCIS, neither does it contradict the intention of the law.
Suggesting to file a motion to reconsider is ludicrous not to mention a waste of time.
Click to expand...
If Congress wanted to say 90 days, it would probably have done so. I think you have good chances to overturn the policy in court, but not on the initial appeal stage

There's nothing in the law that implies it to mean calendar months, so it's clear that 3 months is 90 days
Click to expand...
What makes you feel it is so clear? Any court decisions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top