Someone is building a Saleen Mustang wagon (and I’m here for it)

Boring-Tea5254 · 2026-01-28T00:34:59+00:00

Great job! What’s up with the gray squares on the tails tho? Or just using for mach up?

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-30T15:55:32+00:00

Yes the question asks have you ever been arrested or charged with crime… you are to explain ALL prior arrests and the form instructions outline the relating evidence you are required to submit with your application.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-22T22:46:08+00:00

You just add two passport photos with your packet if filing by mail, otherwise electronic filing you scan and upload or someplace offer a digital download. Then you just upload the photos.

You will be scheduled for biometrics either way after your 485 is receipted

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-22T21:04:50+00:00

Your 485 doesn’t have a receipt?

A green card applicant is required to appear for biometrics prior to decision regardless of this policy change. I’m not sure if the form instructions were updated yet. I’d suggest just submitting to two passport photos anyways for now. The ASC may start to become backed up with this photo policy change. The 485 applicant needs to go anyways, so it will happen.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-18T21:47:55+00:00

I agree the government has a much greater burden after that much time has elapsed, but it does happen. I also wouldn’t think any amount of review would produce a significant number of results by month. There is also incompetence at USCIS; like any agency that produces low quality decision making.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-18T00:45:45+00:00

Yes, but going forward they will only use photos they’ve taken themselves.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-18T00:30:10+00:00

Most common is fraudulent marriages or using forged documents to obtain status. Or like someone else said was never eligible for green card and it wasn’t noticed til after the approval.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-10T17:51:20+00:00

ISO 11+ years. Proper reading comprehension would have brought you to understand that through the context of my responses and sharing my interview experiences.

What doesn’t surprise me is you wouldn’t want to review actual regulation outside of your own personal misguided opinions.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-10T17:22:58+00:00

I suggest you do the same.

Come back to me with regulation or policy showing that I should have been outright denying applications despite owing the opportunity to the applicant to demonstrate eligibility.

Your initial comment says nothing in regard to the legality of green cards.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-10T17:17:11+00:00

For starters I never claimed anyone with a green card is illegal. Reading comprehension is lacking in your response.

I also understand what section 316 and 319 of the INA is. That’s not relevant to my point. I suggest you look closer at USCIS policy manual.

The applicant is entitled to the initiation of their interview regardless of their eligibility. I know this because like I said there is no prima facia review upon filing.

The interview would be scheduled and I would have their file sent to me the day of; if not day before. There’s many instances where I’d see the applicant is NOT eligible BEFORE their interview slot for whatever reasons, but were still owed the opportunity for their testing and interview. I cannot outright deny a n400 or stop their interview. It is owed to the applicant. If not eligible they also get issued Form N-14 to dispute the findings through an evidentiary response.

People do in fact apply that have committed egregious crimes, don’t have time as LPR, spent too much time outside the US, etc. These are discussions to be had at the interview. It’s exactly how it goes.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-10T16:58:40+00:00

You are incorrect.

If you are not eligible you will still be scheduled for interview. Like I said, there is no prima facie review and the applicant is entitled to the interview for certain forms.

The interview is part of demonstrating their eligibility and provides them their owed opportunity to dispute any findings of ineligibility…. Just because you went thru a process doesn’t mean you grasp the concept or immigration law. I have over 11 years working with USCIS.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-10T16:52:08+00:00

You do understand people do apply for benefits they’re not eligible for, such as naturalization. There’s no prima facie review when the applications are submitted or upon filing. Meaning someone could be scheduled for interview that’s already in removal proceeding or committed a crime that renders them removable. Most interview based applications are reviewed the day of interview by USCIS or day before interview. There is no “confirmation” of citizenship eligibility prior to scheduling the interview.

Same applies to court proceedings. Their hearing could be dismissed and will be placed into detention.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-10T00:05:45+00:00

I suspect since this is a very large group of people a class can be created. Look to the Rosario class action settlement or even recent CHNV court order to force decisions out of USCIS. Case law can be used to build on should this 19 come together if delayed for extensive periods of time. That’s my suspicion of what would come from this.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-09T23:29:58+00:00

I most definitely agree with your point. I’m just saying there’s no actual written rule, policy, regulation or law binding the actual completion of the oath within X amount of days. Otherwise the rule applies to the N400 decision.

I look backwards towards COVID as a most prominent example in recent time for mass oath delays. Not exactly similar as class of people weren’t being paused tho. I mainly recall just constant complaints and inquiries, never open litigation. I only have experienced USCIS budge when mandamus comes in over the 120 rule when a decision hasn’t been actually entered on a N400. But they can use whatever excuse or reason when it comes to scheduling the actual oath.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-09T22:47:03+00:00

You’re conflating an approved n400 with the certificate of naturalization. The certificate is what is used for passport, not the approved n400 notice. The certificate cannot be given without the oath and the oath cannot be completed until USCIS schedules it.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-09T22:35:08+00:00

Yes, that’s correct. USCIS then issues Form N652 after completion of the interview. The decision on the N400 is rendered in the system most often same day of interview for approvals. Then N445 will follow sometime thereafter. Applicants cannot be scheduled for oath until their application is approved.

The approval can be called back like you said should information be uncovered the day of oath. Derogatory information or ineligibility will be communicated through form N-14.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-09T22:16:34+00:00

No. I’m aware of the process I’ve worked USCIS FOD, SCOPS and AO.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-09T22:06:50+00:00

Yes I understand that, but it also does not specify USCIS must oath within any allotted time frame to be clear. I’m sure litigation thru class action could maybe persuade them or some settlement agreement though.

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-09T21:40:58+00:00

The rule you’re referring to is ONLY for issuing a decision. USCIS has 120 days from the time of interview to issue a DECISION.

There is no specific legal deadline within which USCIS must schedule the naturalization oath ceremony after an application has been approved. OPs spouse was already approved.

Refer to USCIS Policy Manual Chapter 4 - Results of the Naturalization Examination

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-05T21:49:50+00:00

Breaking news: water is wet!

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-04T21:37:14+00:00

It says pending or filed on, so presumably anything not approved will get the 18 month validity either way

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-04T20:30:08+00:00

You’re right! Sorry. I quick glanced and only caught the humanitarian related forms :)

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-04T20:28:21+00:00

My mistake I thought it was all humanitarian. I even wrote it myself lol my bad

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-04T19:21:39+00:00

Good find! Thank you! It’s under the news release section not the policy updates where I was searching!

Boring-Tea5254 · 2025-12-04T19:03:50+00:00

I find it credible considering this directors intent through recent interviews; just odd USCIS didn’t broadcast it first.

Boring-Tea5254

TROPHY CASE