What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY
I am US citizen, naturalized in 1999, My wife submitted her N-400 on, July 17th,2008
She was finger printed on September, 14th, 2007 , and scheduled for an interview
On May,07, 2008 at INS facility Long Island, NY, she cleared all the tests & interview, unfortunately at the end of the interview process the Officer was not sure about the quantum of physical presence days , he consulted the supervisor who advised him to calculate the days applying some formula , astonishingly instead of calculating and taking any decision at the spot after demanding some documentary evidence or else in this regard he preferred to put the case aside and simply handed over Form N-652 with following Remarks crossed :-
1. You passed the tests of English and US history.
2. INS will send you a written decision about your application.
3. A decision cannot be made about your application.
4. Do not wait for the letter you will be notified by mail
At the time of submission of N-400 I was given to understand that being a spouse of US citizen she must be physically present for 18 months or 548 days ½ of 3 years period whereas at the time of application 714 days of physical presence was at her credit. She did make 15 trips outside USA including 5 trips to CANADA and except the last one which was 195 days and due her serious illness & being under treatment with advice to refrain from Air Travel( With documentary Proofs) not a single trip was over 180 days. On All the 15 trips she accompanied me due my health condition being a Cardiac Patient. We are married for last 38 years and both will be 65 by the end of 2008.
After waiting for the coveted occasion of naturalization for many years and clearing all tests / Interview right from the moment my wife is depressed and some time drifts into traumatic condition. It is now more then 80 days no communication from USCIS and no
Satisfying answer on Phone query. What should be done now in your legal expert opinion as during the process of interview the officer’s demeanor reflected biased and adament to fault finding.
I am US citizen, naturalized in 1999, My wife submitted her N-400 on, July 17th,2008
She was finger printed on September, 14th, 2007 , and scheduled for an interview
On May,07, 2008 at INS facility Long Island, NY, she cleared all the tests & interview, unfortunately at the end of the interview process the Officer was not sure about the quantum of physical presence days , he consulted the supervisor who advised him to calculate the days applying some formula , astonishingly instead of calculating and taking any decision at the spot after demanding some documentary evidence or else in this regard he preferred to put the case aside and simply handed over Form N-652 with following Remarks crossed :-
1. You passed the tests of English and US history.
2. INS will send you a written decision about your application.
3. A decision cannot be made about your application.
4. Do not wait for the letter you will be notified by mail
At the time of submission of N-400 I was given to understand that being a spouse of US citizen she must be physically present for 18 months or 548 days ½ of 3 years period whereas at the time of application 714 days of physical presence was at her credit. She did make 15 trips outside USA including 5 trips to CANADA and except the last one which was 195 days and due her serious illness & being under treatment with advice to refrain from Air Travel( With documentary Proofs) not a single trip was over 180 days. On All the 15 trips she accompanied me due my health condition being a Cardiac Patient. We are married for last 38 years and both will be 65 by the end of 2008.
After waiting for the coveted occasion of naturalization for many years and clearing all tests / Interview right from the moment my wife is depressed and some time drifts into traumatic condition. It is now more then 80 days no communication from USCIS and no
Satisfying answer on Phone query. What should be done now in your legal expert opinion as during the process of interview the officer’s demeanor reflected biased and adament to fault finding.