Fill n application form uscis instantly, download blank or editable online. Sign, fax and Form Popularity n instructions pdf form. Fill Online. eSign. Fax. Fill Print N Application Form, download blank or editable online. Sign, fax The revised N includes Additional questions to address disability Form N- Use with Adobe Reader using the link to the right (PDF, KB) · Instructions for Form. n form: Application For Naturalization USCIS Form N Fill uscis form n supremecourt instantly, download blank or editable online Permit Application Forms: The following forms are in PDF format and are fillable with current or earlier versions of USCIS N , Satisfied.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Hindi|
|Genre:||Children & Youth|
|ePub File Size:||24.35 MB|
|PDF File Size:||10.70 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
On February 4, , USCIS issued a revised Form N, Application for Naturalization. This revision is Executive Summary (PDF, 63 KB). OMB No. ; Expires 03/31/ Form N (Rev. 03/22/12) Y requirements based on a disability or impairment and attaching Form N with. Why I cannot download this pdf form N from USCIS but I can download 2 Replies Latest reply on Feb 23, PM by John Waller.
Idaho Voices for Change Now. USCIS requires you to complete the categories below to conduct background checks. Grand-averaged waveforms to prime words under conditions of low and high relatedness proportion at sites showing a significant difference between conditions. Current Spouse's Present Employer 5. Part 2.
Grand-averaged waveforms to probe words following unrelated primes under conditions of low and high relatedness proportion at two sites that showed a significant difference between conditions. Voltage maps comparing ERPs evoked by probe words under conditions of low and high relatedness proportion. See Supplementary Figure 5 for full electrode waveform map. Because we did not have prior hypotheses about the time-window in which the response to probes would differ, we tested all electrodes and time-samples — ms post-stimulus onset for significant differences using a permutation test over the tmax statistic to control for multiple comparisons critical t-score: This procedure revealed differences in two time-windows: If increasing proportion results in increased prediction of the target based on the prime, we might expect to see effects of proportion prior to the target, either due to differences in how the prime is processed when it will be used to make a prediction, or due to the processes involved in forming the prediction itself.
We therefore also conducted an exploratory analysis in the time-window between the onset of the prime and the onset of the target — ms post-prime onset, in other words corresponding to ms pre-target onset. In this analysis we included primes for related targets, unrelated targets, and animal probes, as these lexical items were counterbalanced across conditions; this resulted in a total of items per prime type low proportion or high proportion per participant.
We used a permutation test over the tmax statistic to control for multiple comparisons critical t-score: This procedure revealed electrodes showing significant differences in two time-windows. Although only these electrodes and time-samples were reliable by this conservative criteria, visual inspection suggested that the response to primes in the high proportion condition showed a broad, slightly leftward positivity relative to primes in the low proportion condition between — ms and — ms Figure 7.
Grand-averaged waveforms to prime words under conditions of low and high relatedness proportion at sites showing a significant difference between conditions. Voltage maps comparing ERPs evoked by prime words under conditions of low and high relatedness proportion high — low.
See Supplementary Figure 6 for full electrode waveform map. In this experiment we used a relatedness proportion paradigm to manipulate the predictive validity of the prime word while keeping the local context constant. A semantic category probe task was used to encourage processing of target meaning, without requiring participants to execute motor responses on trials of interest.
We show that increasing relatedness proportion—a manipulation previously argued to encourage predictive processing Neely, —is associated with a substantially larger N reduction for related targets. We also show that the unrelated and related targets diverge earlier when relatedness proportion is increased, and that the topographical distribution of the effect of relatedness is different under low and high proportion conditions.
Contrary to our original hypothesis, increased relatedness proportion did not result in a larger frontal positivity due to prediction mismatch in the unrelated and thus, unpredicted targets. Rather, increased relatedness proportion was associated with a broadly-distributed late negativity to unpredicted targets.
However, increased relatedness proportion was associated with a larger late positivity to unrelated animal probes, which required an explicit motor response. As argued in the Introduction, distinguishing between passive spreading activation and prediction accounts of the N is difficult using sentence- or discourse-level stimuli.
Any manipulation in contextual constraint or predictability might well lead to differences in association between the context and the target item. An important contribution of the present study is to show that prediction strength alone can modulate the N effect, without any change in the content of the immediate context. This indicates that the N priming effect does not only reflect spreading activation between items in long-term memory. Rather, N amplitude appears to be sensitive to the degree to which the reader predicts the target to be related to the prior context.
One potential alternative explanation for the N effects of relatedness proportion observed here is that they were due to their relative positioning in the experiment. Therefore, one might argue that the differences between blocks were due to some low-level property associated with their order e. Although we cannot dissociate relatedness proportion from trial order in the current paradigm, we do not believe that trial order itself provides a good account for the results we observe here.
The primary reason is that most of the low-level variables that would normally be associated with trial order would seem to predict reduced effect sizes for a non-task-relevant manipulation as the experiment proceeds, such as lower attention and lower motivation. Despite this, we in fact saw a bigger priming effect in the second half of the experiment, which receives a natural explanation through the change in the proportion of related primes.
A more plausible variant on the trial order account is that the modulation of N priming is indeed driven by increased prediction, but that it is the number of related pairs encountered rather than the proportion which drives the shift to prediction, so that after a long enough time in a low-proportion regime participants would still begin using the prime to predict the target. This is an interesting possibility that relates to the broader question of how the properties of the prior input modulate predictive strategies in general, but even if correct it would not alter our central conclusion, that modulation of prediction strength results in modulation of the N effect.
The effect of prediction on the N could be realized in several ways. Most straightforwardly, in strongly predictive contexts, participants may hold the prime in working memory and use this representation to actually pre-activate lexical representations of strong associates which are added to working memory prior to the appearance of the target.
As a result, lexical processing as reflected by N amplitude would be easier when one of those associates is actually presented. However, we should consider whether the current effects of contextual predictability on priming can be explained without assuming that participants pre-activated the target words or their semantic features before they are presented.
While these alternative hypotheses could explain the pattern of N modulation observed here, several aspects of the current results lead us to favor the predictive account. First, the N effect had a reliably different topography in the high proportion condition, suggesting a qualitative difference in mechanism. Second, we observed that the effect of the prime context began earlier in the high proportion condition. These results, discussed further below, can be straightforwardly explained if predictive mechanisms are selectively invoked in this condition, but are harder to explain if context is only used in a later stage or if the shift from low to high proportion only results in an increase of the same spreading activation mechanism.
As discussed in the Introduction, there is also evidence from sentence-level studies for lexical prediction effects prior to the onset of critical words Wicha et al. The fact that a small but reliable N priming effect was observed in the low proportion condition suggests that N facilitation may not be completely attributable to predictive processes. We also take the presence of an N priming effect in the absence of prediction to be consistent with more recent work at the sentence and discourse level showing N facilitation for targets which are not predictable, and which are not necessarily semantically related to the predicted item, but which are plausibly associated with other individual words in the context Camblin et al.
Because semantic relatedness between individual words in context is unlikely to be predictive of upcoming material in typical comprehension, sentences or discourses containing such associations are more akin to our low proportion condition than our high proportion condition, and their effects may be mediated through more passive resonance mechanisms.
Together, these results suggest that spreading activation and prediction may play complementary roles in preparing the comprehender for upcoming material; while spreading activation is less focused than prediction, it can provide some processing benefit even when the context does not make specific predictions available.
Distributional analyses suggested that the topographical distribution of the N effect differs according to whether the context actually predicts the target rather than simply being semantically associated.
This was demonstrated by a significant three-way interaction between relatedness proportion, anteriority, and laterality in the amplitude of the relatedness effect. This pattern is somewhat consistent with the results of Otten and Van Berkum , who created contexts in which the content words and the scenarios suggested by them were similar, but the message-level prediction for the critical word position differed due to the presence or absence of negation.
They showed N effects of both association and message across left hemisphere electrodes, but only effects of message across right hemisphere electrodes. They argued that the effects of message indexed prediction, while the effects of lexical- and scenario-level association reflected effects of a more passive resonance, analogous to the low-proportion condition in the present study.
These differences in distribution have two main consequences. First, they suggest that the differences in contextual facilitation observed between the low and high proportion conditions do not simply reflect differences in the magnitude of the facilitation, but may index qualitatively different processes.
This supports the hypothesis that increasing relatedness proportion causes predictive mechanisms to be invoked, and argues against explanations of relatedness proportion effects as simple increases in the magnitude of passive priming. Of course, even if low and high proportion conditions are associated with qualitatively different mechanisms of contextual facilitation, it could have been the case that their end result—facilitation of lexical processing—was empirically indistinguishable in the response to the target.
The fact that this is not the case is encouraging because it suggests that, with more research, we may be able to develop neural signatures for facilitation due to prediction as compared to facilitation due to association only.
Second, the particular distributions we observed are suggestive with respect to the question of whether these results can be taken as evidence for lexical prediction in typical sentence and discourse comprehension. Interestingly, the studies demonstrating an N attenuation to words that fit with the schema activated by the context but that are incongruous with the precise message-level meaning of the context e.
As noted above, these findings are not so easily explained by prediction and have been attributed to a more passive spread of activation within semantic memory. The current results and those of Otten and Van Berkum are consistent with this interpretation.
Future work aimed at dissociating passive priming from prediction should test for topographical similarity more carefully, as the differences we observed were statistically reliable but easy to overlook in casual visual inspection. We also observed a significant effect of prediction on the onset latency of the context effect. At electrode Cz the difference between unrelated and related targets in the low proportion block only reached marginal significance at ms, while the high proportion block showed significant differences between Alternatively, the early effect in the high-proportion condition may reflect an effect of context on target processing that is specific to prediction.
Some authors have recently argued that the early phase of so-called N context effects in the — ms time-window may be specific to targets that are very strongly predicted by the context and may thus reflect a qualitatively different process from effects in the later part of the N time-window Roehm et al. In particular, these authors note that in paradigms that allow prediction of a particular word, such as idioms or frequent collocations, the early part of the N amplitude difference appears to be driven by an increased positive deflection relative to baseline in the predicted condition, much as is visible for the high proportion related targets in the current study.
This early deflection is argued to be part of the P family, as it seems to be partially dependent on whether the context-target relationship is relevant for the task Roehm et al.
The timing of the early effect observed here significant between — ms was in fact somewhat earlier than ms. The positive polarity of our early effect relative to baseline obviously differs from the N observed in masked priming studies, but this is relatively uninformative since the ERP to masked priming targets includes sensory responses to the mask and the prime overlaid on the response to the target itself.
In masked priming studies the N component is sensitive to the degree of orthographic overlap between prime and target for both real words and pseudowords. In our non-masked, long-SOA study, the N effect would instead arise from orthographic overlap between the predicted target and the actual input.
If the high predictive validity of the prime word leads to a strong prediction for a particular target in our high-proportion condition, this might be realized as not only a prediction for the conceptual representation associated with the predicted lexical item, but also a form-based prediction for the orthographic representations that make up the word.
A related possibility is that the early effect in this study reflects a frontal P2. Federmeier, Mai, and Kutas observed a significant difference between strongly and weakly predicted endings in frontal electrodes between — ms.
This difference was larger for endings presented to the left hemisphere right visual field than endings presented to the right hemisphere left visual field. Federmeier et al. Several recent studies provide additional suggestive evidence that lexical-semantic or syntactic predictions may in turn be realized as form-based predictions Dikker et al.
Other studies using highly predictive contexts may have failed to observe such an early effect because they have generally focused on the time-window centered around the peak of the N effect, rather than specifically examining the onset of the effect.
However, further work will be needed to determine whether this effect is qualitatively distinct from the N effect and whether it can be observed reliably across different studies and different types of predictive contexts. Given the evidence that our relatedness proportion manipulation was successful in modulating prediction strength, one intriguing possibility is that we might be able to see evidence for the instantiation of a prediction by comparing the ERP to primes in the low proportion less predictive condition with primes in the high proportion more predictive condition.
Of course, this would require that the process of instantiating a prediction is tightly time-locked to presentation of the contextual information, and it is not obvious that this should be the case.
However, an exploratory analysis indicated some differences in the ERPs to low-proportion and high-proportion primes. In particular, the response to high-proportion primes was more positive across several left fronto-central electrodes in the P2 and N time-windows.
While the functional interpretation of these differences is unclear, the left-lateralization of the effect in the current study is at least consistent with previous suggestions that left hemisphere areas are involved in instantiating predictions Federmeier, ; Dikker, Although inconclusive, we hope that these data may stimulate further work aimed at determining the neural signatures of prediction formation.
One possibility is that in this paradigm, there simply is not a significant lexical processing cost for predicting the wrong word in the absence of response conflict. One difference between this study and several previous studies that observed frontal positivities associated with prediction cost Federmeier et al. Therefore it could be the case that these frontal positivities reflect processes that are more likely to be engaged during sentence or discourse-level processing.
For example, they may reflect a cast of undoing a higher-level combinatorial process that had been predictively instantiated. Alternatively, they may reflect prolonged attempts to integrate or assimilate unpredicted items that fit with the context to some degree. Evidence for the latter possibility comes from a recent ERP study by Federmeier and colleagues , who presented contexts consisting of short phrases that predicted a target of a certain category e. A type of insect. The targets could be highly typical ant , less typical hornet , or incongruent gate.
Relative to the predicted, highly typical ending, Federmeier et al. This suggests that frontal positivities may not index a process associated with the violation of a prediction per se, but rather may reflect processes involved in integrating or assimilating unpredicted, but plausible, items that fit with the context.
Together, these data provide a possible explanation for the current results: On this account, the frontal positivity observed by Holcomb in a similar paradigm may be due to one particular aspect of the procedure, in which participants were explicitly instructed prior to the high proportion block to attend to the semantic relationship between primes and targets.
This may have encouraged participants to attempt to integrate unrelated primes and targets even when their initial prediction was unfulfilled. Rather than seeing an anterior positivity effect to the unrelated targets in the high proportion condition, we observed an increased negativity to unrelated targets between — ms, which was larger in the high-proportion condition, as would be expected for an effect of prediction cost. Wlotko and Federmeier submitted observed a broad late negativity for sentence completions when the context was moderately constraining relative to highly constraining and weakly constraining contexts.
They argue that the late negativity reflects additional working memory resources involved in reinterpreting the context when an alternative interpretation was initially chosen, similar to late negativities observed for processing nonliteral language e. Consistent with this, Otten and Van Berkum showed a late negativity when a specific prediction for a sentence continuation was violated, but only for participants with lower working memory capacity.
In the current paradigm, when the predicted related target was not encountered in the high proportion unrelated condition, we speculate that participants may have reconsidered the interpretation of the prime in working memory to determine whether the target might have been related to the prime in a different way. Experiments currently underway measuring the effect of prediction strength on fMRI and MEG responses may help resolve these questions by providing information about what regions are being modulated by prediction across time.
We found that the response to animal targets in the high-proportion block was significantly more positive over posterior electrodes, compared to the low-proportion block, and this increased positivity was accompanied by an increase in reaction times.
Although this finding should be taken cautiously given the possible effects of practice and fatigue across the experiment and possible contamination by the motor response, it is consistent with an effect of prediction cost on response selection.
Conflict trials in other cognitive tasks such as Stroop are also associated with an increased late positivity e. West, ; Larson et al. The results of this study demonstrate that contextual facilitation of N amplitude is modulated by the degree to which the context is used to generate a prediction for the target.
Although the word pair paradigm is far from a typical language comprehension situation, these findings provide proof in principle that specific lexical-conceptual predictions can affect N amplitude over and above the effects of passive spreading activation when the content of the context is identical. These results argue against models in which contextual modulation of the N is only realized through spreading activation in long-term memory, and are consistent with models in which context is used during comprehension to generate expectations for upcoming material.
Subsequent analyses indicate that contextual facilitation associated with prediction may also differ in topographical distribution and onset latency from facilitation due to passive priming, raising the possibility that future research could develop signatures for distinguishing these different forms of contextual facilitation in more naturalistic paradigms.
The authors thank Eric Fields and Sorabh Kothari for their assistance with this project. Both sets were used in the current study to allow for more direct comparison between studies. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. J Cogn Neurosci. Author manuscript; available in PMC May Ellen F. Lau , 1, 2, 3 Phillip J. Holcomb , 2 and Gina R. Kuperberg 1, 2. Lau 1 Athinoula C. Phillip J.
Gina R. Kuperberg 1 Athinoula C. Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Copyright notice. The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at J Cogn Neurosci. See other articles in PMC that cite the published article. Supplementary Figures. Abstract When a word is preceded by a supportive context such as a semantically associated word or a strongly constraining sentence frame, the N component of the ERP is reduced in amplitude.
Prediction Errors in ERP Another means of determining whether comprehenders are making predictions is to look for evidence of processing costs when a strongly predicted word is not encountered. The Current Study: Relatedness Proportion in Semantic Priming Our aim in the current study was to test for ERP signatures of lexico-semantic prediction using a different approach.
Methods Materials Table 1 summarizes the design of the material set used in this study. Table 1 Distribution of item types across the two blocks of the experiment. Low Proportion Block High Proportion Block 40 related targets 40 related targets 40 unrelated targets 40 unrelated targets 40 animal probes 40 animal probes unrelated fillers unrelated fillers related fillers.
Open in a separate window. Participants Participants were drawn from the Tufts University community and participated in the study in return for monetary compensation. Stimulus Presentation Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four counterbalanced lists from one of the two materials sets. Electrophysiological Recording Twenty-nine tin electrodes were held in place on the scalp by an elastic cap, in a modified 10—20 configuration Electro-Cap International, Inc.
Results Behavioral Results Participants were only required to make a response when they identified an item from the target category. Figure 1. Figure 2. Effect of relatedness proportion on the topographical distribution of the N effect A quadrant analysis of the difference waves representing the priming effect unrelated-related in the — ms time-window revealed differences in the topographical distribution of the N priming effect across low and high proportion conditions.
Figure 3. Effect of relatedness proportion on the onset latency of the N effect Figure 4 illustrates the timing of the onset of the priming effect in the low and high proportion conditions at electrode site Cz.
Figure 4. Effects of unfulfilled prediction on targets ERP modulation also differed between the low and high proportion conditions in the later, — ms time-window. Figure 5. Effects of relatedness proportion on animal probes Animal probes the semantic category for which participants were monitoring elicited a P3 component in both blocks, as expected for a task-relevant stimulus. Figure 6.
Effects of relatedness proportion prior to target presentation If increasing proportion results in increased prediction of the target based on the prime, we might expect to see effects of proportion prior to the target, either due to differences in how the prime is processed when it will be used to make a prediction, or due to the processes involved in forming the prediction itself.
Figure 7. Discussion In this experiment we used a relatedness proportion paradigm to manipulate the predictive validity of the prime word while keeping the local context constant. Effects of prediction on N amplitude As argued in the Introduction, distinguishing between passive spreading activation and prediction accounts of the N is difficult using sentence- or discourse-level stimuli.
Effect of prediction on the distribution of the N effect Distributional analyses suggested that the topographical distribution of the N effect differs according to whether the context actually predicts the target rather than simply being semantically associated. Effects of prediction on N onset latency We also observed a significant effect of prediction on the onset latency of the context effect.
Effects of instantiating predictions Given the evidence that our relatedness proportion manipulation was successful in modulating prediction strength, one intriguing possibility is that we might be able to see evidence for the instantiation of a prediction by comparing the ERP to primes in the low proportion less predictive condition with primes in the high proportion more predictive condition.
Conclusion The results of this study demonstrate that contextual facilitation of N amplitude is modulated by the degree to which the context is used to generate a prediction for the target. Supplementary Material Stimuli List Click here to view. Supplementary Figures Click here to view.
Acknowledgments The authors thank Eric Fields and Sorabh Kothari for their assistance with this project. Footnotes 1 Of course, the fact that the ERP at a certain point in time is modulated by a factor like contextual predictability does not establish that the relevant mental process occurred at that time; it is always possible that the observed ERP difference is a downstream reflection of the outcome of an earlier computation.
Auditory and visual semantic priming using different stimulus onset asynchronies: Semantic context effects in visual word recognition: An analysis of semantic strategies. Does discourse congruence influence spoken language comprehension before lexical association? Evidence from event-related potentials. Language and Cognitive Processes in press.
An event-related brain potential analysis of visual word priming effects. Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods. The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language.
Are vowels and consonants processed differently? ERP evidence with a delayed letter paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. Constraints on semantic priming in reading: A fixation time analysis. The mechanism underlying backward priming in a lexical decision task: Spreading activation versus semantic matching.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology. Mediated priming in the lexical decision task: Evidence from event-related potentials and reaction time.
Getting it: Human event-related brain response to jokes in good and poor comprehenders. Neuroscience Letters. Right hemisphere sensitivity to word-and sentence-level context: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.
A special role for the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension? Brain Research. The lifetime of automatic semantic priming effects may exceed two seconds. Cognitive Brain Research. Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience. Overlapping dual ERP responses to low cloze probability sentence continuations.
Journal of Neuroscience Methods. Primed lexical decision: Combined effects of the proportion of related prime-target pairs and the stimulus-onset asynchrony of prime and target.
Strategic factors in a lexical-decision task: Evidence for automatic and attention-driven processes. Sensitivity to syntax in visual cortex. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Predicting and parsing language in time and space. The contributions of lexico-semantic and discourse information to the resolution of ambiguous categorical anaphors.
Language and Cognitive Processes. Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Age-related and individual differences in the use of prediction during language comprehension. Both sides get the point: Hemispheric sensitivities to sentential constraint.
Memory and Cognition. Multiple effects of sentential constraint on word processing. Syntactic working memory and the establishment of filler-gap dependencies: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. Clinical Neurophysiology. The readiness is all: The functionality of memory-based text processing.
Discourse Processes. Watching the word go by: Language and Linguistics Compass. On methods in the analysis of profile data. A critical tutorial review. The phonemic restoration effect reveals pre-N effect of supportive sentence context in speech perception.
Relatedness proportion effects on masked associative priming: An ERP study. Automatic and attentional processing: Brain and Language. On the time-course of visual word recognition: An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception.
The effects of prime visibility on ERP measures of masked priming. Attentional control and the relatedness proportion effect in semantic priming. The mind and brain of short-term memory. Annual Reviews of Psychology. The N is modulated by unconsciously perceived masked words: Rapid interactions between lexical-semantic and word-form analysis during word recognition in context: Who did what and when? Using word- and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading.
An electrophysiological investigation of indirect semantic priming. Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to Syntax. Establishing causal coherence across sentences: Thirty years and counting: Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association.
Word expectancy and event-related brain potentials during sentence processing. Kornblum S, Requin J, editors. Preparatory states and processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; Event-related brain potential studies of language. Advances in Psychophysiology. Psycholinguistics electrified: Event-related potential investigations.
Gernsbacher MA, editor. Handbook of psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Are you 50 years of age or older and have you lived in the United States as a Permanent Resident for periods totaling at least 20 years at the time of filing your Form N?
Are you 55 years of age or older and have you lived in the United States as a Permanent Resident for periods totaling at least 15 years at the time of filing your Form N? Are you 65 years of age or older and have you lived in the United States as a Permanent Resident for periods totaling at least 20 years at the time of filing your Form N? If you meet this requirement, you will also be given a simplified version of the civics test.
If you need more space. Information About Your Residence 1. Daytime Phone Number 2. Where have you lived during the last 5 years? Begin with where you live now and then list every location where you have lived during the last 5 years. COM Part 4. Information to Contact You 1.
Work Phone Number if any Information About Your Residence continued 2. Gender 3. If "Yes. Were your parents married before your 18th birthday? Yes No 2. Mother's Country of Birth 3.
USCIS requires you to complete the categories below to conduct background checks. Mother's Middle Name if applicable Is your father a U. Yes No A. Is your mother a U. Current Legal Name of U.
See Form N Instructions for more information 1. Yes No If ''Yes. If you worked for yourself. Information for Criminal Records Check continued 6. Provide the locations and dates where you worked. Provide information for the complete time period.
Include all military. Begin by providing information about your most recent or current employment. Information About Your Employment and Schools You Attended List where you have worked or attended school full time or part time during the last 5 years.
How many total days 24 hours or longer did you spend outside the United States during the last 5 years? How many trips of 24 hours or longer have you taken outside the United States during the last 5 years?
List below all the trips of 24 hours or longer that you have taken outside the United States during the last 5 years. Time Outside the United States 1. Part 7. Begin with your most recent trip and work backwards. Current Spouse's Present Employer 5. If you are married now. If you are married. What is your current marital status? If ''No. How many times have you been married including annulled marriages and marriage s to the same person? Yes No 1 If you are single and have never been married.
Is your current spouse a U. Armed Forces? Other Names Used by Current Spouse include nicknames. Information About Your Marital History 1. Complete the following information. Information About Your Marital History continued 6. Date your current spouse became a U. Page 9 of If your current spouse is a U.
Go to Item Number 8. If your current spouse is not a U. How many times has your current spouse been married including annulled marriages and marriage s to the same person? If your current spouse has been married before. Prior Spouse's Immigration Status U. At birth. When did your current spouse become a U. Provide the following information about all your children sons and daughters listed in Item Number 1. All children should be indicated. Indicate your total number of children.
Current stepchildren. Information About Your Marital History continued 9. Children born when you were not married. Part 9. Legally adopted children. Citizen Permanent Resident Other explain: Children who are currently married or unmarried. Part Information About Your Children 1. Children under 18 years of age or older. If you have more than one previous marriage. Children born in the United States or in other countries. Children who are alive. Use an additional sheet s of paper to list any additional children.
Children living with you or elsewhere. What is your child's relationship to you? Child's Current Address Apt. Information About Your Children continued A. Child's Country of Birth B. Child's Country of Birth D. Information About Your Children continued C. Child's Country of Birth C.. Yes No 4. Yes No 5.
Have you ever not filed a Federal. Have you ever registered to vote in any Federal. Yes No 9. Do you owe any overdue Federal. Yes No 6. Have you ever voted in any Federal.
Yes No B. If you answer "Yes" to any of these questions. Have you ever been a member of. Name of Group The Communist Party? Yes No 3. Any other totalitarian party?
Yes No C. Do you now have. Have you ever been declared legally incompetent. A terrorist organization? Have you called yourself a "non-U. Yes No 7. Additional Information Answer Item Numbers 1. Yes No 8.
Have you ever claimed to be a U. Were you ever a member of. Yes No Additional Information continued A. Vigilante unit? Rebel group? Yes No G. Police unit? Yes No D. Guerrilla group? Not letting someone practice his or her religion? Self-defense unit? Yes No E. Between March Any government in any area 1 occupied by. Badly hurting. Insurgent organization? Paramilitary unit? Have you ever persecuted either directly or indirectly any person because of race.
Military unit? Any German. The Nazi government of Germany? Yes No Were you ever involved in any way with any of the following: Yes No F. Have you ever advocated either directly or indirectly the overthrow of any government by force or violence? Additional Information continued Armed Forces for any reason? Detention facility? Have you ever been charged with committing. Have you ever been convicted of a crime or offense? Have you ever been placed in an alternative sentencing or a rehabilitative program e.
You must disclose this information even if anyone. Prison or jail? Have you ever been arrested.