Oklahoma does not place the chosen name on certificate. Which makes sense since until the ceremony the name remains the same and sometimes doesn't change after the ceremony. I have been told Texas is the same.
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bergeron, Paul
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 10:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Does your state place a bride's chosen married name on a certified record of marriage?
"What is the citation for the requirement?"
Good question which led me to OMB Control No. 1615-0082 and a a USCIS
announcement on April 27, 2009 that "USCIS Revises Filing Instructions
and Direct Mail program for the Application to Replace Permanent
Resident Card (Form I-90): Applicants to File Supporting Documentation
with Applications to Lockbox in Phoenix."
Searching around a bit more brought me to a Federal Register item dated
May 26, 2009 (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-12121.htm) which
appears to extend the comment period on Form I-90 collection activities
to June 25, 2009.
So...your question, Peter, seems to have brought me to a complaint
opportunity, at least.
What is interesting is that all the public announcements and Federal
Register text that I came across relative to the new I-90 rules refer in
general terms to changes in filing location and "supporting
documentation." There is no mention anywhere (that I can find) that
states the "supporting documentation" for a name change due to a
marriage must be a certified record of marriage that contains the
bride's chosen married name. That little tidbit does not appear anwhere
(that I can find) except on the I-90 instructions themselves
(http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-90instr.pdf).
The problem, therefore, may be in the implementation of the rule, not in
the intent of the rule.
By the way, thus far I have been informed that marriage certificates in
Florida, Connecticut and Maryland also do not include the bride's chosen
married name. I'm sure that I will hear about more states as the day
progresses.
Paul Bergeron
Nashua, NH
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Peter Kurilecz
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 10:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Does your state place a bride's chosen married name on
a certified record of marriage?
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Bergeron, Paul
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
> Obviously, it would have been nice if USCIS had checked with the 50
> Bureaus of Vital Records to see how many states can even meet this new
> requirement, but that's another battle for another time.
>
Reminds of the old joke "Hi! I'm from the government. I'm here to help
you." Wonder when they asked for comments about this rule change?
what is the citation for the requirement?
--
Peter Kurilecz CRM CA
[log in to unmask]
Richmond, Va
Information not relevant for my reply has been deleted to reduce the
electronic footprint and to save the sanity of digest subscribers
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance To unsubscribe
from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place
UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
|
