Ilya Fishkin

Short answer: yes, you should file — but the case needs to be prepared very carefully. The one-year rule under INA §208(a)(2)(B) does exist, but the same statute carves out two exceptions: "changed circumstances" and "extraordinary circumstances."

I agree with my colleague on timing and form. One practical pitfall: USCIS routinely misses the 30-day deadline for issuing EAD. If you filed I-765 (c)(8) and 30 days after the 150-day mark have passed with no EAD, file a service request — and if that doesn't work, mandamus in federal court is realistic relief.

To Anna's list I'll add a strategic point: if you're aiming at a green card in the medium term, evaluate your profile for EB-1A and EB-2 NIW now, not later. Both are independent of the employer and have no lottery, but they take several months to assemble (recommendation letters, articles, patents, talks).

Unfortunately, the 3-year rule under INA §319(a) requires you to be living in marital union with the US citizen spouse for three continuous years before filing N-400, AND at the time of filing. Divorce before filing automatically removes you from this category — regardless of how long the marriage lasted.

I confirm Anna's analysis of the H-1B exception (Matter of L-K-, AC21 §106(c)). Two pitfalls that catch people at the border:

Reasonable question — and yes, in most cases filing I-589 in parallel makes sense, especially with TPS renewal uncertainty. TPS and asylum are independent statuses; having one does not block the other.

I fully back David's answer. One key rights point: you have the right to an attorney at any USCIS interview — that's a right, not a courtesy. You also have the right to an interpreter (your own interpreter is allowed, but they must be neutral — not a relative, employer, or the spouse).

Strategic bottom line: over 4 years you've accrued serious unlawful presence, and any departure without a waiver is an automatic 10-year bar. Principle one: do NOT leave on a whim.