Possible DCF, not being a PR of Canada- but given permission to stay 6 months+?

[Cindo and Joe 0]

Here is yet another fun idea from me,

I have been researching for hours/searching these forums about DCF- and specifically Canadian DCF.

I have currently been IN Canada for about a year now (left and came back a few times).. but they actually gave me an official stamp in my passport valid for 6 months (because i'm outlanding PR status in Canada). I am free to be here, and have traveled back and forth through the border about 4 times since the stamp, even with my wife- and there are no problems). I'm working for a U.S. company remotely- which actually helped convince Canadian officials that I can stay here because i'm not stealing jobs and I have strong ties to the U.S. with this job.

After my 6 months is up, if I have still not been granted a Canadian "green card"- the Canadian border agent told me I can just drive back to the border and they will most likely give me an extension/new stamp of 1 year for everything to finish.

I also want to file CR-1 for us to move back to the states, and we're getting ready to send away for the I-130 approval (1st step). However it just seems like I'm spending all this time in Canada- and the Canadian government has been granting me official permission to stay in the country. As far as proving domicile I have plenty (my job, my storage in the U.S., bank account, etc.).

It seems the DCF has some grey areas- so I emailed and asked the question. (Montreal DCF). I'm currently living in Montreal so I was considering just going down to the consulate and asking in person- but I think an appointment is required?

[trailmix 77]

Hi,

I don't know if you have seen this thread on proving domicile, but you may want to have a look:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...60&start=60 (the explanation is on page 1)

You will want to read the domicile information on the I-864 (affidavit of support) as well probably. With that thread above and reading the instructions, it will give you a clearer view of how the consulate approaches domicile.

Historically it has not been too big of a deal, lately many have been denied, including a couple of people with Canadian permanent residency and have in fact been told they will have to give it up (which is not correct, but Montreal seems to have it's own personal rules lately).

So here is the thing, you can try to prove domicile in the U.S. (actually in looking at the proof you stated, you don't appear to me to be domiciled there) - but you have no residence in the U.S.? Also the fact that you have a Canadian PR application in process will not work in your favour.

You have two choices:

1. Prove you are domiciled in the U.S. and just visit Canada.

2. Prove you intend to reestablish domicile in the U.S. (ie: move there and stay there) no later than the intending immigrant.

Whichever you decide to prove, research it thorougly and go with it - there is no room for waffling.

While some U.S. consulates in Canada allow walk ins for U.S. citizens, I just had a look at the Montreal Consulate website and they do not. In fact, for a general question, you can't even get an appointment to go see them - they only want to hear from you via email. link

That even surprised me.

Edited December 27, 2009 by trailmix

[RollingOn 0]

So, what are you asking? There does not seem to be a question involved here.

You are not proving domicile. A storage room is not a house, apartment, etc.

You cannot walk in to the consulate without an appointment unless you are in danger.

They (Canada) are giving you permission to work there for a US company. That would hardly seem to be PR status.

Trailmix is right, as usual.

Rick

[Cindo and Joe 0]

Thanks Trailmix you rock!

Well, I DO have an address in which I was living before I left- and I can at the time of interview get a new rental agreement from the renter to prove that is where I am currently domiciled.

It is also the same address listed on my last 3 years of taxes, Car registration, as well as the address listed on all paperwork for immigration.

Also the job i'm currently contract working for will re-hire me in house/fulltime on my return to the states- however I think all I would need to show is my current status of my ongoing work for them. (they make a new written contract every 3 months).

I figured it would be fine for me to be applying for Canadian PR as it is not breaking any laws- and if they ask why, it's because I know the Canadian residency requirements do not require that I am physically IN Canada... I only need to remain living WITH my Canadian spouse, and that we can do that staying in the U.S.

I guess the DCF is out the window then, and will have to do the normal CR-1 routine. I just hope I don't run into problems now that I have emailed the consulate stating that I've been here in Canada for a while.

[Cindo and Joe 0]

I also have current/valid: California car registration, California car insurance.

[trailmix 77]

Hi,

Yes, a lease will be key. You can still DCF of course, but by doing that you are admitting that you have residency in Canada of some sort of longish duration - I mean you have to be living in Canada for an extended period and they want to see things like a Canadian Driver's license, Health Care Card, PR Card (or in your case an application might suffice). Do you have these things?

If you do decide to DCF and you can get a letter from your employer stating they will be hiring you inhouse when you return, that's also key for proving support.

Here is the thing. I also personally think it's ok for you to be applying for Canadian residency, but in this situation it doesn't really matter what we think. The CO that interviews CR1/IR1 visa applicants doesn't think it's ok. Now, in the cases where people have been denied and are PRs I have noticed that they were trying to prove that they were residents of the U.S. (just like you are going to try to prove) - and if you ask yourself, how can I prove that I am a resident of the U.S. when I am in the middle of applying for residency in another country - well that doesn't make too much sense.

As I mentioned before, you have to be careful with what you are going to try to prove. Prove you are living in the U.S. or prove you are going to reestablish residency - two completely different things. Ponder which one you have a better chance of proving.

In the last year, how many months have you been in Canada?

[Cindo and Joe 0]

In the last year... i've been in Canada for most of it- I'd say almost 11 months.

However I'm not allowed to work in Canada and I cannot recieve medical- I've been granted permission to remain here working remotely for U.S. company while my Canadian residency is established.... only "official" document I have would be the VR paper the Canadian officials supplied me with which allows me to stay in Canada for 6+ months. (I have to get it renewed again soon).

The whole P.R. thing interfering with Domicile is so strange to me- given that:

-they already force a timeline for how long entry is valid with the CR1

-beneficiary must be in the U.S. 6 months out of the year at least to keep green card.

Obviously we are going to move! Maybe it will help to show to the officials that Canadian P.R. requirements allow us to stay in the U.S.

It would be nice to establish Canadian P.R. while living in the U.S.- especially to eventually buy a vacation property together in the Great White North.

[trailmix 77]

It might help to point out the details of how Canadian PRs can maintain their status, not sure, if the person doing interviews for CR1/IR1 is not aware of the situation with Canadian PRs being able to be out of the country for extended periods, it would certainly explain the strange decisions that have been made - I would certainly be interested to see what he would say to that comment.

It may be something as simple as that, it may not be. Also, as you said, obviously you are going to move - I do want to say that many many people here have said that after being denied.

I see how the domicile thing looks a bit strange, but I think you might not be seeing the real gist of it?

You don't need to prove you are moving or residing in the U.S. - and that's it - you need to prove to the CO that you are moving or residing there so that the immigrant does not become a public charge. It's part of the I-864 and something they obviously take a very hard line on.

This is their definition of domicile, in my opinion, you are not going to be considered to be physically domiciled in the United States (again, that's just my opinion - I could be wrong)

For the purposes of INA 213A, "domicile" means:

(1) The place where a sponsor has his or her principal "residence" (as defined in INA 101(a)(33)) in the United States, with the intention to maintain that residence for the foreseeable future.

So (unless you want to try to prove that you are still physically domiciled in the U.S.) your two choices are:

9 FAM 40.41 N6.1-1 Maintaining U.S. Domicile

(1) Departed the United States for a limited, and not indefinite, period of time; (this might be a bit tough for you to prove)

(2) Intended to maintain a U.S. domicile at the time of departure; and, (this one too)

(3) Can present convincing evidence of continued ties to the United States.

9 FAM 40.41 N6.1-2 Establishing U.S. Domicile

a. A petitioner living abroad not meeting the criteria in 9 FAM 40.41 N6.1-1 who wishes to qualify as a sponsor must satisfy you:

(1) That he or she has taken steps to establish a domicile in the United States;

(2) That he or she has either already taken up physical residence in the United States or will do so currently with the applicant;

(3) The sponsor does not have to precede the applicant to the United States but, if he or she does not do so, he or she must at least arrive in the United States concurrently with the applicant;

(4) The sponsor must establish an address (a house, an apartment, or arrangements for accommodations with family or friend) and either must have already taken up physical residence in the United States;

or

(5) Must at a minimum to satisfy you that he or she intends to take up residence there no later than the time of the applicant's immigration to the United States. link

Edited December 27, 2009 by trailmix

[Cindo and Joe 0]

And our country wonders why we have illegal immigrants. If we want to tackle immigration it's not by doing it this way- these procedures are only encouraging it. My brother and his wife did an AOS file and I know everyone says that it is risky- but what the hell CR1, K-3, K-1 are risky- THEY ARE ALL A RISK. We wanted to do things the "legal and safe" way but it seems like you get stiffed for doing it that way.

Edited December 27, 2009 by Cindo and Joe

[Cindo and Joe 0]

Sorry for the rant... it's just hard to swallow having your future in the hands of a single immigration officer- and I know it's not just me. I get frustrated seeing other people trying to do things the right away to hear they "haven't established domicile".

[Hugglebuggles 60]

Really, there is no excuse for circumventing immigration laws on purpose just to avoid the hassle of going through the immigration process. You wanted to do things legal and safe? Great, so did everyone else here. It is rather confusing to me why you would commit to immigrating to Canada and then in the middle of the process you would decide that you want to DCF for a CR-1 and move to the US. In reality I think you are making things more difficult in yourself. If you want to live in Canada then finish the process in Canada and consider your US options. If you want to live in the US then abandon your Canadian PR application, focus on establishing domicile in the US and file a CR-1 for your wife. It seems like you want the best of both worlds and unfortunately in this immigration game that doesn't happen for people very often. As Trailmix pointed out, as it stands now, you will very likely be denied in Montreal for a lack of domicile. There have been people denied recently based on their status in Canada, and having a pending application shows an intent to remain in Canada. You want to move, but weather the IO at the interview will believe you want to move is another question.

[Cindo and Joe 0]

Really, there is no excuse for circumventing immigration laws on purpose just to avoid the hassle of going through the immigration process. You wanted to do things legal and safe? Great, so did everyone else here. It is rather confusing to me why you would commit to immigrating to Canada and then in the middle of the process you would decide that you want to DCF for a CR-1 and move to the US. In reality I think you are making things more difficult in yourself. If you want to live in Canada then finish the process in Canada and consider your US options. If you want to live in the US then abandon your Canadian PR application, focus on establishing domicile in the US and file a CR-1 for your wife. It seems like you want the best of both worlds and unfortunately in this immigration game that doesn't happen for people very often. As Trailmix pointed out, as it stands now, you will very likely be denied in Montreal for a lack of domicile. There have been people denied recently based on their status in Canada, and having a pending application shows an intent to remain in Canada. You want to move, but weather the IO at the interview will believe you want to move is another question.

If there is no excuse then why is it happening everyday with Lawyers assisting the process?

Whether or not I want to have Canadian residency SHOULD be a non-issue, as Canadian Residency requirements do not force you to live in Canada to be a P.R.

As far as what Trailmix has pointed out, I believe I in fact do meet all the I864 requirements...and so have other members on VJ that got denied... that is my issue. Is there something you can point out that I am missing for proving domicile?

[Malrothien 6]

Others were denied for saying they still had domicile in the US - when they really didn't. I am a Canadian PR, US citizen. I am moving back home next month because of all of the domicile denials in the past three months.

Sorry, but you can't have the best of both worlds. You need to decide - are you staying in Canada or are you bringing your spouse to the US? You can't have both.

Also, so what if it "happens every day". You don't know the applicants situations, etc., so they aren't relevant to what is being discussed here.

[Hugglebuggles 60]

If there is no excuse then why is it happening everyday with Lawyers assisting the process?

Whether or not I want to have Canadian residency SHOULD be a non-issue, as Canadian Residency requirements do not force you to live in Canada to be a P.R.

As far as what Trailmix has pointed out, I believe I in fact do meet all the I864 requirements...and so have other members on VJ that got denied... that is my issue. Is there something you can point out that I am missing for proving domicile?

Just because people get away with it everyday does not mean it is excusable or right. My source of frustration with your post is that is seems you are suggesting you wish you would have done things illegally.

Other VJ members who have been denied believed they met all the I-864 requirements as well and were still denied. Many of them had very strong ties to the US, including jobs very similar to the one you have described. Your application for Canadian PR really stands as a red flag, which is what I was trying to point out. Being a Canadian PR already and perusing an application seems different. If you have been living in Canada as a PR with your spouse for months or years then that is one thing, but if you are showing intent to pursue residency in Canada while trying to establish your intent to move to the US I see that as being a problem and an uphill battle. If you believe you meet the requirements and want to peruse two immigration applications between two countries at once then that is up to you. I don't wish you ill and I apologize for sounding harsh. Good luck.

[Malrothien 6]

What Huggle's says is true. One of the ladies denied just got her PR card 6 months ago. I've had mine for 2 years and I'm still going home 3.5k miles away from my husband. Sorry, but I'm not willing to play the "what if" game. Maybe you are.