Continues Residency - how my case might the evaluated?

[Going through 5,668]

The trips abroad are one thing for the IO to consider----the physical presence part you might be okay in.

 

However, the "working in Canada" part is what's going to give an IO a lot of room to consider that you've broken the continuous residency requirement.

Depending on how you set yourself up in Canada will also play a role----did you receive any sort of government benefits there, did you maintain an apartment while in Canada?  While abroad, did you continue to maintain US-based utility bills, file US taxes, etc.  That is also taken into consideration.

 

The reentry permit you have allows you to reenter the US after lengthy time abroad and maintain your resident status.  It does not count as residency days inside the US when calculating the total time for physical and/or continuous residency requirements. 

 

The N-470 form (not the re-entry permit) is the one that preserves residency days for naturalization purposes when abroad---however not everyone qualifies for the N-470.

Edited January 10, 2019 by Going through

[afrocraft 313]

7 hours ago, HonoraryCitizen said:

Why would you take it upon yourself to be the one to test administrative exuberance in court? 

 

 

I didn't say OP should. Depends on his/her circumstances. Others have dismissed this as a lost cause, but I'm only arguing that OP may actually have a strong legal case for eligibility for naturalization, despite the frequent travel abroad. I also suggest how to make that case, should OP decide to move forward.

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

20 minutes ago, afrocraft said:

 despite the frequent travel abroad. 

You mean, despite residing abroad...that’s what most people describe the place they live for 2/3 of the time and where have their job....

Edited January 10, 2019 by SusieQQQ

[C90 376]

As far as I know citizenship is only granted to people that actually want to live in the US fulltime. Even if you didn't break residency, a USCIS officer might have a hard time granting you citizenship knowing that you only visit the US since you work in Canada. So like others said, you can give it a shot, but the chances are there that the officer will not be okay with this. Also, keep in mind that this same standard is for renewing your Greencard. 

[afrocraft 313]

That's the thing: the law doesn't require "residence" in the US; it requires "continuous residence."

 

Quote

(a) No person, except as otherwise provided in this title, shall be naturalized, unless such applicant, (1) immediately preceding the date of filing his application for naturalization has resided continuously, after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence, within the United States for at least

 

It might sound like splitting hairs to you, but the distinction is legally significant. So what's continuous residence? We know it's different from physical presence, because that's a separate requirement, and we know it doesn't mean you can't travel outside the US even for one day. So for how long? The only definition in the law is the following:

 

Quote

(b) Absence from the United States of more than six months but less than one year during the period for which continuous residence is required for admission to citizenship... shall break the continuity of such residence, unless the applicant shall establish to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that he did not in fact abandon his residence in the United States during such period.  
      Absence from the United States for a continuous period of one year or more during the period for which continuous residence is required for admission to citizenship (whether preceding or subsequent to the filing of the application for naturalization) shall break the continuity of such residence...

 

Nothing about absences of less than 6 months. Nada. Despite what you think about OP's travel patterns.

 

[aaron2020 11,651]

If the OP has a re-entry permit, then his time outside the US is not an issue.

 

However, the totality of circumstances is unclear.  He has not stated whether he declared being a Canadian resident on his Canadian taxes and signed up for provincial health care.  Both of which puts his US legal permanent residency at risk.  

Edited January 10, 2019 by aaron2020

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

2 hours ago, afrocraft said:

That's the thing: the law doesn't require "residence" in the US; it requires "continuous residence."

 

 

.

 

But the policy manual specifically mentions, as has been quoted above, that an applicant who has had frequent short absences may not be able to prove his “principal actual dwelling place is in the United States”.  (In other words, residence,) And to state the obvious, interviewing officers consult the policy manual. It’s not like OP was traveling on many different vacations. OP traveled to the same place to live for twice as long as the time he spent in the US, to work. That sure sounds like a “principal dwelling place” to me.

 

I trust you’re offering pro bono help to OP for legal assistance in helping the interviewing officer distinguish between this clear injunction in the manual against OP’s circumstances and what you strenuously insist is law.

Edited January 10, 2019 by SusieQQQ

[Crazy Cat 39,261]

6 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

OP traveled to the same place to live for twice as long as the time he spent in the US, to work. That sure sounds like a “principal dwelling place” to me.

That is a strong argument, you present there!!!   In addition, I would like to enter the OP's own words "I received green card in December 2015. And from that time to July 2017 I was working in Canada, and visited USA regularly.".

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

Bottom line imo is that if the best advice you can give someone is “you can fight the legalities of this in court”, it’s splitting hairs about legalities. Given the current long waiting time for n400 processing, and the time and expense of a possible subsequent legal battle, it just makes more practical sense for OP to wait till s/he can properly prove what needs to be proven according to the policy manual. Of course, I say that on the assumption that OP is actually about to or has already established proper residence and work etc in the US and is not still just visiting from Canada. 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2019 by SusieQQQ

[carmel34 3,531]

I have lots of experience with US/Canada residencies, green cards, and all the rest.  I'm a dual US/Canadian citizen and have moved back and forth for work all of my life.  The concept is pretty simple here, not too complicated.  The country you live in the majority of the time is your country of residence for that year, i.e., six months or more.  Snowbirds from Canada do this all the time.  They have a residence in Ontario or Quebec for the summer and in the winter they move to their residence in Florida or wherever and do this every year.  Some have decided to make the US their official residence and become US citizens by staying more than six months in the US.  And the continuous nature of the stays are irrelevant.  What matters is the total time spent in one country vs the other each year.  I have family in Canada who live close to the Alberta/Montana border and they go back and forth to their lake house in Montana for short stays all year round.  They have to keep track of their total days spent in each country to satisfy residency requirements in the country they want to be taxed in, to maintain a green card, qualify for US naturalization, keep Canadian health care benefits, etc.  This is not a complicated issue as some posters have tried to make it.  USCIS will look at the total days residing in the US each year in question for green card renewals or naturalization applications, regardless of number of visits.

[afrocraft 313]

40 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

OP traveled to the same place to live for twice as long as the time he spent in the US, to work. That sure sounds like a “principal dwelling place” to me.

So if you worked for a US company on an oil rig off the Canadian west coast 8 months of the year (non-continuous) then returned to your rented apartment in Seattle the rest of the year, by your logic the rig (or the Pacific Ocean!) would be your "principal dwelling place", and you'd be ineligible for naturalization because you've broken continuous residence? 

Edited January 10, 2019 by afrocraft

[afrocraft 313]

39 minutes ago, missileman said:

...In addition, I would like to enter the OP's own words "I received green card in December 2015. And from that time to July 2017 I was working in Canada, and visited USA regularly.".

Well if OP put it that way on the application or in testimony to the immigration officer, that would be a killer. OP could simply rephrase, though.

Edited January 10, 2019 by afrocraft

[afrocraft 313]

31 minutes ago, carmel34 said:

And the continuous nature of the stays are irrelevant.  What matters is the total time spent in one country vs the other each year....  USCIS will look at the total days residing in the US each year in question for green card renewals or naturalization applications, regardless of number of visits.

Nothing quoted above is backed up by law or administrative practice. Continuous residence (not "stay") is a legal requirement. And on it's own, the total days residing in the US each year is irrelevant in determining eligibility.

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

24 minutes ago, afrocraft said:

So if you worked for a US company on an oil rig off the Canadian west coast 8 months of the year (non-continuous) then returned to your rented apartment in Seattle the rest of the year, by your logic the rig (or the Pacific Ocean!) would be your "principal dwelling place", and you'd be ineligible for naturalization because you've broken continuous residence? 

That’s not a parallel argument, make it a Canadian company then tell me what you think?

[Going through 5,668]

24 minutes ago, afrocraft said:

So if you worked for a US company on an oil rig off the Canadian west coast 8 months of the year (non-continuous) then returned to your rented apartment in Seattle the rest of the year, by your logic the rig (or the Pacific Ocean!) would be your "principal dwelling place", and you'd be ineligible for naturalization because you've broken continuous residence? 

The difference in the example presented above, is that the person would be working for a US company.  That wouldn't be breaking continuous residence because they were employed abroad by a US-based employer.

 

I don't think that's the case of the OP here.