frequent visits outside

M

mychances

Registered Users (C)
hi everyone...

i will be eligible to apply for citizenship through naturalization in May 2008...i will be able to comeplete the requiremnt of 30 months stay within US...however i have travelled frequently and stayed outside for extended period...

i became permenant resident in 2003...since then i was:

1) outside US for 4 months in 2004
2) outside US for 11.5 months in 2005
3) outside US for 5.5 months in 2006

i have not traveled since 2006...as u can see, i have been outside once for more than 6 months but less than a year...what is a good way to prove that i did not intend to abondon my US residency for naturalization purpose?

- i do not have pay stubs (becuase i wasnt earning while abroad)...
- i do not have any mortgage/lease in my name...
- i have filed for tax returns every year (with zero earnings)
- i have checking account since 2003 in USA...
- i have cell phone bills sice 2004 in my name

is there anything else i shud already prepare for to make my case stronger...also, what are GOOD reasons to stay outside US for extended period? Is taking care of parents good enuff reason?

thanks
 
Did any immediate family (spouse, children, parents) stay is US while you were outside the US during the 11 month period? Did you own a US business? With the lack of evidence to prove that you did not intend to give up continual residence during the 11 month trip outside US, you are likely setting yourself up for a denial on your application. Taking care of family outside the US does not carry much weight when trying to prove continual residence.
 
I suggest you talking to a lawyer abt it instead of asking around here.... I have the same problem with you. However, I was staying with my US parents when I was a minor... And when I sort ppl's advice here, they told me 'no' but when I consulted a number of experience lawyers they told me otherwise (including Rajiv the owner/lawyer of this community) Therefore, talk to a lawyer abt your situation and plan accordingly. :)
 
...but bear in mind that there are just as many different professional opinions as there are lawyers. Just because you found one who agrees with your point of view does not make you any more or less likely to be approved. The biggest factor is the IO assigned to your case.

To the OP: you're going to need some pretty strong evidence to rebut the presumption of a break in residence during that 11.5 month trip. Worst case, you should be eligible to reapply 4yrs+1day from the date of your return in 2005.
 
boatbod said:
...but bear in mind that there are just as many different professional opinions as there are lawyers. Just because you found one who agrees with your point of view does not make you any more or less likely to be approved. The biggest factor is the IO assigned to your case.

To the OP: you're going to need some pretty strong evidence to rebut the presumption of a break in residence during that 11.5 month trip. Worst case, you should be eligible to reapply 4yrs+1day from the date of your return in 2005.
Click to expand...
Unless the 5.5 month trip in 2006 was very shortly after the 11.5 month trip in 2005, in which case the 4 years + 1 day would start counting at the end of the trip in 2006, bringing the eligibility date into 2010.
 
boatbod said:
...but bear in mind that there are just as many different professional opinions as there are lawyers. Just because you found one who agrees with your point of view does not make you any more or less likely to be approved. The biggest factor is the IO assigned to your case.

To the OP: you're going to need some pretty strong evidence to rebut the presumption of a break in residence during that 11.5 month trip. Worst case, you should be eligible to reapply 4yrs+1day from the date of your return in 2005.
Click to expand...

According to you it is a complete waste of time and money to consult lawyers of their legal advices based on their extensive experience working with the agency? Or are you saying IOs are completely intractable on their decision and they can simply ignore the validity of the evidences and circumstances base on their personal preference?
I hope the IOs can actually judge each situation accordingly and not just capable of reciting that 4yr+1 day rule.
 
thanks everyone for ur advices n reply!!

i sure will seek some professional helo...do u guys know of any good, reputed lawyer in IL (chicago and suburbs)? I seriously dont mind spending a little extra for a good lawyer...i need someone who can tell me what can be done!
 
DocyBear said:
According to you it is a complete waste of time and money to consult lawyers of their legal advices based on their extensive experience working with the agency? Or are you saying IOs are completely intractable on their decision and they can simply ignore the validity of the evidences and circumstances base on their personal preference?
I hope the IOs can actually judge each situation accordingly and not just capable of reciting that 4yr+1 day rule.
Click to expand...

Whether you care to believe me or not, there is a clear ability to deny this case while remaining within the boundaries of the basic continuous residence rules. i.e. the OP has at least one absence of between 6 months and 1 year, which automatically causes a presumed break in residence. The question is whether the IO chooses to pursue that avenue or not.

Tell me how a lawyer can change basic facts? In my view, the only thing a lawyer can do for this case, is advise the OP what sort of documentation might be provided to rebut this presumption of broken residence.
 
boatbod said:
Whether you care to believe me or not, there is a clear ability to deny this case while remaining within the boundaries of the basic continuous residence rules. i.e. the OP has at least one absence of between 6 months and 1 year, which automatically causes a presumed break in residence. The question is whether the IO chooses to pursue that avenue or not.

Tell me how a lawyer can change basic facts? In my view, the only thing a lawyer can do for this case, is advise the OP what sort of documentation might be provided to rebut this presumption of broken residence.
Click to expand...

Lawyers don't change the fact. But they referee the process and make sure the IO give all valid evidences amble considerations and credibility according to the law. The presumption is made based on the absences, yes, but I remember yourself said they look at the overall circumstances of a case instead of just one single regulation. Therefore, ONLY an immigration lawyer can analyze his situation in details and determine from a broader prospective what are the pros and cons of his application.

I would still strongly suggest him/her speak to an experienced and credible lawyer abt his case.
 
mychances said:
thanks everyone for ur advices n reply!!

i sure will seek some professional helo...do u guys know of any good, reputed lawyer in IL (chicago and suburbs)? I seriously dont mind spending a little extra for a good lawyer...i need someone who can tell me what can be done!
Click to expand...

You check either http://www.aila.org/ or http://www.immlaw.com/ for a lawyer in your area. I would recommend finding one that has been known for their experience, credibility and handling of complicated cases =) Good luck! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top