4 years and 1 day rule for a trip lasting less than 1 year

creature

Registered Users (C)
Greetings. Those who were subject to the 5-year continuous residence requirement and taken at least one trip abroad which lasted more than 6 months but lass than a year; have you successfully applied the 4 years and 1 day rule in your N400 application?

I've been LPR since 7/2011 but taken a single trip out of the country between 9/2013 to 6/2014 which lasted more than 6 months (but less than 1 year) and which presumably broken my continuous residence. I could argue this at the naturalization interview and present an evidence that I kept my U.S. residence while being temporarily abroad and given the documentation I have I am guessing I would have passed, but to keep my chances higher and not to waste time and money, I'd like to wait until 7/2018 and apply under the 4 year and 1 day rule instead.

I've read many forums and blog posts of immigration attorneys saying that the 4 year and 1 day rule was intended for those who left the country for more than a 1 year, but the Supreme Court has already ruled in a similar case that the above INA provision should be applied to those who stayed abroad for lass than a year as well.

I am interested if there is anyone on this forum who has successful applied under this rule under similar circumstances? Obviously, I could have waited until 6/2019 (5 years since my long trip) to "phase out" the long trip out of my continuous residence requirement, but if there is an option for me to get the citizenship a year otherwise sooner, why not to use it. I am possibly risking delays in my application, especially if the USCIS officer at the interview is not fully familiar with the above rule, but given how long it takes to process N400 these days, I would rather have an application in process sooner rather than later.
 
Same situation here. I obtained green card in 2006 and had a long trip in 2014(only once...) I also have question about 4 years and 1 day rule also apply for a trip more than 6month but less than a year... do I really have to wait 5 years more again?
 
The court case I had in mind is the Lau Ow Bew v. United States, 144 U.S. 47 (1892) . The ruling states "... statutes should receive a sensible construction, such as will effectuate the legislative intention, and, if possible, . . . avoid an unjust or an absurd conclusion.” Therefore, one could argue that applicants with absences of over 6 months, but less than 1 year should not have to wait longer to apply than their counterparts with absences of over 1 year. Accordingly, applicants with absences of over 6 months, but less than 1 year should also only have to wait 4 years and 1 day (or 2 years and 1 day if applying as the spouse of a United States citizen).

But the conclusion for me from the above is that USCIS office processing my N400 application may not have the same interpretation and deny my application as "applied too early". I can appeal the decision and argue in front of an immigration judge with the above statement, but again the result is uncertain. Therefore; I was looking for folks here on the forum who were in the same situation and got their N400 approved successfully (with or without an appeal court hearing).
 
Top