Applying for USC: is the 5-year rule better than the 3-year rule in this case?

[mape]

My wife is about to submit a N-400. She has been a PR for 7 years (via marriage to me; I have been a USC for more than 10 years). We have been married for 9 years. For all the reasons mentioned in other threads, she is going to apply under the 5-year rule, not the 3-year rule -- simpler, less paperwork.

Question: my wife does frequent international travel due to work. Each business trip is about 5 days only. She traveled for work quite a bit until mid-2008, and markedly less since then. We also have longer vacation trips -- about 15 days each vacation trip, about twice a year. In total, in the past 5 years, she has made about 25 trips, for a total of a bit over 200 days. Again, never a trip over 6 months. If I am reading things correctly, she meets the physical presence and the continuous presence requirements -- well over half of her time as PR in US soil, and never a trip over 6 months.

Because she meets these requirements, we don't think we need to worry about going the 5-year route. If the IO asks, "why 20+ trips and 200+ days", she will simply reply, "because my work requires frequent but short international travel".

Question: are we right about not worrying about these trips and the 5-year rule? Or are there IOs out there who can raise an issue (which they shouldn't), in which case it's better to apply under the 3-year rule, even though this implies more paperwork and proof?

Thanks

 

[Jackolantern]

How long was the longest trip? Was the work done for a US-based employer who sent her abroad, or was she working for a non-US employer when abroad? How many of those 200 days were concentrated in mid-2007 to mid-2008?

 

[mape]

How long was the longest trip? Was the work done for a US-based employer who sent her abroad, or was she working for a non-US employer when abroad? How many of those 200 days were concentrated in mid-2007 to mid-2008?

Her longest business trip was 6 days. Her longest vacation trip (mid 2008) was 20 days. The work was done with a US-based employer (an international organization in DC which the US is a member of). Of the 200+ days, about 35 were between october 2007 to mid-2008. Between october 2007 and october 2009, a bit less than100 days. That is, If she were doing the application under the 3yr rule, she would count a bit over 100 days, rather than a bit over 200, and the number of trips would be about 13 trips rather than about 25 trips.

Note than the application asked to count the number of trips and days in the past 5 years (since october 2007) but it asked to write the trips since becoming a PR (since mid 2005). She actually took many many short trips from 2005 and 2007,and When she enumerates the trips, she notes "the trips below this line are beyond the 5 yr window" to avoid confusion.

Therefore, i am assuming using the easier 5yr rule would be fine, right?

BTW, Are applicants routinely asked to produce passport stamps or ticket reservations to prove these kinds of trips?

 

[TheRealCanadian]

There shouldn't be an issue here.

 

[coho]

BTW, Are applicants routinely asked to produce passport stamps or ticket reservations to prove these kinds of trips?

I don't think USCIS will expect every applicant to produce copies of travel tickets of preceding 5 years, during the final interview. They can definitely verify your statement on number of days of absence from US, by going thro' your passport entries.(date of entry/exit into and out of a foreign port). When you had returned from a trip, the admitting officer at the POE in US soil, would have asked you how long you were out of US. Probably he would have punched the info into his system based on your reply. LPR passports are never stamped in US ports to show one's departure date.

In my case I had done 9 trips (not more than 28 days on a single trip, including two cruise vacations) all totaling 184 days in the last 5 years. On all the 9 occasions, the IO asked the same question and entered info into his data base. Of course, I did not give exact number of days of absence, but gave approximate numbers. In my N400, I furnished the accurate info, counting more than 24 hours as a day.

Also, I have read in one of the forums trhat the IO during the N-400 interview had checked the applicant's passport in detail to compute exact number of days from the statement like an Cost accountant !!!.

 

[cafeconleche]

This is completely false. My passport has been stamped a majority of times as an LPR and as a citizen.

 

[Jackolantern]

Note than the application asked to count the number of trips and days in the past 5 years (since october 2007) but it asked to write the trips since becoming a PR (since mid 2005). She actually took many many short trips from 2005 and 2007,and When she enumerates the trips, she notes "the trips below this line are beyond the 5 yr window" to avoid confusion.

That's not necessary. Each trip has its start and end dates listed, so explicitly pointing out which trips are more than 5 years ago is redundant and may be seen as insulting.

Therefore, i am assuming using the easier 5yr rule would be fine, right?

Yes. Her travel pattern creates no problem for continuous residence.

BTW, Are applicants routinely asked to produce passport stamps or ticket reservations to prove these kinds of trips?

They may ask to look through the passport, but tickets are not requested. Missing passport stamps will not be a problem. Their main method of verifying the travel dates is to look through the entry/exit dates obtained from the CBP system.