Citizenship after 5 years of granted asylum?

No. I thought you knew that, Cl-asylee....Asylees can apply 4 years 9 months after the GC is issued (roughly 3 years 9 months after you receive your GC) which is the backdated issue date on your GC, NOT 5 years after the asylum was granted. It is stated VERY clearly in the N400 guidelines, so I do not understand the confusion about this topic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
clotty said:
No. I thought you knew that, Cl-asylee....Asylees can apply 3 years 9 months after the GC isissued which is the backdated issue date on your GC, NOT 5 years after the asylum was granted. It is stated VERY clearly in the N400 guidelines, so I do not understand the confusion about this topic.

I know Clotty, but go and read the old thread.
 
I skimmed through that thread. What are you confused about? INS is STILL clear about this and nothing changed since then. Laws, as is right now, do not allow you to apply for citizenship after 5 years of asylum being granted; if you do apply early like that, your case will be denied.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
clotty said:
I skimmed through that thread. What are you confused about? INS is STILL clear about this and nothing changed since then. Laws, as is right now, do not allow you to apply for citizenship after 5 years of asylum being granted; if you do apply early like that, your case will be denied.

I am not confused. I know the law. Just that there are stories (real? I don't know) of people who applied to citizenship after 5 years of asylum.
 
Cl_Asylee said:
I am not confused. I know the law. Just that there are stories (real? I don't know) of people who applied to citizenship after 5 years of asylum.
If you know the law, then you know that it is not possible. To believe stories of randoms on a board or a pretty clearly stated law? I think the answer is obvious, no? This is not a "can we go to our COP?" question which the law does not provide a straight-up answer; the law is not vague about this subject.There is NOt one person, not even on that thread ,that applied citizenship 5 years after being granted asylum and not have their citizenship application denied. Now with refugees , technically most of them have their GC issue date as the date they are granted the status and can apply for citrizenshiop 5 years after being granted refugee status. Some people most often confuse a refugee with an asylee in this situation and assume same applies to asylees.....Anyway, do not believe any strories on the subject. Sorry, man, but we will get to apply 3 years 9 months after having our GC, unless that "fast citizenship for those who speak fluent English" bill passes....And like I said if you or anyone applies earlier , their application will be denied. I read the citizenship section and read many posts by people whose application were denied because they applied before they were eligible. So it would be a waste of money (the application fee) and time to do that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
clotty said:
If you know the law, then you know that it is not possible. To believe stories of randoms on a board or a pretty clearly stated law? I think the answer is obvious, no? This is not a "can we go to our COP?" question which the law does not provide a straight-up answer; the law is not vague about this subject.There is NOt one person, not even on that thread ,that applied citizenship 5 years after being granted asylum and not have their citizenship application denied. Now with refugees , technically most of them receive their GC issue date the time they are granted the status and can apply for citrizenshiop 5 years after being granted refugee status. Some people most often confuse a refugee with an asylee in this situation and assume same applies to asylees.....Anyway, do not believe any strories on the subject. Sorry, man, but we will get to apply in no less than about 4 years later for citizenship unless that "fast citizenship for those with fluent English" bill passes.

bla bla bla bla bla.....

With USCIS everything is possible. I just want to know OTHER opinions and see if someone can bring a real story.
 
Cl_Asylee said:
bla bla bla bla bla.....

With USCIS everything is possible. I just want to know OTHER opinions and see if someone can bring a real story.
bla blah blah??? No need to be rude. :mad: I answered your question. Just because I did not give you the reply you wanted, dismissing it as blah blah is plain rude. Fine, do whatever you want. Apply early.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I did not start anything. I answered your question. It seems you wanted me to say "oh, I wonder the same thing. Yeah, let's hear some stories", but sorry , my opinion is that I am in 100% certainty (as the law is CRYSTAL clear about this issue) you can not apply for citizenship 5 years after being granted asylum. And since I am blah blah'ing according to you, I will leave the thread and avoid any questions you may ask in the future .
 
clotty said:
I did not start anything. I answered your question. It seems you wanted me to say "oh, I wonder the same thing. Yeah, let's hear some stories", but sorry , my opinion is that I am in 100% certainty (as the law is CRYSTAL clear about this issue) you can not apply for citizenship 5 years after being granted asylum. And since I am blah blah'ing according to you, I will leave the thread and avoid any questions you may ask in the future .

bla bla bla when you will stop?
 
c'mon guys ...

:( what's goin on ...

c'mon ... *shakes both hands*, u both are wonderful people in this board. very helpful and friendly. lets kiss and make up. haha j/k. just try to break the ice here. :rolleyes:
 
lets say i applied for naturalization very early, i was thinking to do it soon this summer,and lets say i got denied as expected,

will this denial hurt my case in the future?

the fact is iam eligible for citizenship on may 16 2009,

if i got denied this summer , can i still apply on may 16 2009
 
Cl_Asylee.... Yes ! you were rude.... It wasnt nice that instead of appreciating some one's comments to your thread.. U started talking 'all that......:(

We are like family members who help each other to solve our problems/issues and if some one doesnt type what we expect then it doesnt mean that we start insulting that person.....
 
I think the initial poster has every right to ask a question. How else does one get clarity? I think the tone of the response was dismissive. Like it is common knowledge. As much as many of people are "know it all" or feel that everyone should be clear on certain fact, that is NOT the case.

It's funny people get through and get greencards and its a different disposition all together. Let us continue to respect those who may not be clear on facts. It is an information board. If you explain something and feel that it fell on deaf ears, then ignore. You owe no one a response, but if you got to respond, do it with respect, because one day you did not know it all.

Respect each other. There are language barriers,cultural barriers communication barriers and perception is often misinterpreted via an internet site. Do not take things personally. I would suggest that people maintain a professional tone in their responses. This way it doesn't come across as a personal attack! cheers!
 
Pinkie, Cl-asylee and I BOTH got our GC's, so it has nothing to do with my "disposition" changing once I got a GC. Absolutely NOTHING. I answered your questions in another thread when I already had my GC; where did you get that feeling that I dismissed your question to suggest I have a different disposition due to having a GC? He and I have been on this board long enough for me to know that he had read many things on this subject which is why I was surprised that he was confused about the topic to make a thread. Let me clarify to you: you and many new members ask questions that are obvious to others, and in no way in them do I say "I am surprised Pinkie you did not know this" but when Cl-asylee or Want or other longtime members ask something, i may be genuinely surprised why they are asking it. There IS a difference there ,so don't put yourself in Cl-asylee's shoes becaue you are not in the same shoes. You are new here; he is not. Your question will not make me scratch my head, but his might. And I expressed that surprise by saying I thought he knew that and GENUINELY asked what his confusion was. If I were going to dismiss his question, I would not have answered the question at all and if you cared to read my replies they were ANSWERING his question. And how did I personally attack him? do tell. Personal attack is insulting someone personally. And last time I checked *I* was the one dismissed by reducing my HELP (yes, by answering questions we are all helping each other here) to a "bla blah". Of course I said what I said strongly because it is a clear cut answer,so the gist of what I said was a clear cut "do not listen to other stories. Do not apply early", but in nowhere in my replies did I disrespect him like he did to me, so refrain from lecturing me on how to respect others. Just because I said I was confused why he was confused and then went on to say "do not believe those stories. The law is crystal clear. It makes more sense to believe the law" , that is NOT insulting anyone; that IS answering their question.

Pinkie, you seemed to have read way into what I wrote maybe because I had previously rubbed you in the wrong way for God knows what or maybe you feel that someone will say to you "but Pinkie, didn't you know this?" in the future and your ego will take it as if that person is dismissing you, so in that case I suggest you take a question like that at face value instead of reading a malicious intent like "dismissal" into it. My posts answered his question and were about this topic, period, so to answer me with a "blah blah" when I tried to help IS rude, and my posts did NOT call for it. And furthermore, it was unnecesary for you to tell me that not everyone knows everything because if you checked my previous replies I replied over and over again the same questions new members have asked , and few members bother doing it, so it is very unfair to me for you to suggest that I dismiss people's questions because I assume everyone should know everything about immigration. On the contrary, I am one of the few members on this board who consistently answer new members' questions eventhough I may have answered the same question ten times before while there are other members who just say "do a search". Your assumption about me is not fair on me.

Cl-Asylee, if you felt I was dismissing you; if that is the feeling that you got, I wish you expressed that better than saying a childish "blah blah" and a second "blah blah" after I expressed how rude a reply it was. That way it would not turn into an argument.

Thank you Singh.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top