Help! IO said I applied too early....don't understand why!

J

jessiewei

Registered Users (C)
I passed my interview on 2/18 and received a letter from the IO today, saying that I filed too early and he has to close my case until later I met the residency requirement. I am so confused so please help:

I got my green card on 2/8/2005 and left for my mother country on 3/13/2005 to continue study. On 7/16/2005 I returned to the U.S. and stayed permanently (except for several short trips, none of them is longer than 2 months). In IO's letter, he mentioned that I did not establish my full time residency until 7/16/2005 because I did not live in the U.S. for more than 90 days after becoming a permanent resident. I've never heard about this rule, does anyone happen to know anything about this?

I applied at the end of Nov. 2009 because I thought my residency began from 2/8/2005 and I have lived in the U.S. for over 30 months in the last 5 years, never leave the country for 6 months or longer. Now I am told to wait for another 5 months, I don't even know whether the IO will remember to reopen my case by then...:(
 
jessiewei said:
I passed my interview on 2/18 and received a letter from the IO today, saying that I filed too early and he has to close my case until later I met the residency requirement. I am so confused so please help:

I got my green card on 2/8/2005 and left for my mother country on 3/13/2005 to continue study. On 7/16/2005 I returned to the U.S. and stayed permanently (except for several short trips, none of them is longer than 2 months). In IO's letter, he mentioned that I did not establish my full time residency until 7/16/2005 because I did not live in the U.S. for more than 90 days after becoming a permanent resident. I've never heard about this rule, does anyone happen to know anything about this?

I applied at the end of Nov. 2009 because I thought my residency began from 2/8/2005 and I have lived in the U.S. for over 30 months in the last 5 years, never leave the country for 6 months or longer. Now I am told to wait for another 5 months, I don't even know whether the IO will remember to reopen my case by then...:(
Click to expand...

Did he close the case with the intention to re-open after 5 months, or did he ask you to re-file when you satisfy the dates as per his calculations? I thought they reject and ask you to re-file if you filed too early. [ I am not making a comment about his rationale, but the process. ]
 
jessiewei said:
In IO's letter, he mentioned that I did not establish my full time residency until 7/16/2005 because I did not live in the U.S. for more than 90 days after becoming a permanent resident. I've never heard about this rule, does anyone happen to know anything about this?
Click to expand...
There is no written rule on this just as there is no written rule on back to back trips of under 6 months breaking continuous residency. The fact that you left US so soon after you received GC demonstrated (in IO's mind) that you didn't esthablish continuous residency until after you returned to US from studies abroad.
 
Bobsmyth said:
There is no written rule on this just as there is no written rule on back to back trips of under 6 months breaking continuous residency. The fact that you left US so soon after you received GC demonstrated (in IO's mind) that you didn't esthablish continuous residency until after you returned to US from studies abroad.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the question is what should OP do next. Wait, or re-file in 5 months?
The question for OP - what letter is this, what does it say? Is it a letter from IO, or CIS? Does it render a decision, or advise to wait.
If you can reproduce the letter here ... delete all personal info, and transcribe the text, that will be very helpful.
 
sanjoseaug20 said:
Yes, but the question is what should OP do next. Wait, or re-file in 5 months?
The question for OP - what letter is this, what does it say? Is it a letter from IO, or CIS? Does it render a decision, or advise to wait.
If you can reproduce the letter here ... delete all personal info, and transcribe the text, that will be very helpful.
Click to expand...

The letter is from my IO, with his hand signature on it. He said he decided to close my case and reopen it later when I meet the requirement, my oath ceremony will be scheduled at that time, so it means I don't need to refile.
 
Bobsmyth said:
There is no written rule on this just as there is no written rule on back to back trips of under 6 months breaking continuous residency. The fact that you left US so soon after you received GC demonstrated (in IO's mind) that you didn't esthablish continuous residency until after you returned to US from studies abroad.
Click to expand...

The 6-month-trip rule is clearly written on the publication M-476 pg.18, while this 90-day residency rule has never been seen from anywhere, at least I know nothing about this.
 
jessiewei said:
The letter is from my IO, with his hand signature on it. He said he decided to close my case and reopen it later when I meet the requirement, my oath ceremony will be scheduled at that time, so it means I don't need to refile.
Click to expand...

As Bob said, certain residency rules are not written clearly, but what the IO said makes sense in the spirit of the law. I know you may not like it due to your personal predicament, but I see it similar to CIS asking for 90 days residency in the district you file, but that's towards the fag end of the process. At the same time it will be better if such things get documented ... this situation is not hard to make into a formal rule, or add to the guide to naturalization.

At the same time, he has not rejected the app, so this is good news. Just wait, and reach out to CIS / or the IO when these 5 months are up.
 
sanjoseaug20 said:
As Bob said, certain residency rules are not written clearly, but what the IO said makes sense in the spirit of the law. I know you may not like it due to your personal predicament, but I see it similar to CIS asking for 90 days residency in the district you file, but that's towards the fag end of the process. At the same time it will be better if such things get documented ... this situation is not hard to make into a formal rule, or add to the guide to naturalization.

At the same time, he has not rejected the app, so this is good news. Just wait, and reach out to CIS / or the IO when these 5 months are up.
Click to expand...

well, I agree with you, the IO is actually doing me a favor by temporarily closing my application rather than rejecting it, I do appreciate his help. It seems that I have no other choice but be patient and wait...
 
jessiewei said:
The 6-month-trip rule is clearly written on the publication M-476 pg.18, while this 90-day residency rule has never been seen from anywhere, at least I know nothing about this.
Click to expand...

Again, back to back trips under 6 months can bring continuous residency into question. The guide (and law) speaks of trips over 6 months. There is no written rule about back to back trips under 6 months, the same goes for having to establish 90 days residency right after you obtain your GC, but both instances can bring continuous residency into question.
 
sanjoseaug20 said:
Yes, but the question is what should OP do next. Wait, or re-file in 5 months?
Click to expand...
It's unusual for an IO to tell an applicant that he will close a case and reopen it when the applicant is eligible. If the IO found the applicant wasn't eligible due to continuous residency, he would have denied and closed the case, instead of telling the applicant he can reopen (without having applicant to file again).
Before deciding how to proceed, the OP needs to go for an Infopass and discuss the issue with a supervisor at the DO to clear up any misunderstandings there may have been.
 
Bobsmyth said:
The fact that you left US so soon after you received GC demonstrated (in IO's mind) that you didn't esthablish continuous residency until after you returned to US from studies abroad.
Click to expand...

The wording on the certificate of naturlaization (lower rigth corner) actually also say naturalization law
requires naturalized citizens to have the intent to reside in the USA after naturalization. I think there was
a such law before that requires nauturalizaed citizen to live in the uSA for at leats one year but that law
was repealled. But the certificate was not updated to reflect that so any naturalized citizen can pack up and leave the USA rigth after taking the oath and still get to keep his citizenship
 
The way I look at this case, there are two sides to it.
Firstly the downside, the IO is incorrect is his interpretation that the applicant did not establish residency until July 2005, instead of February 2005.
Secondly the upside, the IO is not denying the N-400, just delaying its final adjudication.

I think the OP should schedule an infopass and try to speak to a supervisor.
 
Is any update on this thread? I might run into the same situation as I have become LPR on 3/1/05 and out on 4/3/09 for 183 days. However, I went to the citizenship seminar and talked to IOs. They told me that it's ok for me to apply now because they look for overall trip and pattern of traveling. This is really confusing situation as there is nowhere stated in the official document.
 
Bach said:
Is any update on this thread? I might run into the same situation as I have become LPR on 3/1/05 and out on 4/3/09 for 183 days. However, I went to the citizenship seminar and talked to IOs. They told me that it's ok for me to apply now because they look for overall trip and pattern of traveling.
Click to expand...
They will often tell you to apply even if your chances are bad. They've gotten into trouble before for telling people not to apply who turned out to be actually eligible, so unless you are obviously not eligible (e.g. you just got your GC last year), they will tell you to apply. They're not going to tell you NOT to apply when they don't have all the facts of your case, and they don't have time to analyze all the facts unless you actually apply.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I must say that I find this story very strange. The rules are quite clear: an N-400 may be filed at most 90 days prior to satisfying the continuous residency requirement. If the IO was correct and the OP filed too early (more than 90 days prior to satisfying the continuous residency requirement) then I don't see how the case can be temporarily closed and then "reopened". It seems to me that the current N-400 application would have to be denied and a new one filed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top