Naturalization Requirements-Why is everybody worrying??

[dancininthedark]

Below are the naturalization requirements after obtaining GC and nowhere it mentions a requirement of being with your employer for so much time

General Naturalization Requirements

Age
Applicants must be at least 18 years old.
Refer to the section, Naturalized Citizen's Children under Waivers, Exceptions, and Special Cases for information on applicants who are less than 18 years old.
See Also INA 334

Residency
An applicant must have been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence. Lawfully admitted for permanent residence means having been legally accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the United States as an immigrant in accordance with the immigration laws. Individuals who have been lawfully admitted as permanent residents will be asked to produce an I-551, Alien Registration Receipt Card, as proof of their status.

See Also INA 316

Residence and Physical Presence

An applicant is eligible to file if, immediately preceding the filing of the application, he or she:

*
has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence (see preceding section);
*
has resided continuously as a lawful permanent resident in the U.S. for at least 5 years prior to filing with no single absence from the United States of more than one year;
*
has been physically present in the United States for at least 30 months out of the previous five years (absences of more than six months but less than one year shall disrupt the applicant's continuity of residence unless the applicant can establish that he or she did not abandon his or her residence during such period)
has resided within a state or district for at least three months

Good Moral Character
Generally, an applicant must show that he or she has been a person of good moral character for the statutory period (typically five years or three years if married to a U.S. citizen or one year for Armed Forces expedite) prior to filing for naturalization. The Service is not limited to the statutory period in determining whether an applicant has established good moral character. An applicant is permanently barred from naturalization if he or she has ever been convicted of murder. An applicant is also permanently barred from naturalization if he or she has been convicted of an aggravated felony as defined in section 101(a)(43) of the Act on or after November 29, 1990. A person also cannot be found to be a person of good moral character if during the last five years he or she:

*
has committed and been convicted of one or more crimes involving moral turpitude
*
has committed and been convicted of 2 or more offenses for which the total sentence imposed was 5 years or more
*
has committed and been convicted of any controlled substance law, except for a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana
*
has been confined to a penal institution during the statutory period, as a result of a conviction, for an aggregate period of 180 days or more
*
has committed and been convicted of two or more gambling offenses
*
is or has earned his or her principal income from illegal gambling
*
is or has been involved in prostitution or commercialized vice
*
is or has been involved in smuggling illegal aliens into the United States
*
is or has been a habitual drunkard
*
is practicing or has practiced polygamy
*
has willfully failed or refused to support dependents
*
has given false testimony, under oath, in order to receive a benefit under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

An applicant must disclose all relevant facts to the Service, including his or her entire criminal history, regardless of whether the criminal history disqualifies the applicant under the enumerated provisions.

See Also INA 316

Attachment to the Constitution
An applicant must show that he or she is attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States.

See Also INA 316

Language
Applicants for naturalization must be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language. Applicants exempt from this requirement are those who on the date of filing:

*
have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for periods totaling 15 years or more and are over 55 years of age;
*
have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for periods totaling 20 years or more and are over 50 years of age; or
*
have a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, where the impairment affects the applicant’s ability to learn English.

See Also INA 312

United States Government and History Knowledge
An applicant for naturalization must demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history and of the principles and form of government of the United States. Applicants exempt from this requirement are those who, on the date of filing, have a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, where the impairment affects the applicant’s ability to learn U.S. History and Government
Applicants who have been residing in the U.S. subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for at least 20 years and are over the age of 65 will be afforded special condsideration in satisfying this requirement.

See Also INA 312

*
Naturalization Test Questions for Applicants Meeting 65/20 Exception
*
Test Yourself on U.S. History
*
Sample U.S. History Questions with Answers

Oath of Allegiance
To become a citizen, one must take the oath of allegiance. By doing so, an applicant swears to:

*
support the Constitution and obey the laws of the U.S.;
*
renounce any foreign allegiance and/or foreign title; and
*
bear arms for the Armed Forces of the U.S. or perform services for the government of the U.S. when required.

In certain instances, where the applicant establishes that he or she is opposed to any type of service in armed forces based on religious teaching or belief, INS will permit these applicants to take a modified oath.

*
Read the Oath of Allegiance

See Also INA 337
Related Files

* Sample U.S. History Questions with Answers (135KB PDF)

* Sample U.S. History Questions with Answers (169KB PDF)

 

[blahblah_gc]

Because no one wants to be the 1% who are rejected.

 

[Jackolantern]

At the citizenship interview they can ask for anything under the sun. I know one person who was asked for 6 years of mortgage statements, and another who was asked about when she was a university student over 10 years ago.

If you get interviewed by a pissy officer, they can give you a hard time and ask you things that they hope will mess you up. Of course, if they deny it for some stupid reason you'll probably win the appeal eventually, but do you want to have to spend the time and money on an appeal? Better to be prepared for whatever crap they might throw at you.

 

[Yankee_Boy]

Hi Jack,

This being the scenario, what could be an acceptable or reasonable time to stay with an employer after the Green Card? I am seeing posts talking about 3 months to 6 months.

I am wondering how AC 21 fits into this entire scheme? If employees are allowed to change employers even before I-485s are approved, should they not be free to change after they get GC? This is something I am not able to get a clear picture of.

Let me know your comments.

 

[TheRealCanadian]

This being the scenario, what could be an acceptable or reasonable time to stay with an employer after the Green Card? I am seeing posts talking about 3 months to 6 months. I am wondering how AC 21 fits into this entire scheme? If employees are allowed to change employers even before I-485s are approved, should they not be free to change after they get GC? This is something I am not able to get a clear picture of.

The problem we face is that no one really knows what the answer is, since USCIS has never clarified how AC21 affects naturalization. The second problem is that you cannot go back in time, so five years down the road you discover that you switched jobs "too soon" but can do nothing to undo this.

It really comes down to your appetite for risk, and what a "reasonable time frame" would be. I personally would feel quite uncomfortable leaving before 90 days, but I also think that waiting more than six or nine months may be unduly cautious. But that's just me.

 

[kagemusha]

While the naturalization requirements don't say anything specific about how long you should have been with the employer that sponsored your GC, the implicit assumption with "legally accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the United States" is that your GC was obtained in good faith and there was no intent to defraud the system.

Take for instance the case of people who got GCs through marriage. If they happened to get divorced immediately after getting the GC, the suspicion may arise that they married only to get the GC. The burden of proof rests on the applicant to show that they entered the marriage in good faith and things just happened to not work out. So anything that may has to do with the basis on which you got your GC is fair game during your naturalization process. If the GC itself was obtained using questionable means, that provides grounds for USCIS to not only deny your naturalization application but also to revoke your GC and perhaps deport you.

Now things are a little less clear when it comes to GCs obtained through employment. Before AC21, leaving the employer that sponsored your GC too quickly after obtaining the GC suggested that you had no intention of working for the employer (which was the basis for your getting the GC in the first place). But with AC21 there is more flexibility as long as you can demonstrate that you started the process in good faith with every intention to work for the sponsoring employer but that circumstances forced you to change employers. Maybe AC21 experts can chime in here.

-KM

 

[Jackolantern]

I am wondering how AC 21 fits into this entire scheme? If employees are allowed to change employers even before I-485s are approved, should they not be free to change after they get GC? This is something I am not able to get a clear picture of.

You can change jobs with AC21, but note that it is not an unrestricted freedom; the new job still has to be similar to the original one. When you change jobs before the I-485 is approved the new employer effectively becomes your sponsor ... you are not allowed to self-sponsor by being self-employed or working in any arbitrary job. So if you use AC21, it is that new employer you should stay with after the GC to be "safe".

Ultimately it boils down to what level of risk you want to take. The law is unclear, and until some clear guidance is given (either from a change in the law, a court ruling, or a USCIS memo), it will be up to the officers deciding your citizenship to determine what to do. If you are comfortable with taking that risk by leaving after one week or one month, it's up to you.

 

[Micronesia]

Below are the naturalization requirements after obtaining GC and nowhere it mentions a requirement of being with your employer for so much time

General Naturalization Requirements



* Sample U.S. History Questions with Answers (169KB PDF)

This question,really will be From eternity and destines to the eternity.
None for sure knows the proven answer but only can have a possible list out the possible perils from immigration law point of view since no known(or published)case/case law exists explicit in these forums or immigartion sites ,as far as our limited knowledge goes.
OK.Now coming to the same old band wagon group scenario:
let us see and follow as below(as we are less risk takers)
Naturalization of GCs based on marriage or employment,basically the GC was issued based on Clear intent to 'continue' the bases of underlying principles as stipulated.
Marriage--No fraud involved.
Employment--No fraud involved.
What is fraud here in emp.GC?
For example --'Fraudlent intent' in representing the fact that a candidate has the true/real 'intent' in serving the 'sponsoring employer' after GC awarded.
For this the more 'jealous 'IO may - ad'judicate'- an applicant's intent basing on the history of employment,for example.
And we need to remember the IO is having the 'authority' to question if he wants to.(I strongly believe,applicants can not say to IO--No,you don't have this right!).
Now the essence in this case is ,If IO has grounds and substantiation and able to prove that it is a 'fraud' and really he has no 'intent' etc,
the GC will be revoked and 'naturalization' application will be 'Denied' since GC was revoked.
(Here the point is --it is not the Q of denial of CtzSHIP applciatioon directly just because some body has not served(intent),but GC is possibly revoked--indirect affect and hence the denial).
So naturaliztion 'requirements' mentioned in sites may/will not inculde details of 'indirect affect'.

Well,Sould some body be worried if some body has n't worked and employer possibly reported this to CIS?
It is up to each individual how much risk taker he is.
Will this happen?
No body knows whether this can happen for certain
Is there theoretical possibilty?
Seems some what,yes.
Do you take the risk?
It depends entirely on 'you'.
What is safe?
Just follow the conventions/rules/law 'asfar as possible' to 'you'.
Contact in doubt?
A good lawyer.
That's it.

 

[Dallas03096]

Self-employment & AC21

You can change jobs with AC21, but note that it is not an unrestricted freedom; the new job still has to be similar to the original one. When you change jobs before the I-485 is approved the new employer effectively becomes your sponsor ... you are not allowed to self-sponsor by being self-employed or working in any arbitrary job.

http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/handbook/AC21intrm051205.pdf
http://shusterman.com/pdf/ac21-51205.pdf
Interim Guidance for Processing Form I-140 EB Immigrant Petitions and Form I-485 and H-1B Petitions under AC-21 (5-12-05)

Question8. Can an alien port to self-employment under INA 204(j)

Answer: Yes, as long as the requirements are met. First, the key is whether the employment is in a “same or similar” occupational classification as the job for which the original I-140 petition was filed. Second, it may be appropriate to confirm that the new employer and the job offer are legitimate through an RFE to the adjustment applicant for relevant information about these issues. Third, as with any portability case, USCIS will focus on whether the I-140 petition represented the truly intended employment at the time of the filing of both the I-140 and the I-485. This means that, as of the time of the filing of the I-140 and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.

 

[Jackolantern]

Interesting. I guess it all comes back to the "same or similar" criteria. In most cases being self-employed won't be "same or similar" to what you did as an employee. A doctor who worked for a hospital and leaves to set up his/her own practice can probably do it, but not a programmer who quits his/her job to start a consulting company. And of course, changing to self-employment puts you in a more dubious situation than moving from one company to another, if the USCIS ever wants to challenge you.

 

[Jackolantern]

That memo also talks about intent.

Third, as with any portability case, USCIS will focus on whether the I-140 petition represented the truly intended employment at the time of the filing of both the I-140 and the I-485. This means that, as of the time of the filing of the I-140 and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.

Leaving too soon could be construed as not having that intent. But since they were referring to the intent that existed as of filing the I485 rather than the intent upon having the GC, leaving one day after getting the GC apparently should be fine if you stayed very long (e.g. 2 years) after filing the I485.

However, I don't want to be the test case for this. I will stay at least another six months, collect my bonus, and then decide what to do.

 

[Dallas03096]

Interesting. I guess it all comes back to the "same or similar" criteria. In most cases being self-employed won't be "same or similar" to what you did as an employee. A doctor who worked for a hospital and leaves to set up his/her own practice can probably do it, but not a programmer who quits his/her job to start a consulting company. And of course, changing to self-employment puts you in a more dubious situation than moving from one company to another, if the USCIS ever wants to challenge you.

This is what I found in immigration-law.com about self-employment:
For instance, if you are a computer consultant working at your employer's client site. For whatever reasons, the client does not want to continue doing business with your employer. The client is willing to give the contract to yourself for the same job. From the perspective of AC-21 portability, you may not anticipate too much problem. However, there is a potential issue of the breach of employment contract with your employer. Accordingly, unless either your employer consents to such change or there is no employment contract

 

[yummyk]

That memo also talks about intent.

Leaving too soon could be construed as not having that intent. But since they were referring to the intent that existed as of filing the I485 rather than the intent upon having the GC, leaving one day after getting the GC apparently should be fine if you stayed very long (e.g. 2 years) after filing the I485.

However, I don't want to be the test case for this. I will stay at least another six months, collect my bonus, and then decide what to do.

Jackolantern and all: this sounds like good advice to me, and I was in your shoes several years ago. I knew that I would not stay with my sponsoring employer forever, but I wasn't sure when an appropriate point to leave would be. Back in those days, these forums were filled with advice on how long to stay with the sponsoring employer post GC approval. I see that the debate has never really been resolved as here we are all these years later talking about the same thing.

I was approved using Consular Processing in November 2002, and once I got the GC it was like an enormous weight off my shoulders. I just put my head down and kept working for my sponsoring employer. However, in July of 2003 I got a rude awakening when I received a sub-par performance review. This had more to do with the economic climate at the time than it did with my performance, but for me the message was clear: it was time to go. I ended up leaving my sponsoring employer after 10 months, in September 2003.

Before I left, I consulted with an immigration attorney who informed me that this length of time was, in his opinion, acceptable. His exact words, delieverd without hesitation, were: "you're fine". The general rule of thumb in these forums back then was that 6 months with your sponsoring employer was an acceptable standard, after which an individual was free to leave his/her employer. However, every situation is different - I may have stayed longer had I not received that poor performance review. I was never laid off, but the threat of a layoff caused me to act. Would a "reasonable person" have acted the same way? Who knows. I mention it only to provide context regarding my "intent" to work for the sponsoring employer permanently. Ultimately, the attorneys tell us that that everything comes down to intent. Can intents change over time, following a GC approval? You bet they can.

One standard, based on a legal precedent, that seems to be applied to one's intent is the 30-60-90 day rule. Simply stated, if one changes jobs 30 days within receiving the GC, one's original intent may definitely be questioned and fraud is almost always suspected. There may have been a good reason for the change, but it raises a flag. If the change occurs within 30-60 days, this still raises a flag, but less so. Once the 90 day point is hit, if you are still with the sponsoring employer, one's original intent is generally assumed to have been genuine. I realize that this is an oversimplifcation, and that the original court case was argued around a non-immigrant who came to the US and decided, almost immediately, to apply for a change of status to (I believe) a student visa. However, it is my understanding that the 30-60-90 day rule is applied in other areas as a standard for "intent" (GC by marriage being the obvious exception).

So, although you are probably OK changing after 3 months, I do think there is merit to the so-called 6 month rule of thumb. The reason for the extra three months is to be a little bit more conservative and to give yourself a buffer in case you need it later on. I also recognize that AC21 changed the rules a bit, but as was stated here - nobody wants to be the guinea pig that tests the application of the new rules in court.

 

[Jackolantern]

The ironic thing in my situation is that now that my GC has been approved, I have less of a desire to leave my current employer. With the management changes that have been occurring, there have been many rumors of upcoming layoffs, and I was thinking of preemptively changing jobs rather than having them suddenly lay me off and I can't find a "same or similar" job before they revoke the I-140.

Now that the GC is approved, it is no big deal if they lay me off, as doing that won't take away the GC, and I have enough money saved up to survive a long time without a job if I have to. Since there is no pressing need to preemptively change jobs, I might as well stay at least until I get the bonus early next year. Or maybe longer.

 

[Yankee_Boy]

While all these years I yearned to get the card and get out, now I find that the journey starts once again towards citizenship. And yet again, we need to be careful on when we need to leave the employer.

Going through several posts in the forum I am thinking that a time period of 3-4 months should suffice. Anything more than that, I am just wasting my energy (having wasted it for employers for almost six years).

If you are getting paid well then I agree that a continuation of employment would probably be best. But if being independent gets you a better job and a better per hour rate (if you're a contractor), you should be going after it. I will plan and take up another job after 3-4 months. That is my personal opinion.