To Naturalize or Not?

thanks Jack,

Its after GC and I still have the letter from my manager explaining the reason for my termination.

You should be fine. My situation is different. You were laid off at no fault of yours. As Jackolatern said you maybe asked to explain and you can show the termination letter.
 
Laid off two weeks before GC approval, or two weeks after the GC?

If it's two weeks after, you shouldn't have a problem. At worst you may have to explain the situation.

If it's two weeks before, it could be a big problem if you get a hostile interviewer who wants to dig into your employment history.

if it is 2 weeks before, spmunuku should wait 3 years (or 5 if he really wants to play it safe) and apply under the marriage route. This doesn't mean that employment history is out of bounds, but as it wont' be listed on the application, he can always quote "mid 2005" or 'late 2003" (or whatever) if the IO wants to probe employment history going back to the time of the GC.
 
I do not see I-90 ask for arrests or convictions.
There is no such question on I-90. However, when you go for a fingerprint appointment, they will make you fill out a questionnaire that asks if you have been arrested and charged with a misdemeanor. So, living in the USA as a PR will not prevent people from facing problems if their criminal history is not clean.
 
There is no such question on I-90. However, when you go for a fingerprint appointment, they will make you fill out a questionnaire that asks if you have been arrested and charged with a misdemeanor. So, living in the USA as a PR will not prevent people from facing problems if their criminal history is not clean.

I thought FP process for GC/GC renewal is just the same as FP for citizenship.
 
I thought FP process for GC/GC renewal is just the same as FP for citizenship.
The FP process for N-400 only requires fingerprints whilst the FP process for I-90 requires fingerprints, photo and filling out the questionnaire.
 
whymenot, I'm in almost a similar situation like yours. And I have talked to a couple of leading lawyers. From what I heard from them and also from this forum you can apply for citizenship for your wife without worrying. Every application is viewed separately and so you wife WILL not have any issues at all.

Here is what I would suggest for your citizenship (my personal suggestion). After your wife gets citizenship, at a time convenient for you, you go back to your home country (with or without your wife), surrender your GC and be there for some time (may be an year - experts here could suggest how long this could be). And then apply for GC as the spouse of US citizen and at the time of interview make sure your wife is domiciling in US. Come back here and after three years apply for citizenship under Family Based category.

Even though we have genuine reasons to join/continue with the sponsor, there is no way we can prove that we had genuine intent. Unfortunately the law puts all responsibility on us to prove our genuineness but we have no solid proof.
 
whymenot, I'm in almost a similar situation like yours. And I have talked to a couple of leading lawyers. From what I heard from them and also from this forum you can apply for citizenship for your wife without worrying. Every application is viewed separately and so you wife WILL not have any issues at all.
That is not entirely true when the wife's GC was based on the husband's GC and the husband's GC is in question. Others on this forum have had situations where the wife was interrogated about the husband's employment. One case involved the wife's citizenship decision being put on hold until the husband could produce some documents.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with the general opinion that it's probably better to wait. But if you were to apply, my opinion is that you should get through just fine for the following facts:

(a) Though they can review entire history, the normal procedure is not to question their own prior decisions. Unless there's a glaring problem, like fraud, it'd be unlikely they'd go back to reverse prior approvals.

(b) You had genuine employment on which LC and 140 was approved. (Be sure to save paystubs etc to show this). You continued to work until they terminated you (effectively the date the last paycheck was issued).

(c) After 5 years as a permanent resident, USCIS can't just administratively revoke your GC. They need to go to an immigration judge etc, and as far as I can see from history here and elsewhere, they do this only when they have a strong motive, such as someone with a criminal incident, etc. No fraud, no criminal background, >5 years as permanent resident -- dude.. you should worry more about swine flu or something.

(d) Your wife's case is even harder to deny if she applies alone. Because N400 is her application alone, they are reviewing her file, not yours. To initiate a review on your file, they need to establish a reason to suspect validity of her GC. There is no such reason. And even if there is, because it's >5 years, they'll need to meet a much higher bar of proof to revoke your GC, such as showing there was fraud. It's a legally harder standard to meet and I doubt that exists in your case.

(e) The only "problem" I see is actually your employer's headache - if you were on a H1B and they didn't terminate you [you didn't sign a termination notice and there's no conclusive proof of one being delivered to you] -- they could be forced to pay back wages you up until you took up a new job. In which case, you were always employed. I don't expect this to happen, but we're discussing a theoretical legal problem, and the theoretical solution is in your favor.

Bottom line is, your GC is in good grounds and your N400 will come through (perhaps with a few extra months of "administrative reviews" -- read nervous waiting time for you): So it's up to you and in the end, how much patience you have with paperwork and USCIS! My opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
(i) If your employment was genuine, sound and documented up until LC was approved and 140 filed;
Congress would not have put in the "same or similar" requirement in the AC21 law if it the offer of employment only had to last through the LC and I-140.

The OP was not eligible for the green card when it was adjudicated, and USCIS would not have approved the GC if they knew about his employment situation at the time of adjudication. He has no leg to stand on if USCIS decides to delve into his employment history and wants to take him to court to revoke the GC.

If he applies, all he can do is hope that USCIS doesn't question or investigate that about him, and that they will choose not to pursue deportation if they do find out.
 
Jackolantern - it's a very weak case for USCIS to revoke a +5 year GC. I said "within a hairline of AC21" as I do realize he's outside it, but I'll edit my post to not say things that imply OP is covered by AC21.

The reason I say it is weak is because to distinguish someone who is self-employed on a startup (that never took off) versus being unemployed is a tremendous amount of work, something I would not expect them to do unless the person was undesirable like a drug dealer.

Next, after establishing that the GC was issued in error, rescinding it is whole another battle for USCIS as the critical 5 year period has completed. See this thread for a discussion. Or take a look at this case where the Judge notes: see also Garcia v. Att'y General, 553F.3d 724 (3rd Cir. 2009) (holding that any rescission of LPR status is subject to the statute of limitations)

The theoretical possibility always remains, now and forever into future. But at some point, risks become "background risks" and the possibility of being hit by a car becomes a more immediate danger. So my point isn't really about the absolute legal basis for the GC, but as a practical matter, if it poses risk. I'm of the opinion the risk is minimal.

As a practical matter, 5-year tax transcripts are routinely requested during N400, and OP probably should wait until these no longer show any unemployed periods, just to avoid unnecessary headaches.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh, one important point to remember - never ever lie to immigration officials.

Lying to immigration officials creates an independent basis for them to deny/revoke your privileges. If the officer asks you, "were you employed when you adjusted to status". If you lie and say "YES, was employed" -- boom -- that creates a very easy and simple basis for them to deny (and keep denying in the future) your N400 application(s). No judge necessary and no statue of limitations applies.

Revoking your 5+ year GC is a zillion times more difficult than denying your N400 if you lie to a immigration official. Don't volunteer unnecessary information, but never ever lie.
 
The reason I say it is weak is because to distinguish someone who is self-employed on a startup (that never took off) versus being unemployed is a tremendous amount of work, something I would not expect them to do unless the person was undesirable like a drug dealer.
Self employed? Don't be ridiculous. He wasn't self-employed, isn't going to get USCIS the court to believe that, and qualifying as self-employed under AC21 requires real revenue or funding and activity, not just calling yourself self-employed.

He wasn't qualified for the GC at the time of adjudication, and if USCIS had known the facts they would have denied the GC. He doesn't stand a chance if USCIS decides to pursue revocation of the GC. His only chances lie in hoping that USCIS won't know or won't care about that employment gap so many years ago, not in winning a court battle for which he has no real defense. Don't lump this case with others where USCIS already had all the material facts before the GC approval but overlooked some of the facts and approved it by mistake ... those cases are basically impossible to revoke after the 5-year window. But this case involves a major material fact that USCIS did not have at the time of adjudication.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As I mentioned I have a desire to be a US citizen but not at the cost of GC being revoked or deportation. I do not want to separate my spouse's application from mine. I am going to apply for my GC renewal in 2012 (for some reason my wife's GC expiry date is 10 years and 6 months from the date of issue and mine is exact 10 years). We had traveled out in 2005 (3 years after my PR status) and were admitted back without any issues. I will keep on renewing the GC till I am really comfortable to apply for Citizenship (ready for any revocation/deportation if that happens).

JackOlantern,

Was it my responsibility to notify USCIS that my company was not paying me and there was no work (there was no official termination letter) so please do not grant me the PR status?
 
JackOlantern,

Was it my responsibility to notify USCIS that my company was not paying me and there was no work (there was no official termination letter) so please do not grant me the PR status?

I don't think so, unless they sent you an RFE or interviewed you. But still they can revoke it on the basis that you were not eligible for it at the time of adjudication, and they did not have the material facts back then (if they had the facts but approved you anyway, they can't revoke it after 5 years).
 
(a) I'm not saying OP is covered by AC21 or the GC approval was valid or he was self employed. I'm merely stating that it's a lot of work for USCIS to establish either
(b) It's a terrible idea to lie to officials - in the context of immigration, it creates fresh, no-time-limit basis for denials, and hands USCIS the power to deny like cake on a plate
(c) It is NOT POSSIBLE TO REVOKE A GREENCARD AFTER 5 YEARS UNLESS there was fraud or misrepresentation of information (anytime)
(d) Failure of USCIS to investigate changes in a case (where regulation did not require updates), and was true and factual at the time it was filed is NOT fraud, NOT misrepresentation
(e) I've quoted a case that comes closes to this situation and a Judge's quote and I hold that it's more valuable than someone's opinions

As I am not adding any new information to the thread anymore, signing off the thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
(e) I've quoted a case that comes closes to this situation and a Judge's quote and I hold that it's more valuable than someone's opinions
That case is irrelevant to this thread, as USCIS already had the material facts when they approved the GC. They knew the guy did not leave the US and reenter with a fresh H1B as they instructed, and they knew he didn't pay the fee they said he didn't pay.
 
Top