Application with the Judge

[MW2015]

So what does it mean once my citizenship application has been given to a judge. Will they make a final decision after reviewing my case files. Will I have a meeting with the judge and need any representation. Just wish they would post this movement on the website instead of having to go through the MPs office to obtain.

Thanks for your assistance.

 

[jefftoland]

So what does it mean once my citizenship application has been given to a judge. Will they make a final decision after reviewing my case files. Will I have a meeting with the judge and need any representation. Just wish they would post this movement on the website instead of having to go through the MPs office to obtain.

Thanks for your assistance.

why do you have to see the judge,what are the reasons?

 

[MW2015]

why do you have to see the judge,what are the reasons?

likely for CIT-0520 reviewing the number of days out of the country, I work out of the country often on business. Not sure if they want a decision on whether some of the travel is acceptable or not since may have missed the 1460 days requirements due to this travel.

 

[jefftoland]

likely for CIT-0520 reviewing the number of days out of the country, I work out of the country often on business. Not sure if they want a decision on whether some of the travel is acceptable or not since may have missed the 1460 days requirements due to this travel.

Okay you will have to see the judge to explain and go with some any documents to back up.

 

[dpenabill]

likely for CIT-0520 reviewing the number of days out of the country, I work out of the country often on business. Not sure if they want a decision on whether some of the travel is acceptable or not since may have missed the 1460 days requirements due to this travel.

jefftoland's post states the gist of it . . . assuming the MP's office is correct and your case is headed to a Citizenship Judge for a hearing/interview.

Further observations:

If the count of days actually physically present in Canada falls below 1460 days, even by one day, the application will almost certainly be denied. Reason for absence is NOT relevant.

There is no question about whether the travel was acceptable or not. The question is whether the number of days outside Canada means you fell short of having been actually in Canada at least 1460 days within the relevant six years.

To get this far, it appears you have claimed 1460 or more days were spent physically in Canada. So IRCC cannot summarily reject the application. But if IRCC in effect declines to grant citizenship, because it has determined you fell short of 1460 days actual presence, the case goes to a Citizenship Judge.

You may or may not get a chance to have a hearing or interview with a Citizenship Officer before the case is actually referred to a Citizenship Judge.

If the case is headed to a Citizenship Judge, you should get a notice to attend a hearing with the CJ. You can bring additional evidence to such a hearing. While the hearing is typically more like an interview, the applicant can have a lawyer representing him or her at the hearing. A lawyer is a good idea if you believe you were present in Canada at least 1460 days. Withdrawing the application would be a good idea if you see that because of your business travel you ended up short of 1460 days.

We do not see many reports of these kinds of cases these days. Very few reports from applicants who actually attend a CJ hearing. These days the issue is usually more cut-and-dry, so to say, than it was for residency cases under the old 3/4 rule. The only issue is whether your submissions show you were physically in Canada at least 1460 days; if yes, you should be scheduled to take the oath; if not, the application must be denied (IRCC has no discretion to grant citizenship if it is determined you had 1459 or fewer days in Canada . . . and again, the purpose of the travel is not relevant).

If you believe that your submissions to IRCC show that you were in fact present 1460 days or more, I would not necessarily trust the MP's office that the case is headed to a "judge." Perhaps it is time to do an ATIP request. Sometimes a case is designated a presence case, which are the cases which go to a Citizenship Judge, while a decision by IRCC (by a Citizenship Officer) is still pending. Meaning that even though the status of the application has the designation indicating it is a presence case, there is a possibility that IRCC may still be reviewing it before deciding whether it really needs to go to a Citizenship Judge or not.

 

[MW2015]

Status just updated with the following:

1. We sent you a notice on July 21, 2017 to appear for an interview with a citizenship judge on August 25, 2017 at 10:00 AM. The notice you will receive by mail will be your official confirmation of your appointment. If you have not received this notice prior to the date of your scheduled appointment, please contact us.

How should I prepare for this meeting?

 

[Jaroddz]

Hello MW2015, i will advice you to request ATIP it will show if it's residency hearing (at least it will gives you an idea how to prepare), i'm in the same boat except the fact that i didn't travel much (twice in 3 years) but they still questioning my residency (waiting for a hearing since June 2016) i guess because i have residency in US even i haven't spent a nigh

 

[dpenabill]

Status just updated with the following:

1. We sent you a notice on July 21, 2017 to appear for an interview with a citizenship judge on August 25, 2017 at 10:00 AM. The notice you will receive by mail will be your official confirmation of your appointment. If you have not received this notice prior to the date of your scheduled appointment, please contact us.

How should I prepare for this meeting?

You should immediately review this with your lawyer. If you do not have a lawyer yet, scramble to get one.

Too late to obtain information through ATIP that will help much for purposes of the CJ hearing ("interview"). It is probably worth obtaining this information anyway. At the least it would help you decide whether to appeal a negative CJ ruling, if the decision is negative.

In this regard, again if the CJ determines you were actually, physically present in Canada just 1459 or fewer days, the outcome will almost certainly be negative as there is no discretion to approve or grant citizenship if the applicant falls short of 1460 days actual presence. (Again, reason for absences is NOT relevant.)

I'd suggest making a customized ATIP request specifically requesting a copy of the File Preparation Template referred to the CJ. Odds are close to none that you will actually be given that, but what you are given in response may be very informative. Also specifically ask for a copy of any and all documents and information submitted to the Citizenship Judge, and any and all information and documents considered by the Citizenship Officer in your case. (Doing this and reporting here about what you are given would be a great contribution to the forum. Too late to help you much but it would be very useful information to help others in a situation like yours in the future.)

Otherwise, as I offered before, if you can truthfully state and have evidence that you were actually, physically present in Canada for at least 1460 days, be prepared to document that as best you can. Be prepared to go through the calendar for all the relevant time and positively affirm the specific dates you were in Canada . . . the CJ might not offer an opportunity to do this, but if you believe you were present at least 1460 days, then you should prepare to do this and politely press for a chance to fully go through and give the CJ an account for all the days you can say you were actually, physically in Canada. And back that up with as much evidence as you can showing you were in Canada as many of those days as you possibly can.

If you realize you fell short of 1460 days presence, even if by just a little, go to the hearing prepared to withdraw your application with an explanation for why you applied and declared what you declared in the presence calculation. That could make a difference, and perhaps a big difference, in how you are assessed in a subsequent citizenship application, particularly after the new 3/5 rule takes effect which rule will allow more leeway for those who have to spend time abroad.

Please let us know how this goes. Your reporting already has helped and your further reporting could be important for helping others in the future.

Be sure to be entirely truthful. And good luck.

 

[Jaroddz]

My ecas got updated yesterday and i'm scheduled for the judge, "We sent you a notice on August 3, 2017 to appear for an interview with a citizenship judge on September 27, 2017." not sure what kind of documents should i bring with me, i'm assumption that the reason is my US green card because i just travelled 3 times and never to US during that period and i do have more then 1095 days any advice will be helpful, i'm already talking to my lawyer to determine the best course of action.

 

[MW2015]

I did end up withdrawing my application after meeting with the judge. The judge was very nice and he said he was the only one willing to go through my complete list of travel dates. He totaled up about 150 different travel dates but the problem is Nexus when you drive across does not capture all the dates properly and I did that quite frequently. He tried everything in his power to make my dates work but could not find enough corrections and found too many inconsistencies due to land travel. He did say likely the 3/5 rule will be back in play in the Fall and I should re-apply mid-2018. Learned a lot in the last two years through this forum and this process as well as from discussing this with the judge.

 

[Jaroddz]

I did end up withdrawing my application after meeting with the judge. The judge was very nice and he said he was the only one willing to go through my complete list of travel dates. He totaled up about 150 different travel dates but the problem is Nexus when you drive across does not capture all the dates properly and I did that quite frequently. He tried everything in his power to make my dates work but could not find enough corrections and found too many inconsistencies due to land travel. He did say likely the 3/5 rule will be back in play in the Fall and I should re-apply mid-2018. Learned a lot in the last two years through this forum and this process as well as from discussing this with the judge.

sorry to hear that, best of luck.

 

[Stef.]

Bummer! Best of luck with your application next year.

 

[vitoriaboy]

How many days did u actually have in Canada? How much was your shortfall?

 

[MW2015]

How many days did u actually have in Canada? How much was your shortfall?

32 days

 

[SufferInCan]

.............................
If the count of days actually physically present in Canada falls below 1460 days, even by one day, the application will almost certainly be denied. Reason for absence is NOT relevant.

There is no question about whether the travel was acceptable or not. The question is whether the number of days outside Canada means you fell short of having been actually in Canada at least 1460 days within the relevant six years.

...............................

Not true in this court ruling
http://globalnews.ca/news/3688523/federal-court-canadian-citizenship-upheld/