UPFRONT: Not all applicants are created equal. The vast majority of QUALIFIED applicants, nonetheless, are similar enough to proceed through the process in what is commonly referred to as the
ROUTINE application process. Not all.
Yes, more than a few who are not qualified nonetheless apply . . . some come here scratching their heads about what could have gone wrong, like a few who recently reported in this forum that there were errors in their presence calculation and it turns out they were a little bit short, when being short simply, absolutely, means the person was NOT qualified.
But otherwise, yes, for more than a few QUALIFIED applicants it is not readily verified that they are qualified, and thus for a wide variety of reasons they are NON-ROUTINE. The reasons can vary widely as to why IRCC does not readily verify an applicant is qualified, and the reason in any individual case can relate to any of the eligibility requirements.
The fact that it is impossible to guess what the "reason" is, in the abstract, does NOT mean the applicant himself or herself does not know the likely reason. Indeed, in contrast, with perhaps some RARE exceptions, the applicant himself or herself will have a very good idea why there is an issue, why there is some concern. Protests to the contrary are generally unpersuasive.
While it is very difficult to predict timelines, for ROUTINELY processed applications let alone those subject to NON-ROUTINE processing, there tends to be a big difference for those who are subject to certain types of NON-ROUTINE processing, with Presence-Case applications, and criminality or security related Prohibition-Case applicants, looming large and tending to result in much longer processing time lines. The latter really is a separate group, potentially facing very long processing time-lines.
IN ANY EVENT . . . . . . . . . .
I submitted my application jan 2018 got invited for the test june 2018 but I was travelling so it got postponed to oct 2018 . I passed the test oct 2018 and was asked to provide additional documents which was received at IRCC jan 2019. Since then there is no update. My MP has requested update but the response is very general: your application is in the queue for review/assessment with your local officer.
My application is very straight forward. Ive done my university education here and have worked . Only traveled few times for less than 2-3 weeks..... any idea folks?
The temptation is to ask: which is is it? Do you have a very straight forward application? Or was your process subject to a postponement for more than three months and then involve a request for more documents? Cannot be both.
Generally a straight-forward application equates with ROUTINE processing. Any postponement of processing means it is NOT ROUTINE, not anymore anyway. Any request for additional documents means the application is NOT ROUTINE.
That said, some postponements and some requests for additional documents do not mean the application is all that far outside the ROUTINE, and many such applications are more or less *routinely* processed in the broader sense of routine.
Note: the narrow sense of "routine" as used by IRCC is any action or procedure in addition to the formal routine processing path, so even a fingerprint request technically means the application is "non-routine" in the narrow, IRCC sense. That just means that IRCC's NON-promise of a routine processing timeline is officially not applicable.
No-s*** Sherlock, one might say. Indeed, when the timeline is longer than the reported "processing time" one can conclude the application is not "routine" in IRCC's narrow sense and thus, again, IRCC's NON-promise of a routine processing timeline is officially not applicable. In which case one MUST say "
No-s*** Sherlock. With emphasis.
For you, WHY? What's up? What's happening? Or, in other words: WHAT is it about YOUR application that is NOT straight forward . . . since, clearly, it is NOT a straight-forward application.
The answer to this is not suggested in what you have reported. Something's up. Something triggered the request for more documents.
This is NOT about luck. While no one here can guess what the relevant factors are in your individual case,
YOU KNOW your history, your circumstances, the process to date, the reason for needing to postpone the test, what documents were requested, why an extension was needed in responding to the documents requested, and what information was included in both your application, answers to questions at the PI, and in the documents submitted later. No advanced studies in government administration needed to SELF-ASSESS all that you know about yourself in comparison to all the eligibility requirements for citizenship, to personally have some sense of . . . well . . . WHY? What's up? What's happening? Or, in other words: WHAT is it about YOUR application that is NOT straight forward . . .?
As I noted in my upfront observations, concerns or issues leading to Presence-Case applications, as well as criminality or security related Prohibition-Case applicants, are a category of their own tending to result in very long time lines. Some of these cases present OUTCOME RISK FACTORS (things that might result in the application being denied) in addition to lengthy processing time lines.
Frankly, you really should have a decent idea if there is a concern or issue which puts your application in the category of either a Presence-Case or Prohibition-Case.
If there is no concern or issue which puts your application in the category of either a Presence-Case or Prohibition-Case, it is possible your application has stalled some for more or less bureaucratic reasons but otherwise it should be on track to result in the Oath being scheduled within a relatively reasonable time (with the caveat that what is a "relatively reasonable time" tends to be a lot longer than many applicants think is reasonable).
