- Aug 3, 2009
- 305
- 25
- Category........
- Visa Office......
- Buffalo
- NOC Code......
- 2175
- Job Offer........
- Pre-Assessed..
- App. Filed.......
- 10-04-2011
- Doc's Request.
- 15-04-2011
- Nomination.....
- ????
- AOR Received.
- 25-05-2011
- IELTS Request
- Sent with the initial application to CIO
- File Transfer...
- 20-06-2011 to Buffalo
- Med's Request
- 22-02-2013 from Ottawa
- Med's Done....
- 27-02-2013
- Interview........
- Wavied :)
- Passport Req..
- 05-04-2013 via Email
- VISA ISSUED...
- 06 May, 2013
- LANDED..........
- 11 May, 2013 Landed Immigrant :)
Very important and useful information which most of the applicants are looking for answers:
So, according to the CIC administration:
The Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, 2014, outlines authorities for public servant decision-makers to render a decision. Section 14 of the Citizenship Act outlines authorities for judges to make decisions on citizenship applications.
The decision-maker must bear in mind not only the Act's provisions, but also the Federal Courts' interpretations of those provisions.
Evaluate information received
The officers evaluate the documentation and information gathered and recorded by themselves and by others (CPC-Sydney, Immigration, etc.).
Ensure evidence is satisfactory
When provided to the decision-maker, the applicant's file should include, at least:
the application form and documents as listed in the document checklist;
the results of the written or oral citizenship test (not applicable to 5(5) or 11(1));
the CIT 0065 Citizenship Application Review Decision form with the biographic information, Part I, and Part II completed (not applicable to 5(5) or 11(1));
any relevant supplementary information, such as records of conversations with port of entry officials regarding a client’s immigration status or residence in Canada.
Request additional information if necessary
Officers must ensure that they have all the evidence necessary to make a decision.
Under section 23.1 of the Act, the officer can request that applicants provide any additional information or evidence relevant to their application.
However, it is the applicant’s responsibility to satisfy the decision-maker that they meet all the requirements of the Act and Regulations.
When an officer may make a decision without a hearing
Officers may make a decision without a hearing if there is sufficient evidence on file to support a positive decision. This information can be gathered through the information on file, the program integrity interview, an in-depth residence interview, the submission of additional documentation or through background checks. In cases where a positive decision cannot be rendered, the case may be referred for a hearing if more information is needed. In certain circumstances, for a refusal decision, the process of sending an applicant a procedural fairness letter can be used in lieu of an in-person hearing. Refer to the instructions on Decision Making without the personal appearance of the applicant.
When to refer an application to a judge for a decision and officer grants
An application will be referred to a judge for a decision if the sole reason for referral is subsections 5(1)(c), 5(5)(d), or 11(1)(d). Citizenship judges will now only have the authority to make a decision on the residence requirement.
Judge will make their decision on whether the applicant meets the residence requirement.
The officer must make a decision, based on the judge’s determination, on whether to grant citizenship. The officer refers the file to Case Management Branch (Litigation Management) if the officer believes the Minister may wish to exercise his right to apply for judicial review.
When to refer an application to an officer for a hearing
An application will be referred to a citizenship officer for hearing if the reason for referral is:
Any requirement(s) other than subsections 5(1)(c), 5(5)(d), or 11(1)(d) (residence requirement)
Any requirement(s) in addition to 5(1)(c), 5(5)(d), or 11(1)(d) (residence requirement)
If, in the hearing, the applicant fails one criterion, the officer can refuse the application and will not continue to assess other criteria. For example, if the application has been referred to hearing for knowledge and residence issues also exist, the officer can refuse for knowledge and would not refer to a judge to assess residence. If, however, the applicant passes the knowledge requirement but the officer is not satisfied that the applicant meets the residence requirement, the applicant would be referred to a judge and the judge may hold a for hearing for the residence requirement.
Decision-making process for Citizenship Officers
So, according to the CIC administration:
The Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, 2014, outlines authorities for public servant decision-makers to render a decision. Section 14 of the Citizenship Act outlines authorities for judges to make decisions on citizenship applications.
The decision-maker must bear in mind not only the Act's provisions, but also the Federal Courts' interpretations of those provisions.
Evaluate information received
The officers evaluate the documentation and information gathered and recorded by themselves and by others (CPC-Sydney, Immigration, etc.).
Ensure evidence is satisfactory
When provided to the decision-maker, the applicant's file should include, at least:
the application form and documents as listed in the document checklist;
the results of the written or oral citizenship test (not applicable to 5(5) or 11(1));
the CIT 0065 Citizenship Application Review Decision form with the biographic information, Part I, and Part II completed (not applicable to 5(5) or 11(1));
any relevant supplementary information, such as records of conversations with port of entry officials regarding a client’s immigration status or residence in Canada.
Request additional information if necessary
Officers must ensure that they have all the evidence necessary to make a decision.
Under section 23.1 of the Act, the officer can request that applicants provide any additional information or evidence relevant to their application.
However, it is the applicant’s responsibility to satisfy the decision-maker that they meet all the requirements of the Act and Regulations.
When an officer may make a decision without a hearing
Officers may make a decision without a hearing if there is sufficient evidence on file to support a positive decision. This information can be gathered through the information on file, the program integrity interview, an in-depth residence interview, the submission of additional documentation or through background checks. In cases where a positive decision cannot be rendered, the case may be referred for a hearing if more information is needed. In certain circumstances, for a refusal decision, the process of sending an applicant a procedural fairness letter can be used in lieu of an in-person hearing. Refer to the instructions on Decision Making without the personal appearance of the applicant.
When to refer an application to a judge for a decision and officer grants
An application will be referred to a judge for a decision if the sole reason for referral is subsections 5(1)(c), 5(5)(d), or 11(1)(d). Citizenship judges will now only have the authority to make a decision on the residence requirement.
Judge will make their decision on whether the applicant meets the residence requirement.
The officer must make a decision, based on the judge’s determination, on whether to grant citizenship. The officer refers the file to Case Management Branch (Litigation Management) if the officer believes the Minister may wish to exercise his right to apply for judicial review.
When to refer an application to an officer for a hearing
An application will be referred to a citizenship officer for hearing if the reason for referral is:
Any requirement(s) other than subsections 5(1)(c), 5(5)(d), or 11(1)(d) (residence requirement)
Any requirement(s) in addition to 5(1)(c), 5(5)(d), or 11(1)(d) (residence requirement)
If, in the hearing, the applicant fails one criterion, the officer can refuse the application and will not continue to assess other criteria. For example, if the application has been referred to hearing for knowledge and residence issues also exist, the officer can refuse for knowledge and would not refer to a judge to assess residence. If, however, the applicant passes the knowledge requirement but the officer is not satisfied that the applicant meets the residence requirement, the applicant would be referred to a judge and the judge may hold a for hearing for the residence requirement.
Decision-making process for Citizenship Officers
