***>>> January 2020 AOR <<<***

[legalfalcon]

Hi @legalfalcon
do you have any comments on why in activity section of gcms note express entry there is review required?
I have recommended pass for eligibility by case analyst on the notes.

Re-posting one of my old posts:


Understanding “Review Required”

A lot of applicants see “review required” in their GCMS notes for eligibility. There are many theories floating around with regard to what “review required” means and if it is alarming.

Before I venture into explaining the significance, it is important to understand that each application goes through the following stages as per the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the regulations (Canadian Immigration Law):

R10 – Completeness Check
Criminality
Medicals
A11.2 – eligibility
Security

Out of the above, the most important stage is eligibility. This is also the most time-consuming stage because your documents have to be verified, evaluated and assessed to ascertain that you meet the eligibility criteria for the program you have applied (FSW / CEC / FTW). To stream line this process and make it easier for an immigration officer (decision making authority), all applications are first evaluated by case analysts or program assistants. They review the documents and summarize it in the GCMS. If they have any concerns with any document or want the immigration officer to carefully look into a specific document, they will flag it as “review required.” It is the content of the note that is important here. If the review required is for a specific document, while the summary of the note says that an applicant has met the eligibility, or “ready to finalize” it simply means that while the applicant has met the eligibility criteria, but the specific document needs a careful examination form the officer before promoting (eligibility pass) by the officer.

However, if there are concerns, there will be a review required for the eligibility, and there will be no text to the effect “ready to finalize” or pass. The note will specifically state job duties do not match, or the employment cannot be verified, or the number of years of work experience claimed cannot be verified. This is where an application can land in muddy waters. But the final decision rests on the immigration officer. He may override the decision of the analyst / assistant or go with the analysis of the analyst / assistant.

Even in cases where the analyst / assistant is of the opinion that the applicant has met the eligibility, and there is no “review required,” the officer can replace it with his own opinion. Though rare, but it does happen. This is why the eligibility is only passed when an officer conclusively marks the eligibility as passed.

Finally, there is “review required” for PoF. This is the most common in many applications. This is because, the financial and banking practices of each country are different. Eg. Fixed deposits are know as Certificate of Deposit (CD) in the US. Similarly, treasury bonds, mutual funds, stocks, and many other investment vehicles are there. If your PoF anything other than a bank deposit, it is more likely that it will be marked as “review required.” Also, IRCC does not go by day to day fluctuations in FOREX. Instead, the Canadian federal government issued a quarterly conversion rate for all FOREX vis-a-via CAD. If your PoF is in a foreign currency, then you may have “review required” for the officer to make a determination.

Just because you have “review required” does not mean that you hit the panic mode. Instead, read the context in which it is there. If there is a concern regarding a document, you can send a replacement document via CSE. The most common reasons for RR are:

1. Work reference letter without job duties
2. Work reference letters missing all the details requested by IRCC
3. If you submitted a letter from a colleague because you were unable to get one from your employer, but did not have a LoE on file, this too will lead to RR.
4. Not sufficient work experience in the primary NOC.
5. Inability to verify your employment as your employer details are missing.

There are just some of the scenarios.

 

[Nixnic19]

Good news:

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/news/2020/09/ircc-speeding-up-processing-for-spousal-applications.html

 

[Kaplan16]

Good news:

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/news/2020/09/ircc-speeding-up-processing-for-spousal-applications.html

Hmm. But this just affects those who applied under the Spousal sponsorship program. Hopefully other PR applicants benefit from it.

 

[nns14]

Hmm. But this just affects those who applied under the Spousal sponsorship program. Hopefully other PR applicants benefit from it.

In fact, it is not good for EE applicants, because the already limited resources by IRCC will be focusing on spousal sponsorship program. Hope it is not the case.

 

[mellodie]

It seems like your your eligibility was passed and now the other stages have passed too and a final review is pending, after which the PPR will be sent. However, the webforms remain ambiguous and the best would be to call or request your GCMS notes to be sure.

“Valid” here indicates, that the documents required for the specific stage are “legal, not expired, and accepted by IRCC,” and no further input is required by the applicant. To read on webform see

I've ordered GCMS Notes. Thank you very much

 

[Kaplan16]

In fact, it is not good for EE applicants, because the already limited resources by IRCC will be focusing on spousal sponsorship program. Hope it is not the case.

Well said... I guess the recent protest on TV about COVID-19 restrictions affecting family reunification generated such swift response from them.

 

[haiderimam]

Seriously? Review Required because your age changed even though you still met CRS? Were you at the cut-off threshold? This makes me worry. My age changed between ita and aor. Is it still in RR for you?

Did you re-calculate your six selection factor points with new age?It needs to be 67/100 to meet the mandatory requirement of the program.

 

[legalfalcon]

Well said... I guess the recent protest on TV about COVID-19 restrictions affecting family reunification generated such swift response from them.

It was because many MPs have written to the Immigration minister as their constituents were complaining, and this was also raised in the Parliament.

 

[mknox]

Did you re-calculate your six selection factor points with new age?It needs to be 67/100 to meet the mandatory requirement of the program.

Points remain the same as they were before on the six factor selection grid. 82/100.

 

[Avinash4canada]

Hi Guys ,

Good day ! I have raised the web form for the third time and this time I am starting to get worried. My AOR was on 25th January. My security and criminal background checks are being shown as valid , where as my eligibility says it is being reviewed by the officer . By this point of time , we expect every thing to be complete ,but my application is still under process ! @legalfalcon , can you please advise what could be happening here .

 

[legalfalcon]

Hi Guys ,

Good day ! I have raised the web form for the third time and this time I am starting to get worried. My AOR was on 25th January. My security and criminal background checks are being shown as valid , where as my eligibility says it is being reviewed by the officer . By this point of time , we expect every thing to be complete ,but my application is still under process ! @legalfalcon , can you please advise what could be happening here .

If your eligibility is being reviewed, then your eligibility may not have been passed, or after being passed, awaiting a final review before being finalized.

See #2,521

There are many January AoRs, whose applications have not yet been finalized.

“valid” here indicates, that the documents required for the specific stage are “legal, not expired, and accepted by IRCC,” and no further input is required by the applicant.

See https://bit.ly/2FZgYh4

 

[Nixnic19]

In fact, it is not good for EE applicants, because the already limited resources by IRCC will be focusing on spousal sponsorship program. Hope it is not the case.

Keeping hopes up for EE applicants like me!

 

[Kaplan16]

It was because many MPs have written to the Immigration minister as their constituents were complaining, and this was also raised in the Parliament.

Oh! Okay. Hopefully Express entry applicants from other countries asides the US have their applications finalized soon.

 

[SR_T]

Did you receive any update after submitting remedial? Thank you.

I didn't submit any document after remedical. The doctor's office transmitted the reports to IRCC. It said we have requested a medical exam and then it changed to you have passed the medical exam. There was no other updates till IRCC passed the medical test.

 

[legalfalcon]

First of all there is no need to panic. Even if you made a mistake, you can send a webform and correct it. No matter who is filing your application, at the end it is you who signs it and therefore you have to make sure that whatever is entered in the application, has to be accurate and correct.

Now to the law:


Any application you file can be looked into and there should be no discrepancy is you have filed multiple applications. If you filed a TRV in which you did not declare a job, and then you claimed a job in your PR application, this is a discrepancy. Similarly if you were refused a visa before, the same has to be declared in the subsequent application filed with IRCC.

If you file any application with IRCC, TRV, WP, PR etc, any of them can be looked into to review your current application and any inconsistency can be a cause of misrepresentation. All applications have to be consistent, and if they are not, a reason on why you omitted the information has to be provided. Even if the reason is that you inadvertently forgot to mention a prior refusal, you have to inform IRCC.

While answering the statutory questions you have to list all prior visa refusals. Failing to declare any prior visa refusal is misrepresentation and the federal court has ruled on it in the following decision:

Algohar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1364 (CanLII), available at http://canlii.ca/t/j36dk

It is an applicant's duty to disclose all material information pertaining to ones information and answer all questions truthfully.

If you inadvertently forgot to mention a prior visa refusal, you can send a webform and inform IRCC. Irrespective of what stage your application is at, or if it has even been approved, if it is found that you failed to disclose any material information in your application, it can impact your PR status.

In Tuiran v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 324 (CanLII) the court held, " Section 16(1) of the Act requires visa applicants to answer all questions truthfully and produce all relevant documents and evidence reasonably required when making an application under the Act. The purpose of the misrepresentation provisions in the Act is “to ensure that applicants provide complete, honest and truthful information in every manner when applying for entry into Canada” (Jiang v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2011 FC 942 at para 36; Khan v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 512 at paras 26-29; Wang v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 1059 at paras 57-58, affirmed in 2006 FCA 345 [Wang])." I emphasize that it does not matter that the authorities may have the ability to catch the misrepresentation or not. What matters is whether the misrepresentation induced or could have induced an error in the administration of the IRPA.

If you feel that there is a discrepancy, or if you inadvertently missed out answering. questions in your application, you can send a wbfrom and inform IRCC of the same.