The difference between *routine* and *non-routine* is not as significant as IRCC and some others make it seem. There are far bigger differences depending on what makes the process *non-routine,* ranging from requests which typically have a minimal impact on the processing timeline, to big deal things like full-blown RQ which can lead to very lengthy delays or even, depending on the facts, mean the application is in jeopardy.
There is NO definite or fixed timeline. Not even for entirely *routine* applications. The timeline varies from applicant to applicant.
You could see Decision Made in eCas tomorrow . . . or not until months from now. You could be scheduled for the oath soon or not until next year.
Re the document request:
Any request technically makes the application *non-routine,* but that only means IRCC does not expect your overall timeline to be less than a year (which is NO guarantee even for entirely *routine* applications). The real differences, as I noted, depend on how or why the application is *non-routine,* since some non-routine procedures do not cause much of a delay while others can cause long delays.
So it matters what extra document was requested, and WHY it was requested, and how long it took to provide the document, and of course what the document itself shows.
A Finger Print request usually has a minimal impact so long as the applicant provides the FPs timely. Requests related to proof of presence, in contrast, tend to increase the timeline.
But, again, what the response shows also matters. If the applicant has a criminal arrest which is verified by the FPs, even if the charges were totally dismissed that could mean it takes awhile longer for IRCC to verify the arrest and disposition do NOT constitute a prohibition or have an impact on the presence calculation. Likewise documents which directly relate to proof of presence: if the documents provided concur with and support the presence calculation, there should be little further delay. BUT if the documents show something inconsistent with what was declared in the application, that can trigger further inquiries and a longer processing time. VARIES. DEPENDS.
As to how IRCC reviews some citizenship applications after the interview there are probably some similarities with the Secondary Review process IRCC employs for some PR card applications, in that additional inquiries or investigations may be conducted and the timeline to decision or outcome is extended. This does not illuminate much about what IRCC is in fact doing. This does not illuminate much about the timeline or how much longer it will be.
Main thing: there is NO fixed or definite timeline, no where near even a likely let alone for-sure timeline.
Thus, again, you could see Decision Made in eCas tomorrow . . . or not until months from now. You could be scheduled for the oath soon or not until next year.
Six months since the interview seems to be getting to the long end of things. Be sure to check your eCas regularly. Be sure IRCC has correct contact information. May be time to telephone the call centre to ask about the status of the application. There are spreadsheets maintained by some participants here which can help you compare your timeline to others. Too many seem overly obsessed with following the timelines, but it is probably a good idea to at least get a sense of how yours compares to others and whether you might need to be more proactive. That said, odds are high all you need to do is continue waiting, and watching for notice from IRCC while you wait. Again, you could get notice of the oath any day . . . or not for a few more months. Quoting @dpenabill
