It is a sign the case is progressing to the next stage. If in fact that is what is happening, that is that your file was actually referred to a Citizenship Judge.
But no, otherwise a referral to a Citizenship Judge is NOT a good sign.
I previously commented on a lawyer's comment about the case probably headed for a CJ hearing:
For emphasis: That is unfortunate news.
For further emphasis: When a citizenship application goes to a CJ the burden of proof is totally on you, and it means it is very likely that IRCC has prepared a File Preparation Template outlining details stating why they do not believe you met the physical presence requirement.
In effect, a citizenship application ONLY goes to a CJ when a Citizenship Officer has already determined the applicant did NOT meet the actual physical presence requirement. Technically it is not the same as a Citizenship Officer denying the application, but in effect it amounts to that, that IRCC has decided to deny the application but you get a more or less trial de novo before a Citizenship Judge . . . and the CJ will be given a file containing IRCC's explanation for why the application should be denied.
No. No. No with emphasis. It is not a good sign to have a citizenship application referred to a Citizenship Judge. It means IRCC has concluded the applicant's submissions do not meet the burden of proof. It means that IRCC has concluded the applicant did not meet the actual physical presence requirement.
Obviously your GCMS record is flagged. Obviously the alert is at least about screening you for ongoing PR Residency Obligation compliance.
Obviously the officials handling your case in IRCC have accessed your CBSA travel history. As someone in your situation should fully expect.
And overall it appears that IRCC doubts or disputes (probably the latter) some portion of the days you report (you claim) to have been in Canada.
The key to how this goes will most likely depend on the extent to which you have and present hard evidence to prove ALL the days you say you were actually present in Canada. You will need more than just travel dates. You will need objective evidence showing where you were for days in-between known dates of arrival in Canada and the next date you claim to have left.
You can have a lawyer assist you in preparing for the CJ hearing and assist you in the hearing. That would be a very good idea.
REMINDER: the burden of proof is also on you to show days IN Canada for purposes of complying with the PR Residency Obligation. It is apparent you have been spending more time outside Canada the last few years than you do in Canada. Remember, if there is doubt or a lack of direct evidence to show where a person was during a given period of time, it is entirely reasonable to infer they were in the same place they spent most of their time . . . for you that would be OUTSIDE Canada.
Yeah, a lawyer would be a good idea.
