I made quite a few trips to the US during my eligibility period. 90% of them were day trips to Buffalo and Niagara Falls. I generated the I-94 report which is showing all trips but it's only showing arrivals and not departures. I am afraid if i include the I-94 report as is, it will raise more questions than help. I am thinking not to include it but i have seen other posts that suggests that case officers usually request it for frequent US travelers.
In addition to my response in your other topic about this same issue, which I partially quote below, recognizing (as I said there), how you approach this is a personal decision, the approach suggested by
@yanesrahn (as I understand it) is a reasonable, practical, and prudent one: do NOT include the records with the application, but keep them to bring to the interview or to submit if IRCC otherwise requests them.
Otherwise, regarding U.S. records, it is NOT accurate that "
case officers usually request it for frequent US travelers."
To be clear, many frequent U.S. travelers applying for citizenship do report being asked to submit U.S. records, or to give written consent to IRCC allowing direct access to those records . . . but
many others report NOT being asked. And many, many more forum participants whose posts generally indicate frequent travel to the U.S. do NOT mention any such requests, indicating they too are examples of frequent U.S. travelers who were NOT asked for such documents. (This group includes me.)
This forum is overflowing with less than reliable reports about what "
usually" happens, or what happens to "most" applicants, in this or that particular situation. Far too many extrapolate what "usually" happens based on what happens in their individual case. Even when there are many with a similar experience, that falls far short of showing what "usually" happens in common circumstances (citizenship applicants with frequent travel to the U.S. are very common) unless the reports consistently coincide . . . which for this particular circumstance, being a frequent traveler to the U.S., the reporting does NOT indicate applicants are "usually" required to provide U.S. records. Actually the contrary.
Moreover, overall, including applicants who have been frequent U.S. travelers, the ratio of applicants subject to any sort of RQ related non-routine processing is relatively LOW.
In contrast, yes, a request for U.S. records means the application is involved in non-routine RQ-related processing. (Not necessarily a big problem, not necessarily resulting in long delays, but this does put the application into a non-routine processing track.)
THAT SAID: there are scenarios in which there is a higher RISK of being among those who are asked for such information or records.
For example: applicants whose frequent travel to the U.S. appears to be related to either employment in the U.S. or maintaining residential ties in the U.S. (applicants with a spouse living in the U.S. for example), including applicants with U.S. Green Card or other specific residence-status in the U.S. These applicants obviously have an elevated risk of RQ-related non-routine processing, for rather obvious reasons, which can range from minimal requests for additional information or documentation (such as the U.S. entry records), to more robust forms of RQ (including RQ-lite, the CIT 0520, or full-blown RQ, the CIT 0171 Residence Questionnaire).
What is important to recognize about these scenarios is that all indications are the RISK of non-routine RQ-related processing/requests is NOT reduced or mitigated, let alone outright avoided, by sending in additional documents with the application. If the applicant's circumstances are such that IRCC will make RQ-related requests, including requests for record of movement from other countries, there is little or nothing the applicant can do up front to avoid getting those requests.
With the small POSSIBLE exception, again as suggested by
@yanesrahn, that having records like this to present during the PI Interview MIGHT favourably resolve some concern so as to satisfy IRCC and thereby avoid further requests following the interview. My impression is that many reports consistent with this are more about the official conducting the interview being polite and reassuring, not so much that having the records on hand has made the difference . . . BUT there are a few reports which seem to reliably and more definitively indicate that presentation of certain records at the interview, IN RESPONSE to an affirmative statement by the interviewer that such information would be asked for, appears to have satisfied IRCC.
SUMMARY: Given the very small, if any chance, that submitting U.S. entry records with the application will help, that weighs heavily against taking even a small risk that including such records might trigger concerns IRCC would not have had otherwise. That is, with so little to gain, no reason to take even a small risk.
Obtaining such records is probably prudent (I did, but had trouble getting them, and even though I made the request well before applying for citizenship, I did not actually get them until well AFTER I had already taken the oath.) And bringing them to the interview is probably prudent.
How you approach this is, of course, very much a personal decision, and there are individual circumstances which can suggest reason to deviate from the instructions and norms.
Reminder: when making an application to a bureaucracy it is almost always best to simply follow the instructions. That means the norm is providing NO MORE, NO LESS, than what is requested. Another reminder: your application will be handled by total stranger bureaucrats. Bureaucrats are good dealing with round pegs for round holes, square pegs for square holes; NO odd pieces on the side.
There is no credible information that including any extra documentation or information with the application will facilitate "easier and smoother processing." None at all.
