groupalias

Hi there,

have been reviewing the guidelines on naturalization and looking at
form N-400. Two questions came up I am seeking the group's advice on:

Question 1) In "Part 7. Time Outside the United States (Including
Trips to Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean Islands)" there are three
questions:
A: How many total days did you spend outside of the United States
during the past 5 years?
B: How many trips of 24 hours or more have you taken outside of the
United States during the past 5 years?
C: List below all the trips of 24 hours or more that you have taken
outside of the United States since becoming a Lawful Permanent
Resident. Begin with your most recent trip. If you need more space, use
a separate sheet of paper.

While A and B are clear and reasonable I am struggling with C. I am a
LPR for over 20 years and will not be able to produce accurate records
for every trip outside the US that took place during the entire time
(what section C appears to be referring to)!?

I have been travelling with my family as a child quite a bit as well as
in my professional life. Any suggestions how to proceed?


Question 2) In part 10 section G. Selective Service Registration it
reads "If you answered "YES", but you did NOT register with the
Selective Service and you are now 26 years old or older, attach a
statement explaining why you did not register."

I am also someone who missed to register with the selective service -
in fact I hadn't known that it applied to me until now - but I am over
31 years old and other threads seem to indicate that I need not to
worry about this anymore.

However, what kind of statement if any should I attach to the
application?

Thanks for your help, Harry.

Ingo Pakleppa

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[email protected] wrote:
    | Hi there,
    |
    | have been reviewing the guidelines on naturalization and looking at
    | form N-400. Two questions came up I am seeking the group's advice on:
    |
    | Question 1) In "Part 7. Time Outside the United States (Including
    | Trips to Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean Islands)" there are three
    | questions:
    | A: How many total days did you spend outside of the United States
    | during the past 5 years?
    | B: How many trips of 24 hours or more have you taken outside of the
    | United States during the past 5 years?
    | C: List below all the trips of 24 hours or more that you have taken
    | outside of the United States since becoming a Lawful Permanent
    | Resident. Begin with your most recent trip. If you need more space, use
    | a separate sheet of paper.
    |
    | While A and B are clear and reasonable I am struggling with C. I am a
    | LPR for over 20 years and will not be able to produce accurate records
    | for every trip outside the US that took place during the entire time
    | (what section C appears to be referring to)!?

I'm having the same question, and talked to a lawyer about it.
Basically, do the best you can, and then attach a sheet saying "Travel
dates outside the USA are from memory and approximate. I meet the
physical presence requirements." or something to that effect.

    | I have been travelling with my family as a child quite a bit as well as
    | in my professional life. Any suggestions how to proceed?
    |
    |
    | Question 2) In part 10 section G. Selective Service Registration it
    | reads "If you answered "YES", but you did NOT register with the
    | Selective Service and you are now 26 years old or older, attach a
    | statement explaining why you did not register."
    |
    | I am also someone who missed to register with the selective service -
    | in fact I hadn't known that it applied to me until now - but I am over
    | 31 years old and other threads seem to indicate that I need not to
    | worry about this anymore.
    |
    | However, what kind of statement if any should I attach to the
    | application?

I would write "I was not aware of the requirement. I was not required to
register for the last five years." The five years comes from the fact
that you must show a good moral character for five years, and failure to
register counts as evidence of lack of good moral character.

- --
Remember, I am strictly a layperson without any legal training. I
encourage everybody to seek competent legal counsel rather than
relying on usenet newsgroups.

Please visit my new FAQ at http://www.kkeane.com (always under
construction)

My email address in usenet posts is now invalid for Spam protection.
See my Web site for information on how to contact me.

Please feel free to enjoy some of my photographs at my Web site
http://www.ingopakleppa.com ! Comments are welcome.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCbzVdyUlVTFdHXskRAl7/AJ4sIHLLzVLYdWJqxJXUg1SfHa/m+ACgl3pq
Qwy0IqPAZKTLAgWcsMcbKw4=
=iXcF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

groupalias

Hi Ingo:

thanks - you seem to be the one who knows everything in this group ;-)

as far as the travel outside the US is concerned, do you think their
primary interest is what happened during the last 5 years? Is it ok if
I answer C for that period and add a statement like you mentioned?

Thanks again, Harry.

Ingo Pakleppa

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I am planning on doing exactly that, since I don't recall all the trips,
either.

[email protected] wrote:
    | Hi Ingo:
    |
    | thanks - you seem to be the one who knows everything in this group ;-)
    |
    | as far as the travel outside the US is concerned, do you think their
    | primary interest is what happened during the last 5 years? Is it ok if
    | I answer C for that period and add a statement like you mentioned?
    |
    | Thanks again, Harry.
    |


- --
Remember, I am strictly a layperson without any legal training. I
encourage everybody to seek competent legal counsel rather than
relying on usenet newsgroups.

Please visit my new FAQ at http://www.kkeane.com (always under
construction)

My email address in usenet posts is now invalid for Spam protection.
See my Web site for information on how to contact me.

Please feel free to enjoy some of my photographs at my Web site
http://www.ingopakleppa.com ! Comments are welcome.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCcK1LyUlVTFdHXskRAodbAJwKwmBs11uP2LSD4jSaaM D3NLgn+gCgmztW
iCIumcG2b0VbzGICugqf1Y4=
=bMo0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jonathan McNeil Wong

[email protected] wrote:
    > Hi Ingo:
    >
    > thanks - you seem to be the one who knows everything in this group ;-)
    >
    > as far as the travel outside the US is concerned, do you think their
    > primary interest is what happened during the last 5 years? Is it ok if
    > I answer C for that period and add a statement like you mentioned?
    >
    > Thanks again, Harry.
    >

Ingo does indeed know a lot; he's definitely an "alt.visa.us guru".

The interest is twofold. First, they want to be sure you meet the
physical presence requirement, for which only the past five years are
relevant. But second, they want to be sure you haven't abandoned, which
makes all previous years relevant.

--
Above intended as general commentary, not specific legal
advice. Your mileage may vary.

================================================== =============
Jonathan McNeil Wong Voice: 510-451-0544
Donahue Gallagher Woods LLP Facsimile: 510-832-1486
P.O. Box 12979 URL: http://www.donahue.com
Oakland, CA 94604-2979 E-mail: [email protected]
================================================== =============

Ingo Pakleppa

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jonathan McNeil Wong wrote:
    | The interest is twofold. First, they want to be sure you meet the
    | physical presence requirement, for which only the past five years are
    | relevant. But second, they want to be sure you haven't abandoned, which
    | makes all previous years relevant.

You have a point there, although I'm not sure how relevant it would
really be in the end. According to another immigration lawyer, the
abandonment issue could only come up immediately upon return. Abandoning
the GC is *not* automatic, but rather based on a decision by an
immigration officer, even if the absence was longer than a year and/or
not covered by a reentry permit.

He described one case where somebody stayed out of the US for six years,
then returned and reestablished residency. He got lucky because the
officer at the border didn't ask him how long he had been out of the USA
- - that's where his GC could have been revoked. Once he reestablished his
residency, the abandonment just disappeared as an issue.

Meeting the physical presence requirement for the past five years would
most likely also be enough to satisfy the need to show that you
reestablished residency, if you had ever been abandoned your residency
in the first place.

There is yet another interest USCIS has in reviewing your travel
history, and that is ensuring that you did not violate any embargoes or
should be suspected of terrorism. So if you traveled to Cuba, Libya,
pre-war Iraq or any other embargoed country, you should be prepared to
show evidence that you had permission to do so. Similarly, if you
traveled to Afghanistan or Sudan during the Taliban time, you should
have evidence of the legitimacy of your trip.

So if there is any trip that you think may be in the slightest of
interest to USCIS, be sure to mention it explicitly (try to get the
dates right for these trips, but at least be sure to mention them).
Trips that aren't really of interest, say, a short vacation in Mexico,
would be less important to get right, and omitting a trip should be
fairly harmless.

- --
Remember, I am strictly a layperson without any legal training. I
encourage everybody to seek competent legal counsel rather than
relying on usenet newsgroups.

Please visit my new FAQ at http://www.kkeane.com (always under
construction)

My email address in usenet posts is now invalid for Spam protection.
See my Web site for information on how to contact me.

Please feel free to enjoy some of my photographs at my Web site
http://www.ingopakleppa.com ! Comments are welcome.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCd0DMyUlVTFdHXskRAhc6AKCrYIcC7SAZxl1ny97FZg AFc55FFQCeMPmu
4QcCZYkysjH6KYEjATn1ktQ=
=yE6m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jonathan McNeil Wong

Ingo Pakleppa (see Web site for email) wrote:
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > Jonathan McNeil Wong wrote:
    > | The interest is twofold. First, they want to be sure you meet the
    > | physical presence requirement, for which only the past five years are
    > | relevant. But second, they want to be sure you haven't abandoned, which
    > | makes all previous years relevant.
    >
    > You have a point there, although I'm not sure how relevant it would
    > really be in the end. According to another immigration lawyer, the
    > abandonment issue could only come up immediately upon return. Abandoning
    > the GC is *not* automatic, but rather based on a decision by an
    > immigration officer, even if the absence was longer than a year and/or
    > not covered by a reentry permit.
    >
    > He described one case where somebody stayed out of the US for six years,
    > then returned and reestablished residency. He got lucky because the
    > officer at the border didn't ask him how long he had been out of the USA
    > - - that's where his GC could have been revoked. Once he reestablished his
    > residency, the abandonment just disappeared as an issue.
    >
    > Meeting the physical presence requirement for the past five years would
    > most likely also be enough to satisfy the need to show that you
    > reestablished residency, if you had ever been abandoned your residency
    > in the first place.
    >
    > There is yet another interest USCIS has in reviewing your travel
    > history, and that is ensuring that you did not violate any embargoes or
    > should be suspected of terrorism. So if you traveled to Cuba, Libya,
    > pre-war Iraq or any other embargoed country, you should be prepared to
    > show evidence that you had permission to do so. Similarly, if you
    > traveled to Afghanistan or Sudan during the Taliban time, you should
    > have evidence of the legitimacy of your trip.
    >
    > So if there is any trip that you think may be in the slightest of
    > interest to USCIS, be sure to mention it explicitly (try to get the
    > dates right for these trips, but at least be sure to mention them).
    > Trips that aren't really of interest, say, a short vacation in Mexico,
    > would be less important to get right, and omitting a trip should be
    > fairly harmless.

I agree that abandonment is not automatic. I am not so sure that a
previous abandonment can be cured, so to speak, if not raised at the
time of entry. I should ask Stuart Folinsky what he thinks; he's really
good at these arcane issues.

Good point too about prohibited travel; I hadn't thought of that. The
NQP questionnaire that I've seen doesn't actually contain a checklist
item for this, but you are right that it is a legal issue.


--
Above intended as general commentary, not specific legal
advice. Your mileage may vary.

================================================== =============
Jonathan McNeil Wong Voice: 510-451-0544
Donahue Gallagher Woods LLP Facsimile: 510-832-1486
P.O. Box 12979 URL: http://www.donahue.com
Oakland, CA 94604-2979 E-mail: [email protected]
================================================== =============

groupalias

out of curiosity - what would happen if you had abonded residency over
7 years ago but had re-established residency in the meantime?

Also, who is Stuart Folinsky?

Thanks, Harry.

Sami Boulos

[email protected] writes:

R> out of curiosity - what would happen if you had abonded residency over
    > 7 years ago but had re-established residency in the meantime?

I'm assuming "abandoning residency" means living outside the U.S.
and not having any ties (house, bank accounts, filing taxes ,etc.).

When one re-enters the U.S. and is asked how long they have been out,
what is the answer? If it is seven years, they probably won't
be let in. If it's some other (false) answer, then IMHO that person
has lied to gain an immigration benefit.

Question 24, p. 8 on the N-400 form asks if one has lied to a U.S.
government official in order to gain entry or admission to the U.S...


    > Also, who is Stuart Folinsky?
    >
    > Thanks, Harry.
    >

I am not a lawyer..