md95065

So, after 21 years in the US, the last 16 of which have been as a permanent resident I am finally thinking about naturalization ...

The reason it has taken so long is not so much that I am particularly attached to my British citizenship (which, in any case, I would not lose) but that I never saw much point in acquiring US citizenship.

However, since it now looks as I really am here for the long haul and I already have essentially all of the responsibilities of a USC I might as well go all the way and get the last few remaining rights that go with citizenship.

I have to admit that the prospect of only having to deal with USCIS one more time and then never again is also quite appealing.

The only problem I have is Part 7 of the N-400 which requires you to list all trips of more than 24 hours that you have made outside of the US since becoming a lawful permanent resident ...

So, in my case that would be 70 or 80 trips over the course of 16 years - none of which were more than 2 weeks in length. While I can probably account for the trips that took place during the last 5 years completely accurately (fortunately there haven't been very many), there is no way that I can possibly do that for all of them.

In the late 1990's I did start to put together a list of the trips that I had taken up to the date - if I can find that list then it will help a lot, but even back then it wasn't completely accurate.

I spent about 4 hours last night going through looking at all of the stamps in my passport and going through all of the other records that I have trying to reconstruct as much of this history as possible but there are still a lot of gaps in it. The stamps in my passport indicate that I have been admitted to the US as a returning LPR at least 70 times since 1992, but even that isn't a complete list because back in the 90's they didn't always stamp your passport when you came in, and there are a few places where I know that I took a trip but there is no re-entry stamp that is even close to matching the return date.

Obviously I know the countries that I visited - Japan, Germany and Belgium once each, and lots of trips to Canada, the UK and the Netherlands - I also know that I was never outside the US for more than 2 weeks at a time (because that was the longest that I could tolerate being away from "home" - i.e. California) and that most of the trips were between 3 and 10 days in length but that is about it.

All of that being the case, how the heck do I fill out the N-400?

Do I just fill out everything that I do know and attach a statement about the other trips indicating the countries visited, maximum duration of 2 weeks and approximate number of trips - or what?

Poppy girl

You are doing the right thing in getting your citizenship because as I mentioned on here before an Immigration officer told me as soon as I can apply to do so, because there is going to be a lot of changes over the next few years and residency will not necessarily secure anyone's status in the US.

Sorry I can't help you on the question, and I was worried about 5 trips to account for

AlanR

[QUOTE=md95065;6617415]
The only problem I have is Part 7 of the N-400 which requires you to list all trips of more than 24 hours that you have made outside of the US since becoming a lawful permanent resident ...

So, in my case that would be 70 or 80 trips over the course of 16 years - none of which were more than 2 weeks in length. While I can probably account for the trips that took place during the last 5 years completely accurately (fortunately there haven't been very many), there is no way that I can possibly do that for all of them.


All of that being the case, how the heck do I fill out the N-400?

QUOTE]

I suspect that this may be less of a problem than you may think. Of course, none of us would be able to remember all the trips spanning 16 years, but you're doing the right thing in going through passports etc and doing the best you can in the circumstances. If you're up-to-date in the last 5 years then this will probably be more than OK - and I'm sure that they'll (USCIS) have access to records - as long as there's no issues that they would highlight in terms of length of trips . And if you can establish that no trip was longer than 6 months (should be simple?) and certainly not longer than 12, then again I suspect you'll not have a problem. I assume that you've been residing in your district for more than 3 months...Once you're in the US system with IRS, then as far as I'm concerned then citizenship is the only possible option - I see no disadvantages; only advantages. Good luck with your application.

Tracym

I hadn't seen that Poppy - what kind of changes are you talking about? And when?

Poppy girl

No idea it was a comment he made to me and said in the next few years, and I am going to take his word for it.

Tracym

Hmm. Well that's interesting - although who knows if he really knows.

In any case, I would certainly agree with you - get citizenship asap.

md95065

Well, I am hoping that it won't be a problem at all.

The immediate question, however, is exactly how I should fill out the N-400.

I am leaning towards entering all of the information that I have (which in itself will be sufficient to get me onto a continuation sheet separate from the main form) and then add some kind of statement about the other trips for which I do not have specific details.

I was just wondering if anyone else on here had ever had to deal with something like this.

Noorah101

I think other folks on here have written something like "X number of trips to *list countries*, between the dates of *list dates*, none of which was over 2 weeks in length.

Rene

BritishGuy36

The only potential disadvantage I see with the process (and I'm not necessarily talking about myself here, just talking in general terms) is that the naturalisation oath is particularly patriotic and for some it may be an afront to their conscience (for either personal or religious reasons) to give their allegiance so wholeheartedly to another nation (or any nation for that matter, including their current country of citizenship).

I suppose most on the forum would be of the opinion that if you aren't willing to swear allegiance to the US then just get lost.

On the other hand, doesn't the US proclaim free speech for all - and as such, why should such fervently patriotic acts be a requirement of the process to citizenship in the first place?

P.S. Sorry for the thread hijack - perhaps this is a subject for a new thread?

Tracym

I'm a yank, and I wouldn't say that at all (just get lost).

I don't know if I'm so rabidly patriotic as to be comfortable saying that oath alound myself - I'll have to give the thing another read.

I dunno - it's a requirement you say it. So I guess - say it.

I wonder how many people have had their fingers crossed behind their backs for some of it...

BritishGuy36

That was my point....if one's conscience is offended by uttering the words, saying "just say it" doesn't cut any ice with them.

Sure it's easy for some to say it and not mean it, for others it may not be. And those for whom it's easy probably wouldn't understand why anyone would have a problem with it.

Tracym

Oh I can understand why it could bother people, I didn't mean that.

I just meant - I suppose if you want the citizenship enough, you'll grit your teeth and say it.

Can't really think of a way around it (other than the crossed fingers )

meauxna

The relevant time period is the past 5 years. Start with today and work backward & be as detailed as possible.
Then do the best you can with the time before that.

It has come up in the past but I can't think of any good search terms for you yet..

md95065

That was, in fact, one of the reasons that I did not start the naturalization process as soon as I was eligible - not that I have any particular attachment to my UK citizenship (which, in any case, I would not lose if I did become a US citizen) but rather that I do not have any particular fondness for the concept of national citizenship in the first place. So, from that perspective, I was not particularly motivated to pursue it.

I must have changed a bit in the last 10 years because when I looked at the "oath" again I didn't find it so obviously offensive as I had done in the past and I believe that I could now actually take it "without mental reservation" etc etc, just so long as I get the modified version without the ridiculous "so help me God" at the end of it.

One other thing does still irk me, though, and at the end of the day it alone may be enough to persuade me not to bother going through with this.

The USCIS seems to have interpreted the legal requirement that all new citizens must "take" the oath to mean "must attend an oath ceremony".

I don't mind taking an oath - I don't mind the fact that I have taken the oath being a matter of public record - but I don't see why I should have to sit through a public ceremony, be talked at by some presumed dignitary, watch a video of the president and possibly also be expected to recite the "Pledge of Allegiance" in addition to taking the oath itself just because the USCIS thinks that I should ...

Noorah101

Probably because it's so much more cost-effective to do it in a group ceremony, and just like a graduation, it's all about tradition. Grant it, I never went to my own college graduations, because of the same reason you state. But when my husband becomes a USC, I'll go to his ceremony.

Rene