If I break up my eleven month stay into smaller groups, am I OK?

[uvrays 0]

Hey, everyone. I have some questions regarding the continual residence and the physical presence requirements for naturalization, and I'd really appreciate your input.

Here's my present situation. I received my green card on Feb. 9, 2004. I've lived in Massachusetts, in the same house as my parents, since graduating from college in June 2006.

Now, I'm leaving for Norway this Saturday, having been contracted for six months' work (as a musician in an orchestra), although I may be asked to stay on longer.

However, as I'm finding out, it's kind of risky to stay more than 180 continuous days overseas, particularly for someone applying for naturalization. So, I'm thinking I'll be returning during Christmas vacation in December. This way, I'll have been outside the country for less than five months continuously. After that, I might return at the end of February during my week off, and then at the end of June, when the season ends.

My question's this, though: will the people reviewing my naturalization papers agree with my way of thinking? Or is there a minimum length of time I have to spend here (in Massachusetts) between each trip? Will they say I've basically been out of the country for eleven months?

I pass the 30-month requirement for physical presence, and I've never taken a trip outside the country for more than three months since getting my green card. But my situation with Norway seems a little different, since I'm taking on work overseas, possibly for a significant period. But I'll still be paying my taxes, and I don't intend to stay in Norway permanently: our house in Massachusetts will still be here, and so will my parents. Couldn't I still argue that my home address is still in Massachusetts?

So, essentially, my question's this: as long as I come back periodically to Massachusetts (until I come back for good), am I in the clear?

I'm hoping to get citizenship as soon as possible, so that I won't have to worry about stuff like this in the future. Thanks in advance for any help you can give.

[NickD 203]

Hey, everyone. I have some questions regarding the continual residence and the physical presence requirements for naturalization, and I'd really appreciate your input.

Here's my present situation. I received my green card on Feb. 9, 2004. I've lived in Massachusetts, in the same house as my parents, since graduating from college in June 2006.

Now, I'm leaving for Norway this Saturday, having been contracted for six months' work (as a musician in an orchestra), although I may be asked to stay on longer.

However, as I'm finding out, it's kind of risky to stay more than 180 continuous days overseas, particularly for someone applying for naturalization. So, I'm thinking I'll be returning during Christmas vacation in December. This way, I'll have been outside the country for less than five months continuously. After that, I might return at the end of February during my week off, and then at the end of June, when the season ends.

My question's this, though: will the people reviewing my naturalization papers agree with my way of thinking? Or is there a minimum length of time I have to spend here (in Massachusetts) between each trip? Will they say I've basically been out of the country for eleven months?

I pass the 30-month requirement for physical presence, and I've never taken a trip outside the country for more than three months since getting my green card. But my situation with Norway seems a little different, since I'm taking on work overseas, possibly for a significant period. But I'll still be paying my taxes, and I don't intend to stay in Norway permanently: our house in Massachusetts will still be here, and so will my parents. Couldn't I still argue that my home address is still in Massachusetts?

So, essentially, my question's this: as long as I come back periodically to Massachusetts (until I come back for good), am I in the clear?

I'm hoping to get citizenship as soon as possible, so that I won't have to worry about stuff like this in the future. Thanks in advance for any help you can give.

Do you 305 bucks to spare?

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/men...00045f3d6a1RCRD

[uvrays 0]

Thanks for the info. I wish I could use the N-470, since it'd still be cheaper than the multiple flights back and forth, but it seems to pertain only to individuals in certain sectors (i.e. clergymen, government workers, etc.)?

[uvrays 0]

Actually, maybe the better question would be whether I would need to break up the 11-month period at all, since it falls under the "longer than 6 months, less than a year" category. Could I make a case for continued residency if I maintain my Massachusetts address (my parents' house) and pay my taxes?

[moonhunt 1]

Actually, maybe the better question would be whether I would need to break up the 11-month period at all, since it falls under the "longer than 6 months, less than a year" category. Could I make a case for continued residency if I maintain my Massachusetts address (my parents' house) and pay my taxes?

I would say it's risky.

It is very important how interview officer is thinking with your situation.

If he/she thinks you stay longer oversea than home, he/she can reject your case based on no intention to live here.

6 month rule is example, but whatever you insist your intention to live here, your in and out record for border and your job pretty mich tell them you have stronger connection in oversea than in here.

So it seems to me that it is very risky situation.

Besides you have to live in address in same DO/State for at least 3 months when you apply for N400.

For me, it seems very difficult to show your residency when your passport tell them you are out of country.

[NickD 203]

Actually, maybe the better question would be whether I would need to break up the 11-month period at all, since it falls under the "longer than 6 months, less than a year" category. Could I make a case for continued residency if I maintain my Massachusetts address (my parents' house) and pay my taxes?

I would say it's risky.

It is very important how interview officer is thinking with your situation.

If he/she thinks you stay longer oversea than home, he/she can reject your case based on no intention to live here.

6 month rule is example, but whatever you insist your intention to live here, your in and out record for border and your job pretty mich tell them you have stronger connection in oversea than in here.

So it seems to me that it is very risky situation.

Besides you have to live in address in same DO/State for at least 3 months when you apply for N400.

For me, it seems very difficult to show your residency when your passport tell them you are out of country.

I knew about the N-470, read that part about the private sector, but never looked at the form until now, rather restrictive.

Do know that my wife had to bring in her passports and her IO checked them against the dates we listed she was out of the country, they seem to be rather particular about that so not sure how you could work around that, and if you falsify information, well, not good.

Could call an immigration attorney to learn if there is some legal way or maybe somebody else here knows how, good luck with it.

[kmineo 0]

I would consult a lawyer, but my two cents is that if you are traveling back and forth and just renting over there, and keeping you main residence here in the states, paying taxes, I would say that shows strong intent of trying to live here. Especially since going overseas for a job in a symphony doesn’t sound like a life long decision, but more like an opportunity to gain experience. The biggest hiccup would be if Norway is your current country of citizenship. If so they might think it sounds a bit fishy. Still not sure what the IO will make you start the 5 year count over again, technically it would seem (my opinion again) that you weren’t out of the country for over a 6 month trip so you still would be eligible.

[uvrays 0]

Thanks everyone for the input. I am indeed just renting an apartment over there and will be auditioning for symphonies in the US in the foreseeable future. I will probably have to look more into it, what's defined as "residence," since my residence right now in Massachusetts is my parent's house, so that'll be maintained, yes, but not because I'm actively doing anything (paying mortgages, etc.).

Sounds, though, the worst thing that can happen is that my naturalization app will be rejected, but I'll still have my PR since I'll be overseas less than a yea. In that case, I'll just have to spend more time here once I get back, before I submit another N-400.

Incidentally, my citizenship right now is with Korea, so no problems with the "going back to Norway" argument. Thanks again, everyone.

[moonhunt 1]

Thanks everyone for the input. I am indeed just renting an apartment over there and will be auditioning for symphonies in the US in the foreseeable future. I will probably have to look more into it, what's defined as "residence," since my residence right now in Massachusetts is my parent's house, so that'll be maintained, yes, but not because I'm actively doing anything (paying mortgages, etc.).

Sounds, though, the worst thing that can happen is that my naturalization app will be rejected, but I'll still have my PR since I'll be overseas less than a yea. In that case, I'll just have to spend more time here once I get back, before I submit another N-400.

Incidentally, my citizenship right now is with Korea, so no problems with the "going back to Norway" argument. Thanks again, everyone.

Be careful about that.

After 9/11, immigration officer at Port of Entry such as airport have every right to kick you out when they suspect you are not living in the US in real manner.

LPR - A.K.A. Green Card - has risk to loose your permanent residentship with small cause, which bring immigration officer's attention.

That's why everybody is trying to get citizenship.

Since you don't pay mortgage or utility bill, you have weak proof for your residency in the U.S from my opinion.

From documentations, because you rent the room from oversea, and spent more time there than U.S.,

some people may think you have more strong tie to oversea than here.

Don't get me wrong. I don't want for you to get disappointed.

It is really up to you whether you want to take risk or not.

Immigration lawyer can give advise, but if immigration officer think the other way, and make the decision based on his/her thought, it is for you to take all the pain and cost to get it back.

From my viewpoint, it is very risky.

I guess I would say "Welcome" to another Korean in this forum. ^^

[uvrays 0]

The thing is, I've spent the last four and a half years since my getting PR status in the US. Also, although it might be ultimately irrelevant, I've been in the US since 1991. From what I've read, people with PR status don't need an I-131 for trips overseas lasting less than one year. This is according to the I-131 instructions, which are quoted at the bottom of this page:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...p;#entry1849554

But yes, it's risky, so thanks for bringing that up. At this point, though, I'm pretty much locked into going. Hoping everything will work out.

[NickD 203]

Thanks everyone for the input. I am indeed just renting an apartment over there and will be auditioning for symphonies in the US in the foreseeable future. I will probably have to look more into it, what's defined as "residence," since my residence right now in Massachusetts is my parent's house, so that'll be maintained, yes, but not because I'm actively doing anything (paying mortgages, etc.).

Sounds, though, the worst thing that can happen is that my naturalization app will be rejected, but I'll still have my PR since I'll be overseas less than a yea. In that case, I'll just have to spend more time here once I get back, before I submit another N-400.

Incidentally, my citizenship right now is with Korea, so no problems with the "going back to Norway" argument. Thanks again, everyone.

Be careful about that.

After 9/11, immigration officer at Port of Entry such as airport have every right to kick you out when they suspect you are not living in the US in real manner.

LPR - A.K.A. Green Card - has risk to loose your permanent residentship with small cause, which bring immigration officer's attention.

That's why everybody is trying to get citizenship.

Since you don't pay mortgage or utility bill, you have weak proof for your residency in the U.S from my opinion.

From documentations, because you rent the room from oversea, and spent more time there than U.S.,

some people may think you have more strong tie to oversea than here.

Don't get me wrong. I don't want for you to get disappointed.

It is really up to you whether you want to take risk or not.

Immigration lawyer can give advise, but if immigration officer think the other way, and make the decision based on his/her thought, it is for you to take all the pain and cost to get it back.

From my viewpoint, it is very risky.

I guess I would say "Welcome" to another Korean in this forum. ^^

Seems to be two separate issues here, meeting the requirements for the N-400 and not losing your green card with an extended stay. Recall reading about that with the brochure that came with my wife's and daughter's ten year card, paying taxes, carrying the card to the bathroom, selective service, address change, and leaving the country for an extended period of time. See you have to file a I-131 for the latter that is for permanent resident card holders.

Again, I did not read the instructions nor the form as we have no plans on leaving the country, at least not for that long, but have to be aware of this stuff to avoid future problems. Maybe there is a form you have to fill out with a stiff fee if you want to go to the bathroom.

Anybody here deal with the I-131?

[Boiler 45,970]

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=552184

You are asking questions way beyond this board, and possibly any board.

But have a look at the link above.

[NickD 203]

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=552184

You are asking questions way beyond this board, and possibly any board.

But have a look at the link above.

The problem the way I see it, is that same government that controls tariffs, can regulate the extreme cost of medical care, and with their, not mine, EPA that rather than solving problems is forcing corporations to move out of this country with super stiff fines is forcing all of our jobs out of this country. Then they control the USCIS that won't let you go where these jobs are to earn a living. And since the IRS cannot tax a buck that leaves this country, they have to increase the rates here for those that still have a job.

Very simple formula they are over looking, mostly because they are extremely stupid, if you make a buck from an American corporation, IRS get 20% of it, you get 80% or 80 cents, you spent that 80 cents and that person keeps 64 cents of it, IRS gets 16 cents, he spends that 64 cents, IRS gets 13 cents of it leaving 51 cents until it passes in enough hands the IRS gets that full buck back. But if a buck leaves this country, IRS doesn't get any of it.

How is that buck used by the countries that get it, to buy weapons from other countries that is used against us, so we have to spend even more money to defend ourselves not to mention killing and wounding our young in the process. Killing is cheap, the wounded are very expensive leaving even a higher debt for this country. Always was concerned about that in the military, was only worth 10,000 bucks if killed. Far more money than that for GI benefits and even a much greater amount if stuck in a VA hospital for the rest of your life.

We have over a 10,000 year know supply of energy in this country and the knowledge as how to use it, the reason we are burning gasoline is that is what other agencies of our government are forcing us to use. And our very own EPA won't let us use this energy, even though it's far cleaner, and that buck will stay here!!!

So exactly who are our leaders representing? Us or some foreign nations, if we have traitors, they are in Washington DC, they make the laws. And they make the laws to protect themselves, a kid swiping a candy bar from a grocery store pays a much higher penalty then these crooked politicians. And the speaker of the house has more power than the other 434 congressman combined! Never was meant to be that way.

Do these views seem far out and erratic? Just open your eyes and look around exactly who are our representatives representing? Not us, we the American People.

[warlord 73]

Comming back to the US to visit will not preserve continous residency. The IO's will easily be able to see through that by your passport and see how long you come back for. Are you contracted by a US company over there or by the hosting country? If it's not a US base then you could very well have a big issue working and living outside the US for a non US company. Not only could this break your residency, but could also put your Green Card in Jeapordy.

Continous residency is something they're getting more strict with now and people are finding out little 'trips' back isn't working like it used to and are getting denied.

You may want to go there for a few months, come back to the US for a few and go back over etc, that would make it a little more convincing to the IO that you maintained US residency.

The problem is it will be eventually up to the IO to determine what the next course of action is. So if you have a very strong case as to why they should give you citizenship then maybe you might luck out, but it will be a risk up until that IO makes the decision...

[NickD 203]

Comming back to the US to visit will not preserve continous residency. The IO's will easily be able to see through that by your passport and see how long you come back for. Are you contracted by a US company over there or by the hosting country? If it's not a US base then you could very well have a big issue working and living outside the US for a non US company. Not only could this break your residency, but could also put your Green Card in Jeapordy.

Continous residency is something they're getting more strict with now and people are finding out little 'trips' back isn't working like it used to and are getting denied.

You may want to go there for a few months, come back to the US for a few and go back over etc, that would make it a little more convincing to the IO that you maintained US residency.

The problem is it will be eventually up to the IO to determine what the next course of action is. So if you have a very strong case as to why they should give you citizenship then maybe you might luck out, but it will be a risk up until that IO makes the decision...

On the practical side, the function of a job is to earn money so you can survive so the cost of that job also has to be considered as that can greatly reduce that bottom line. Considered that with my first wife, day care costs, extra clothing, transportation, too tired to cook at night so always ate out, with her paycheck, we were going in the hole. But that was also a mistake, she needed to get out and work as does my present wife, just let her work.

With uvrays, (is this global warming where CFC's are killing the ozone layer, in theory at least?), has to consider what is paycheck will be, the cost of traveling back and forth, added rent, food, transportation, and that is a killer the way the airline rates are going, would he even have a buck left over, or go in the hole? Other factor is the USCIS, if not happy with the decision, can always file an appeal that would cost another couple of bucks. I use that term loosely. But the experience may be beneficial to him in the future. IRS does not let you deduct transportation and other related expenses for your job, so what you pay is all post tax money. Or what's left of it.

One way to get ahead is to go on welfare, thought about that, but still have my pride.