I 751 plus n400 combo possibly jeopardized by wrong legal advice

[Millin 0]

Hi! While waiting for already 18 months for my i751, after consulting my lawyer, I decided to apply to n400 to both speed up the case and do two things at once. Now I have what I think might be a combo interview coming up in 2 weeks. Only yesterday my attorney took the time to speak to me in person, and after reviewing my case (that the same studio helped me file) told me I might not be eligible for a n400 because I don't meet the physical presence criteria. This is happening because I traveled for 2 months this spring, after filing the n400 in February (me and my husband both travel for work). Before filing and during my filing appointment, I asked my paralegal if I could travel after filing since I had some commitments abroad, and she said "Yes, you can" and "The count is made 3 years from filing, so you are good". Apparently, as I learned only two weeks before the interview, this is not the case, and now my 18-month count, that until the filing date was below the limit (17 months), is off two months. What should I do? The laser says to reschedule, but I would prefer to withdraw my n400 and get the 10-year green card with or without an interview, and then apply for naturalization. 

[Dashinka 24,481]

How much total time have you been outside the US since you received your green card (over the 3 year period as I assume you filed the N400 based on the 3 year rule)?  Based on your post it seems you may have only been present in the US for 17 months over the three year period, but that is not entirely clear.  You can travel after filing, my wife took a month's trip abroad after she filed, but she more than met the 18 months over 3 years requirement.

 

Others may know better, but I would continue with the interview and see where the chips fall.  The I751 and N400 are treated separately, so if you do not meet the N400 requirements, your I751 could still be approved.

 

Good Luck!

[Millin 0]

Thank you for your thoughtful answer, D!

 

So, I have:

 

during the 3 years from filing: 504 days on 547 allowed

during the 3 years from scheduled interview: 605 days on 547 allowed

and since I got my green card in November 2019, I would add another 2 or 3 weeks to the previous count (now i don't have that trip's details with me but imagine two weeks of winter holidays). 

 

You see that, even if the lawer answer was, if taken out of context, correct (yes, indeed I AM allowed to travel), after expressing the need to be out of the country for more than a couple of days, I should have been recommended not to travel or at least warned of the consequences. 

 

 

 

[Dashinka 24,481]

31 minutes ago, Millin said:

Thank you for your thoughtful answer, D!

 

So, I have:

 

during the 3 years from filing: 504 days on 547 allowed

during the 3 years from scheduled interview: 605 days on 547 allowed

and since I got my green card in November 2019, I would add another 2 or 3 weeks to the previous count (now i don't have that trip's details with me but imagine two weeks of winter holidays). 

 

You see that, even if the lawer answer was, if taken out of context, correct (yes, indeed I AM allowed to travel), after expressing the need to be out of the country for more than a couple of days, I should have been recommended not to travel or at least warned of the consequences. 

 

 

 

I believe the relevant period is November 2019 through November 2022.  Were you in the US 548 days during that period?  I would not go by the filing date since you get 90 days to file early, but the N400 cannot be approved until after the 3 year LPR anniversary.

[Jon & Ygritte 178]

Were you in the US a minimum of 548 days before filing counting from the entry date on your green card? If not, you didn't meet the requirement for physical presence in the US.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Jon & Ygritte

[Chancy 6,241]

*** Moved from US Citizenship Progress Reports to General Discussion ***

 

[Millin 0]

Yes, I was. The problem surfaces when you calculate from the interview backwards, or from the oath backwards, which is what I was told will happen. 

[Jon & Ygritte 178]

Have you been abroad more than 50% of the time since filing?

[Millin 0]

between filing in February and now? yes, I did. 

[Jon & Ygritte 178]

48 minutes ago, Millin said:

between filing in February and now? yes, I did. 

I'm definitely not an expert at this, but this is my understanding:

 

At the time of filing you have to have fulfilled the requirement for physical presence, which is a minimum of 548 days in the US for a 3 year period (even if you are filing 90 days early).

At the time of the interview you have to have been in the US for more than 50% of the days starting from the beginning of the above mentioned 3 year period up until the interview.

At the time of the oath you have to have been in the US for more than 50% of the days starting from the beginning of the above mentioned 3 year period up until the oath.

 

On top of that you also have to fulfill the requirement of continuous residence in the US.

 

I would be grateful if a more experienced poster would chime in and say if this is correctly understood or not.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Jon & Ygritte

[Jon & Ygritte 178]

On 6/8/2023 at 11:48 AM, Jon & Ygritte said:

I'm definitely not an expert at this, but this is my understanding:

 

At the time of filing you have to have fulfilled the requirement for physical presence, which is a minimum of 548 days in the US for a 3 year period (even if you are filing 90 days early).

At the time of the interview you have to have been in the US for more than 50% of the days starting from the beginning of the above mentioned 3 year period up until the interview.

At the time of the oath you have to have been in the US for more than 50% of the days starting from the beginning of the above mentioned 3 year period up until the oath.

 

On top of that you also have to fulfill the requirement of continuous residence in the US.

 

I would be grateful if a more experienced poster would chime in and say if this is correctly understood or not.

Any experienced poster who wants to comment on the validity in my statements?