Citizenship Application: RFE on Continuous Residence Leads to Approval Recommendation and Oath Ceremony Scheduling

USCIS Recommends Approval After N-400 RFE on Continuous Residence Issue- Awaiting Oath Ceremony

We recently received notice that USCIS has recommended the approval of one of our clients’ N-400 applications for naturalization after we submitted a response to a Notice of Continuance. The notice was given three days after USCIS received our RFE response. This is a very positive development and a standard USCIS procedure- once a reviewing officer recommends approval, the case is placed in line for the oath ceremony. We are now awaiting final approval and the ceremony schedule.

In this case, the client had initially filed the N-400 application without legal assistance and later received the Notice of Continuance following the naturalization interview, a notice similar to a Request for Evidence (RFE). The issue raised by USCIS was whether the applicant had maintained continuous residence, which is a common challenge for individuals who have spent extended time abroad.

The client had traveled overseas temporarily but could not return to the US as planned due to unforeseen complications during the global pandemic. The absence lasted close to one year but did not exceed 365 days. This extended stay abroad has become a very common reason people seek legal assistance with their naturalization applications, as it often triggers questions about whether continuous residence has been maintained.

While there were some complicating factors in this case, we carefully reviewed the situation and advised the client on a tailored legal strategy. We prepared a comprehensive response including legal analysis and extensive supporting documentation. Where certain records were unavailable, we assisted in preparing affidavits to explain the specific circumstances.

A common misconception is that filing US tax returns during an extended absence is enough to prove continuous residence. While tax compliance is helpful, it is rarely sufficient on its own. USCIS generally considers a broader range of evidence, such as proof of maintaining a US residence, financial and community ties, and documentation of intent to return.

We’ve seen many people in similar situations. Often, individuals stuck abroad due to unexpected events, such as a global crisis or a family emergency, had to complete overseas work assignments while waiting to return to the US. When they return and later apply for naturalization, they face questions about whether their continuous residence was broken.

For some, waiting to restart and complete the statutory residency period (3 or 5 years, depending on the eligibility category) may be an option. However, for others, resolving the issue and preserving their eligibility now is essential, especially if there are personal or professional reasons they cannot delay applying for citizenship.

In our office, we’ve assisted clients in many of these cases. While each case is different, one thing remains: the situation itself does not excuse a presumed break in continuous residence. USCIS requires that applicants demonstrate their efforts to maintain their continuous residence during the extended absence, supported by clear and objective documentation.

The key to a successful outcome is providing strong supporting documents, clearly explaining the situation, and showing how the facts meet the legal requirements. It's not just about submitting an immigration form and any supporting documents.

If you’ve received a similar notice at your naturalization interview or are considering applying for citizenship after an absence of more than 180 days but less than one year, it is strongly recommended that you consult with an immigration attorney before submitting anything to USCIS. Early legal guidance can help avoid unnecessary delays or denials and significantly improve your chances of success.

Email: info@amylawoffice.com (email is preferred)
Phone: 571-387-0407 (please make sure to leave a voice message so we can get back to you in case we miss your call)

Disclaimer: This blog post is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Relying on this information does not create an attorney-client relationship with the Immigration Law Office of Amy Chung, PLLC (“Firm”, “We”). The Firm is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information presented on this website without formal legal representation. Legal representation is established only upon the mutual signing of a Legal Services Agreement and the prospective client's payment of the required attorney’s fee.