Thanks for the reply. However, after reviewing the citizenship application, it states: "if you were in your country or territory of origin immediately prior to becoming a permanent resident and landing in Canada and this time falls within this four (4) year period, you are NOT required to provide a police certificate."
So, now I feel like I do not need one. Anyone have any perspective?
This instruction in the application allows the PR to EXPLAIN why no police certificate is included with the application even though the applicant has properly checked the [yes] box for item 10.b. So, technically you do not need to submit the FBI certificate with the application even though you were in the U.S. for a six month period within the previous four years of the date you apply. Check the [yes] box, list the U.S., and explain that you provided a clearance in the process of becoming a PR.
Beyond That, Some Practical Observations:
Conventional wisdom to apply with a good margin over the minimum is particularly applicable to your situation.
Obviously the six weeks you were in Canada as a visitor, just before landing, technically count (half day credit for each day).
However, as a practical matter unless you were issued a formal visitor visa or a Visitor's Record, it is likely that your GCMS records do NOT show you had temporary resident status in Canada during that time. So IRCC might NOT give you credit for those days. (Burden of proof for both presence and status is on the PR; absent IRCC having records verifying status, the risk is high IRCC views the situation as falling short of meeting the burden of proving presence AND status; there have been several anecdotal reports of returned applications for applicants who relied on such periods of time, which should be little or no surprise.)
You should of course include these pre-PR days in your physical presence calculation BUT it would be prudent WAIT to apply with a margin that is at least 25 days MORE than what you otherwise planned to have as a margin. Probably at least a couple months margin before applying.
Thus, if you are among those applicants who kept good records and can submit a near-perfect travel history, and thus be confident you will be OK applying with a relatively modest margin over the minimum (a month plus a bit or so), probably a good idea to ADD at least another month wait to that before applying.
Waiting awhile longer to apply can often result in becoming a citizen sooner. Sometimes by a lot.
Note that this can be particularly so for Americans. It appears that U.S. citizens applying for Canadian citizenship tend to either have a very smooth and relatively fast processing path to citizenship OR get bogged down in some RQ-related non-routine processing. There seems to be a fairly low threshold for IRCC concern about the physical presence calculation when the applicant is a U.S. citizen, probably given that it is so easy for U.S. citizens to go back and forth over the border AND the Canadian government does not have direct access to entry-into-the-U.S. records for U.S. citizens like it does for all other PRs.
(I believe this will be or is in the process of changing, but the information sharing scheme Obama & Harper worked out, and which has taken years to fully implement, pursuant to which Canada and the U.S. share entry records, has NOT applied to citizens of the respective countries; so Canada has no direct access to U.S. records for when U.S. citizens entered the U.S., and the U.S. does not have direct access to Canadian records for when Canadian citizens enter Canada. Bottom-line: for most PRs applying for citizenship, Canada can readily verify dates of entry into Canada and dates of entry into the U.S., the latter indicating a date of exit from Canada; not so, in regards to entry into the U.S., if the applicant is a U.S. citizen.)
Thus, a solid margin of days IN Canada over the minimum 1095 days can make a fairly big difference in whether IRCC has questions about the travel history.
In particular: There have been a significant number of forum anecdotal reports from U.S. citizen applicants who were given a request to obtain and submit their U.S. records of entry during or after the PI Interview (the interview attendant the test event), and this can delay processing and being scheduled for the oath for several or many months, even if there are otherwise no apparent concerns about the applicant's presence calculation. Obviously, such applicants can begin the process for obtaining those records from the U.S. BEFORE a request, and then be able to submit them much faster, but even this results in the application being taken out of the routine processing queue and thus in some delay. It is not clear, but my sense is that despite no apparent presence calculation concerns, for most of these applicants, those getting the request to obtain and submit their U.S. records of entry, there is something about their case triggering what IRCC perceives as cause for more thorough verification of the travel history. Margin over the minimum is undoubtedly a factor but not the only factor. It is, however, one factor the applicant has the most control over, simply by waiting two or three more months to apply.
Personal experience: It was around six years or so ago, so is a bit dated now, but I made the FOIA request for my U.S. entry records well before I applied for citizenship. I did not get those records until well AFTER I took the oath for citizenship. (Seems to go faster these days, but more than a few here still complain about how long it takes the U.S. to provide these records.) Obviously, good thing I was not among those asked to provide CIC (before the name change to IRCC) my U.S. entry records. It may also be worth noting, even though I am someone who tends to not practice what I preach, regarding having a solid margin, that is one sermon I did practice what I preach, waiting nearly two years past when I became eligible to apply (noting, however, there were additional, personal circumstances suggesting the prudence of that; how much of a margin is prudent is a very individually specific matter).
