However, between July XX, 2019 and June XX, 2021, I applied for WP extension and PR . I received my PR and no response for my WP extension status. When checked with IRCC they said it is nullified since PR was approved.
Safe and Easy Approach:
Enter any pre-PR status dates based on explicit grants of status. Should be easy: enter date status was granted, date that grant of status expired, as stated in the notice granting status.
Do not include periods in which you had implied status.
Yes, even if you believe that period should be given credit. And yes, that means waiting longer to apply. Do not forget to
ALSO still wait to have a good buffer over the minimum.
In some scenarios it is not difficult to document implied status. Safe approach is to still wait to apply NOT relying on credit for days with implied status, but if it is relatively straight-forward entering the information that documents a period of implied status, in final draft of application to be submitted include this . . . not relying on it to qualify for the grant of citizenship but using it more as a buffer (in addition to a good buffer based on calculation not counting period of implied status). That is, go ahead and include it, so it counts, but waiting to qualify as if the period of implied status did not count.
That is the SAFE and easier approach.
Short explanation: there is a risk that IRCC's records do not sufficiently corroborate foundation for establishing implied status, in which case those days may not be given credit. Even if applicant can supplement their case with sufficient documentation to eventually get credit for implied status period of time, there is a significant risk that will involve residency-presence related non-routine processing that results in a much longer processing time. That is, waiting longer to apply can mean getting to the oath sooner even if the implied status days get credit.
That said, periods of implied status are generally short, and since pre-PR days only get half-credit anyway, waiting longer to cover that period typically is not a long wait, and typically well worth it if for no other reason than peace of mind, less worry.
Longer explanation With Further Observations:
First, an acknowledgement that it MIGHT be possible to get pre-PR credit (toward your actual physical presence) for days that you were IN Canada during the period of time after the work permit expired, for those days while you had an application for extension of the work permit pending. However, even if technically credit for those days should be given, establishing that for any period of time during which you did not have an explicit grant of status can be difficult, problematic, and perhaps even practically not possible.
That is, whether this period of time can possibly be counted, for you, and assuming it can, how to proceed to accomplish that is complicated and difficult enough to sort out I will not attempt to address it, as to whether you can count, toward your actual physical presence, days that you were IN Canada during the period of time after the work permit expired, while you had an application for extension of the work permit pending. Likewise as to how to answer the questions, or what additional/supplemental information to include with the application, in order to get credit for those days.
If you want to count those days, and again maybe you can, what I have to offer will not help.
Getting Presence Credit For Pre-PR Days In Canada With Implied Status:
Any period of time for which you were explicitly granted Temporary Resident Status (including visitor or a work permit), as evidenced by a date of the grant and date it expires, can be for sure counted (well, those days actually in Canada and within the five year eligibility period).
What we are talking about here, in contrast, is getting presence credit for a period of time during which the prospective applicant had (or claims to have had) implied status. While implied status is a real thing, and is a form of legal temporary resident status, the problem with implied status is that means there is no explicit grant of status for that period of time. There is no particular record or document that establishes the particular individual had implied status, let alone the date it expires. Status is implied based on meeting certain requisites. The problem is that the factual basis for concluding the Foreign National (FN, prior to becoming a PR) had implied status may, or may NOT be sufficiently documented in the prospective citizenship applicant's GCMS records, to establish they had implied status during that particular period of time.
What tends to get overlooked is the applicant's burden of proof. That applicants bear the burden of proving physical presence is well known and understood. Submitting an application requires the applicant to detail travel history, work history, and address history, and even all that is not enough in some cases, such as when the applicant is subject to RQ-related non-routine processing.
That technically applicants also bear the burden of proving they had legally granted Temporary Resident status is not so widely recognized or understood. That's because generally the applicant's GCMS records amply document the grant of status and its period of validity, so the applicant's statement of status in the application and presence calculation is enough proof because IRCC readily verifies the status in GCMS. Absent a clear grant of status as documented in GCMS, it can be difficult to sufficiently establish the applicant had Temporary Resident status during a period of time.
Perhaps the more common example is not implied status, but periods of time in Canada as a visitor. Many visa-exempt FNs will be waived through the Port-of-Entry without any formal grant of status or even a Visitor-Record. Technically the visitor is in Canada with Temporary Resident status. Which should count toward the citizenship physical presence requirement . . .
IF, if the applicant meets the burden of proving they were in Canada with Temporary Resident status. Typically their GCMS will not document this status. There have been numerous reports of applications returned, based on the applicant being short of meeting the presence requirement in such situations, since in screening the application for completeness, the applicant's status during the period of time in Canada as a visitor could not be verified . . . technically the applicant can challenge this, or could have submitted supplemental information with the application that requires IRCC to process the application considering this time. The problem is that this most likely means the application becomes a presence-case, bogged down in RQ-related non-routine processing, and in many if not most cases ending up taking not just longer but quite a lot longer than it would just waiting to apply without relying on credit for this period of time. And this is at the risk (depending on particular facts and circumstances) that IRCC and then, if it goes that far, a Citizenship Judge concludes the applicant has failed to meet the burden of proof for that period of time and the application is denied.
REMEMBER: IRCC and a CJ do not need to conclude the applicant did not have status during that time, to deny credit, just that the applicant has failed to meet the burden of proof as to having status.
In regards to periods of implied status it is a little more complicated. This is in part because many times, particularly where short periods of time are involved, establishing there was implied status can be fairly straight-forward. Where an application for an extension of status is timely and properly made, for example, and granted a month or three after the earlier grant of that status expired, connecting the dots is easy. Where it is that straight-forward, and the prospective applicant is more or less absolutely certain of their position, there should be little or no problem relying on implied status.
Many, many times it is not that straight-forward. And when it is not straight-forward (which seems the case here), it's a gamble to try relying on getting credit.
The safe bet is to wait to apply not counting the days with implied status.
During your 5-year eligibility period, did you have a valid temporary resident status before becoming a permanent resident?
Answer : yes
Your temporary resident status
Answer : Tempory resident permit holder ( Is this correct for closed work permit ?? I was holding a closed work permit before becoming a PR. )
Date you received the status : July XX, 2019
Date your status expired: June XX, 2021 (date before becoming PR)
However, between July XX, 2019 and June XX, 2021, I applied for WP extension and PR . I received my PR and no response for my WP extension status. When checked with IRCC they said it is nullified since PR was approved.
Date your status expired: Should this be my work permit expiry date or day before I received my PR?
