CASE: I-130/I-485

NATIONALITY: Philippines

LOCATION: Covington, TX

Our client came from the Philippines on a J-1 in August 2016 to work as a teacher. Based on her  DS-2019, she was subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement. 

In January 2018, she married her U.S. citizen husband and later on consulted with our firm for her J-1 visa waiver prior to applying for adjustment of status. If someone is subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement, he or she cannot get a green card in the United States until he or she fulfills the requirement or obtains a waiver.

Upon retention, our office promptly prepared a waiver request through a No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Philippine Embassy in the United States and eventually the EVP in the Philippines.

On November 27, 2019, the J-1 Waiver Application (Form DS-3035) was filed to the Department of State.  On December 16, 2019, our office sent our client’s materials to the Waiver Review Committee in Manila, Philippines.  Then, the Waiver Review Committee forwarded the materials and favorable recommendation to the Philippine Embassy in D.C. who eventually issued a No Objection Statement.

On May 5, 2020, the Waiver Review Division issued a favorable recommendation based on the No Objection statement.  Eventually, on May 12, 2020, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval notice for the waiver. 

Once her J-1 waiver was approved, our client retained our office again for her adjustment of status application. Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on May 15, 2020.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients through conference calls. On April 6, 2021, our client was interviewed at the Louisville, KY USCIS office.  The interview went well, and eventually, on the same day of her interview, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: J-1 Waiver (No Objection Statement)

NATIONALITY: Philippines

LOCATION: Covington, KY

Our client came from the Philippines on a J-1 in August 2016 to work as a teacher. According to her DS-2019, she was subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement. 

In January 2018, she got married to her U.S. citizen husband and later on consulted with our firm for her J-1 visa waiver prior to applying for adjustment of status. If someone is subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement, he or she cannot get a green card in the United States until he or she fulfills the requirement or obtains a waiver.

Upon retention, our office promptly prepared a waiver request through a No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Philippine Embassy in the United States and eventually the EVP in the Philippines.

On November 27, 2019, the J-1 Waiver Application (Form DS-3035) was filed to the Department of State.  On December 16, 2019, our office sent our client’s materials to the Waiver Review Committee in Manila, Philippines.  Then, the Waiver Review Committee forwarded the materials and favorable recommendation to the Philippine Embassy in D.C. who eventually issued a No Objection Statement.

On May 5, 2020, the Waiver Review Division issued a favorable recommendation based on the No Objection statement.  Eventually, on May 12, 2020, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval notice for the waiver. Now, our client can file for her adjustment status application along with her U.S. Citizen husband’s I-130 petition for her.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Indian

LOCATION: Kentucky

Our client contacted us in March 2015 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from India and obtained his green card in June 2010 through marriage to his U.S. Citizen ex-wife. He first retained us for his H-751 since he got divorced to his US Citizen spouse, and that was approved. He retained our office again on March 6, 2015 for his N-400 application.

The N-400 application was filed on March 26, 2015 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him for his naturalization interview via conference calls. On June 25, 2015, our client appeared at the Louisville, KY USCIS office for his naturalization interview. Attorney JP Sarmiento from our office accompanied our client. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his naturalization and citizenship interview. Eventually, his application was approved on July 28, 2015. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Joint Motion to Reopen and Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Indonesian
LOCATION: Kentucky; San Francisco (EOIR)

Our client is from Indonesia who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in March 2004. She has remained in the United States past her authorized period of stay.  Later, she filed for asylum and withholding of removal in April 2006, but the Immigration Judge in San Francisco, CA denied all applications for relief.

She filed an appeal with the BIA, but in June 2007, the Board affirmed the Immigration Judge’s findings and dismissed the appeal. She then proceeded to appeal her case at the Federal Circuit Court, but was denied. She even filed a Motion to Reopen, which was also denied in January 2013.

Our client remained in the United States with the final order of removal.

She married her current U.S. citizen husband in August 2012. Her husband filed an I-130 petition in November 2012, which was subsequently approved by the USCIS in November 2013.

Our client and her husband consulted our firm. They wish to know if she has any viable options for her immigration status.

After careful review, our office determined that we can file a Request to the DHS to join in a Motion to Reopen based on the I-130 approval and Bo Cooper’s May 17, 2001 Memorandum.

Our client retained our office on December 4, 2013.

Once retained, our office prepared and filed a Request to Join in a Motion to Reopen and Terminate to the San Francisco DHS office on February 21, 2014. Our office prepared an extensive brief along with multiple supporting documents to request a favorable exercise of DHS’s discretion on this case. Our client’s husband was a member of the US army, deployed in Afghanistan several times, and that was part of our argument.

We argued that DHS should consider the following factors as set forth in Bo Cooper’s May 17, 2001 Memorandum: (1) whether adjustment of status was available at the prior hearing; (2) whether the alien is statutorily eligible for adjustment of status; and (3) whether the alien merits a favorable exercise of discretion. Bo Cooper, Motions to Reopen for Consideration of Adjustment of Status (May 17, 2001). In considering these factors, as delineated in William J. Howard’s October 24, 2005, Memorandum, “Where a motion to reopen for adjustment of status… is filed on behalf of an alien with substantial equities, no serious criminal or immigration violations, and who is legally eligible to be granted relief except that the motion is beyond the 90-day limitation contained in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23, strongly consider exercising prosecutorial discretion and join in this motion to reopen to permit the alien to pursue such relief to the immigration court.” William J. Howard, Prosecutorial Discretion (October 24, 2005).

Our office argued that if our client’s case is reopened, she will be prima facie eligible to adjust her status. Our client has been living in the United States since 2004, has no criminal record, and has an approved I-130 petition based on the marriage to U.S citizen spouse.

Eventually, the DHS office agreed to join in our Motion to Reopen and Terminate on April 21, 2014. The DHS filed the joint motion to the San Francisco Immigration Court, and our client case will be reopened and terminated soon.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751 / Waiver of the Joint Waiver Requirement
APPLICANT: Indian
LOCATION: Kentucky

Our client contacted our office in early May of 2012 regarding his potential I-751 filing. He is from India and he married a U.S. citizen in May 2009 in India.

Through his marriage, he was able to come to the United States with an immigrant visa and obtained a 2-year conditional green card in June of 2010. Thus, his conditional residency terminated in June 2012.

Unfortunately, their marriage ended in February 2011. Our client experienced a lot of difficulties during his marriage with his ex-wife. Thus, our client could not file the I-751 application jointly with his ex-wife.

We advised that we can help him file the I-751 application with a waiver of the joint filing requirement. We requested a waiver because our client entered into the marriage in good faith, but the marriage was terminated through divorce or annulment before they can file a joint petition.

On June 20, 2012, our office filed the I-751 application with various supporting documents (over 18 exhibits and an affidavit over 3 pages) to demonstrate our client’s bona fide marriage with his ex-wife.  Since he did not have a lot of supporting documents regarding joint financial documents and joint living arrangements of him and his ex-wife, we also attached numerous notarized affidavits from our client’s friends and family members.

In May of this year, the USCIS scheduled an I-751 interview for our client. Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client over conference calls and discussed with him potential issues at the interview.

On June 6, 2013, our client was interviewed for his I-751 application at the USCIS Louisville, KY Field Office.  Attorney Glen Sung Hee Yu from our office also accompanied our client as well.  The interview went well, and eventually, the USCIS approved his I-751 application on June 12, 2013. Now, he has his ten-year green card.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other I-751 success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact our office anytime for free consultations.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 approval under the INA 245(i) provision
CLIENT: Indian
LOCATION: Kentucky

Our client is from India who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in September 2002. Since that time, she never left the United States.

In December 1986, our client’s uncle filed an I-130 (fourth preference) petition for her father.  This I-130 petition was approved.  At the time the I-130 Petition was approved, our client was a minor and was a derivative beneficiary. Our client was not able to immigrate on that petition though because she aged out.

Later, our client’s father filed an I-130 petition on her behalf on January 9, 2006.  This Petition was approved in the same year.

Our client contacted us around September of 2010 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her possible adjustment of status application. Attorney Sarmiento met them in the Washington DC area.

After consultation, we determined that she was eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us in October 2010.

Section 245(i) of the INA allows certain foreign nationals to become permanent residents of the United States despite entering without inspection (EWI) or overstaying (if beneficiary of petitions filed not by those other than an immediate relative).

Immigrants are barred from adjusting their status if they entered the United States without first being inspected and admitted by a Customs and Border Patrol officer and if they have either failed to maintain lawful status or been unlawfully employed in the country, with certain exceptions. Section 245(i) was first added to law in 1994 to allow certain people who otherwise would not be eligible to adjust status to be able to do so upon payment of a $1,000 fine.

Four years later, on January 14, 1998, Congress phased Section 245(i) out of law. Immigrants and their families who had already begun the process of changing their status under Section 245(i) by January 14, 1998 were grandfathered into the section’s benefits.

On December 21, 2000, Congress extended the qualifying date for Section 245(i) benefits to April 30, 2001. This law allowed immigrants who had labor certifications or visa petitions filed on their behalf between 1998 and April 30, 2001, to qualify for adjustment of status. Those who were beneficiaries of petitions filed prior to January 14, 1998 could still adjust despite an EWI record, and those people do not have to meet the December 2000 physical presence requirement.

Our client was the beneficiary of a petition before January 14, 1998 (as a derivative beneficiary of the F-4 petition filed by her uncle to her father on December 29, 1986), and thus was eligible to adjust under INA Section 245(i) despite her overstay, without any need to show physical presence in the United States in December 14, 2000.

Once retained, our office prepared and filed her adjustment of status application under the 245(i) provision. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  We thoroughly prepared our client prior to her interview as well.

On February 1, 2011, our client was interviewed at the Louisville, Kentucky USCIS Field Office.

Due to the complexity of the case, we made sure the officer was clear about our client’s 245i eligibility. The interview went well; however, the priority date retrogressed before her adjustment of status applicant was approved.

Finally, priority dates opened again. On February 4, 2013 our client’s I-485 application was approved.  She finally became a green card holder.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other 245i success stories, please click here.

For other family immigration success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact our office anytime for free consultations.

<a href=”https://plus.google.com/107743308565341841259?rel=author”>Google</a>

<a href=”https://plus.google.com/109631653288081090975″ rel=”publisher”>Google+</a>

{ 0 comments }