CASE: Asylum

CLIENT: From Zimbabwe

LOCATION: Austin / Houston, TX

Our client, a Zimbabwean asylum seeker from Austin, Texas retained us on April 8, 2013 for an asylum case. She is an F-1 student currently working under an OPT. She wanted to seek asylum relief.

While she was in Zimbabwe last year, she was forced to attend a political rally for the government and she was severely beaten and harassed by government militia. Persecution occurred due to her political opinion and the political affiliation of her parents and brother. She was hospitalized because of this persecution and had to leave Zimbabwe. She is scared to go back home to Zimbabwe, fearing that she will be persecuted again.

We prepared her asylum application, going over several drafts until her claim was as detailed as possible. Names, addresses, dates, and all possible issues relevant to her asylum claim were addressed. We also asked her to provide supporting documents corroborating her claim. Our firm also did some research on articles pertaining to her particular claim, and the type of persecution that members of anti-government political activists suffer in Zimbabwe.

The asylum application was filed in May 17, 2013. On June 24, 2013, the CIS issued an interview notice for her, scheduled for July 10, 2013 at the Houston, Texas USCIS Asylum Office. Prior to her interview, Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu prepared her thoroughly over conference calls to make sure she was able to address any possible question the asylum officer would ask. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu also went to Houston and represented our client at her asylum interview.

On July 25, 2013, the CIS in Houston approved our client’s asylum case. She is now an asylee and will be eligible to apply for permanent resident status in one year.  She also would obtain her work permit in about two weeks.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status (I-485) / I-360 Approval
CLIENT: Kenyan
LOCATION: Ohio

Our Kenyan client came to the U.S. on a J-1 Visa in 2004. She overstayed and was placed in removal proceedings two years ago, and she retained our office.

When she came in 2004, her visa made her subject to the 2-year foreign residency requirement. As our previous success story explained, this client received an I-612 J-1 waiver approval from the USCIS in January 2012 with our assistance.

Our office then filed her I-360 petition as a spouse of an abusive U.S. Citizen. Our client experienced domestic violence and spousal abuse while she was married to her ex-husband. Thus, we prepared and filed her I-360 petition, which included 26 exhibits and a detailed brief to the USCIS Vermont Service Center on May 5, 2011.

This petition was also reviewed by the Immigration Judge during our client’s Master Calendar hearing and the IJ opined that our client’s I-360 petition is prima facie approvable. Nevertheless, our client’s I-360 petition was pending for a while.

Despite our client’s thoroughly prepared I-360 application, in August 2012, the USCIS Vermont Service Center issued a Request for Evidence (RFE). Specifically, the RFE letter requested our client to submit more medical documents to prove her ex-husband subjected her to extreme cruelty. Moreover, the RFE letter asked our client to submit more notarized affidavits from witnesses. Our client and our office thoroughly gathered the requested documents, and filed a response to RFE on November 7, 2012 with 13 exhibits.

Finally, on February 22, 2013, the USCIS Vermont Service Center approved our client’s I-360 petition. With the approved I-360 and I-612 J-1 waiver, our office filed a Request to Join in a Motion to Terminate proceedings to the USICE-DHS Cleveland Office with an attached I-485 application and its supporting documents on April 2, 2013.

On April 6, 2013, the assistant chief counsel of the DHS agreed with us and signed a joint motion to terminate.

On April 9, 2013, our client appeared at the Cleveland Immigration Court for her master calendar hearing.  The Immigration Judge granted the Joint Motion to Terminate and eventually terminated our client’s case without prejudice on the same day.

After removal proceedings were terminated, the USCIS scheduled an I-485 adjustment of status interview for our client. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our client at our office as well.  On July 12, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland USCIS office. Attorney Sune Hee Yu from our office accompanied her.

On July 18, 2013, her green card application was approved.

{ 2 comments }

CASE: Termination of Removal Proceedings Based on Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Russian

LOCATION OF COURT: New York, NY

LOCATION OF CLIENT: Texas

Our client is from Russia who came to the U.S. on a J-1 Exchange Visitor Visa in June 2005. She then changed her status to F-1 in November 2005, but she failed to maintain her F-1 status after that.  She was thereafter placed in removal proceedings in New York, NY. She applied for asylum.

Our client married her U.S. citizen husband in November 2011 in Brooklyn, NY. Her husband filed an I-130 petition on her behalf after they got married. Eventually, our client’s I-130 petition was approved in April 2013. She applied for adjustment of status by herself with the CIS, but this was denied due to lack of jurisdiction.

She contacted our office around May 2013 to seek legal assistance. She retained our office in May 28, 2013.

After our office was retained, we prepared and filed a request to join in a Motion to Terminate proceedings with an attached I-485 application and its supporting documents to the New York ICE-DHS office. In less than a month, the DHS counsel in New York agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Eventually, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on July 2, 2013. Now, she can file her I-485 adjustment of status application with the CIS.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Motion to Reopen
CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Client: Houston, TX / EOIR: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States from Cameroon in 2000.  He entered legally on an F-1 visa.

In 2002, he filed for asylum with the USCIS.  He was interviewed at the CIS office, but his asylum application was referred to the Immigration Court in New Orleans.  After his first master calendar hearing, he requested for a change of venue to Hartford, CT.

In 2004, our client married his U.S. citizen wife and she filed an I-130 on behalf of our client. Our client filed the I-485 adjustment of status application simultaneously with the I-130 petition even though he was in removal proceedings. He had no legal representation at that time.

However, with the help of the Immigration Judge and DHS counsel, he served copies of the I-130 and I-485 application and informed the court that he filed the adjustment of status application. When he served the copies of his I-130/I-485 application, the DHS attorney told our client that she will try to re-route the I-485 application he filed to the CIS to the court. Our client assumed that given that he had been in clear communication with the Court and the DHS attorney,  that everything will be fine with his case and both files will be merged.

Later in August 2004, our client moved to Cleveland, Ohio due to his new employment and his case venue was changed from Hartford, CT to Cleveland, OH as well.  He attended his master calendar hearings in Cleveland, and in December 2005, our client and his wife attended their green card interview at the USCIS Cleveland Field office.  After the interview, our client eventually got his conditional green card in the mail and he was under the assumption that if he was given a green card, then he must have done everything right and that the removal case had been dropped.

While he resided in the Cleveland area, he moved to different addresses and he had always promptly notified both Immigration Court and the USCIS by filing change of address forms.  In April 2006, he went to his another master calendar hearing which he got in his new address.  However, our client was told to go home and that he will get a letter in the mail with a re-scheduled master hearing date.  He never received anything else from Court since then.

As mentioned above, our client got his green card and he filed an I-751 application two years later to remove conditions on the green card. He also got this. He had foreign trips and one of his entries, the issue of his final order came up but he eventually was let go and his green card was even given back to him.

Later, he filed an N-400 naturalization application and during his N-400 interview the final order of removal in absentia which was issued in November 2006 was brought up again. He was stunned and contacted a local immigration attorney in Houston, Texas where he currently resides. However, his attorney never filed the Motion to the court.

Our client contacted our office in late April 2013 and sought legal assistance. We advised him that we can file a Motion to Reopen in absentia order of removal.

To rescind the final order, he has to get his case reopened. This is done through a Motion to Reopen filed with the Immigration Judge who gave the final order.  Based on this Motion to Reopen, the Immigration Judge can rescind the in absentia order of removal if you are able to show that you did not receive proper notice of the hearing. If the Notice to Appear or hearing notice was sent to the wrong address for example, and not the last address you provided to the immigration service, then there’s a good basis for a Motion to Reopen.

On May 9, 2013, our office filed a Motion to Reopen with the Cleveland Immigration Court. Documentation of his address at the date of the final order, a detailed affidavit regarding his addresses and his circumstances around the final order date, copies of his green card and immigration related documentation, documentation of the last address he provided to the immigration service and to the Immigration Court prior to the final order date, and other supporting documents were submitted (14 exhibits).

On June 19, 2013, the Cleveland Immigration Court granted our motion and reopened our client’s case.  Our client now does not have the final order of removal and may seek to terminate removal proceedings.

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 motion to reopen 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: Motion to Remand based on Pending I-130 Petition
CLIENT: Romanian
LOCATION: Chicago, IL

Our client came to the United States with a valid J-1 visa from Romania in July 2002. He remained in the United States for a time longer than permitted.

Later on, he was placed in removal proceedings due to his overstay and a Notice to Appear was issued. His cancellation of removal application was denied by the Immigration Judge in April 2011, but an appeal was timely filed.  The BIA appeal was denied March 15, 2013.

While the BIA appeal was pending, our client married his U.S. citizen wife in September 2012. His wife filed an I-130 petition for our client on November 5, 2012.  He contacted our office for legal assistance for a Motion to Remand.  We explained to him the Motion to Remand procedure and he retained our office on April 1, 2013.

On April 5, 2013, we prepared and filed the Motion to Remand for Adjustment of Status Based on a Pending I-130 on behalf our client.  We had to file this Motion within 90 days of the Board decision to make it timely. You typically want the I-130 to be approved prior to filing the Motion to Remand, but by submitting the actual I-130 application itself and its supporting documents attached to the Motion, even though it is still pending, you can show that it is approvable.

In Matter of Coelho, 20 I&N Dec. 464, 473 (BIA 1992), the BIA found that a motion to remand must conform to the same standards as a motion to reopen, where the respondent presents new evidence which would likely change the result of the case. In a Motion to Reopen before the BIA, the Applicant must show that the evidence is material, unavailable at time of original hearing, and could not have been discovered or presented at the original hearing. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1). In this case, adjustment of status relief was not available for our client at his previous hearing since he was not married to his U.S. Citizen wife.

Our office filed a Motion to Remand for Adjustment of Status based on a pending I-130 to the BIA on April 5, 2013. We argued that our client will be eligible for adjustment of status once the I-130 is approved since he had a legal entry to the U.S., has no criminal records, and has no other grounds of inadmissibility.

We also attached a lot of bona fide marital evidence between our client and his U.S. citizen wife to demonstrate that the I-130 petition was approvable. Eventually, on May 30, 2013, the BIA granted our motion, reopened our client’s case, and the record was remanded for further proceedings.

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 Motion to Reopen 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 after the Termination of Proceedings

CLIENT: Moldovan

LOCATION: Baltimore, MD (EOIR) / Fairfax, VA (USCIS)

Our client came to the United States from Moldova in 2008 with her ex-husband.  While they were residing at the Baltimore area, her ex-husband filed an asylum application to the USCIS.  Our client was a derivative applicant for this asylum application.  Later this case was referred to the Baltimore Immigration Court and removal proceedings were initiated against our client and her ex-husband.  While this asylum application was pending at the Immigration Court, our client and her ex-husband got a divorce due to marital difficulties.  Her previous immigration lawyer filed a Motion to Deconsolidate, but our client never got a response from her previous attorney nor the Court regarding the possible deconsolidation.

Her individual hearing was scheduled in May 2011, but she was not informed of this date.  She later learned that she had a final order of removal because of her absence from her ex-husband.  Once she learned about that, she contacted our office for legal assistance. We advised her that we can file a Motion to Reopen in absentia order of removal based on exceptional circumstances. She retained our office on August 15, 2011.

To rescind the final order, she has to get her case reopened. This is done through a Motion to Reopen filed with the Immigration Judge who gave the final order.  Based on this Motion to Reopen, the Immigration Judge can rescind the in absentia order of removal if you are able to show that you did not receive proper notice of the hearing. If the Notice to Appear or hearing notice was sent to the wrong address for example, and not the last address you provided to the immigration service, then there’s a good basis for a Motion to Reopen.

On August 18, 2011, our office filed the Motion to Reopen with the Baltimore Immigration Court. Documentation of her address at the date of the final order, a detailed affidavit regarding her addresses and her circumstances around the final order date, documentation of her medical appointment on the day of hearing, the last address she provided to the immigration service and to the Immigration Court prior to the final order date, and other supporting documents were submitted (12 exhibits). Eventually, on September 23, 2011, the Baltimore Immigration Court granted our motion and reopened our client’s case.

Our client’s divorce was finalized on August 11, 2011.  After her case was reopened, she married her current U.S. citizen husband in July 2012.  Her U.S. citizen husband filed an I-130 petition on behalf of our client on August 16, 2012 with our legal assistance and they appeared at the I-130 interview on December 18, 2012 at the Fairfax, VA USCIS Field Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and her husband for the interview.  Although the interview was intensive, on January 9, 2013, the I-130 petition was approved.

After the I-130 was approved, our office filed a Motion to Terminate proceedings with an attached I-485 application and its supporting documents on January 30, 2013.  On February 13, 2013, our client appeared at the Baltimore Immigration Court for her initial master calendar hearing after the reopening of her case.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office represented our client at the hearing and sought termination before the Immigration Judge.  The Immigration Judge granted our Motion to Terminate and eventually terminated our client’s case without prejudice on the same day.

Once her case was terminated with the Immigration Court, our office prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on March 7, 2013, together with other necessary forms and supporting documents. 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 May 22, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Fairfax, Virginia USCIS office. Our client was fully prepared and the interview went well.  On the same day, her green card application was approved.

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 marriage-based green card 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 Adjustment of Status / Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is from the Philippines who came to the U.S. on a B-2 Visitor’s Visa in March 2009. She remained in the United States after her authorized stay expired. Because of her overstay, she was placed in removal proceedings in Cleveland, Ohio.

Our client married her U.S. citizen husband in April 2011 in Ohio. Her husband filed an I-130 petition on her behalf after they got married. Eventually, our client’s I-130 petition was approved in June 2012. Unfortunately, after being in Court prior to our retention about 4 to 5 times, she could not get her case terminated.

She contacted our office around September 2012 to seek legal assistance. She retained our office in October 1, 2012.

After our office was retained, we prepared and filed a request to join in a Motion to Terminate proceedings with an attached I-485 application and its supporting documents to the Cleveland Immigration Court. The DHS counsel in Cleveland agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Eventually, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on February 5, 2013.

Once her case was terminated with the Immigration Court, our office prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on February 25, 2013, together with other necessary forms and supporting documents. 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 at our office.

On May 10, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland CIS office. Our attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu accompanied them as well. Our client was fully prepared and the interview went well.  On May 17, 2013, her green card application was approved.

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 marriage-based green card success stories, please click here.

For other termination success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Bond Redetermination Hearing
APPLICANT: Chinese
LOCATION: Florence Immigration Court AZ

Our office was contacted in April of 2012 regarding one Chinese person who was detained in Florence, Arizona. He tried to enter the United States without valid documents and was incarcerated by immigration officers.

Prior to retention, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement set a bond amount of $15,000.  Our client wished to have that reduced so we filed a motion for bond redetermination with the Florence Immigration Court in Arizona.  Our office communicated with him and his U.S. resident relative in New York, and gathered as much information regarding his relief, equities, criminal record, family ties, and financial ability to post bond.  We also gathered supporting documents from our client’s relatives, from proof of their status and residence, to bank statements and tax returns.

On May 7, 2013, we represented our client at his Florence Arizona Immigration Court bond re-determination hearing.  During the bond re-determination hearing, we explained to the Court that our client already passed his credible fear interview, was not a flight risk, had established his residence upon release, had established his financial ability to post bond, and that he had ample family ties in the United States who submitted proof of his residence and immigration status.  Moreover, our office explained that his lack of criminal record, designated address with contact information from his relative in the United States, ability to post bond, and eligibility for asylum relief clearly demonstrate that the bond should be reduced.  At the end of the hearing, the Immigration Judge took our arguments into account and reduced the bond amount to only $7500.

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 jail case 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 Adjustment of Status / Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Liberian

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our Liberian client came to the U.S. on a B-2 Visitor’s Visa in October 1996. He remained in the United States after his authorized stay expired. He was a minor at that time.

Because of his overstay, he was placed in removal proceedings in Cleveland, Ohio.

His hearing was coming up when he retained us in January 10, 2011. He just got married to his spouse a few days earlier. We prepared and filed the I-130 petition on his behalf on January 14, 2011.

Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office represented our client at his hearings and sought adjustment of status relief. The I-130 interview was scheduled on August 12, 2011 and our attorney prepared them for the interview and accompanied them as well. The I-130 petition was eventually approved by the USCIS on December 28, 2011.

After the I-130 petition was approved, we filed a Request to Join in a Motion to Terminate proceedings with an attached I-485 application and its supporting documents. The DHS counsel in Cleveland agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Eventually, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to Terminate without prejudice on July 18, 2012.

After removal proceedings were terminated, our office prepared and filed an I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on October 13, 2012, together with other necessary forms and supporting documents. 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 over the phone.

On April 23, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland CIS office. Our attorney accompanied them as well. Our client was fully prepared and the interview went well.  On May 2, 2013, his green card application was approved.

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 marriage based green card success stories, please click here.

For other termination 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-765 Employment Authorization Post Admin Closure

CLIENT: Guatemalan

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States from Guatemala in January 2000.  He entered the United States without valid inspection and admission. He has remained in the United States since then.

Years later, he married his U.S. citizen wife. He was placed in removal proceedings in 2012, and he hired our office to represent him.

At his master calendar hearing, our attorney took pleadings, sought relief under Cancellation of Removal, and filed his application. Our client also filed an I-765 work permit application to the USCIS. This I-765 was approved in March 2012.

Prior to his individual hearing in November 2012, upon request from our office and the Department of Homeland Security, and upon agreement of the Immigration Judge, his removal proceedings were administratively closed.

In February 2013, our client contacted our office again to renew his work permit.

Our office prepared and filed his I-765 work permit application on February 13, 2013.

Our office included a brief with the application because our client’s case was administratively closed; thus, granting a work permit is not automatic, but discretionary.

We cited a DHS memorandum on the issue, quoting their policy in that “Per longstanding federal law, individuals affected by an exercise of prosecutorial discretion will be able to request work authorization, including paying associated fees, and their requests will be separately considered by the USCIS on a case-by-case basis.”

Our office emphasized the equities of our client, how he has worked hard and paid taxes, his lack of any criminal record, and his marriage to a US Citizen.  His case was administrative closed due to several “positive” factors of his case.

Not every work permit application post-administrative closure is approved, but for our client, fortunately it was. The USCIS approved our client’s I-765 work permit renewal request on March 28, 2013. Despite the administrative closure, our client is authorized to work in the United States until March 20, 2014.

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 deportation 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 }