CASE: Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Atlanta, GA (USCIS) / Memphis, TN (EOIR)

Our Cameroonian client came to the United States in December 1999 on an F-1 student visa. In July 2001, he filed an asylum application to the USCIS, was interviewed by the USCIS, and later his case was referred to the Immigration Court.  Thereafter, a Notice to Appear was issued and our client was placed in removal proceedings. After he got the Notice to Appear, he appeared at his initial master calendar hearing at the Memphis Immigration Court with his previous attorney.

His removal proceedings were continued, but he could not appear at his individual hearing in April 2003 due to hospitalization.  Thus, the Court found him removable and ordered him removed in absentia.  

Later, in April 2011, he filed a Motion to Reopen with assistance from his previous immigration counsel.  However, this Motion to Reopen was denied by the Court in July 2011.  Thereafter, he contacted our office to determine whether he can file a Motion to Reopen again.  After the consultation, we explained him that the only way the Court can reopen his case is based on changed country conditions in Cameroon.  It is because our client’s second Motion to Reopen can be considered untimely filed and numerically barred.  After the explanation, our client decided to retain our office and retained us on November 22, 2011 for Motion to Reopen based on changed country conditions.

Under immigration law, if an applicant seeks to make an asylum claim and a final order of removal has been entered and the ninety-day filing deadline for motions to reopen has passed, the BIA and the majority of Circuit Courts have found that the applicant may only file the asylum application through a motion to reopen and only under the “changed country conditions” provision of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(i).  Thus, our office prepared the Motion to Reopen based on the changed country conditions in Cameroon.

On March 6, 2012, our office filed the Motion to Reopen with the Memphis Immigration Court. With 15-pages brief, we included a detailed affidavit regarding his involvement in political activist group in Cameroon, several affidavits from his fellow members who confirmed his involvement with the organization.  We claimed that the number of arrests and detentions of his political group members has recently escalated since his original removal hearing in 2003 resulting in changed country conditions.  We also attached a letter from a human rights officer in which he states that he knew our client’s political involvement in Cameroon. Moreover, other supporting documents such as newspaper articles and country report of Cameroon were submitted (24 exhibits).  On March 29, 2012, the DHS filed a Response in Opposition to our Motion.  Nevertheless, on May 2, 2012, the Memphis Immigration Court granted our motion and reopened our client’s case.  

Once his case is reopened, he retained our office again. Our attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu appeared at his master calendar hearing via telephonic appearance and his individual hearing was scheduled on September 29, 2014 at the Memphis Immigration Court.

Our client was persecuted and harmed in Cameroon based on his political opinion and movement.  Our client was scared to go back home to Cameroon, fearing that he will be persecuted based on his political opinion. Moreover, our client’s late father and his uncle were mistreated and harmed in Cameroon due to their political opinion as well.

We helped him file his asylum application and represented him in immigration court hearings. We also asked him to provide supporting documents corroborating his claim, some of which were a letter from his family, colleagues and friends in Cameroon. Our firm also did some research on articles related to his claim, and the type of persecution he will experience in Cameroon if sent back.

Our client’s individual hearing was scheduled on September 29, 2014 at the Memphis Immigration Court. Attorney Sung Hee Yu from our firm prepared him extensively. He also represented our client at his Individual Hearing at the Memphis Immigration Court.

Prior to the hearing, Immigration Judge held a pre-trial conference with Attorney Yu and the DHS counsel. During the pre-trial conference, and all of the possible issues were examined. At the conclusion of the conference, withholding of removal was granted. After the hearing, the Immigration Judge granted Withholding of Removal for our client based on his persecution in Cameroon.

In December 2014, our client married his current U.S. citizen wife. He retained our office again for the I-130 petition. Once we were retained, our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition for our client and filed it to USCIS on August 14, 2015.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on October 3, 2016 at Atlanta USCIS Field Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and his wife for the interview via conference calls. Attorney Yu also accompanied them for their interview. The interview went well, and the I-130 petition was eventually approved on October 11, 2016.

Once the I-130 was approved, our office filed a request to join in a Motion to terminate proceedings with the I-485 application and supporting documents. The DHS counsel in Memphis, TN agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on February 24, 2017.  Now, he can file his I-485 adjustment of status application to USCIS to obtain his green card.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Filipina                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Birmingham, AL

Our client is from the Philippines who came to the U.S. on an H-1B visa in October 2009. Since then, she has remained in the United States and worked as a high school teacher in Birmingham, AL.  In July 2016, our client married her current U.S. citizen husband.  She retained our office in July 2016 for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on July 22, 2016.  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 via conference calls. On February 27, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Atlanta, Georgia USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office also accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, on the same day of the interview, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:   Immigrant Visa / I-601A Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Chinese

LOCATION: Guangzhou, China (Visa Interview)

Our client came to the United States from China without inspection and admission. Removal proceedings were initiated against him as an alien present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled. He was deported back to China in 2001. He has a naturalized citizen son and LPR wife.

Our client’s U.S. Citizen son filed an I-130 petition for him and this I-130 petition was approved on March 24, 2014. However, our client cannot file for an immigrant visa without a waiver of inadmissibility to become a green card holder.

INA § 212(i) provides for a discretionary waiver of the entry without inspection inadmissibility ground. To qualify for the waiver, the alien must establish that his or her US Citizen spouse would suffer extreme hardship if the alien were denied admission. INA § 212(i)(1). In addition to the equities presented, the USCIS may consider the nature of the inadmissibility ground.

There is a seminal BIA case that deals with this waiver.  In Matter of Cervantes, 22 I & N Dec. 560 (BIA 1999), the BIA identified the factors to be considered in determining whether a qualifying relative would suffer extreme hardship if the alien were denied admission.  Those factors include: the presence of LPR or USC family ties both within and outside the United States; the conditions in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate and the extent of the qualifying relative’s ties to that country; the financial impact of departure from the United States; and significant conditions of health, particularly when tied to the unavailability of suitable medical care in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate.

Our client’s I-601 application had a good chance since our client’s LPR wife suffers from a great degree of medical and psychological hardship. In the I-601 brief and supporting documents, our office included extensive medical reports of his wife.  We argued that it would be extremely difficult for our client’s wife to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in China in case she joins our client there.

In our brief, we also argued that his wife will have difficulty in finding the same level of employment in China, and that his wife will face extreme financial and emotional difficulties if she joins him in China.

On February 1, 2016, we file the I-601 waiver application which included the brief in support, his wife’s extensive medical and psychological examination records, and other documents that demonstrated hardship to his wife if she joins our client in China. Eventually, his I-601 waiver was approved on October 18, 2016. Then, we filed our client’s immigrant visa package to National Visa Center on October 25, 2016 with an approved I-601 waiver. The U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China informed our office that they scheduled an immigrant visa interview for our client. On February 8, 2017, our client appeared at his immigrant visa interview at the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, and the Consulate officer approved his immigrant visa on the same day.

Now, our client can come back to the United States with an approved immigrant visa and he will get his green card in a mail within two months of his entry to the United States.  

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status / Response to RFE

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is from the Philippines with K-1 Fiancée Visa. Once she came to the United States with her K-1 Visa, within 90 days of her entry, she married to her boyfriend (now her U.S. citizen husband). Then, she filed I-485 adjustment of status application by herself in 2016. However, on August 26, 2016, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence. After the issuance of RFE, our client contacted our office and retained us on October 17, 2016.   

Once retained, we helped our client obtain supporting documents for the adjustment of status and prepared the response brief for RFE. We fully explained the basis of her adjustment of status and her husband’s financial ability through Form I-864. On October 20, 2016, we filed the Response to RFE.

On February 17, 2017, our client’s adjustment of status application was approved. Our client finally becomes a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing
CLIENT: LPR Petitioner; Filipina Beneficiary
LOCATION: Petitioner: Chicago, IL; Beneficiary: Manila, Philippines

Our client is a green card holder from the Philippines. She has a daughter who lived in the Philippines. After our client got her green card in 2014, she decided to petition her daughter in the Philippines for an immigrant visa. She contacted our office again in September 2014 and retained our office to help bring her daughter to the States.  It is important to note that an alien cannot adjust his or her status (get a green card) outside the U.S. by filing an I-130 and I-485 simultaneously. Since the client’s daughter was not in the United States, our office promptly filed the I-130 petition to the USCIS first on October 2, 2014.

After the I-130 was filed, everything went smoothly and the receipt notices came on time. The I-130 Petition was approved by the USCIS on March 2, 2015. After the I-130 approval and when the I-130 priority date became current, we filed the immigrant visa packets to the National Visa Center on January 27, 2016, who in turn forwarded the client’s materials to the U.S. Embassy in Manila, Philippines. An interview notice was set for the client’s daughter. On July 20, 2016, the beneficiary went to her interview in Manila. On the same day, the U.S. Embassy in the Philippines approved and issued her immigrant visa.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing (Immigrant Visa) – Marriage-Petition
CLIENT: US Citizen Petitioner; Chinese Beneficiary in China
LOCATION: Petitioner: Ohio; Beneficiary: Hunan, China

Our client is a U.S. citizen.  He married his wife in China in November 2015.  After the marriage, he came back to the United States and contacted our office in early January 2016 and retained us to bring his wife to the States.

Our office prepared and filed the I-130 to the National Visa Center on January 22, 2016. After the I-130 was filed, everything went smoothly, there were no requests for evidence, and the receipt notices came on time. The I-130 Petition was approved by the USCIS on April 8, 2016. After the I-130 approval, we filed the immigrant visa packets to the National Visa Center on June 1, 2016, who in turn forwarded our client’s materials to the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China. An interview notice was set for the client at the US Consulate in Guangzhou, and we prepared her for her interview. On August 3, 2016, the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China approved and issued her immigrant visa.

With the approved Immigrant visa, our client’s wife can come to the United States immediately, and she will get her green card within two months of entry.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Columbus, Ohio

Our client is from Cameroon who came to the U.S. on a F-1 Student Visa in April 2008 to study. Our client currently resides in the greater Columbus area with his current U.S. Citizen wife. They were married in July 2013, and he retained our office on July 11, 2016 for the I-130 petition. Our client’s U.S. citizen wife filed the I-130 petition for our client before, but it was denied. Moreover, our client was placed in removal proceedings in 2010 at the Baltimore Immigration Court and the Court granted withholding of removal relief for our client. Once we were retained, our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition for our client and filed it to the USCIS on July 22, 2016.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on October 18, 2016 at Columbus USCIS Filed Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and his wife for the interview at our office. Attorney Yu also accompanied them for their interview. The interview lasted two hours, but the I-130 petition was eventually approved on the same day of the interview.

Once the I-130 was approved, our office filed a request to join in a Motion to terminate proceedings with the I-485 application and supporting documents. The DHS counsel in Baltimore, MD agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on February 10, 2017.  Now, he can file his I-485 adjustment of status application to USCIS to obtain his green card.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:  I-485 Adjustment of Status with step-father’s I-130 petition

CLIENT: Vietnamese

LOCATION: Michigan

Our clients are from Vietnam who came to the U.S. in 2012 on a J-2 visa. Since that time, they never left the United States.

In August 2015, our clients’ mother married our clients’ step-father (U.S. citizen) and later she got her green card through marriage. Our clients are also eligible to file an adjustment of status along with his step-father’s I-130 petition for them since their mother and their step-father’s marriage occurred prior to their 18th birthday and they are younger than 21 years old.

Our clients retained us on August 23, 2016. Once retained, our office promptly filed the I-130 petition and Form I-485 for their adjustment of status applicantion on August 30, 2016. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  Eventually, on February 7, 2017, our clients’ I-485 applications were approved.  They finally became green card holders.

{ 0 comments }

Case: I-130/I-485
Applicant/Beneficiary – Korean
Location: Cleveland, OH

Our client entered the United States in August 2016 from South Korea under the visa waiver program. She came here to visit her U.S. citizen boyfriend (now her husband) during summer. As a Visa Waiver Entrant, she was only authorized to remain in the United States only for 90 days.  

Later, in September of 2016, our client and her U.S. citizen boyfriend married in the United States. Her husband contacted our office, and they retained our office on September 27, 2016.  One main issue in her green card application through marriage was the fact that she came to the United States under the visa waiver program.   As our office wrote in our previous success story with a similar issue,  under the visa waiver program, citizens of certain countries can enter the U.S. for 90 days without a visa with the condition that the visitor waives his or her right to contest removal (other than on the basis of asylum).  The “no-contest” provision of the Visa Waiver Program is fundamental; if someone could enter under the VWP and then contest removability, it would defeat the whole purpose of the Program which is to make it easy for certain nationals to come to the United States to visit and then leave without all the red-tape involved in visa issuance.

Since our client resided in Cleveland, Ohio, her application had a better chance compared to states under the 9th Circuit (see Momeni v. Chertoff).  However, it was quite foreseeable that the USCIS field office will exercise its discretion to deny his application because of her visa waiver entry.  

Nevertheless, our office filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on October 11, 2016.  Our office requested the CIS to exercise favorable discretion in granting adjustment of status and argued that the application was filed before her authorized stay period was expired. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, the fingerprint appointment, and the work permit all came on time. There was no Request for Evidence.  Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients. On January 30, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS Field Office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu accompanied them at the interview as well.  Despite the visa waiver issue, the USCIS officer approved her green card application on February 9, 2017.  Now, our client becomes a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Indian

LOCATION: Long Island, NY

Our client contacted our office in January of 2016 regarding his I-751 application.

He is from India and he married a U.S. citizen in June 2013. Through his marriage, he obtained a 2-year conditional green card in March 2014.  His conditional residency was terminated in March 2016.

To comply with immigration requirements, our client and his wife had to file an I-751 Joint Petition to Remove Conditions. He retained our office on January 4, 2016 and our office prepared an I-751 application for our client with bona fide marriage evidence.

On January 11, 2016, our office filed an I-751 application to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from his friends and family members, a copy of birth certificate of their child, joint bank statements, joint tax records, utility bills, joint lease, and photos of our client and his wife to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

There was no RFE issuance or interview request for our client’s I-751 application. As a result, on January 25, 2017, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application and our client received his 10-year green card.

{ 0 comments }