CASE: I-360 Special Immigrant Derivative and I-485 Adjustment of Status

 CLIENT: Belgian

 LOCATION: Virginia

Our clients’ mother is a G-4 visa holder from Belgium who is working for an international organization in the United States.  She has a daughter and a son who came to the United States with him and sought legal assistance from our firm for her children’s permanent residency in the United States based on the special immigrant provisions under the INA.

INA 101(a)(27)(I)(i) defines such an alien as “an immigrant who is the unmarried son or daughter of an officer or employee, or of a former officer or employee, of an international organization described in paragraph (15)(G)(i), and who:

• While maintaining the status of a G4 nonimmigrant, has resided and been physical present in the United States for periods totaling at least one-half of the seven years before the date of application and for a period or periods aggregating at least seven years between the ages of five and 21 years
• Applies for adjustment of status no later than his or her twenty-fifth birthday…

Based on this provision, we advised our client that her children will be eligible for adjustment of status. They have been physically present in the U.S. for a period totaling at least one-half of the seven years before this date, aggregating at least seven years between the age of 5 and 21.

Our client’s mother retained our office on September 18, 2015.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-360 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on September 24, 2015.  We included a letter from their mother’s international organization for verification purposes and their school transcript as well. Once the applications were filed, everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.

Eventually, on December 24, 2015, the USCIS approved both the I-360 and I-485 applications for our client’s children.  They now are green card holders.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 (Petitions for Parents) and Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Pakistani

LOCATION: New Jersey

Our client retained us to petition for her parents for a green card. Our client was born and raised in Pakistan, but was naturalized in the United States in 2012. She contacted our office in May 2015 and discussed with us the green card process for her parents. Her parents came to the United States from Pakistan in March 2015 to visit our client, and our client wanted to petition them while they were here in the United States.  After consultation, she retained our office on May 14, 2015.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on June 30, 2015 for her parents.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.  Eventually, on December 15, 2015, our client’s parents’ adjustment of status applications were approved. Now, they are green card holders.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States from the Philippines on a J-1 exchange visa in March 2014. Her J-1 program was not subject to the 2 year foreign residency requirement.  She married a U.S. Citizen in June 2015 and retained our office on June 29, 2015 for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on August 18, 2015.  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 as well. On November 9, 2015, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, on December 21, 2015, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Filipino

LOCATION: Baltimore, MD

Our client came to the United States from the Philippines on an F-1 student’s visa in July 2009. After he completed his program, he remained in the United States.  He married his current wife in May 2013; however, his wife was a green card of holder at the time of their marriage.

In July 2015, his wife became a naturalized U.S. citizen. They contacted our office and retained our office for his green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on July 14, 2015.  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 December 22, 2015, our client was interviewed at Baltimore, Maryland USCIS office. Eventually, on the same day of the interview, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Case: I-130/I-485

Applicant/Beneficiary – Portuguese

Location: Cleveland, OH

Our client entered the United States in December 2014 from Portugal under the visa waiver program. He came here to visit his U.S. citizen girlfriend (now his wife) for a couple months. As a Visa Waiver Entrant, he was only authorized to remain in the United States for 90 days. However, our client did not leave the United States after his authorized period of stay expired.

Later, in June 2015, our client and his U.S. citizen girlfriend married in the United States. His U.S. citizen wife filed an I-130 petition for him first. However, they contacted our office for the filing of his adjustment of status application. They retained us on August 13, 2015.

One main issue in his green card application through marriage was the fact that he 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.

Our office filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on September 3, 2015.  Our office requested the CIS to exercise favorable discretion in granting adjustment of status. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permit all came on time. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients in our office. On November 23, 2015, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland Ohio USCIS Field Office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients. Despite the visa waiver issue, on December 16, 2015, the USCIS approved his green card application.  Now, our client is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 (Petition for Mother) and Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: California

Our client retained us to petition for her mother for a green card. Our client’s daughter was born and raised in the Philippines, but was naturalized in the United States in February 2015 through our firm’s legal assistance. She contacted our office in late February of 2015 and discussed with us the green card process. After consultation, she retained our office on March 1, 2015.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on March 18, 2015.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permit all came on time. On October 19, 2015, our client appeared at her I-485 adjustment of status interview at Santa Ana, California USCIS Field Office. Prior to the interview, our office prepared her with possible interview questions via conference calls. Eventually, on December 16, 2015, our client’s adjustment of status application was approved. Now, she is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Ghanaian

LOCATION: Cleveland Ohio

Our client came to the United States in July 2011 with a J-1 visa from Ghana. Later, she married a U.S. Citizen in February 2015 and retained our office for her petition and adjustment of status application.

She also asked us to file her daughter’s (Petitioner’s step-daughter) adjustment of status application.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 petition and I-485 adjustment of status application on September 25, 2015. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. There were no requests for evidence.

Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients at our office. On December 3, 2015, our clients were interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied them at their interview as well. On December 11, 2015, our client and her daughter’s green card applications were approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status (I-485) / Joint Motion to Reopen and Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Moldovan

LOCATION: Philadelphia, PA; Baltimore, MD (DHS)

Our client is from Moldova who came to the U.S. on a J-1 visa in June 2009. She remained in the United States past her authorized period of stay.  Later, she filed for asylum and withholding of removal in December 2009, but the Immigration Judge at the Baltimore Immigration Court denied all applications for relief.

She filed an appeal with the BIA, but in 2012, 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.

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

She married her current U.S. citizen husband in February 2014. After she married her husband, they consulted with our firm. They wanted to know if she had 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 (if the I-130 petition is approved) and Bo Cooper’s May 17, 2001 Memorandum. After consultation, our client retained our office.

Once retained, our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition. The I-130 petition was filed on July 3, 2014. Her I-130 petition was scheduled for an interview, and they appeared at the USCIS Philadelphia USCIS Field Office on February 12, 2015. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well. This was suggested (attorney accompaniment) because she had a final order of removal. The interview went well and the I-130 petition was subsequently approved by the USCIS on February 18. 2015.

Once the I-130 petition was approved, our office prepared and filed a Request to Join in a Motion to Reopen and Terminate to the Baltimore DHS office on March 19, 2015. Our office prepared an extensive brief along with multiple supporting documents to request a favorable exercise of DHS’s discretion on this case.

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 2009, 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 June 1, 2015. The DHS filed the joint motion to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), and the BIA issued a decision on July 30, 2015 and reopened and terminated our client’s case.

After her case was terminated, she retained our office again for her I-485 adjustment of status application. Our firm prepared and filed the Adjustment of Status Application and the Employment Authorization Document on August 28, 2015. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.

Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our client via conference call. On December 10, 2015, our client was interviewed at the Philadelphia, PA USCIS. The interview went well, and on the same day, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Hungarian

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted our office in late July of 2014 regarding his I-751 application.

He is from Hungary and he married a U.S. citizen in January 2012. Through his marriage, he obtained a 2-year conditional green card in September of 2012. Our office helped him with his green card application.  His conditional residency terminated in September 2014.

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 August 6, 2014 and our office prepared an I-751 application for our client with other supplemental exhibits.

On August 29, 2014, our office filed an I-751 application to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from his friends and family members, joint bank statements, utility bills, and photos of our client and his wife to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

Once the application was filed, the fingerprint notice was issued two weeks later. The USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) to demonstrate the bona fideness of our client’s marriage with his wife. We filed an extensive Response to RFE to the USCIS with more bona fide marital documents on January 15, 2015.

The USCIS then scheduled an interview for our client and his wife. On July 2, 2015, our client and his wife were requested to appear for an interview at the USCIS Cleveland Field Office.  Prior to the interview, our office prepared them thoroughly in our office and also accompanied them at the interview as well. Eventually, on December 7, 2015, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Fiancée Visa

PETITIONER: US Citizen in Ohio

BENEFICIARY: Colombian

PETITION FILED: March 4, 2015

PETITION APPROVED: April 2, 2015

K-1 VISA APPROVED: November 25, 2015

Our client, a US Citizen Petitioner, met his Colombian fiancée in Colombia in 2013. They started their relationship, and he visited Colombia. In June 2014, he proposed to her during their trip in Mexico. After his proposal, he retained our firm to file a fiancée petition for her.

After retention, we informed our client about the necessary supporting documents to demonstrate the bona fide nature of their relationship. Our client retained our office on November 5, 2014. We helped him and his fiancée draft letters in support of the fiancé petition, and we filed the petition on March 4, 2015.

On April 2, 2015, less than a month after the filing, the I-129F fiancée petition was approved. On November 25, 2015, our client’s fiancée appeared at the U.S. Embassy in Bogota, Colombia for her K-1 visa interview. The interview went well, and on the same day, the U.S. Embassy issued her K-1 visa.

{ 0 comments }