CASE: I-130 (Petition for Mother) and I-485 Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client retained us to petition his mother for a green card. Our client was born and raised in China, but was naturalized in the United States. He contacted our office in late May of 2014 and discussed with us the green card process. After consultation, he retained our office on May 30, 2014.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on June 11, 2014 for his mother.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and a work permit all came on time. Eventually, on July 18, 2015, our client’s mother’s adjustment of status application was approved. Now, she is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:  I-601 Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Filipino

LOCATION: Chicago, IL

Our client entered the U.S. in 1993.  Later, he married his U.S. citizen wife and his wife filed an I-130 petition for him and he concurrently filed an I-485 adjustment of status application.  Our client also filed an I-601 wavier application with his adjustment application with the help of his previous immigration lawyer.  He needed to file I-601 waiver because he was found inadmissible due to his previous immigration law violation.

In 1997, our client went back to his father who was critically ill. After he visited his father, our client re-applied for his visitor’s visa to come back to the United States. However, he claimed himself as a single rather than “married” on his visitor’s visa application in order to get his visitor’s visa easily. He got his visa and came back to the United States. Nonetheless, when he applied for his permanent residency in the United States, the USCIS found that he misrepresented a material fact to get his B-2 visitor’s visa. As a result of his actions, he was found to be inadmissible to the United States pursuant to Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the INA.  (Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this Act is inadmissible). 

As mentioned above, his green card application was denied, as well as the I-601 waiver application. He had multiple tries, but none of them were successful.

Our client contacted our office in November 2011 to pursue an I-601 waiver once again. Our firm thoroughly analyzed why his previous I-601 waiver applications were denied.  Based on his story and surrounding circumstances (hardship to his U.S. citizen wife if he is deported), our office determined that he had a good chance to win I-601 application. He retained our office on November 21, 2011.

If someone is found to be inadmissible under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the INA, INA Section 212(i) provides for a discretionary waiver of the fraud or misrepresentation inadmissibility ground.  To qualify for the waiver, the alien must establish that his or her USC spouse would suffer extreme hardship if the alien were denied admission.  INA Section 212(i)(l).  In addition to the equities presented, the USCIS may consider the nature of the fraud or misrepresentation. 

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 an unavailability of suitable medical care in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate.    

Our client’s I-601 application has a good chance since our client’s U.S. Citizen wife suffers from physical pains emanating from her surgery and some incidents in the past.  Thus, in I-601 brief in support, our office included extensive medical reports of his wife. We argued that if he is removed from the United States, extreme hardship to his wife is clearly foreseeable and evident.  His wife needs consistent and continuous physical therapy to help deal with her pain. Also, it would be extremely difficult for her to get the same level of physical therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in the Philippines in case she joins our client there.

In our brief, we also contended that our client and his wife have maintained strong family ties in the United States, that his wife will have extreme difficulty to find the same level of occupation in the Philippines, that his wife will face extreme financial and emotional difficulties if she is removed.

On May 2, 2012, our client and his wife appeared at an interview at the Chicago USCIS Field Office.  Subsequently, one year later, the USCIS requested another interview for our client to appear at the USCIS Chicago Field Office. Our client appeared at the USCIS office on November 5, 2013 and on both occasions, our attorneys accompanied our client.

Eventually, his I-601 waiver application was approved on July 10, 2015. 

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing (Immigrant Visa)

CLIENT: LPR Father; Chinese Beneficiary Minor Sons in China

LOCATION: Petitioner: Ohio; Beneficiary: China

I-130 FILED: July 19, 2013

I-130 APPROVED: November 14, 2013

IV APPROVED: May 27, 2015

Our client retained us to bring his minor sons over from China. He was born and raised in China, but lives in the United States as an LPR (Green Card holder).

On July 19, 2013, our firm filed the I-130 Petitions to the CIS. There were no Requests for Evidence throughout the pendency of the petition. On November 14, 2013, the I-130 Petitions were approved. However, we could not start the immigrant visa processing because their visa numbers were not available. In April 2014, once their visa numbers were available, we then started the immigrant visa processing phase of trying to get his sons over to the United States.

On April 17, 2014, we filed the immigrant visa packet to the National Visa Center who in turn forwarded our clients’ materials to the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China. An interview notice was set for our client’s sons at the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, and we prepared them for their interview. On May 27, 2015, the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China approved and issued their immigrant visas.

With the approved immigrant visas, our clients’ sons can come to the United States immediately, and they will get their green cards within two weeks of entry.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing (Immigrant Visa)

CLIENT: US Citizen Petitioner Mother; Chinese Beneficiary Minor Son in China

LOCATION: Petitioner: Ohio; Beneficiary: China

I-130 FILED: June 11, 2014

I-130 APPROVED: July 21, 2014

IV APPROVED: June 1, 2015

Our client retained us to bring her minor son over from China. She was born and raised in China, but was naturalized in the United States.

On June 11, 2014, our firm filed an I-130 Petition to the CIS. There were no Requests for Evidence throughout the pendency of the petition. On June 21, 2014, the I-130 Petition was approved. We then started the immigrant visa processing phase of trying to get her son over to the United States.

On March 12, 2015, we filed the immigrant visa packet to the National Visa Center who in turn forwarded our client’s materials to the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China. An interview notice was set for our client’s son at the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, and we prepared him for his interview. On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China approved and issued their immigrant visa.

With the approved immigrant visa, our client’s son can come to the United States immediately, and he will get their green cards within two weeks of entry.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Green Card (Same Sex Marriage Case)

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: New York, NY

Our client came to the United States on a B-2 visitor’s visa from the Philippines in August 2013. She had a same-sex partner who is her current spouse.

On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court held that restricting U.S. federal interpretation of “marriage” and “spouse” to apply only to heterosexual unions, by Section 3 of the defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), is unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. ___ (2013). After Windsor decision, the USCIS implemented a new policy that the USCIS officer must review immigration via petitions filed on behalf of a same-sex spouse in the same manner as those filed on behalf of an opposite-sex spouse. As long as a same-sex couple is married in a U.S. state that recognizes same-sex marriage, their marriage shall be considered a valid marriage under the immigration law.

After DOMA was struck down, our client and her current LPR spouse, decided to get married. They married in New York, NY on September 10, 2013 where same-sex marriage is recognized. On the same day of their marriage, our client contacted our office and retained us for her I-130 petition and I-485 adjustment of status application. Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 petition and I-485 adjustment of status application, together with all necessary supporting documents, on September 16, 2013. Although the Petitioner was a green card holder, we could file the I-130/I-485 simultaneously at that time because the priority date for the F2A category was current in September 2013. 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 17, 2013, our client was interviewed at the New York City USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu accompanied them as well. However, the F2A category’s priority date retrogressed before her adjustment of status application was adjudicated. Nevertheless, her priority date became current in June 2015. Eventually, on July 1, 2015, the USCIS approved our client’s green card application. 

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 (Petitions for Parents) and I-485 Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Romanian

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client retained us to petition his parents for their green cards. Our client was born and raised in Romania, but was naturalized in the United States in 2014. He contacted our office in late August of 2014 and discussed with us the green card process. After consultation, he retained our office on August 22, 2014.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Applications on September 23, 2014 for his parents.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. Eventually, on July 1, 2015, our client’s parents’ adjustment of status applications was approved. Now, they are green card holders.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Korean

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client contacted our office in early January this year regarding her I-751 application.

She is from South Korea and she married a U.S. citizen in November 2012. Through her marriage, she obtained a 2-year conditional green card in March of 2013.  Her conditional residency terminated in March 2015.

To comply with immigration requirements, our client and her husband had to file an I-751 Joint Petition to Remove Conditions. She retained our office again on January 14, 2015 and our office prepared an I-751 application for our client with supporting documents.

On February 5, 2015, our office filed an I-751 application to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from her friends and family members, joint bank statements, joint taxes, utility bills, insurance policies, and photos of our client and her husband to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

Once the application was filed, a fingerprint notice was issued two weeks later. There was no RFE issuance or interview request for our client’s I-751 application. As a result, on June 30, 2015, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application and our client received her 10-year green card which removed the conditions.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Burkina Faso

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States from Burkina Faso on an F-1 student’s visa in August 2012. He married a U.S. Citizen in September 2014 and retained our office on January 22, 2015 for his green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on March 19, 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 June 26, 2015, our client was interviewed at Cleveland, Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, on the same day, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:   I-601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Guatemalan

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client came to the United States from Guatemala in January 2000 without inspection and admission. He married his U.S. citizen wife in 2006. They have two U.S. citizen children together.  His U.S. Citizen wife filed an I-130 petition for him on March 4, 2009. This I-130 petition was approved on June 5, 2009.

Our client cannot file for adjustment of status application due to his ground of inadmissibility. He needs a waiver of inadmissibility to become a green card holder. Moreover, our client was placed in removal proceedings, but with our office’s assistance, his removal proceedings were administratively closed in December 2013 to file a provisional waiver application.

Under current law, immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are not eligible to adjust status in the United States must travel abroad and obtain an immigrant visa. Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver of inadmissibility to overcome the unlawful presence bars under section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act before they can return to the United States.

In 2013, the USCIS announced of new policy called the provisional unlawful presence waiver. Beginning March 4, 2013, certain immigrant visa applicants who are spouses, children and parents of U.S. citizens (immediate relatives) can apply for provisional unlawful presence waivers before they leave the United States. The provisional unlawful presence waiver process allows individuals, who only need a waiver of inadmissibility for unlawful presence, to apply for a waiver in the United States.

The new process is expected to shorten the time U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives while those family members are obtaining immigrant visas to become lawful permanent residents of the United States.

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-601A application had a good chance since our client’s U.S. Citizen wife and son suffer from a great degree of medical hardship. In the I-601A brief and supporting documents, our office included extensive medical reports of his wife and his son.  We argued that if he was removed from the United States, extreme hardship to his wife is clearly foreseeable and evident.  His wife has ongoing medical hardships and she would not be able to take care of her own needs and the bulk of their family chores, most importantly taking care of their children. Also, it would be extremely difficult for her to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in Guatemala in case she joins our client there.

In our brief, we also argued that our client and his wife have maintained strong family ties in the United States, that his wife will have difficulty in finding the same level of employment in Guatemala, that our client has good employment in the United States, and that his U.S. citizen child and his wife will face extreme financial and emotional difficulties if he is removed.

On March 11, 2015, we filed the I-601A waiver application which included the brief in support, his wife and son’s extensive medical examination records, and other documents that demonstrated hardship to his wife if he is removed from the United States.

However, on May 13, 2015, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) for our client’s case. USCIS explicitly requested our client to submit more evidence to prove extreme hardship to his U.S. citizen wife if he is forced to relocate in Guatemala. In response to this RFE, our office prepared a response brief along with more medical evidence of our client’s U.S. citizen wife. Our office filed the response to RFE on June 12, 2015.

Eventually, his I-601A waiver was approved on June 22, 2015. Now, he can file packet 3 and 4 here in the United States, and would go to Guatemala shortly to get his immigrant visa.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:   I-601A Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Guatemalan

LOCATION: Ohio

Our client came to the United States from Guatemala in February 2005 without inspection and admission. He married his U.S. citizen wife in 2012. His U.S. Citizen wife filed an I-130 petition for him on January 24, 2013. This I-130 petition was approved on March 4, 2013.

Our client cannot file for adjustment of status application due to his ground of inadmissibility. He needs a waiver of inadmissibility to become a green card holder.

Under current law, immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are not eligible to adjust status in the United States must travel abroad and obtain an immigrant visa. Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver of inadmissibility to overcome the unlawful presence bars under section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act before they can return to the United States

In 2013, the USCIS announced of new policy called the provisional unlawful presence waiver. Beginning March 4, 2013, certain immigrant visa applicants who are spouses, children and parents of U.S. citizens (immediate relatives) can apply for provisional unlawful presence waivers before they leave the United States. The provisional unlawful presence waiver process allows individuals, who only need a waiver of inadmissibility for unlawful presence, to apply for a waiver in the United States.

The new process is expected to shorten the time U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives while those family members are obtaining immigrant visas to become lawful permanent residents of the United States.

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-601A application had a good chance since our client’s U.S. Citizen wife suffers from a great degree of medical hardship. In the I-601A brief and supporting documents, our office included extensive medical reports of his wife.  We argued that if he was removed from the United States, extreme hardship to his wife is clearly foreseeable and evident.  His wife has ongoing medical hardships and she would not be able to take care of her own needs and the bulk of their family chores, most importantly taking care of their children (our client’s step-children). Also, it would be extremely difficult for her to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in Guatemala in case she joins our client there.

In our brief, we also argued that our client and his wife have maintained strong family ties in the United States, that his wife will have difficulty in finding the same level of employment in Guatemala, that our client has good employment in the United States, and that his U.S. citizen child and his wife will face extreme financial and emotional difficulties if he is removed.

On January 13, 2015, we filed the I-601A waiver application which included the brief in support, his wife’s extensive medical examination records, and other documents that demonstrated hardship to his wife if he is removed from the United States.

However, on March 9, 2015, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) for our client’s case. USCIS explicitly requested our client to submit more evidence to prove extreme hardship to his U.S. citizen wife if he is forced to relocate in Guatemala. In response to this RFE, our office prepared a response brief along with more medical evidence of our client’s U.S. citizen wife. Our office filed the response to RFE on April 7, 2015.

Eventually, his I-601A waiver was approved on June 9, 2015. Now, he can file packet 3 and 4 here in the United States, and would go to Guatemala shortly to get his immigrant visa.

{ 0 comments }