CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Iranian
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States in 2012 with an H-1B work visa from Iran.  He married a U.S. Citizen in July 2013 and retained our office on July 24, 2013 for his adjustment of status application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on August 2, 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 at our office. On October 29, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, OH USCIS.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well. The interview went well, and on the same day, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

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

CLIENT: Chinese LPR Petitioner in Ohio; Chinese Beneficiary Wife in China

LOCATION: Petitioner: Ohio; Beneficiaries: China

Our client retained us to bring his wife from China to the United States. He is a permanent resident and was married in 2010. He filed the I-130 petition by himself and it was approved. However, he had difficulty with the Immigrant Visa process so he retained our office on March 13, 2013.

On May 20, 2013, we filed the immigrant visa packets 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 wife at the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, and we prepared her for her interview. On September 24, 2013, 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 weeks of entry.

{ 0 comments }

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

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

LOCATION: Petitioner: Ohio; Beneficiaries: China

I-130 FILED: December 6, 2012

I-130 APPROVED: February 15, 2013

IV APPROVED: September 23, 2013

Our client retained us to bring his mother from China to the United States. He was born and raised in China, but was naturalized in the United States.

On December 6, 2012, our firm filed the I-130 Petition to the CIS. There were no Requests for Evidence throughout the pendency of the petition. On February 15, 2013, the I-130 Petition was approved. We then started the immigrant visa processing phase of trying to get his mother over to the United States.

On May 22, 2013, we filed the immigrant visa packets 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 mother at the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, and we prepared her for her interview. On September 23, 2013, the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China approved and issued her immigrant visa.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status / Public Law 111-83 / INA Section 204(l) Amendment Issue (less stringent humanitarian reinstatement process) / 245(i)

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Chicago, IL

Our Filipina client came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in May 1993 and overstayed her status

Prior to retaining our firm, her sister filed an I-130 petition for her back in 1990. As some of you know, priority dates for Philippine nationals under the family-based immigration category are more retrogressed than other countries. The wait is more than 20 years!

The I-130 petition was approved by the INS in 1990.  However, she could not apply for her green card until her priority date became current.  Therefore, she had to wait for more than 20 years in order to even apply for her green card. Unfortunately, her sister (I-130 Petitioner) passed away before she was eligible to apply for her green card. 

Before 2009, through the more stringent humanitarian reinstatement process, the INS (USCIS now) allowed the foreign national’s spouse, parent, mother-in-law, father-in-law, sibling, child who is at least 18 years of age, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, sister-in-law, brother-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, or legal guardian to become a substitute sponsor if a family-based visa petitioner dies following the approval of the I-130 petition but before the foreign national obtains permanent residence. Even if the I-130 had been approved, it would be deemed revoked once the petitioner dies. At that time, reinstatement of the revoked petition was not automatic despite a substitute sponsor being available. And the process was still a matter of discretion. The INS had to determine whether “humanitarian reinstatement” was appropriate based on the individual facts of the case.  Thus, the applicant must demonstrate exceptional hardship and request for humanitarian reinstatement if his or her petitioner is deceased before the petition gets reinstated.

Public Law 111-83 (2009) eased this burden for beneficiaries whose petitioners died prior to their adjustment of status application.  The new regulation does not require “humanitarian reinstatement” anymore.  Therefore, as long as they meet certain qualifications such as having physical presence in the U.S. at the time of the petitioner’s death and also having a qualified substitute sponsor for these beneficiaries, the beneficiaries are eligible to adjust.

Our client’s US citizen brother-in-law (husband of deceased petitioner) was willing to become a substitute sponsor and she met the physical presence requirement. On October 19, 2010, our office filed an I-485 adjustment of status application under the 245(i) category. We of course cited PL 111-83. On February 3, 2011, our client appeared at the Chicago CIS office for her adjustment interview.  Attorney JP Sarmiento accompanied her at the interview. Attorney Sarmiento also explained the new regulations and explained to them that the old humanitarian reinstatement standards were not needed anymore.

However, the F4 priority date for the Philippines backlogged. Our client had to wait until the priority date became current. In October 2013, her priority date became current. Eventually, our client’s adjustment application was approved by the USCIS on October 7. 2013.  After a long wait, our client is finally a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

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

CLIENT: Kenyan

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio (EOIR) / Columbus, Ohio (USCIS)

Our client is a Kenyan citizen who came to the U.S. on an F-1 Student Visa in December 2007 to study at a college in Ohio. In January 2010, she married her U.S. citizen husband, and her husband filed an I-130 petition for her. However, the I-130 petition was denied and our client was placed in removal proceedings due to her failure to maintain F-1 status. After her I-130 was denied, her husband filed a second I-130 petition for her in March 2012.

After she was placed in removal proceedings, she contacted our office and sought legal assistance. She retained our office on June 7, 2012.

Our office prepared and submitted a copy of the I-130 Petition with more bona fide marriage evidence of her marriage to the Cleveland Immigration Court. We wanted to show the Court that despite this second filing, that an approval was feasible, and so we wanted to demonstrate even prior to the Master Hearing that the marriage was bona fide. This was important so that we can get a continuance. The filing also included a bona fide marriage exception letter which was omitted when our client filed the I-130 petition previously.

So while the second I-130 petition was pending, our client appeared at the Cleveland Immigration Court on August 7, 2013 for her initial master calendar hearing.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office represented her at the hearing, did pleadings and sought adjustment of status relief upon approval of the I-130 petition. He asked for a continuance and on the basis of the bona fide evidence submitted to the court, argued that this was, despite it being a second I-130, good cause. The continuance was granted.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on October 9, 2012 at the Columbus USCIS Field Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and her husband for the interview. Attorney Yu also accompanied them at their interview. The interview lasted more than two hours, our clients were separated, but the I-130 petition was eventually approved on November 14, 2012.

After the I-130 was approved, our office 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. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on January 9, 2013.

Once her case was terminated with the Immigration Court, our office prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on June 28, 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 September 3, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Columbus, OH USCIS office. The interview went, and on October 11, 2013, our client’s green card application was finally approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-360 Petition

NATIONALITY: Mexican

LOCATION: Ohio

Our Mexican client came to the U.S. in June, 2004. He entered the United States without admission and inspection and he has lived in Ohio since then. In May 2012, he contacted our office to seek legal representation for his I-360 petition. According to his story, our client’s marital life was tough and he eventually was abused by his spouse.  With his story and other evidence, our office determined that he would be eligible for I-360 self-petition as a spouse of an abusive U.S. citizen.

Our client experienced domestic violence and spousal abuse during his marriage. His wife physically and mentally abused our client throughout the years. Thus, we prepared and filed his I-360 petition, which included 21 exhibits and a detailed brief to the USCIS Vermont Service Center on July 19, 2012.

Despite our client’s thoroughly prepared I-360 application, in June 2013, the USCIS Vermont Service Center issued a Request for Evidence (RFE).  Specifically, the RFE letter requested our client to submit more documents to prove his good moral character. Our client and our office thoroughly gathered the requested documents, and filed a response to RFE on August 29, 2013.

Finally, on October 7, 2013, the USCIS Vermont Service Center approved our client’s I-360 petition. With the approved I-360, our client can file his I-485 adjustment of status application to the USCIS for his permanent residency.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Belgian

LOCATION: Virginia

Our client came to the United States from Belgium to study on an F-1 student visa in January 2012. Later on, she fell in love and married a U.S. Citizen in August 2012. They retained our office on February 6, 2013 for her adjustment of status application.

Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on May 23, 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 through conference calls. On September 16, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Fairfax Virginia USCIS office.  On September 26, 2013, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-129F Fiancée Petition and Fiancée Visa

PETITIONER: US Citizen in Gainesville, FL

BENEFICIARY: Filipina

PETITION FILED: March 20, 2013

PETITION APPROVED: July 25, 2013

VISA APPROVED: September 24, 2013

Our client, a US Citizen Petitioner, met his Filipina fiancée online. They developed a relationship and he eventually went to Taiwan to meet her in December 2012. He proposed to her on that visit. Months after his proposal, he retained our firm to file a fiancée petition and get her a fiancé visa.

After retention, we gave our clients a list of supporting documents to demonstrate the bona fide nature of their relationship. Our client retained our office on February 12, 2013. We helped him and his fiancée draft letters in support of the fiancé petition, and we filed the petition on March 20, 2013.

On July 25, 2013, the I-129F fiancée petition was approved. On September 5, 2013, the beneficiary appeared at the American Institute in Taiwan for her fiancé visa interview.  The interview went well, and her fiancé (K-1) visa was approved on September 24, 2013. She will come to the United States and will marry her fiancé within 90 days of her entry.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 (Petition for Mother) and Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Nepalese
LOCATION: Maryland

Our client retained us to petition her mother who came to the U.S. from Nepal as a visitor in 1998. Our client was born and raised in Nepal, but was naturalized in the United States in 2012. She contacted our office in October of 2012 and discussed the possibilities of petitioning her mother. After consultation, she retained our office on October 22, 2012.

Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on December 3, 2012 for her mother. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. Eventually, on September 13, 2013, our client’s mother’s adjustment of status application was approved. Now, she is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status through EOIR / Motion to Remand / I-130 Approval
CLIENT: Nepalese
LOCATION: Baltimore, MD

Our client came to the United States with a valid B-2 visa from Nepal in January 1998. He remained in the United States for a time longer than permitted.

In November 2009, he was placed in deportation proceedings due to his overstay and a Notice to Appear was issued. His asylum application was denied by the Immigration Judge, but an appeal was timely filed.

While the BIA appeal was pending, our client’s daughter became a naturalized U.S. Citizen in January 2012.

Our office immediately filed an I-130 petition for our client on February 6, 2012. After we received the I-130 receipt notice, we prepared and filed a Motion to Remand for Adjustment of Status Based on a Pending I-130 on behalf our client. 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, 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 his daughter has not become a naturalized U.S. citizen yet.

Our office filed a Motion to Remand for Adjustment of Status based on a pending I-130 to the BIA on February 24, 2012. 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. Eventually, on July 10, 2012, the BIA granted our motion, reopened our client’s case, and the record was remanded for further proceedings.

While we were waiting for adjudication of the I-130 petition, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) regarding the paternal relationship of our client. Apparently, the birth certificate submitted from Nepal was not enough. So we scheduled a DNA test for our client and this resulted to a 99.99% likelihood of paternity. On September 14, 2012, the USCIS approved the I-130 petition for our client.

Upon approval of the I-130 petition, our client’s removal proceeding was commenced again in the Baltimore Immigration Court. On March 20, 2013, our client was appeared at his Master Calendar hearing at the Baltimore Immigration Court. He was represented by Mr. Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office and our attorney explained the procedural history of our client’s case to the immigration judge and sought for adjustment of status relief. The individual hearing was scheduled for September 19, 2013.

Prior to the individual hearing, our office prepared our client for his upcoming hearing over conference call. On September 19, 2013, our client and Mr. Yu appeared at the Baltimore Immigration Court for our client’s individual hearing. Eventually, the Immigration Judge granted our client’s adjustment of status relief. Now, he is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }