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

CLIENT: Filipinos

LOCATION: Chicago, IL

Our client retained us to petition her parents for a green card. Our client was born and raised in the Philippines, but was naturalized in the United States in 2013.

She contacted our office in November 2013 and discussed with us the green card process. After consultation, she retained our office on November 18, 2013.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and Adjustment of Status Application on January 3, 2014 for her parents.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.  Eventually, on August 6, 2014, our client’s parents’ adjustment of status applications were approved. Now, they are green card holders.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 (Petitions for Parents) and Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Egyptians
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client retained us to petition for his parents for a green card. Our client was born and raised in Egypt, but was naturalized in the United States in 2012. He contacted our office in early April of 2013 and discussed with us the green card process. After consultation, he retained our office on April 23, 2013.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and Adjustment of Status Application on May 2, 2013 for his parents.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.  Eventually, on January 21, 2014, our client’s parents’ adjustment of status applications were approved. Now, they are green card holders.

{ 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: 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: I-130 (Petitions for Parents) and Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Pakistan
LOCATION: New Jersey

Our client retained us to petition his parents who came to the U.S. from Pakistan as visitors. Our client was born and raised in Pakistan, but was naturalized in the United States. His parents were visiting him. He contacted our office in late August of 2012 and discussed with us the possibilities of petitioning his parents. After consultation, he retained our office on September 4, 2012.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on September 19, 2012 for his parents.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.  Eventually, on July 18, 2013, our client’s parents’ adjustment of status applications were approved. Now, they are green card holders.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing (Immigrant Visa)
CLIENT: US Citizen Petitioner Daughter; Chinese Beneficiary Parents in China
LOCATION: Petitioner: Ohio; Beneficiaries: China
I-130 FILED: April 26, 2012
I-130 APPROVED: October 10, 2012
IV APPROVED: May 6, 2013

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

On April 26, 2012, our firm filed the I-130 Petitions to the CIS. There were no Requests for Evidence throughout the pendency of the petition. On October 10, 2012, the I-130 Petitions were approved. We then started the immigrant visa processing phase of trying to get her parents over to the United States.

On March 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 parents at the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, and we prepared them for their interview. On May 6, 2013, the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China approved and issued their immigrant visas.

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

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 parent petition 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-130 and Consular Processing (Immigrant Visa)
CLIENT: US Citizen Petitioner Daughter; Chinese Beneficiary Mother in China
LOCATION: Petitioner: Ohio; Beneficiary: China
I-130 FILED: April 8, 2011
I-130 APPROVED: July 14, 2011
IV APPROVED: September 24, 2012

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

On April 8, 2011, our firm filed the I-130 Petitions to the CIS. There were no Requests for Evidence throughout the pendency of the petition. On July 14, 2011, the I-130 Petitions were approved. We then started the immigrant visa processing phase of trying to get her parents over to the United States.

Unfortunately, our client wanted to delay the process due to her father’s serious illness. Her father passed away, but our client still wanted to bring her mother to the United States.

On August 10, 2012, 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 24, 2012, 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.

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 consular processing 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 / 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, the 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. Now, he can apply for the adjustment of status before Immigration Judge or USCIS upon termination of his 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 / Remand Cases, please click here.

For other I-130 Parent Petition Success Stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE:  I-130
CLIENT: Mexican
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is from Mexico who came to the U.S. without inspection and admission in 1988 with her parents. Since that time, she never left the United States.

In November 1991, our client’s father filed an I-130 (F2A) petition for her mother.  This I-130 petition was approved in March 1992.  At the time the I-130 Petition was approved, our client was a minor and was a derivative beneficiary. However, our client’s parents divorced in 2007.  Furthermore, our client was placed in removal proceeding in December 2009.

Around November 2010, our client contacted our office to represent her at removal proceedings. After we reviewed her previous immigration documents, we determined that she might be eligible to adjust her status under INA 245(i) and the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA).  She retained our office on December 1, 2010 and our attorney represented her at her master calendar hearing.  Cancellation of Removal relief was requested and we preserved possible adjustment of status relief through INA 245(i) and CSPA.

Section 245(i) of the INA allows certain foreign nationals to become permanent residents of the United States despite entering without inspection (EWI) or overstaying (if beneficiary of petitions filed not by an immediate relative). Immigrants are barred from adjusting their status if they entered the United States without first being inspected and admitted by a Customs and Border Patrol officer and if they have either failed to maintain lawful status or been unlawfully employed in the country, with certain exceptions. Section 245(i) was first added to law in 1994 to allow certain people who otherwise would not be eligible to adjust their status to be able to do so upon payment of a $1,000 fine.

Four years later, on January 14, 1998, Congress phased Section 245(i) out of law. Immigrants and their families who had already begun the process of changing their status under Section 245(i) by January 14, 1998 were grandfathered into the section’s benefits. However, this left thousands of otherwise qualified persons who had not begun the process unable to adjust status in the United States. They could not return to their countries to begin the legal process of obtaining their permanent residency in the United States also without being subject to either a three- or a 10-year bar upon returning to the United States.

On December 21, 2000, Congress extended the qualifying date for Section 245(i) benefits to April 30, 2001. This law allowed immigrants who had labor certifications or visa petitions filed on their behalf between 1998 and April 30, 2001, to qualify for adjustment of status. Those who were beneficiaries of petitions filed prior to January 14, 1998 could still adjust despite an EWI record, and those people do not have to meet the December 2000 physical presence requirement.

Section 3 of CSPA, codified in section 203(h) of the INA, provides that “If the age of the alien is determined to be 21 years of age or older… the alien’s petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition.”

Our client was the derivative beneficiary of her father’s petition for her mother in November, 1991.  Our client is now older than 21. According to Section 3 of CSPA, a new I-130 petition by our client’s father on behalf of our client should automatically retain the priority date of the original I-130 petition, which was November 1991, in which our client was a derivative beneficiary. If this new I-130 is approved with a November 1991 priority date, our client would be eligible to adjust under 245(i) since the priority date is current and the petition was filed before January 1998.  So it was two petitions that saved her case, one for 245i, and the other for adjustment eligibility, retaining the old priority date under CSPA.

On January 11, 2012, our office filed the I-130 Petition with a cover brief (citing the CSPA provision) and other supporting documents.  Her I-130 was approved by the USCIS California Service Center on June 14, 2012 with the old priority date (November 1991).  Now, we can work on terminating her proceedings for CIS adjustment of status.

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 245i success stories, please click here.

For other CSPA 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: Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition / I-485 under the INA 245(i) provision
CLIENT: St. Lucian
LOCATION: New York, NY

Our client is from St. Lucia who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitors visa in December 2003. Since that time, she never left the United States.  Because of her overstay, removal proceedings was initiated against her in September 2010.

In May 1986, our client’s aunt filed an I-130 (fourth preference) petition for her father.  This I-130 petition was approved in August 1986.  At the time the I-130 Petition was approved, our client was a minor and was a derivative beneficiary. Later, our client’s father filed an I-130 petition on behalf of our client in February 1998.  This Petition was approved in November of that year.

Our client contacted us around December of 2010 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her removal proceedings. After the consultation, we determined that she is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us on January 13, 2011.

Section 245(i) of the INA allows certain foreign nationals to become permanent residents of the United States despite entering without inspection (EWI) or overstaying (if beneficiary of petitions filed not by an immediate relative). Immigrants are barred from adjusting their status if they entered the United States without first being inspected and admitted by a Customs and Border Patrol officer and if they have either failed to maintain lawful status or been unlawfully employed in the country, with certain exceptions. Section 245(i) was first added to law in 1994 to allow certain people who otherwise would not be eligible to adjust their status to be able to do so upon payment of a $1,000 fine.

Four years later, on January 14, 1998, Congress phased Section 245(i) out of law. Immigrants and their families who had already begun the process of changing their status under Section 245(i) by January 14, 1998 were grandfathered into the section’s benefits. However, this left thousands of otherwise qualified persons who had not begun the process unable to adjust status in the United States. They could not return to their countries to begin the legal process of obtaining their permanent residency in the United States also without being subject to either a three- or a 10-year bar upon returning to the United States.

On December 21, 2000, Congress extended the qualifying date for Section 245(i) benefits to April 30, 2001. This law allowed immigrants who had labor certifications or visa petitions filed on their behalf between 1998 and April 30, 2001, to qualify for adjustment of status. Those who were beneficiaries of petitions filed prior to January 14, 1998 could still adjust despite an EWI record, and those people do not have to meet the December 2000 physical presence requirement.

Our client was the beneficiary of her father’s petition in February 1998, which is current, but this by itself would not have allowed her to adjust status since this was filed after January 1998 and because she came in 2003, thus not meeting the December 21, 2000 physical presence requirement. However, she was also the beneficiary of a petition filed before January 14, 1998, that of her aunt’s petition for her father. So it was two petitions that saved her case, one for 245i, and the other for adjustment eligibility.

Once retained, our office promptly filed a Motion to Change Venue from Buffalo to New York.  This was granted and on April 1, 2011, 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 New York agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to Terminate without prejudice on August 17, 2011.

Once her case was terminated, the USCIS New York scheduled an I-485 interview for our client. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our client through conference call. On May 1, 2012, our client was interviewed at the New York City USCIS office. Attorney JP Sarmiento accompanied her at the interview as well. Due to the complexity of the case, we made sure the officer was clear about our client’s 245i eligibility. On May 30, 2012, our client’s I-485 application was approved.  She finally became a green card holder.

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 245i success stories, please click here.

For termination success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact us anytime for free consultations.

{ 0 comments }