CASE: J-1 Waiver (No Objection Statement)

NATIONALITY: Philippines

LOCATION: New York

Our client came from the Philippines on a J-1 in April 2015 to work as a visiting research fellow. According to her DS-2019, she was subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement.

In November 2016, she got married to her U.S. citizen husband and later on consulted with our firm for her J-1 visa waiver prior to applying for adjustment of status. If someone is subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement, he or she cannot get a green card in the United States until he or she fulfills the requirement or obtains a waiver.

Upon retention, our office promptly prepared a waiver request through a No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Philippine Embassy in the United States and eventually the EVP in the Philippines.

On December 23, 2016, the J-1 Waiver Application (Form DS-3035) was filed to the Department of State.  We also sent a request to the New York State Government to get authentication for the necessary documents.  Later, these authenticated documents and No Objection Application (for the Philippines Government) were sent to the Philippines Consulate General in New York for further authentication.  On February 23, 2017, our office sent our client’s materials to the Waiver Review Committee in Manila, Philippines.  Then, the Waiver Review Committee forwarded the materials and favorable recommendation to the Philippine Embassy in D.C. who eventually issued a No Objection Statement.

On July 6, 2017, the Waiver Review Division issued a favorable recommendation based on the No Objection statement.  Eventually, on July 25, 2017, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval notice for the waiver. Now, our client can file for her adjustment status application along with her U.S. Citizen husband’s I-130 petition for her.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: J-2 Waiver of Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement / Over 21-year-old dependent child

NATIONALITY: Chinese

LOCATION: New York City, NY

Our client is a citizen of China who came to the U.S. on a J-2 Visa in October 1995.  He came with his father who came on a J-1 Visa for his research program in the United States. Both were subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement, meaning they had to go back to their home country for two-years before they can apply for permanent residency or some non-immigrant visa such as the H, L, and O visas.

After our client’s father’s J-1 program was completed, his family moved to Canada. Our client came back to the United States with an H-1B visa after he obtained his current employment in New York.

He turned 21 in 2001. He would like to get a waiver because he has an approved I-140 petition for him. However, because of his two-year foreign residency requirement, our client cannot file an adjustment of status application in the United States without the fulfillment of requirement or the waiver.

Although J-2 dependents cannot independently apply for a waiver, in cases where a J-2 child reaches 21, the Waiver Review Division may consider requests for waivers on behalf of the J-2 dependent.  The Department of State’s policy allows for that process in instances where the J-2 dependent obtains a divorce form the J-1 principal, the J-1 principal dies, or in cases where the J-2 dependent turns 21, which is our client’s case. In fact, our client turned 21 in November 2001.

Our firm was retained to do his J-2 waiver, and on May 17, 2017, the J-2 Waiver application (Form DS-3035 and supporting documents) was filed to the Department of State. We also sent a request to the DOS to be an interested government agency and recommend this waiver based on the fact that our client reached the age of 21 and was not a dependent of a J-1 visa holder anymore.  Eventually, on June 9, 2017, the DOS recommended to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) that our client be granted a waiver.  On July 27, 2017, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval notice for our client’s waiver request.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Chinese                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is from China who came to the U.S. on F-1 student’s visa in 2011 to pursue her studies in music. In April 2017, our client married her current U.S. citizen husband.  She retained our office in May 2017 for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on May 16, 2017.  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 as well. On August 1, 2017, our client was interviewed at Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office also accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, on August 2, 2017, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in April 2017 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from China and obtained his green card in July 2012.

After retention, we prepared the application and filed the N-400 on April 21, 2017 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him via conference calls.  On July 20, 2017, our client appeared at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office for his naturalization interview. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his naturalization and citizenship interview. Eventually, his application was approved on July 27, 2017. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:  Adjustment of Status / Termination of Proceedings after Joint Motion to Reopen
CLIENT: Pakistanis
LOCATION: Philadelphia, PA

Our clients are Pakistani citizens who currently reside in Philadelphia, PA with their U.S. Citizen sons.  Our client entered the United States with valid L-1 and L-2 visas in November 2000.  Later, they were granted withholding of removal in July 2006 by the Philadelphia Immigration Court.  They have remained in the United States thereafter. In November 2013, our clients’ son became a naturalized U.S. citizen. However, for them to get a green card, their case should first be reopened by the Immigration Court for them to apply for adjustment of status either with the Court, or with the CIS should proceedings be terminated after reopening.

In May 2015, our clients contacted our office and sought legal assistance for their immigration matter.  After thorough consultations, our client retained us on May 14, 2015.  Upon retention, we first prepared and filed their U.S. citizen son’s I-130 petitions for them. We filed the I-130 petitions to USCIS on May 20, 2015 and the USCIS approved the I-130s on October 5, 2015. Once the I-130s were approved, we filed Request to Join in a Motion to Reopen for our client to USICE-DHS office in Philadelphia.  Our cover brief explained how they got their withholding of removal status, approval of I-130, and their prima facie eligibility to apply for adjustment of status.

After the long reviewing period, the DHS office in Philadelphia finally agreed to join in Motion to Reopen and an assigned counsel signed on the Motion on April 11, 2016.  Once we received the Joint Motion to Reopen, we filed a Motion to Philadelphia Immigration Court to request reopening of our clients’ cases so that they can apply for adjustment of status. Eventually, on April 28, 2016, the Philadelphia Immigration Court terminated our clients’ removal proceedings.

Once their cases were terminated they retained our office again for their I-485 adjustment of status applications. Our firm prepared and filed the Adjustment of Status Applications and the Employment Authorization Document on June 23, 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 client via conference call. On July 25, 2017, our clients were interviewed at the Philadelphia Pennsylvania USCIS.  The interview went well, and on July 31, 2017, their green card applications were approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status Based on Approved K-1 Visa

CLIENT: Nigerian

LOCATION: Youngstown, OH

Our client came to the United States in November 2016 as a K-1 visa entrant from Nigeria.  Our client is the beneficiary of an approved I-129F petition. He came to the United States as a K-1 Fiancé of a U.S. Citizen whom he married within 90 days of his entry. By law, if you married your petitioner-fiancé within 90 days of your K-1 visa entry, you are eligible to apply for adjustment of status (green card) in the United States.

Our client contacted our office initially in March 2017 and consulted with us for his adjustment of status application. After the retention, our firm quickly prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on April 4, 2017.  Things went smoothly and the receipt notices, and the fingerprint appointment all came on time.  

It is not mandatory to have an adjustment of status interview for an applicant who entered on a K-1 visa.  However, the USCIS may require an interview to test the validity and bona fide nature of the marriage between the Petitioner and Beneficiary. Nevertheless, the USCIS scheduled an interview for our client. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients at our office. On July 25, 2017, 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. After the interview, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Immigrant Visa / I-140 (EB-2 Category) / Schedule A

EMPLOYER: Nursing Care Facility

BENEFICIARY: Filipino

LOCATION: Beneficiary: Philippines / Petitioner: Houston, TX

Our client is from the Philippines. His prospective employer-sponsor was willing to petition him for a second-preference employment immigrant visa petition (I-140). Since he has a registered nurse license and the proffered position for him is a nurse manager at the nursing care facility, the petitioner wanted to try going for a “Schedule A” classification. They also wanted to do EB2 (requiring at least a Masters degree or Bachelors degree + 5 yrs experience).

The Department of Labor (DOL) maintains a schedule of occupations in its regulations, Schedule A included, for which the individual permanent labor certification procedure is not required. The schedule of pre-certified occupations is referred to as Schedule A, and is included in DOL regulations at 20 CFR 656.10. Based on an occupation’s inclusion on Schedule A, an employer may file an immigrant visa petition (I-140) directly with the (USCIS) without having to file a Labor Certification with the Department of Labor. Usually, prior to filing I-140 petitions (EB-2 or EB-3 category), the employer must file a Labor Certification to the Department of Labor. However, for Schedule A cases, the employer does not have to go through the labor certification process. We argued that the position of Health Services Manager should be classified under Schedule A. We argued that it falls under the broad spectrum of “professional nurse” occupations. We also argued that the job description has excerpts that fall under “professional nurse” and that the description justifies the requirements also of Bachelor’s degree in nursing and five years of related experiences.

Our client has a Master’s Degree in Nursing degree. He also has a registered nursing license in the state of Texas. Our office was retained and we started on the Prevailing Wage Determination filing and other related matters.

Once the prevailing wage was determined, we filed the I-140 application on February 26, 2016 via premium processing. We included a job offer letter, the notice of filing, employment letter, and other necessary supporting documents. In our cover brief, we included the “ability to pay” argument and why the nurse manager position falls under a Schedule A and EB2 designation.

However, on March 10, 2016, the USCIS Texas Service Center issued Request for Evidence (RFE) and requested our client to submit his prospective employer’s most recent tax return record and his degree evaluation report. Our office prepared the response and filed the Response to RFE on March 14, 2016. Eventually, on March 25, 2016, the USCIS Texas Service Center approved his EB-2 I-140 petition.

Once his I-140 was approved, our client retained our office again for his immigrant visa processing. Once we were retained, our office filed the immigrant visa packets to the National Visa Center on May 5, 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 at the U.S. Embassy in the Philippines. His interview was scheduled in October 2016 initially; however, due to his health, the interview was re-scheduled. On June 28, 2017, our client appeared at the U.S. Embassy in Manila, Philippines. The interview went well, and the Embassy approved and issued his immigrant visa.

With the approved Immigrant Visa, our client can come to the United States immediately, and he will get his green card within two months of entry.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Employment Based Adjustment of Status (Derivative Applicant) / 245(i)

CLIENT: Filipino

LOCATION: Indiana

Our Filipino client came to the U.S. in June 2001 with a valid B-2 visitor’s visa. He has remained in the United States since then. He married his current spouse in June 2002 and she obtained her permanent residency in 2016 through an employment petition. Our client’s wife was the beneficiary of labor certification that was filed before April 30, 2001 and she was physically present in the United States before December 2000.

Our client contacted us around November of 2016 for consultation and sought legal assistance for his adjustment of status. He was not sure whether he could be a derivative applicant of the adjustment of status based on his wife’s I-140 approval and his eligibility under INA 245(i). Nonetheless, after consultation, we determined that he is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us on December 1, 2016.

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.

However, aforementioned requirements were not met for our client since he was not a beneficiary of any I-130 / I-140 petition which was filed prior to April 30, 2001. He was not also physically present in the United States prior to December 2000. Nonetheless, there is a controlling BIA case for our client’s situation. In Matter of Estrada and Estrada, 26 I&N Dec. 180 (BIA 2013), the BIA held that:

“Although not grandfathered, qualifying after-acquired spouses and children are still able to benefit from section 245(i) of the Act in certain circumstances. The Supplementary Information to the interim rule clarifies that a dependent spouse or child – if eligible under section 203(d) of the Act  – who is accompanying or following to join a grandfathered adjustment applicant is “considered to be grandfathered” if the qualifying relationship existed before the grandfathered alien adjusts his or her status…. Such spouses and children are able to benefit from section 245(i) of the Act by virtue of their status as dependents under section 203(d), which provides that a spouse or child who is accompanying or following to join a principal beneficiary of an immigrant visa is entitled to the same status as that alien. Thus, when a grandfathered alien applies for adjustment of status under section 245(i) as the principal adjustment applicant, his or her dependent spouse or children are eligible to adjust status under that section notwithstanding the fact that they are not grandfathered aliens.

As mentioned above, our client married his wife in June 2002. His wife filed her adjustment of status application by virtue of an approved and current I-140 petition filed for her and invoked INA 245(i) in the process as the principal beneficiary. By virtue of 245(i), our client’s wife obtained her permanent residency in September 2016. Thus, based on Matter of Estrada and Estrada, our office argued that our client is able to benefit from section 245(i) by virtue of his status as spouse who is following to join a principal beneficiary under 245(i) since the qualifying relationship (their marriage in 2002) existed before the grandfathered alien (our client’s wife) adjusted her status (adjustment in 2016 through 245(i).

On December 20, 2016, our office filed his I-485 adjustment of status application and I-485 Supplement A under the 245(i) category for our client.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  Eventually, on July 19, 2017, our client’s I-485 adjustment of status application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: J-1 Waiver of the Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement, No Objection Statement

NATIONALITY: Indonesian

LOCATION: Providence, RI

Our Indonesian client came to the U.S. on a J-1 Visa in June 2012.  She came to the U.S. for her post-doctoral research program, and her J-1 visa made her subject to the two-year foreign resident requirement.  Her research and higher education enhanced her interest in the field, and she would like to further her future research and development projects.  However, due to the two-year foreign residency requirement, she had to obtain a waiver first before she could change her current status in the United States.

After she retained our firm, we prepared and filed a waiver request through a No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Indonesian Embassy in the United States.  Our office contacted the Indonesian Embassy in Washington D.C. to make sure we knew all the requirements needed for their office to issue a no objection statement.  The Embassy requested nine different documents including a statement of reason for the waiver, the applicant’s resume, a copy of his valid Indonesian passport, and a copy of Form DS-3035.

On April 7, 2017, the J-1 Waiver (Form DS-3035) Application was filed to the Department of State.  We also sent a request to the Indonesian Embassy to issue a No Objection Statement and recommend this waiver based on the fact that our client would have been eligible to file a change of status application but for the waiver.

The Indonesian Embassy eventually issued a No Objection Statement for our client, and sent this letter to the State Department’s Waiver Review Division.  On May 22, 2017, the Waiver Review Division issued a favorable recommendation based on the No Objection statement. The CIS then issued a receipt and an I-612 approval notice on July 19, 2017.  Now that our client’s two-year foreign residency requirement is waived, she can be a beneficiary of other non-immigrant visa in the United States without going back to Indonesia for 2 years.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Indian                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Philadelphia, PA

Our client is from India who came to the U.S. on an F-1 student visa to pursue his undergraduate degree. In January 2017, our client married his current U.S. citizen wife.  He retained our office in February 2017 for his green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on February 13, 2017. 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 July 19, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Philadelphia Pennsylvania USCIS office. Eventually, on July 21, 2017, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }