CASE:   I-601A Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Honduran

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States from Honduras in 2011 without inspection and admission. He married his U.S. citizen wife in June 2013. With our firm’s legal assistance, his U.S. Citizen wife filed an I-130 petition for him in October 2013. This I-130 petition was approved in April 2014.

However, our client cannot file for adjustment of status application due to his ground of inadmissibility (entry without inspection and admission). 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 child. Also, it would be extremely difficult for her to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in Honduras 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 Honduras, and that his U.S. citizen child and his wife will face extreme emotional difficulties if he is removed.

On January 27, 2016, 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. Eventually, his I-601A waiver was approved on October 25, 2016. Now, he can file packet 3 and 4 here in the United States, and would go to Honduras shortly to get his immigrant visa.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Change of Status from B-2 to F-1

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Anaheim, CA

Our client came from the Philippines on a valid B-2 visa in February 2016. Later, she decided to study further in the United States and get admission. She retained our office for her I-539 Change of Status application to change her status from B-2 to F-1 to the USCIS.

Once retained, we helped our client obtain supporting documents for the Change of Status. We filed I-539 Change of Status application along with supporting documents to USCIS on May 19, 2016. In the application, we fully explained her financial ability to pursue her studies in the U.S., and reasons for her studies. Eventually, on October 11, 2016, the Change of Status was approved. Our client is now on F-1 and can start her program.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage Based Adjustment of Status / 245(i)

CLIENT: Korean

LOCATION: Chicago, IL

Our Korean client came to the U.S. without inspection and admission by crossing the U.S./Canada border in March 1999. When she came to the United States, she was only 3 years old. Thereafter, she married her U.S. husband in May 2015. Currently, she resides in Illinois with her husband and daughter.

Our client contacted us around February of 2016 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her case. Initially, our office determined that she is eligible for I-601A provisional waiver. However, after the care review of her case and story, we determined that she is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us on February 5, 2016.

The basis of her 245(i) eligibility was that her father was a beneficiary of the labor certification which was filed on April 23, 2001. Therefore, she was a beneficiary of a labor certification filed after January 15, 1998 and before April 30, 2001. Moreover, according to the Robert Bach “Accepting Applications for Adjustment of Status Under Section 245(i) of the “Immigration and Nationality Act” memorandum (“Bach Memo June 10, 1999)

“Section 245(i) defines the term “beneficiary” to include a spouse or child ‘eligible to receive a visa under section 203(d) of the Act’ This applies to spouses or children ‘accompanying or following to join’ the principal alien….

The spouse or child of a grandfathered alien is also grandfathered for 245(i) purposes. This means that the spouse or child is grandfathered irrespective of whether the spouse or child adjusts with the principal. The spouse or child also are grandfathered even after losing the status of spouse or child, such as by divorce or by becoming 21 years of age…

Often, a principal alien who has filed a visa petition or labor certification application will have a “child” who reaches the age of 21, and thus no longer meet the statutory definition of child, before the petition or application is approved or the principal alien adjusts status. However, such an “aged-out” beneficiary will remain a beneficiary for the purpose of determining whether he or she may use section 245(i) to adjust status.”

Thus, our client was grandfathered by her father’s Labor Certification, and is eligible for 245(i).

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.

On April 28, 2016, our office initially filed I-130 petition for our client. While the I-130 petition was pending, our office filed their I-485 adjustment of status applications under the 245(i) category for our client on June 1, 2016.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  We thoroughly prepared our client prior to her interview as well.

On October 31, 2016, our client was interviewed at the Chicago, Illinois USCIS Field Office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu, Esq. from our office accompanied our clients as well. The interview went well, and her adjustment of status application was approved on November 1, 2016. After a long wait, our client is finally a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status / I-140 (EB-3 Category) / Schedule A

BENEFICIARY: Filipina Registered Nurse

LOCATION: Houston, TX

Our client’s beneficiary is a registered nurse from the Philippines licensed in the state of Texas. Prior to retaining us, she was working at a nursing / rehabilitation center in the greater Houston area under an H-1B status. Her current employer was willing to petition her for a third-preference employment immigrant visa petition (I-140). Our client also has an approved EB-3 I-140 petition with a priority date of November 2009.

Since she is a registered nurse, she is eligible for “Schedule A” classification. 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 first going to the DOL for a labor certification. 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. The position of Professional Nurses is included in Schedule A.

Also, under 8 CFR 204.5(e):

“Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.”

As mentioned above, our client’s approved I-140 petition was not denied, was actually approved, and was never revoked at any point. Thus, by virtue of 8 CFR 204.5(e), this succeeding I-140 Petition by our client’s prospective employer for our client is entitled to the previous priority date.

Our client has a nursing degree and has several years of related experience. Our firm told her that her current employer can petition her as a Registered Nurse under the schedule A category. More importantly, since the priority date of her previous I-140 was current, she can eventually apply for her immigrant visa via consular processing. Our office was retained on October 29, 2014 and we started on her Prevailing Wage Request.

We filed the I-140 application on January 7, 2015 via premium processing. We included the job offer letter, the notice of filing, his previous I-140 approval notice, and other necessary supporting documents.  Eventually, on January 15, 2015, the I-140 was approved and it retained our client’s old priority date.  

Once the I-140 petition was approved, our client retained our office again for her and her family members’ I-485 adjustment of status applications. Our office filed an I-485 adjustment of status application for our client and her family members on February 11, 2015. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment came on time. However, while the applications were pending, the EB-3 priority dates for the Philippines nationals were retrogressed so that our client cases could not be adjudicated.  

Her priority dates became current again in 2016. However, on August 25, 2016, the USCIS issued the Request for Evidence for our clients for their new medical records. Our client and her family members submitted their new medical records to the USCIS on October 4, 2016. Eventually, on October 27, 2016, the USCIS Texas Service Center approved our client and her family members’ adjustment of status applications. Now, she finally is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: J-1 Waiver of the Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement, Extreme Hardship

NATIONALITY:  Kenyan

LOCATION: Maryland

Our client came from Kenya in February 1993 with a valid J-1 visa.  He got his J-1 status as a research scholar and was receiving government funding for his research.  His J-1 status made him subject to the two-year foreign resident requirement. After he completed his J-1, he remained in the United States. Later, he married his current U.S. citizen wife and became a father of two U.S. citizen children. Our client would like to file his adjustment of status application along with his wife’s I-130 petition; however, due to the two-year foreign residency requirement, he had to obtain a waiver first.

Unlike our other J-1 clients, our client could not pursue his waiver under No Objection Statement or Interest Government Agency (IGA). As mentioned above, our client also received government funding for his research programs which made his case tougher for the No Objection Statement or IGA waiver route. Our client, though, would like to pursue his J-1 waiver based on exceptional hardship standard. In fact, our client’s U.S. citizen wife is experiencing exceptional medical hardships.

According to 8 C.F.R. Section 212.7(c)(5), “an alien who is subject to the foreign residence requirement and who believes that compliance therewith would impose exceptional hardship upon her spouse or child who is a citizen of the United States… may apply for a waiver on Form I-612.”

Some of the factors in analyzing extreme hardship are as follows: age of the subject, family ties in the U.S. and abroad, length and residency in the U.S., health / medical conditions, conditions in the country of removal – economic and political, financial status – business and occupation, position in / ties to the community. Matter of Anderson, 16 I&N Dec. 596 (BIA 1978).

After he retained our firm, we prepared and filed a waiver request through an exceptional hardship basis. On December 17, 2015, the J-1 Waiver (Form DS-3035) Application was filed to the Department of State.  Thereafter, our office prepared affidavit of our client, extensive brief in support for our client’s J-1 waiver application, and other supporting documents. Our client provided us with extensive medical documents and doctor’s reports for his U.S. citizen wife’s medical conditions.  On December 18, 2015, our office filed I-612 application to the USCIS and asked for them to issue and recommends this waiver based on the fact that our client’s wife would experience exceptional hardship if our client needs to go back to Kenya for two years.

However, on May 11, 2016, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) for our client’s I-612 case. The USCIS asked our client to submit more evidence to demonstrate the extreme hardship to his U.S. citizen wife if he has to go back to Kenya for 2 years.  On August 2, 2016, our office filed the Response to RFE to USCIS along with additional documents to support the claim of financial and medical hardship including income and expenses, plus more recent medical documents of his U.S. citizen wife evidencing the hardship.

Eventually, the USCIS approved his I-612 waiver on October 26, 2016. Now that our client’s two-year foreign residency requirement is waived, he can file his adjustment of status application along with his wife’s I-130 petition in the United States.  

{ 0 comments }

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

EMPLOYER: Nursing Care Facility

BENEFICIARY: Filipino

LOCATION: Beneficiary: Thailand / Petitioner: Houston, TX

Our Filipino client was working in Thailand as a nurse coordinator. His prospective employer-sponsor in Texas 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 Bachelor’s degree in nursing and 5 years of experience as a nurse coordinator and a coordination nurse. 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 16, 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 2, 2016, the USCIS Texas Service Center issued the Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) for our client’s I-140. The USCIS alleged whether our client’s past experience letters from Thailand were genuine. We submitted new past experience letters and submitted the response to NOID on March 11, 2016.

Eventually, on March 17, 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 16, 2016, who in turn forwarded the client’s materials to the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand. An interview notice was set for the client at the U.S. Embassy in Thailand. On October 4, 2016, our client appeared at the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand. 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:   I-601A Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Guyanese

LOCATION: Albany, NY

Our client came to the United States from Guyana in 2005 on a C1/D crew visa. He married his U.S. citizen wife in 2007.  Thereafter, his U.S. Citizen wife filed an I-130 petition for him in 2008. This I-130 petition was approved on November 23, 2009.

However, our client cannot file for adjustment of status application due to his ground of inadmissibility (entry without inspection and admission as a crewman). 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 filed I-601A application before with a different immigration counsel, but it was denied in October 2014. Nevertheless, he had since gather more evidence, financial and medical, to have a stronger re-file case.

Our client’s I-601A application had a good chance since our client’s U.S. Citizen wife suffers from a great degree of hardship. Moreover, their U.S. citizen children suffer from great degree of medical hardships. Although their U.S. citizen children are not considered as “qualifying relatives” for the I-601A, we argued that children’s medical hardship is also hardship to our client’s U.S. citizen wife, by virtue of having to take care of them (children with medical / special needs) is an extreme hardship to her. In the I-601A brief and supporting documents, our office included extensive medical reports of his children.  We argued that if he was removed from the United States, extreme hardship to his wife is clearly foreseeable and evident.  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 child. Also, it would be extremely difficult for her and their kids to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in Guyana in case they join 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 Guyana, and that his U.S. citizen child and his wife will face extreme emotional difficulties if he is removed.

On April 28, 2016, 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. Eventually, his I-601A waiver was approved on October 13, 2016. Now, he can file packet 3 and 4 here in the United States, and would go to Guyana shortly to get his immigrant visa.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: EB-2 I-140 Petition    
EMPLOYER: Korean Church
BENEFICIARY: Korean Education Pastor
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is a Korean church in Cleveland, Ohio who was willing to petition someone for an Education Pastor position for a second-preference petition (I-140).  Our client’s prospective employee has a master’s degree in Divinity. After talking to our client, our firm concluded that this employer can petition him as an Education Pastor.  Second preference petitions for Koreans are current, which means that if a PERM Labor Certification for a second preference position gets approved, the I-140 and I-485 could be filed simultaneously. Based on our client’s prospective employee’s educational, professional and working backgrounds, our office determined that he is clearly eligible for EB-2 classification for his I-140 petition.  Our client eventually retained us in October 2015.

Prior to filing PERM, our firm prepared the prevailing wage request, job order, advertisements, internal job posting, recruitment report, and all other steps which are important pre-PERM filing. Take note that PERM could be filed at least 60 days from the job posting date or 30 days from the last ad. On October 6, 2015, the prevailing wage request was filed.  After we obtained foreign degree evaluation report, our office filed the job order on January 12, 2016.  On April 8, 2016, we promptly filed PERM.  Eventually, on July 19, 2016, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB2 position for the Korean beneficiary.

We then proceeded with the I-140 Petition filing. We submitted the “ability to pay” letter for the I-140 petition application. We included the job offer letter, employer’s audited balance sheet (since the church is tax-exemption entity), and other necessary supporting documents. The I-140 Petition was filed on October 17, 2016 via premium processing service. Eventually, on October 25, 2016, the I-140 EB-2 Petition for our Korean client was approved without any Request for Evidence (RFE). Our client can file his I-485 adjustment of status application at any time.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Immigrant Visa / I-140 (EB-3 Category) / Schedule A / Old Priority Date Retention

EMPLOYER: Nursing / Rehabilitation Center

BENEFICIARY: Filipino Registered Nurse in the Philippines

LOCATION: Manila, Philippines

Our client’s beneficiary is a registered nurse from the Philippines licensed in the state of Texas. Currently, he is working at a hospital in the Philippines as a nurse. His prospective employer was willing to petition him for a third-preference employment immigrant visa petition (I-140). Our client also has an approved EB-3 I-140 petition with a priority date of July 2008.

Since he is a registered nurse, he is eligible for “Schedule A” classification. 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 first going to the DOL for a labor certification. 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. The position of Professional Nurses is included in Schedule A.

Also, under 8 CFR 204.5(e):

“Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.”

As mentioned above, our client’s approved I-140 petition was not denied, was actually approved, and was never revoked at any point. Thus, by virtue of 8 CFR 204.5(e), this succeeding I-140 Petition by our client’s prospective employer for our client is entitled to the previous priority date.

Our client has a nursing degree and has several years of related experience. Our firm told him that his potential employer can petition him as a Registered Nurse under the schedule A category. More importantly, since the priority date of his previous I-140 was current, he can eventually apply for his immigrant visa via consular processing. Our office was retained on July 22, 2014 and started on his Prevailing Wage Request.

We filed the I-140 application on March 15, 2015 via premium processing. We included the job offer letter, the notice of filing, his previous I-140 approval notice, and other necessary supporting documents.  Eventually, on March 23, 2015, the I-140 was approved and it retained our client’s old priority date.  

Once his priority date became current, 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 12, 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 Philippines. On August 15, 2016, our client appeared at the U.S. Embassy in Manila, Philippines. Eventually, on October 25, 2016, the Immigrant Visa was issued for our client.

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: J-2 Waiver of Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement Post-Divorce
NATIONALITY: Egypt
LOCATION: North Carolina

Our client is a citizen of Egypt who came to the U.S. on a J-2 Visa in February 2010.  He came with his wife who held a J-1 Visa as a researcher.  Both were subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement.

Unfortunately, while they were residing in the United States, his marriage did not work out well. Eventually, he got divorced from his ex-wife.  Before he divorced with his ex-wife, he changed his status from J-2 to F-1. However, he was still subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement.  Our client pursued his Ph.D. degree in the United States, and intends to file the I-140 NIW Self-Petition with adjustment of status application. Nevertheless, he could not file adjustment of status in the U.S. and changed his status to other non-immigrant visa in the United States because of the 2 year foreign residency requirement.

In August of this year, our client contacted our office. He retained our firm to do his J-2 waiver. On August 11, 2016 the J-2 Waiver (DS-3035) 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 was divorced from the J-1 visa holder.  Eventually, on August 29, 2016, the DOS recommended to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) that our client be granted a waiver. Finally, the USCIS issued I-612 waiver approval notice on October 17, 2016.  Now, our client can file an adjustment of status application (I-485) along with his NIW I-140 self-petition for his green card with a waiver.

{ 0 comments }