CASE: Adjustment of Status Based on Approved K-1 Visa
CLIENT: Chinese
LOCATION: Columbus, OH

Our client came to the United States in March 2014 as a K-1 visa entrant from China.  Our client is a beneficiary of an approved I-129F petition and came to the United States as a K-1 Fiancée of a U.S. Citizen whom she married within 90 days of entry.  By law, if you married your petitioner-fiancé within 90 days of your K-1 visa entry, you are eligible for adjustment of status.   

Our client contacted our office initially in the middle of May 2014 and consulted with us for her adjustment of status application.  Eventually, she retained our office, and our firm quickly prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on June 6, 2014 a few days before her K-1 authorized stay period expired.  Things went smoothly and the receipt notices, and the fingerprint appointment all came on time.  Her Work Authorization Card was issued as well.

It is not mandatory for having an adjustment interview for an adjustment applicant based on K-1 visa entry.  However, the USCIS may require an interview to test the validity and bona fide nature of marriage between the Petitioner and Beneficiary.  Fortunately, the USCIS did not ask for an adjustment interview for our client.  On December 4, 2015, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-140 / National Interest Waiver

CLIENT: Korean

LOCATION: California

Our client contacted us in August 2014 about the possibility of doing a National Interest Waiver. He is a software development engineer in the field of network distribution system research, and is currently working as a software development engineer in a company in Silicon Valley.

His significant contributions have placed him at the pinnacle of the field of computer science and network and distributed system. He is a leading researcher and engineer in the field; specifically, energy management of mobile devices, network performance and management in wireless networks.  Our client’s research on network and distributed systems has led to important innovations in his field of endeavor. His research solutions have successfully deployed, and provide Hotspot services enabling reliable internet connectivity to several cities over multiple countries. He is highly regarded by his peers, and is routinely sought after by other scientists for collaborations and technical reviews.

Upon review of his credentials and qualifications, our office determined that he was qualified for the National Interest Waiver (NIW) category. Being qualified for NIW is beneficial since you would not need an employer nor family member to petition for you for green card purposes. You’d be eligible for a self-petition and unless you are from China or India, in which case you’d still have to wait for priority dates to be current, you would be eligible to apply for adjustment of status (green card) immediately without any lag in priority dates.

As a primer, NIW applicants must have a master’s or higher degree. The landmark immigration case that discusses the standards for NIWs is Matter of New York State Department of Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Comm.1998). This case held that the qualifying applicant must show the following elements in his or her I-140 NIW petition: First, it must be shown that the alien seeks employment in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. Next, it must be shown that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver must establish that the alien will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U. S. worker having the same minimum qualifications.

Our office prepared a 21-page brief for our client’s NIW filing. Our client also obtained 8 letters of recommendation from his colleagues and internationally-recognized scientists. Our office also included his publication records, presentation records, and conference materials in the NIW application. We demonstrated the intrinsic merit of our client’s research in the United States, the national scope of his research, and asserted that our client would serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. His NIW application contained 32 exhibits (Exhibit A to FF).

Our office filed his I-140(NIW) petition to the USCIS Nebraska Service Center on December 10, 2014. On April 28, 2015, the USCIS approved his I-140 petition without any Requests for Evidence.  Now, with the approved NIW I-140 petition, he can file his adjustment of status application at any time. 

{ 0 comments }

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

NATIONALITY: Chinese

LOCATION: San Francisco, California

Our client was a citizen of Canada who came to the U.S. on a J-2 Visa in January 1992 when she was a Chinese Citizen.  She came with her mother who came on a J-1 Visa for her 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.

Once her mother’s program was completed, her family immigrated to Canada. In 1999, our client came back to the U.S. on a TD visa (dependent of TN visa holder) with her parents. She finished her high school and went back to Canada for her undergraduate degree. In 2009, she came back to the U.S. on an F-1 student visa to pursue her degree. Later, she married her current husband and she filed her adjustment of status application as a derivative applicant of her husband’s application.

She turned 21 in 2005. However, because of her two-year foreign residency requirement, the USCIS requested her to show whether she has complied with the 2 year foreign residency rule. She was not aware of this requirement since she was so young when she came to the United States in 1992.

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 December 2005.

In order to obtain aJ-2 waiver before her RFE deadline, she contacted our office. Our firm was retained to do her J-2 waiver on March 2, 2015. On March 4, 2015, 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 April 9, 2015 the DOS recommended to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) that our client be granted a waiver.  On May 4, 2015, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval notice for our client’s waiver request.

{ 0 comments }

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

NATIONALITY: Korean

LOCATION: Ohio

Our client is from South Korea who came to the U.S. on a J-1 Visa in December 2002 as a visiting scholar. His J-1 program made him subject to the two-year foreign residence requirement.  He retained our office to seek legal assistance for his H-1b visa.. Before his H-1b gets approved, he has to get a waiver of his two-year foreign residency requirement.

Once retained, our office promptly prepared and filed a waiver request through the No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Korean Embassy in the United States.

Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office contacted the Korean Consulate General Office in Chicago to pursue the waiver for our client.  The Consulate requested six different documents including a statement of reason for the waiver, the applicant’s resume, a J-1 visa waiver confirmation application, and a letter of reason for obtaining the J-1 waiver.  Most of those documents needed to be written in Korean, so Attorney Yu, a Korean himself, assisted our client in completing those documents.

On January 28, 2015 the J-1 Waiver (Form DS-3035) Application was filed to the Department of State.  We also sent a request to the Korean Embassy to issue a No Objection Statement and recommend this waiver based on the fact that our client is eligible to file a National Interest Waiver petition and adjustment of status application.

The Korean Consulate General in Chicago forwarded our client’s documents to the Korean Embassy in DC.  After that, the Korean Embassy issued a No Objection Statement for our client, and sent this letter to the State Department’s Waiver Review Division.  On March 25, 2015, the Waiver Review Division issued a favorable recommendation based on the No Objection statement. Eventually, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval on May 1, 2015.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:  I-485 Adjustment of Status / I-360 Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Petition

CLIENT: Guatemalan

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States in September 2012 from Guatemala. He came to the United States without inspection and admission and was caught at the border. After that the DHS released him, but he was placed in removal proceedings. He came to Cleveland, OH to be reunited with his older brother who resides in the Cleveland area.

He retained our office in April 2013 for representation at his deportation proceedings. On June 4, 2013, our client appeared at the Cleveland Immigration Court for his master calendar hearing. Attorney Yu from our office represented him, did pleadings and sought asylum relief. After the hearing, our office also sought other options for our client since he was a minor.

Section 203(b)(4) of the INA allocates a percentage of immigrant visas to individuals considered “special immigrants” under section 101(a)(27) of the INA, including those aliens classified as special immigrant juveniles under Section 101(a)(27)(J). “Special Immigrant Juvenile” includes only those juveniles deemed eligible for long-term foster care based on abuse, neglect, or abandonment.  To be eligible as a SIJ, the DHS’ express consent to the juvenile court’s dependency order is required. Then, the approved SIJ petition (Form I-360) makes a minor petitioner immediately eligible to adjust status by filing an adjustment of status application.

Our client was 17 years old when he contacted our office. In fact, our client was not supported by his parents and had to work in farms to support himself since he was 8 years old in Guatemala. Our client’s sister-in-law, who is a U.S. citizen and lives with our client, would like to be a legal guardian of our client. With our help, she filed a complaint for him to be deemed a neglected child to Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court on October 10, 2013.

The Juvenile court hearing was scheduled on November 26, 2013. Attorney JP Sarmiento represented our client and his sister-in-law at the hearing. Eventually, on the same day, the court found that our client is neglected and dependent and our client’s sister-in-law was appointed legal guardian.

After that, our office filed an I-360 application on December 2, 2013 to the USCIS. The application was supported by a court order declaring dependency by the juvenile court, court order deeming the juvenile eligible for long-term foster care due to abuse, neglect, or abandonment, determination from the juvenile court that it is in our client’s interest not to be returned to Guatemala, and his birth certificate.

Our client appeared for his I-360 interview on January 10, 2014 at the Cleveland USCIS Field Office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office also accompanied our client as well. However, after the interview, the USCIS issued the Notice of Intent to Deny.  Specifically, the USCIS alleged that the juvenile court’s order was not sufficient enough to adjudicate his I-360 petition because the juvenile court did not expressly declare that it is in our client’s interest not to be returned to Guatemala.

After the issuance of the NOID, our office contacted the juvenile court and sought for possible amendment of the judge’s decision. In response to our request, the juvenile court issued an amended decision and held that the sentence regarding the child’s best interests was omitted. The court found that it is not in the best interests of our client to be returned to Guatemala. Our office filed the response to the NOID on February 3, 2014 along with juvenile court’s new decision. Nevertheless, the USCIS approved our client’s I-360 petition on February 19, 2014.

Once his I-360 petition was approved, our office prepared and filed a request to join in a Motion to Terminate to USICE-DHS in Cleveland Office in April 2014. The DHS agreed with our motion, and on December 17, 2014, the Immigration Judge granted our Joint Motion to Terminate proceedings.

After his removal proceedings were terminated, our firm prepared and filed an I-485 adjustment of status application on March 3, 2015. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permit all came on time. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients through conference calls. On April 27, 2015, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland USCIS Field Office. The interview went well, and on April 28, 2015, the USCIS approved our client’s adjustment of status application. Now, our client is a green card holder. 

{ 0 comments }

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

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Irvine, CA

Our client retained us to petition his mother for a green card. Our client was born and raised in the Philippines, but was naturalized in the United States in 2014 through our firm’s legal assistance. He contacted our office in late April of 2014 and discussed with us the green card process for his mother. After consultation, he retained our office again on May 1, 2014.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on May 23, 2014. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permit all came on time. Eventually, on April 20, 2015, our client’s mother’s adjustment of status application was approved. Now, she is a green card holder

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Jamaican

LOCATION: New York, NY

Our client contacted our office in early February of 2014 regarding her I-751 application.

She is from Jamaica and she married a U.S. citizen in July 2011. Through her marriage, she obtained a 2-year conditional green card in April 2012. Our office helped her in the green card process.  Her conditional residency terminated in April 2014.

To comply with immigration requirements, our client and her husband had to file an I-751 Joint Petition to Remove Conditions. She retained our office on February 19, 2014 and our office prepared an I-751 application for our client with other supplemental exhibits.

On March 31, 2014, our office filed an I-751 application to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from her friends and family members, joint tax filing records, joint bank statements, utility bills, insurance policies, and photos of our client and her husband to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

Once the application was filed, the fingerprint notice was issued two weeks later. However, the USCIS issued the Request for Evidence (RFE) to demonstrate the bona fideness of our client’s marriage with her husband. We filed an extensive Response to RFE to the USCIS with more bona fide marital documents on November 25, 2014.

Nonetheless, the USCIS scheduled an interview for our client and her husband. On March 11, 2015, our client and her husband were requested to appear for the interview at the USCIS New York City Office.  Prior to the interview, our office prepared them thoroughly via conference calls and also accompanied them at the interview as well. The interview went well, and as a result, on the same day of the interview, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application. On April 20, 2015, our client received her 10-year green card which removed the conditions.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 adjustment of status / I-140 (EB-2 Category) / Schedule A

EMPLOYER: Physician’s Office

BENEFICIARY: South Korean Nurse Practitioner

LOCATION: Greater Houston Area, TX

Our client is a certified nurse practitioner. Her prospective employer was willing to petition her for a second-preference employment immigrant visa petition (I-140). Since she was a certified nurse practitioner, she was 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 Nurse Practitioner is included in Schedule A.

Our client has a Bachelors and Masters degree in nursing and is a certified Nurse Practitioner. Our office was retained on June 10, 2014 and we filed a Prevailing Wage Determination Request immediately.

We filed the I-140 application on October 6, 2014 via premium processing. We included the 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 nurse practitioners must fall under the Schedule A designation.

On October 21, 2014, without any Request for Evidence (RFE), the USCIS Texas Service Center approved her EB-2 I-140 petition. Once the I-140 petition was approved, our client retained our office again for her I-485 adjustment of status application. Our office filed an I-485 adjustment of status application for our client on December 9, 2014. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment came on time.

Eventually, on April 16, 2015, the USCIS Texas Service Center approved our client’s adjustment of status application. Now, she finally is a green card holder. 

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-140 (EB-3 Category) / Schedule A

EMPLOYER: Nursing / Rehabilitation Center

BENEFICIARY: Filipino

LOCATION: Houston, TX

Our client’s beneficiary is a registered nurse from the Philippines licensed in the state of Texas. He came to the United States and currently works in the United States with his H-1B status.  His current employer was willing to petition him for a third-preference employment immigrant visa petition (I-140).

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.

Our client has a nursing degree and has worked for the sponsor-employer. Our firm told him that his employer can petition him as a Registered Nurse under the schedule A category. Our office was retained on April 10, 2014 and we started on his Prevailing Wage Request.

We filed the I-140 application on June 25, 2014 via regular processing. We included the job offer letter, the notice of filing, and other necessary supporting documents. On April 18, 2015, the I-140 was approved. Now, our client can file an I-485 adjustment of status application based on the approved I-140 petition since his priority date is current in the month of April 2015.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-140 / National Interest Waiver / Response to RFE

CLIENT: Korean

LOCATION: Gainesville, FL

Our client contacted us in October 2014 to get legal assistance for an NIW Response to Request for Evidence (RFE) he obtained after he filed the NIW Self-Petition himself. He is a post-doctorate researcher and scientist in the field of ferroelectric material and biomedical research, and is currently working as a post-doctorate researcher in an academic institution in Gainesville, FL. In May 2014, our client filed an I-140 NIW self-petition to the USCIS by himself. However, in September 2014, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence and requested our client to demonstrate the following:

·         The petitioner (our client) must establish that he has a past record of specific prior achievement with some degree of influence on the field as a whole;

·         The petitioner must establish, in some capacity, the beneficiary’s ability to serve the national interest to a substantially greater extent than the majority of others in the field;

·         The petitioner must establish that the beneficiary’s skills or background are unique and innovative and serve the national interest; and

·         The petitioner must persuasively demonstrate that the national interest would be adversely affected if a labor certification were required.

During consultation stage, our office reviewed our client’s credentials and qualifications.  Moreover, our office reviewed the copy of his initial I-140 NIW filing which was done by our client himself.  After review, we determined that our client was clearly qualified for the National Interest Waiver (NIW) category because he has over 900 citations and his significant contributions have placed him at the pinnacle of his field. Throughout his research career, our client has successfully developed a series of dielectric materials and structures for Radio Frequency (RF) tunable and dynamic random access memory applications such as: A and B site doped barium strontium titanate, Lead strontium titanate and hetero-layered lead strontium titanate, etc.  These dielectric materials and hetero-layered thin films would benefit the United States in many aspects of our economy, national defense, and environment. Our client’s research work were highly evaluated by reviewers of various journals and by colleagues and experts in the field.

Our client received an RFE because he did not demonstrate his “exceptional ability” and outstanding past accomplishments by using the standards for NIW. The landmark immigration case that discusses the standards for NIWs is Matter of New York State Department of Transportation , 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Comm.1998). This case held that the qualifying applicant must show the following elements in his or her I-140 NIW petition: First, it must be shown that the alien seeks employment in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. Next, it must be shown that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver must establish that the alien will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U. S. worker having the same minimum qualifications.

Our client retained us on October 24, 2014. He received seven (7) more letters of recommendation from his colleagues and internationally-recognized scientists for his Response to RFE. Our office prepared a 28-page brief for our client’s Response to RFE. Our office also included his publication records, presentation records, and conference materials in the NIW application.  In the response brief, we demonstrated the intrinsic merit of our client’s research in the United States, the national scope of his research, and asserted that our client would serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications.

Our office filed his Response to RFE to the USCIS Texas Service Center on December 10, 2014 with substantial amount of supporting documents. On April 6, 2015, the USCIS approved his I-140 petition. When he filed his I-140 petition, he simultaneously filed his adjustment of status application (I-485). Since his I-140 petition was approved, his adjustment of status application will likely be approved soon.

{ 0 comments }