CASE: H-1B Visa Petition

PETITIONER:  Nursing Care Company in Ohio

BENEFICIARY: Cambodian Compliance Manager

Our client is a Nursing Care Company in Ohio that works with individuals and doctors to design home care plans to meet their needs. They contacted our office in the middle of March 2013 to seek legal assistance for its foreign beneficiary’s H-1B visa petition.

The beneficiary is a Cambodian who obtained her Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree in Law in Cambodia, and also an LLM from George Washington University. The proffered position for the Beneficiary was for a Compliance Manager which we argued qualified as a specialty occupation. We argued that the minimum requirement for this position is a Bachelor’s Degree in Law or its equivalent.

Upon retention, our firm prepared and eventually filed the H-1B visa petition with various supporting documents on April 1, 2013 via regular processing. The USCIS Vermont Service Center issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) on May 23, 2013.

The USCIS argued that the offered position does not qualify as a “specialty occupation.” They claimed that the business was new and that a Bachelor’s degree was not required for this position.  They claimed that the beneficiary’s position is not specialized and complex enough to be qualified as a specialty occupation as the law requires.

In response to the RFE, our office argued in an 6-page response brief with 10 exhibits that the nature of the specific duties are so specialized and complex that knowledge required to perform the duties is usually associated with the attainment of a Bachelor’s degree.  Moreover, we argued that the degree requirement is common to the industry in parallel positions among similar organizations.

Our office filed the response to the USCIS Vermont Service Center on June 12, 2013. Our client’s H-1B application was approved on September 17, 2013. Now the Beneficiary can work for the Petitioner on an H-1B status until September 23, 2016.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: H-1B Extension

PETITIONER: Advertising Media Company

BENEFICIARY: Albanian Graphic Designer

LOCATION: California

Our client is a Graphic Designer from Albania who currently works at an Advertising Media Company in the greater Los Angeles area. She is on a valid H-1B visa. Her H-1B status was about to expire in September 2013.  Our client sought legal assistance from us for her H-1B 3-year extension and retained our office on March 14, 2013.

Upon retention, our office prepared her H-1B extension application.  The Labor Condition Application was filed and approved and eventually our office filed the H-1B extension application on May 17, 2013 to the USCIS California Service Center. We made sure there were sufficient arguments and documents to support the case that a “graphic designer” in this instance is a “specialty occupation.” There was no Request for Evidence with the filing and the Petitioner did not opt for premium processing. The case was approved on September 11, 2013. The H-1B is good from October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2016.

{ 0 comments }

Case: TPS Extension
Client: El Salvadoran
Location: Cleveland, OH

The Secretary of Homeland Security may designate a foreign country for Temporary Protected Status due to conditions in the country that temporarily prevent the country’s nationals from returning safely, or in certain circumstances, where the country is unable to handle the return of its nationals adequately. USCIS may grant TPS to eligible nationals of certain countries (or parts of countries), who are already in the United States. Eligible individuals without nationality who last resided in the designated country may also be granted TPS. The Secretary may designate a country for TPS due to the following temporary conditions in the country: 1) Ongoing armed conflict (such as civil war); 2) An environmental disaster (such as earthquake or hurricane), or 3) an epidemic or other extraordinary and temporary condition. During a designated period, individuals who are TPS beneficiaries or who are found preliminarily eligible for TPS upon initial review of their cases (prima facie eligible):

• Are not removable from the United States
• Can obtain an employment authorization document (EAD)
• May be granted for travel authorization

Once granted TPS, an individual also cannot be detained by DHS on the basis of his or her immigration status in the United States.
Our client first entered the United States in 2000 and has resided in the U.S. ever since. He had obtained TPS and work permits for a long time. He contacted our office in June 2013 for his TPS extension and work permit. Our client retained us on July 1, 2013. On July 2, 2013, our office filed his TPS Application and Work Permit with a brief regarding his eligibility. We explained that our client has continued residence in the United States and continued physical presence since 2000. On August 30, 2013, the USCIS approved his TPS and issued a valid work permit for our client.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Administrative Closure in Removal Proceedings

CLIENT: Mexican

LOCATION: Atlanta, GA

Our client came to the United States in April 1994 from Mexico. When he entered the U.S, he was not inspected and admitted. He has stayed in the United States ever since and never left.  He now lives in Atlanta, GA with two U.S. citizen children. He is a good worker and a good father for his kids.

In 2010, he was picked up and detained by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Moreover, he did not even know he had a final order of removal, so he contacted our office.  With our office’s assistance, he filed a Motion to Reopen in Absentia and this Motion was granted by the Atlanta Immigration Court in 2010.  After that he was placed in removal proceeding again.

On August 25, 2011, Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office represented our client at his master calendar hearing at the Atlanta Immigration Court. We did pleadings and asked for cancellation of removal for non-LPR relief. The individual hearing was scheduled for September 11, 2013.

Our client did not have enough hardships and we understood we were with one of the toughest judges in the country, so with consent from our client, our office sought prosecutorial discretion with the DHS to administratively close our client’s case. We note that our client at this point already obtained his work permit.

Our request was based on John Morton’s Memorandum issued on June 17, 2011. Former USCIS Director John Morton issued a memorandum clarifying and expanding prior Immigration and Customs Enforcement directives regarding prosecutorial discretion.

This memorandum notes that prosecutorial discretion should be exercised in a wide range of situations including “granting deferred action, granting parole, or staying a final order of removal.” ICE now considers nineteen non-exclusive factors, including the following factors relevant to this case:

• The agency’s civil immigration enforcement priorities;
• The person’s length of presence in the United States, with particular consideration given to presence while in lawful status;
• The person’s criminal history, including arrests, prior convictions, or outstanding arrest warrants;
• The person’s immigration history, including any prior removal, outstanding order    of removal, prior denial of status, or evidence of fraud;
• Whether the person poses a national security or public safety concern;
• The person’s ties and contributions to the community, including family relationships;
• The person’s ties to the home country and conditions in the country;
• whether the person has a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, child, or parent;

No one factor is determinative and decisions to exercise prosecutorial discretion should be based on the totality of the circumstances.

On July 25, 2013, our office filed a written request to administratively close proceedings for our client. In the brief, we argued that most factors weigh heavily in favor of an exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Our client has been in the U.S. for 19 years, and has two Citizen children. Also, he has never been convicted of any crime, and has always paid taxes. He fully supports his kinds, and sends them to school. We also argued that it would be tough for his family if he was to be deported, considering he is the sole supporter of his two U.S. citizen children throughout their lives.  Our office included numerous letters of support from his co-workers and friends, tax records, criminal record search, and other supporting documents.

On September 11, 2013, at his Individual Hearing, the DHS requested administrative closure for our client’s case based on our request. The court granted the request, and our client’s case is now administratively closed. He can now continue staying in the United States, work legally due to his work permit, and continue renewing it while his case is administratively closed.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage Based I-130 petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Filipina
LOCATION: Houston, TX

Our client came to the United States in September 2010 with a B-2 visitor’s visa from the Philippines.

She later changed her status from B-2 to F-1 when she enrolled in school.

She then married a U.S. Citizen in March 2013 and retained our office on May 2, 2013 for her adjustment of status application.

Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and Adjustment of Status Application on May 21, 2013.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.

Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients through conference calls.

On September 9, 2013, our client was interviewed at the Houston, Texas USCIS office.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well. On the same day, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Ghanaian

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client contacted our office in early May this year regarding his I-751 application.

He is from Ghana, married to a U.S. citizen since August 2009. Through his marriage, he obtained a 2-year conditional green card in July of 2011.  His conditional residency terminated in July 2013.

To comply with immigration requirements, our client and his wife had to file an I-751 Joint Petition to Remove Conditions. He retained our office on May 14, 2013 and our office prepared an I-751 application for our client with other supplemental exhibits.

On June 7, 2013, our office filed an I-751 application to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from his friends and family members, joint tax filing records, a birth certificate of their child, joint bank statements, utility bills, insurance policies, and photos of our client and his wife to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

Once the application was filed, the fingerprint notice was issued two weeks later. There was no RFE issuance for our client’s I-751 application. On August 29, 2013, our client and his wife were requested to appear for an interview at the USCIS Cleveland Office.  Prior to the interview, our office prepared them thoroughly. We also accompanied them at the interview as well. The interview went well, and as a result, on the same day, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application and our client received his 10-year green card.

{ 0 comments }

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

Our client is a U.S. citizen who married his wife in Tbilisi, Georgia in December 2012.  After the marriage, he came back to the United States and contacted our office in early January 2013 and retained us to bring his wife to the States.

Our office prepared and filed the I-130 to the USCIS in January 8, 2013. After the I-130 was filed, everything went smoothly, there were no requests for evidence, and the receipt notices came on time.

The I-130 Petition was approved on March 11, 2013.

After the I-130 approval, we filed the immigrant visa packets to the National Visa Center on May 24, 2013, who in turn forwarded our client’s materials to the U.S. Embassy in Tbilisi, Georgia. An interview notice was set for the client at the US Embassy in Tbilisi, and we prepared her for the interview. On August 7, 2013, the interview was conducted.  Eventually, on August 30, 2013, the U.S. Embassy in Tbilisi, Georgia approved and issued her immigrant visa.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751 / Response to RFE

APPLICANT: Filipina

LOCATION: Ohio

Our client contacted our office in the middle of March this year regarding a Response to RFE for her I-751 application filing. She is from the Philippines and got her 2-year conditional green card through her marriage to her U.S. citizen husband.  She obtained a 2-year conditional green card in June of 2010, and her conditional residency terminated in June 2012.

To comply with immigration requirements, our client and her husband filed an I-751 Joint Petition to Remove Conditions before June 2012. However, she did not have an attorney back then, and did not submit sufficient evidence to prove the bona fideness of her marriage to her U.S. citizen husband. As a result of that, on February 14, 2013, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) for our client’s I-751 filing.

After consulting, she retained our office on March 27, 2013.

We reviewed the CIS’ RFE letter and prepared our response.  On May 7, 2013, our office filed the Response to RFE to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from her friends and family members, joint bank statements, utility bills, insurance policies, and photos of our client and her husband to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

After that, there was no interview request for our client’s I-751 application. Instead, on August 26, 2013, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application and our client received her 10-year green card which removed the condition.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Korean

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client contacted our office in early April this year regarding her I-751 application.

She is from South Korea and married a U.S. citizen in January 2010. Through her marriage with, she obtained a 2-year conditional green card in July of 2011.  Her conditional residency terminated in July 2013.

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 again on April 17, 2013 and our office prepared an I-751 application for our client with other supplemental exhibits.

On May 2, 2013, our office filed an I-751 application to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from her friends and family members, 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. There was no RFE issuance or interview request for our client’s I-751 application. As a result, on August 22, 2013, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application and our client received her 10-year green card which removed the conditions.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Indian
LOCATION: New York, NY

Our client came to the United States in 2007 with an H-1B work visa from India.  He married a U.S. Citizen in September 2012 and retained our office on March 4, 2013 for his adjustment of status application.

Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and Adjustment of Status Application on April 8, 2013.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.

Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients through conference calls.

On August 22, 2013, our client was interviewed at the New York City, NY USCIS.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well.

On August 23, 2013, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }