CASE: I-821D Application for Consideration for Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals / I-765 Employment Authorization DocumentAPPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Korean Client in Dayton, OH

As our office explained before on our website, the USCIS issued a memorandum in August 2012 regarding deferred action of childhood arrivals cases.  According to the USCIS Deferred Action Memorandum issued in August 2012, an individual who meets the following criteria may apply for deferred action:

• Was under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
• Came to the U.S. before reaching his/her 16th birthday;
• Has continuously resided in the U.S. since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
• Was physically present in the U.S. on June 15, 2012, and at the time of application to the USCIS;
• Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;
• Is currently in school, has graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, has obtained a GED, or is an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. Coast Guard or the U.S. Armed Forces; and
• Has not been convicted of a felony, a “significant misdemeanor,” three or more other misdemeanors, or does not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety;

Our client’s brother contacted our office immediately after he heard of this relief on the news.  His younger brother, our client, initially came to the United States in December 2000 with a valid B-2 visitors visa when he was only 8 years old.

As of June 15, 2012, our client was twenty (20) years old.   Also, our client was studying at a college in Dayton, Ohio. Our client went to grade school, middle school and graduated from high school in the United States.  Also, since his last entry to the United States in December 2000, our client never left the United States.

He was physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012 and has continuously resided here since December, 2000. Our client has never been convicted of a felony, a “significant misdemeanor,” three or more other misdemeanors, and does not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.  So, our client was clearly eligible for deferred action.

Our client retained us on August 21, 2012.  Once retained, we informed him of all supporting documents we would need.  Our client and his family members sent us supporting documents that prove our client’s education history, physical presence in the United States, and his initial entry to the United States.  Our office also prepared Form I-821D and I-765, and drafted a detailed cover letter demonstrating why our client should merit this relief.

On August 30, 2012, our office filed his I-821D and I-765 to the USCIS.  Our client went to the ASC Appointment (Biometric appointment) at the Cincinnati USCIS office on October 2, 2012.  On November 2, 2012, the USCIS approved our client’s I-821D and I-765.  It is good for two years, and our client can now work and study in the United States lawfully.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: H-1B Visa Petition

PETITIONER:  Capital Investment Company in Georgia

BENEFICIARY: Lithuanian International Compliance Manager

Our client is a Capital Investment Company in Georgia which owns local and international travel clubs and sells memberships. They contacted our office in late April of 2012 to seek legal assistance for its foreign beneficiary’s H-1B visa petition.

The beneficiary is Lithuanian and obtained her Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree in International Law in Lithuania. She has worked for different companies in the United States on an H-1B visa and got an offer from our client. The proffered position for the Beneficiary was for an International 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 International Law/Relations or its equivalent.

Upon retention, our firm prepared and eventually filed the H-1B visa petition with various supporting documents on May 1, 2012 via premium processing. However, the USCIS Vermont Service Center issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) on July 13, 2012.

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 15 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 October 1, 2012. Our client’s H-1B application was approved 15 days later on October 15, 2012. Now the Beneficiary can work for the Petitioner on an H-1B status until March 31, 2015.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other H-1B success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Cancellation of Removal for Permanent Residents
CLIENT: Peruvian (Green card holder / detained)
LOCATION: Cleveland Immigration Court in Ohio

Our client came to the United States in 1992 when he was a child. Through INA Section 245i, he got his green card in 2001. He has been in the US ever since. His brother and mother are both US Citizens.

Unfortunately he was convicted of certain crimes over the past decade. He had domestic violence, theft, DUI, and violation of protection order convictions. Because of these the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) picked him up and detained him in August of this year. He was not eligible for a bond due to his criminal convictions. He was also removable on three grounds due to those convictions.

Our client’s friends and family members contacted our office in late August for legal representation. We were retained on August 27, 2012. The case at the onset was tough. He was not married to a US Citizen. He had US Citizen kids but they don’t live with him. He had family in the US, a US citizen brother and mother, but they both reside in New Jersey. His grounds for removability were also based on three grounds. His only relief was Cancellation of Removal. It was going to be a tough case. We knew it and he knew it.

Prior to his hearing, we visited our client twice in jail. Over the course of the entire representation, our firm’s attorneys visited our client more than five times. Our client appeared at his master calendar hearing at the Cleveland Immigration Court in Ohio via televideo from the detention facility and Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu represented him at the hearing and sought cancellation of removal relief for permanent residents.

Under INA Section 240A(a), for a permanent resident to be eligible for Cancellation of Removal, the alien must prove that s/he:

• Has been an LPR (green card holder) for at least five years;
• Has resided in the United States continuously for seven years after having been admitted in any status;
• Has not been convicted of an aggravated felony; and
• Merits a favorable exercise of discretion.

The criteria for favorable exercise of discretion was explained in Matter of C-V-T-, 22 I&N Dec. 7 (BIA 1998). The BIA in C-V-T stated that the factors that the immigration judge must consider when deciding whether to grant cancellation of removal to a lawful permanent resident are as follows:

The positive factors are:
• family ties in the United States, particularly ties to lawful permanent residents or U.S. citizens;
• residence of long duration in the U.S. (particularly when the inception of residence occurred at a young age);
• evidence of hardship to the Respondent and his family if deportation occurs;
• service in the U.S. armed forces;
• a history of employment;
• existence of property or business ties;
• evidence of value and service to the community;
• proof of genuine rehabilitation if a criminal record exists;
• other evidence attesting to a Respondent’s good character.

Adverse factors include:

• nature and underlying circumstances of the grounds of removal;
• the presence of additional significant violations of the Immigration Laws;
• the nature, recency, and seriousness of criminal records; and
• the presence of other evidence has been indicative of a respondent’s bad character or undesirability as a permanent resident of the U.S.

Generally, the immigration judge must weigh the positive factors against the negative factors in exercising her discretion.

After the Master Calendar Hearing, the Court scheduled the individual hearing date on October 17, 2012.

Our firm worked with our client and his friends and family members for the application and supplemental documents. We contacted his family members in other states for supporting documents and letters of support for our client’s case.

In preparing our client for the Individual Hearing, Attorney Yu visited our client multiple times at the Bedford Heights detention facility, meeting for several hours each time. Obviously the central issue in this case would be whether or not our client’s positive factors outweigh the negative factors. Our firm eventually was able to gather supporting documents and prepared supplemental evidence with multiple exhibits, and arranged them pursuant to the specific elements of Cancellation of Removal eligibility.

At the Individual Hearing on October 17, 2012, Attorney Yu represented our client at the Cleveland Immigration Court. Testimony then followed and we questioned our client extensively on the positive factors of his case. Attorney Yu questioned him regarding his length of residence in the U.S., employment history, educational history, family issues and hardships to him and his family members if he was to be deported to Peru. Our client was prepared, was very consistent, and was honest in his answers. The extensive questioning and detailed testimony of our client took so much time that the hearing had to be continued.

On November 2, 2012, our client’s Individual Hearing was resumed. The government counsel did extensive cross-examination regarding our client’s criminal history and other issues. Also, some of our client’s family members and friends testified as witnesses.

During the closing argument, Attorney Yu argued why our client merits a favorable exercise of discretion according to the C-V-T- factors. The government of course focused on the negative factors in his case, those issues which we mentioned at the start of this success story.

In the end, the Cleveland Immigration Court granted our client’s cancellation of removal relief. It was a tough call and our firm was very happy for our client. He has been here since 1992 but had a few bumps along the way. He has reformed, will finish his studies, and will continue supporting his kids. It was obviously an emotional moment as his mom, aunt, grandmother, and friends were in Court.

He soon will be released, and he will get back his green card.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other Cancellation of Removal success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Cancellation of Removal for Non-Permanent Resident
CLIENT: Kenyan
LOCATION: Respondent resides in St. Louis, MO / Kansas City Immigration Court in MO

Our client retained our firm back in March 2010 from St. Louis, MO. She came to the United States in 1999 from Kenya with a J-1 exchange visitor visa. She has one U.S. citizen son who has serious food allergies, asthma, and eczema, and she has not had lawful status in the United States since her J-1 visa is expired. She was subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement. She was a single mom. The father of her child left her while she was pregnant.

The first thing we did for her was file an I-612 J-1 hardship waiver. She would not be able to adjust status without that. And our firm won the hardship waiver for her.

She was then placed in removal proceedings and on July 12, 2011, our client appeared at her master calendar hearing at the Kansas City Immigration Court in Missouri, and Attorney JP Sarmiento represented her at the hearing and sought cancellation of removal relief for non-permanent residents.

For a non-permanent resident to be eligible for Cancellation of Removal, the alien must prove that s/he:

• Has been physically present in the U.S. continuously for ten years prior to the issue date of the Notice to Appear;
• Has been a person of good moral character;
• Has not been convicted of any crimes that would make her/him inadmissible;
• Her/his removal would cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her/his U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, parent, or child.

The Court scheduled the individual hearing date on March 14, 2012.

Our firm worked with our client for the application and supplemental documents. We called her several times for supporting documents, and obtained the medical records from her son’s hospital. Obviously the central issue in this case would be whether or not our client has established exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her qualifying relative, her U.S. citizen son.

As mentioned above, our client’s U.S. citizen son suffered from serious food allergies. He also suffers from eczema and was treated for asthma, though his asthma was in remission for a period of time. Our firm eventually was able to gather supporting documents and prepared supplemental evidence with multiple exhibits, and arranged them pursuant to the specific elements of Cancellation of Removal eligibility.

We arranged the medical documents for our client’s son as well. We arranged all her physical presence documents according to the specific year they referred to, and filed them with the Kansas City Immigration Court. We then prepared the client for her hearing, and focused on the extreme and exceptional hardships her U.S. Citizen son would face.

At the Individual Hearing on March 14, 2012, Attorney JP Sarmiento represented our client at the Kansas City Immigration Court. Testimony then followed and we questioned our client extensively on the hardships her U.S. Citizen son would face. Our client was prepared, was very consistent, and was honest in her answers. She was detailed with the specific medical issues of her son. She testified that her son’s food allergies present a very serious health issue for her son in that he suffers anaphylaxis. However, the Court could not render the decision at the end of hearing due to the exhausted annual quota for Cancellation relief.

On October 3, 2012, the Kansas City Immigration Court granted our client’s cancellation of removal relief. The Court specifically noted that our client’s son’s food allergies, in the aggregate with his asthma and eczema, together with the fact that our client has been a single mother since pregnancy, would be an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship for him should he return to Kenya. The Judge mentioned that food labeling and medical treatment is not as readily available as in the United States. Finally, after 13 years of hard work and perseverance, our client is now a permanent resident (green card holder) of the United States.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other cancellation of removal success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Change of Status / I-539
NATIONALITY: Filipina
LOCATION: Hawaii
DATE FILED: August 9, 2012
DATE APPROVED: October 5, 2012

Our client came from the Philippines on an H-4 visa (Dependent of H-1B). She was about to turn 20 years old, and wanted to attend a college in the U.S. Her father was still on an H-1B in Cleveland, but the job was not as secure as it was before. If he loses his job, our client will also lose her H4 status.

Her family contacted us. As parents, they wanted the best for their daughter, regardless of what happens to them in the future. Should the family lose their status, they just want to make sure their daughter continues in the States and attend college. They had relatives in Hawaii and they wanted her to stay with them as she goes to college. So they contacted us to get legal assistance for her change of status from H-4 to F-1.

Upon retention, we went into detail with their reasons for requesting a change of status. We made sure all addresses, contact information, and dates on their statements were complete and accurate. We made sure the SEVIS fees were paid and we obtained the I-20 document from our client. We prepared a brief that explained our client’s financial ability to go to school in the U.S.

The application was supported by corroborating evidence as exhibits to the application to avoid a possible Request for Evidence from the CIS. Our firm filed the I-539 Extension Application on August 9, 2012. On October 5, 2012, her change of status application was approved by the USCIS with no Requests for Evidence. Now she can stay in the United States and go to college, regardless of what happens to her parents’ situation.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other F-1 visa success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact our office anytime for free consultations. <a href=”https://plus.google.com/107743308565341841259/posts?rel=author”>Google</a>

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-129F Fiancé Petition and Fiancé Visa
PETITIONER: US Citizen in Cleveland, OH
BENEFICIARY: Guyanese
PETITION FILED: May 21, 2012
VISA APPROVED: October 11, 2012

Our client, a US Citizen Petitioner, met her Guyanese fiancé in Barbados last year. A few months after she came back to the States, she retained our firm to get a visa for her fiancé.

We informed her of all supporting documents we would need, helped her and her fiancé draft a letter in support of the fiancé petition, and filed the petition on May 21, 2012.

On August 17, 2012, the I-129F fiancé petition was approved. Our client’s fiancé was then scheduled for a fiancé immigrant visa interview in early October 2012 at the US Embassy in Georgetown, Guyana. We prepared all forms and supporting documents for his interview and sent them by international mail to Guyana. He was also prepared prior to the interview.

On October 11, 2012, our client passed his fiancé visa interview. He would be reunited with our client in the U.S. soon and would get married within 90 days of his entry. From there he can apply for his green card.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other fiancé visa success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Asylum in Immigration Court
CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Cleveland Immigration Court

Our Cameroonian client came to the United States on an F-1 visa in December 2011. She was persecuted and harmed in Cameroon based on her political opinion and political activism, so within one year of her entry, she filed an asylum application (Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and relief under the CAT) to the USCIS.

She was interviewed at the Asylum Office in Chicago, but her case was referred to an immigration judge in July 2012. The Notice to Appear was issued and our client was placed in removal proceedings. The USCIS thought that our client’s testimony was different from that of her written statement.

After the case was referred to the Immigration Court, our client contacted our office in late July of 2012, and eventually retained our office on July 30, 2012.

Our client was scared to go back home to Cameroon, fearing that she will be persecuted based on her political opinion and her past participation with human rights activist groups. While our client was a college student in Cameroon, she became a human rights activist involved in educating and informing fellow students on campus about their basic fundamental rights. Our client organized some student movement activities, joined student marches against government’s actions and participated in political activities. As a result, she was arrested and detained multiple times by the Cameroonian police and has experienced harm and mistreatments in numerous occasions.

We helped her supplement her asylum application and represented her in immigration court hearings. We also asked her to provide supporting documents corroborating her claim, some of which were a letter from her parents, colleagues and friends in Cameroon, Cameroonian medical documents of our client’s injury, and her membership certification with the different human rights organizations. Our firm also did some research on articles related to her claim, and the type of persecution she will experience in Cameroon if sent back.

Our client’s individual hearing was scheduled on October 19, 2012 at the Cleveland Immigration Court. Attorney Sung Hee Yu from our firm prepared her extensively twice, both of which lasted several hours. He also represented our client at her Individual Hearing.

During the hearing, our client testified credibly as to her past persecution in Cameroon and likelihood of future persecution. After the hearing, the Immigration Judge granted asylum relief for our client. She is now an asylee who will get her work permit in two weeks and will be eligible to apply for permanent residency in one year.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other asylum success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: J-1 Waiver of the Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement, No Objection Statement
NATIONALITY: Nepalese
LOCATION: Maryland
FILED: August 24, 2012
APPROVED: October 15, 2012

Our Nepalese client came to the U.S. on a J-1 Visa in August 2006. She came to the U.S. for hospitality training, and her J-1 visa made her subject to the two-year foreign resident requirement.

Upon the completion of her program in 2007, she went back to Nepal and came back to the United States with a Q-1 visa. She did not fully fulfill her 2 year foreign residency requirement in Nepal.

In May 2009, our client married his U.S. Citizen husband and she wanted to apply for permanent residency. Her husband filed an I-130 petition, and this was approved by the USCIS in February 2011. However, due to the two-year foreign residency requirement, she had to obtain a waiver first before she file the adjustment of status application. Either that or she has to go back to Nepal and finish her two-year requirement..

After she retained our firm, we prepared and filed a waiver request through a No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Nepalese Embassy in the United States. Our office contacted the Nepalese Embassy in Washington D.C. to make sure we had all the requirements needed for their office to issue a no objection statement. The Embassy requested numerous documents including a statement of reason for the waiver, the applicant’s resume, a copy of her valid Indonesian passport, the approved copy of I-130 notice, a copy of DS-2019, and a copy of Third Party Bar Code Page

On August 24, 2012 the J-1 Waiver (Form DS-3035) Application was filed to the Department of State. We also sent a request to the Nepalese 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 marriage based adjustment of status application but for the waiver.

The Nepalese Embassy eventually issued a No Objection Statement for our client, and sent this letter to the State Department’s Waiver Review Division. On September 24, 2012, 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 October 15, 2012. Now that our client’s two-year foreign residency requirement is waived, she can file her green card / adjustment of status application with the approved I-130 petition.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other J-1 Waiver success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: J-1 Waiver of the Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement, No Objection Statement
NATIONALITY: Indonesian
LOCATION: New York, NY
FILED: August 2, 2012
DOS RECOMMENDATION: September 24, 2012
I-612 APPROVAL: October 5, 2012

Our Indonesian client came to the U.S. on a J-1 Visa in September 2000. She came to the U.S. for business training, and her J-1 visa made her subject to the two-year foreign resident requirement. She overstayed, and worked various jobs in New York.

In June 2012, our client married her U.S. Citizen husband and she wanted to apply for permanent residency. However, due to the two-year foreign residency requirement, she had to obtain a waiver first.

After she retained our firm, we prepared and filed a waiver request through a No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Indonesian Embassy in Washington DC. 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 her valid Indonesian passport, and a copy of Form DS-3035.

On August 2, 2012 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 marriage based adjustment 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 September 24, 2012, 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 October 5, 2012. Now that our client’s two-year foreign residency requirement is waived, she can file for adjustment of status application with her husband’s I-130 petition.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other J-1 waiver success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: J-2 Waiver of Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement Post-Divorce
NATIONALITY: Kenyan
LOCATION: Texas
FILED: August 23, 2012
DOS RECOMMENDATION: September 24, 2012
APPROVED:
Our client is a citizen of Kenya who came to the U.S. on a J-2 Visa in 2002. She came with her husband who held a J-1 Visa as a graduate student. Both were subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement.

Unfortunately, their marriage did not work out and she eventually got divorced from her ex-husband. She lost her J-2 status and she was still subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement.

She remained in the United States and fell in love with who would be her current U.S. Citizen husband. They got married in July 2012.

He wanted to file an I-130 petition for her, but she could not file for adjustment of status because of the 2 year foreign residency requirement.

In August of this year, our client’s relative contacted our office. She wanted us to help our client obtain a waiver so she can eventually file for her green card.

Our firm was retained to do her J-2 waiver on August 16, 2012. On August 23, 2012 the J-2 Waiver 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.

On September 24, 2012, the DOS recommended to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) that our client be granted a waiver. On October 10, 2012, the USCIS issued the I-612 waiver approval.

Now, our client’s U.S. citizen husband can file an I-130 petition for our client and our client can file her green card application with the waiver approval.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other J-2 waiver success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }