CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status.
NATIONALITY: Indonesian
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

The marriage-based green card approval we got recently was for an Indonesian client who came to the U.S. on a J-1 Visa in April 2008.  He came to the U.S. for business training, but his J-1 program subjected him to the two-year foreign residency requirement. In October 2011, our client married his U.S. Citizen wife.  He had to get a waiver of his two-year foreign residency requirement so he consulted with our office and later retained us on January 4, 2012.

As explained in a previous success story, our office worked on our client’s J-1 waiver.  Eventually, the Indonesian Embassy issued a No Objection Statement for our client, and sent this letter to the State Department’s Waiver Review Division.  On February 16, 2012, the Waiver Review Division issued a favorable recommendation based on the No Objection statement. The CIS has receipted the fee and issued an I-612 approval notice for our client’s waiver of the two-year foreign residency requirement on March 7, 2012.

After we received the I-612 waiver, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 petition and I-485 adjustment of status application on April 24, 2012.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.  Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients at our office.  On August 9, 2012, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland USCIS office.  We accompanied our client at his interview as well.  On August 10, 2012, his green card application was approved.

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 marriage green card immigration 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: Immigration Bond Court Hearing / Release from Detention
APPLICANT: Guatemalan
LOCATION: Cleveland Immigration Court, Ohio

Our office was contacted in the middle of July regarding a Guatemalan who was recently picked up by the Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) officers and detained in Ohio. He entered the United States without inspection in 2006.

Prior to retention, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement told us that they have a no bond issuance for our clients, because he was single, had a probation violation issue, has no family ties, and no permanent address. Our client wished to be released.

Upon retention, we filed a motion for bond redetermination with the Cleveland Immigration Court in Ohio. Our office communicated with our client and his U.S. resident relative in Cleveland, and gathered as much information regarding his relief, equities, family ties, and financial ability to post bond. We also gathered supporting documents from those relatives, from proof of their status and residence, to bank statements and tax returns.

On August 7, 2012, we represented our client at his Cleveland Immigration Court master calendar and bond hearings. For the Master Calendar hearing, we did pleadings and sought asylum relief. During the bond re-determination hearing, we explained to the Court that our client was not a flight risk, had established his residence upon release, had established his financial ability to post bond, and that he had ample family ties in the United States who submitted proof of their residence and immigration status. Our office explained that his designated address with contact information from his relative in the United States, ability to post bond, and eligibility for asylum relief clearly demonstrate that the bond should be set. At the end of the hearing, the Immigration Judge took our arguments into account and set the bond for our client at $7500.

Our client has been released, and he is now in the process of preparing his asylum application.

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 immigration bond hearing and release from detention 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: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)
APPLICANT: Ukrainian
LOCATION: Ohio

Our client contacted us in March 2012 to seek legal representation for her naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. She came to the United States from Ukraine and obtained her green card in 1993. She retained our office for her naturalization and citizenship N-400 application on March 28, 2012.

The naturalization and citizenship N-400 application was filed on April 12, 2012 with all supporting documents. Our office prepared her before her naturalization interview, and also accompanied her on July 31, 2012 at the Cleveland CIS office. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed her naturalization and citizenship N-400 interview. Eventually, her naturalization application was approved. Her oath taking will be scheduled soon in which she will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

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 naturalization and citizenship N-400 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: Motion to Terminate Removal Proceedings Based on an Approved I-130 Immediate Relative Spousal Petition
CLIENT: Senegalese
LOCATION: Baltimore, MD

Our client is a Senegalese citizen who came to the U.S. on an F-1 Student Visa in August 2006 to study at a college in Maryland.  As our previous success story explained, our client had a final order of removal in absentia, but his case was reopened after our office’s successful Motion to Reopen in January 2012.

Our client and his wife married in October 2010, and retained our office on March 3, 2011. Our office immediately filed an I-130 Petition with bona fide marriage evidence on March 23, 2011.  While the I-130 petition was pending, our client appeared at the Baltimore Immigration Court on February 15, 2012 for his initial master calendar hearing.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office represented him at the hearing, did pleadings and sought adjustment of status relief upon approval of the I-130 petition.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on May 4, 2012 at Baltimore USCIS Filed Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and his wife rough conference call. Attorney Yu also accompanied them for their interview. The interview lasted more than one hour, but the I-130 petition was eventually approved on the same day.

After the I-130 was approved, our office filed a Motion to Terminate Removal Proceedings with the I-485 application and supporting documents to the Baltimore Immigration Court. The DHS counsel in Baltimore did not oppose the Motion to Terminate Removal Proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to Terminate Removal Proceedings without prejudice. Our client is not in removal proceedings anymore. Now, he can file his I-485 adjustment of status application to USCIS to obtain 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 more success stories, please click here.

For more motion to terminate removal proceedings success stories, please click here.

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: 2nd Circuit Appeal / Asylum / Christianity – Religion
CLIENT: Chinese
LOCATION: Virginia

Our client came to the United States without a valid visa and passport from China in 1996.  In 2006, our client filed an asylum application based on the fact that he has two children. This application was referred to the New York Immigration Court.  In April 2007, the New York Immigration Court granted our client’s asylum application. The government appealed and in August 2008, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) reversed the Immigration Court’s decision. In 2009, our client filed an amended application so that he can pursue his claim based on religion – that he was baptized subsequent to the Board’s decision.  Unfortunately, in October 2009, the Immigration Judge denied the asylum application, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture claims. Our client filed an appeal immediately, but the BIA dismissed the appeal. The BIA found that the time limitation barred our client’s asylum application.

In November 2011, our client contacted our office for her Second Circuit Appeal. Our office determined that our client has a good chance for winning an appeal with the Second Cicuit. Our client retained our office on November 30, 2011 for his appeal to the federal Second Circuit Court. On April 13, 2012, our office filed a brief to the Second Circuit stating that the Board of Immigration Appeals abused its discretion when they denied our client’s asylum application.  Specifically, we argued that although the asylum was filed outside the one year period, the time limitation does not bar our client’s asylum application due to the fact that he became a Christian less than a year before he filed his second asylum claim. On July 12, 2012, the Second Circuit Court remanded our client’s case to the BIA for further consideration of our client’s previous asylum claim.

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.

For any questions, feel free to comment below or contact our office directly.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: G4 Son and Daughter I-360 and I-485
CLIENT: Filipino
LOCATION: Arlington Virginia

Our clients (son and daughter of their G4 visa holding mother – employee of an international organization) came to the US on G4 derivative visas in 2004. One came at the age of thirteen, and another at the age of nine. They have resided in Virginia ever since, on valid G4 status, as their mother worked for an international organization on a G4 visa also since 2004. They’ve heard of a process in which a G4 son or daughter can apply for permanent residency after meeting certain age and physical presence requirements, and having been here since 2004 on G4 visas, they consulted with attorneys. They retained our firm in March 2012 for their I-360 Special Immigrant Self-Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Green Card Application (Permanent Residency),

The I-360 sought to classify the self-petitioner as a special immigrant unmarried son or daughter of an international organization employee (their mother on a G4 visa) under INA § 203(b)(4).

INA 101(a)(27)(I)(i) defines such an alien as “an immigrant who is the unmarried son or daughter of an officer or employee, or of a former officer or employee, of an international organization described in paragraph (15)(G)(i), and who:

(I) While maintaining the status of a G4 nonimmigrant, has resided and been physical present in the United States for periods totaling at least one-half of the seven years before the date of application and for a period or periods aggregating at least seven years between the ages of five and 21 years
(II) Applies for adjustment of status no later than his or her twenty-fifth birthday…

The I-360 Self-Petition for G4 Sons and Daughters and their I-485 Adjustment of Status Green Card Applications were filed on March 7, 2012. The I-360 Self-Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application (Green Card / Permanent Resident) showed ample proof of their residency the past seven plus years, including school records for each year. The G4 visas and entry stamps were documented. We also had a letter from the international organization their mother worked at evidencing her employment with them on a G4 visa since 2004. We also emphasized on our brief the ages and dates relevant to the calculations involved in adjudicating these G4 special immigrant green card cases. Forms I-508 and I-566 were also submitted, as is required for G4 visa holders applying for adjustment of status. On July 16, 2012, the I-360 and I-485 were both approved. After spending the past eight years in the United States as G4 visa holders, they finally are now permanent residents 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 employment immigration success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 2 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Ethiopian
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States in August 2009 with an F-1 Student visa from Ethiopia.  She married a U.S. Citizen in December 2011 and retained our office on March 31, 2012 for her adjustment of status application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on April 13, 2012.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients at our office. On July 24, 2012, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS.  On July 26, 2012, her green card application was approved.

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 marriage-based green card 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: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)
APPLICANT: Ukraine
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in March 2011 to seek legal assistance for his naturalization application. His main issue was his English language skills. Despite obtaining his green card in 1993, he said he did not speak good English.  He came to the United States from Ukraine and obtained his green card in 1993.  He retained our office on March 28, 2012 to assist in his citizenship application.

Our client was born in 1955. He became a Permanent Resident of the United States in1993. Under INA Section 312(b)(2) and 8 U.S.C. Section 1423(b)(2), the English language requirement shall not apply to (1) persons who are over 50 and have lived in the U.S. for 20 years in LPR status; or (2) persons who are over 55 and have lived in the United States for 15 years in LPR status.

When our firm was retained and prior to filing, our client was 57 years old and had lived in the United States as a green card holder for more than 18 years. Accordingly, we argued based on the said statute that he sufficiently met the waiver of the English Language Test, and that he was also permitted to take the civics test in his own language. Attorney Sung Hee Yu accompanied our client at the interview, and his naturalization interview was conducted in his native language.  On July 26, 2012, his naturalization application (N-400) was approved. His oath taking will be scheduled soon in which he will be a naturalized Citizen.

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 naturalization 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: N-400 Citizenship / Naturalization
APPLICANT: Indian
LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio
ISSUEs: Rebuttable Presumption / Continuous Residence

Our client contacted us in late April of 2012. He came to the United States from India as a derivative beneficiary of his father’s immigrant visa in 2007 and became a permanent resident. He retained our office for his naturalization application on May 3, 2012. The main issue of his naturalization case was the two long, over six-month trips that he had within the past four years.

According to INA §316(b) and 8 C.F.R. §316.5.(c)(1)(i), an absence between 6 months and 1 year from the United States raises a rebuttable presumption that continuity of residence has been interrupted. That would be an issue in naturalization cases, where continuity of residence is essential. Applicants with this issue should rebut that presumption should they wish to apply.

Our client was out of the United States for almost a year in two consecutive years. Our client was in India during those times to completion his undergraduate studies.  In our brief, we cited Li v. Chertoff, 490 F.Supp.2d 130 (D. Mass. 2007), which held that in cases where an applicant left the country to study abroad after they became a permanent resident, the courts have ruled that such study does not result in abandonment of residency. We asked the CIS to also apply this to our client’s case since the facts in the Li case is very analogous to our client’s.

The brief and his N-400 application were filed on May 14, 2012 with all necessary supporting documents. Our office prepared him for his interview, and also accompanied him on July 24, 2012 at the Cleveland CIS office. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his citizenship interview. We emphasized the brief as well and her reasons for his long trips to India. His N-400 was approved after the interview. His oath taking is scheduled soon where he will become a U.S. Citizen.

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 naturalization success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

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

{ 1 comment }

CASE: PERM Labor Certification
EMPLOYER: Hospital
BENEFICIARY: Filipino Doctor
LOCATION: Erie, PA

Our client is a family doctor from the Philippines, who is currently working at a hospital in Erie Pennsylvania who was willing to do an immigration petition him for a second-preference petition (I-140).  Our client has an M.D. degree and is a licensed doctor in the state of Pennsylvania. He has maintained his status as an H-1B visa holder in the United States.  After talking to our client, our firm concluded that his potential employer can petition him as a Family Medicine Physician. Based on our client’s educational, professional and working background as a family doctor, our office determined that he is clearly eligible for the EB-2 classification for his I-140 petition.

Prior to filing PERM labor certification, 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 the PERM Labor Certification application could be filed at least 60 days from the job posting date or 30 days from the last ad. Within a week from our retention, the prevailing wage request was filed.  On May 10, 2012, we filed the PERM labor certification application.  Eventually, on July 17, 2012, a little after two months from filing, the PERM labor certification was approved – an EB2 position for the Filipino doctor. Now our client can file the I-140 Petition. He can file the I-485 green card application and I-765 once the priority dates becomes current.

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 PERM labor certification 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 }