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

Our client came to the United States in November 2007 with an H-2B temporary work visa from the Philippines. She overstayed and later on married a U.S. Citizen in February 2011. They then retained our office in March 2011 for her green card.

Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and Adjustment of Status Application on April 13, 2011.  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. On July 11, 2011, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS.  We accompanied them at the interview as well.  On July 20, 2011, her green card application was approved and our client obtained her 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 marriage-based green card success stories, please click here.

For all our success stories, please click here.

Also fell free to contact our office anytime for a free consultation.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 Response to an Intent to Revoke
CLIENT: Chinese
LOCATION: Sacramento, California; Guangzhou China

Our Chinese client contacted our office in the middle of May. He was a U.S. Citizen living in California and sought legal assistance for his wife’s case in China. The USCIS, based on a request from the U.S. Embassy in Guangzhou, issued an intent to revoke his I-130 petition.

Our client married his Chinese citizen wife back in November 2008. This was the first marriage for both him and his wife. He mentioned that he never even had a girlfriend before, all the time consumed with work and school here in the United States. He is a civil engineer in Sacramento California.

Our client filed an I-130 petition for his wife in January 2009.  On March 20, 2009, the Director of the California Service Center approved the I-130 petition and his wife was eventually interviewed at the U.S. Embassy in Guangzhou. Her U.S. Citizen husband was even there during the interview. However, the U.S. Embassy denied her immigrant visa application, citing five reasons: failure to show a continuous bona fide relationship; their work, educational, and income discrepancy; the fact that they met through a “third party”; the lack of a wedding reception after the wedding; and the immediacy of the wedding from the U.S. Citizen’s entry to China. The approved I-130 petition was subsequently returned to the California Service Center by the Department of State for further review and action. The USCIS then issued a Notice of Intent to Revoke.

On its Notice of Intent to Revoke, the CIS specifically addressed the five issued brought up by the U.S. Embassy.  After our office received the Notice, our office spoke several times at length with our client. We obtained in detail their history, how they met, how many times they’ve seen each other, who in their respective families do they both know and who among them could provide affidavits attesting to their relationship, how they continue to communicate with each other and if documentation can be provided to prove those, etc. Our client realized that there were so many possible evidence to support his case, evidence he was not able to think of prior to his wife’s interview.

We then prepared a response brief, clearly separating our explanations and the respective supporting documents to address each of the five issues. We also worked with our client in obtaining supporting documents and affidavits, making sure we were as thorough and complete as possible, considering how strict the U.S. Embassy in Guangzhou is.

In our 14-page response brief, we addressed each of the issues thoroughly. We went through Respondent’s background and how his personality fits the simple and traditional nature of his Chinese wife, backed by affidavits from his own parents and family members. We emphasized the four trips our client had spanning the past 3 years, and attached over 100 pictures of him and his wife on several occasions with both their families and friends. Documentation about money wire transfers, gifts sent by international mail, detailed phone bills showing the international phone number of his wife and the local phone number of her husband in Sacramento, and over 10 affidavits from friends and families. We explained the reasons why they did not have a reception immediately after, and showed that 3 post-wedding “receptions” were actually held.
Our response to the Notice of Intent to Revoke contained 59 exhibits (Exhibits A to GGG) in support of the response brief.

Our office filed the Response to Intent to Revoke on July 7, 2011 with the USCIS California Service Center.  On July 21, 2011, the USCIS determined that they will not to revoke our client’s I-130 petition.  Since the I-130 petition remains approved, finally, after two and half years of separation since their marriage, our client’s wife can now obtain her Immigrant Visa in China, come to the United States, and obtain permanent residency.

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 further family-based success stories, please click here. For all other success stories, please click here.

Feel free to contact our office anytime for any questions. Our office provides free consultations.

{ 2 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status / J-1 Waiver
NATIONALITY: Korean
LOCATION: Ohio

Our South Korean client came to the U.S. on a J-1 Visa six years ago. Before her J-1 visa expired, she managed to get an F-1 visa and she continued her studies in Ohio.  According to her DS-2019, she was subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement.

Last year, she got married to her U.S. citizen husband and later on consulted with our firm for her adjustment of status (obtaining a green card). Her situation was unique because her passport’s visa page stated that she was not subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement.  However, her DS-2019 was clearly marked with the two-year foreign residency requirement.

To clarify the uncertainty, our office checked with the State Department by filing an advisory opinion request.  Our office promptly filed this advisory opinion request on July 27, 2010 to the Waiver Review Division of the Department of State.

Unfortunately, DOS stated that our client is subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement. After receiving this decision, our office promptly prepared a waiver request through a No Objection Statement (NOS) from the Korean Embassy in the United States.

On November 24, 2010 the J-1 Waiver 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 was eligible to adjust if she obtains the waiver.

The Korean Consulate General in Chicago promptly forwarded our client’s documents to the Korean Embassy in DC.  On January 18, 2011, the Korean Embassy issued a No Objection Statement for our client, and sent this letter to the State Department’s Waiver Review Division.  On January 28, 2011, the Waiver Review Division issued a favorable recommendation based on the No Objection statement.  Eventually, on February 23, 2011, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval notice for the waiver.

Once the waiver was issued, our office filed the I-130 Petition and I-485Adjustment of Status Application on April 20, 2011.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.  We thoroughly prepared our clients prior to the interview.   On July 8, 2011, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland USCIS office.  We accompanied them at the interview as well.  On July 11, 2011, her green card application was approved, and our client obtained her green card.

From having the two-year foreign residency requirement, our firm effectively helped her get a J-1 waiver before she adjusted her status.  She did not have to go to Korea for 2 years before she got her permanent residency in the United States. She’s now a green card holder.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Termination of Removal Proceedings / Adjustment of Status
ISSUES: 245i; Deceased Petitioner
CLIENT: Filipino
LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

This case involves a situation where the beneficiaries had to wait over ten years for priority dates to be current, only to have the petitioner die prior to that happening. Our client, his wife and son, are from the Philippines and came to the U.S. on B-2 visitor’s visas back in 2002. They overstayed their tourist status and have been out of status ever since.

Prior to retaining our firm, our client’s mother filed an I-130 petition for him back in 1992.  As some of you may know, the priority dates for Philippine nationals under the family-based immigration category are more retrogressed than other countries. The I-130 petition was approved by the INS in 1992.  However, our client could not apply for his green card until his priority date became current. He had to wait for almost 20 years in order to even apply for his green card.

Unfortunately, his mother (I-130 Petitioner) passed away before he was eligible to apply for his green card.  He and his family was placed in removal proceedings after the DHS found out about his overstay. He was under the impression that nothing could be done since his mother (the I-130) petitioner died.

Once he contacted our office, we explained that an October 2009 law can help his entire family obtain a green card. We can terminate removal proceedings and apply for adjustment of status application with a substitute sponsor – his U.S. Citizen sister. We also informed him that Section 245i would make him eligible to adjust despite his overstay.

Our office was retained in August 2010, and we later filed his I-485 Adjustment of Status application with a substitute sponsor (his US Citizen sister) and a Request to Join in a Motion to Terminate with the Department of Homeland Security before his immigration hearing. We explained this to the Judge and government attorney at the Cleveland Immigration Court.

As we explained in a previous Success Story, the regulation in 2009, Public Law 111-83 (2009), eased the high burden for beneficiaries whose petitioners died prior to their adjustment of status application.  The new regulation does not require “humanitarian reinstatement” anymore.  Therefore, as long as there is a qualified substitute sponsor for these beneficiaries, the beneficiaries are eligible for adjustment of status even if the original petitioners are deceased.

Our client’s US citizen sister was willing to become a substitute sponsor for our client. On September 27, 2010, our office filed a request to join in a Motion to Terminate Proceedings with the family’s I-485 applications and supporting documents.  Thereafter, with the government’s agreement, the Immigration Judge terminated our client’s removal proceedings on September 28, 2010.  With the Judge’s Order, our office filed our client’s I-485 Adjustment of Status applications with the USCIS on October 7, 2010.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.

On January 3, 2011, our clients had their I-485 interview at the USCIS Cleveland Office.  Our lawyer accompanied our client and his family members for the interview. The Interview went smoothly, but our client could not get his green card right away due to a slight retrogression of priority dates.  Fortunately, in July 2011, his priority date became current, and the USCIS immediately approved his entire family’s Adjustment of Status application. After a 19 year wait from the time our client’s mother filed an I-130 petition, to a 9 year wait from the time his family entered the United States, finally, our client’s family all have their green cards.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Jamaican
LOCATION: Newark, NJ

Our client came to the United States in March 2001 with a B-2 visitor visa from Jamaica.  Unfortunately, his visitor status expired in November 2001, and he overstayed in the United States without getting a new valid immigration status.

Our client was married before to a U.S. Citizen, but his case was denied sometime in 2006 due to affidavit of support issues. In December 2009, our client married his U.S. citizen spouse.  Thereafter, our client contacted our office around July of 2010.  Our attorney met him in New York in person and our client retained our office immediately. We made sure all issues pertaining to his criminal records and previous marriage were covered.  Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and Adjustment of Status Application on October 18, 2011.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.

The USCIS Newark District Office scheduled our client’s interview on March 21, 2011.  Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients over the phone. On March 21, 2011, our client was interviewed at the Newark USCIS office.   However, at the interview, the USCIS office requested for additional evidence with regard to our client’s previous arrest reports in Florida.  Although our client’s criminal cases were dismissed five years ago and we submitted documentation pertaining to those cases, the CIS office still requested a certified copy not just of the Court dispositions (which were submitted) but also of the arrest record. They even wrote on their Request for Evidence what specifically should be in the documents to be issued by the authorities in Florida

Throughout the next few weeks our office sent three written requests to the county court and police department in Southern Florida in order to obtain these documents. We called several times to explain what exactly immigration wanted.  Upon our request, the court sent certified copies of the requested documents, and our office promptly submitted those records to the CIS office in Newark.  Eventually, on June 30, 2011, his green card application was approved, and our client obtained 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. 

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Termination of Removal Proceedings for Adjustment of Status With CIS
CLIENT: Jordanian
LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is a Jordanian citizen who came to the U.S. on a B-2 Visa in 2008. She resides in the greater Cleveland area with her U.S. citizen husband.  They were married in 2006 in Jordan, and prior to retaining our firm, her husband filed an I-130 petition for her while she was in Jordan. Unfortunately, his I-130 petition was denied by the USCIS due to his failure to prove a bona fide marital relationship. Since our client’s husband filed the I-130 by himself, he could not provide sufficient supporting documents when the USCIS issued the Notice of Intent to Deny.  Eventually, this I-130 petition was denied in July 2007, so our client could not come to the United States with a valid immigrant visa.

Thereafter, our client’s husband mistakenly filed Form I-129F to obtain a fiancée visa for our client. However, a K-1 fiancé visa could not be issued because they were already married at the time of the filing.  Thus, this K-1 visa was subsequently denied by the USCIS in 2008.

Our client then came to the the United States with a B-2 visitor visa in December, 2008, but she did not leave the country even after her authorized period of stay was expired. She started to reside with her husband in Ohio. In March 2010, the DHS issued her a Notice to Appear. She was placed in removal proceedings.

They visited our office in early April of 2010.  Once retained, our office promptly filed an I-130 Petition with bona fide marriage evidence. Their I-130 interview was scheduled in December, 2010, and our office thoroughly prepared and accompanied them for the interview. The interview lasted two hours but the I-130 petition was eventually approved.  Our office represented her also at her Master Calendar hearings in Cleveland Immigration Court.

Once the I-130 was approved, our office filed a request to join in a Motion to terminate proceedings with the I-485 application and supporting documents. The DHS counsel in Cleveland agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings.  Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice and her case was transferred to the USCIS Cleveland Office for final adjudication.

Her I-485 Adjustment of Status interview was scheduled on June 28, 2011, and we accompanied our client and her husband at the interview.  After the interview, the CIS officer recommended her I-485 for approval.  Five years after their marriage, after struggling through the immigration system, our client finally has her green card.

For more success stories, please click here.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status
CLIENT: Filipino
LOCATION: Orlando, Florida

Our client came to the United States in December 2008 with an E-1 visa from the Philippines. She married a U.S. Citizen in November 2010 and retained our office in late January of 2011 for her adjustment of status application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and Adjustment of Status Application (I-485) on February 23, 2011.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. There was no Request for Evidence.  Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients. On June 22, 2011, our client was interviewed at the Jacksonville, Florida USCIS office.  On the same day, her green card application was approved, and our client obtained her 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. 

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Bond Hearing
APPLICANT: Chinese
LOCATION: Eloy, AZ

Our firm was contacted in the middle of May regarding a Chinese individual detained in Eloy, Arizona.  She tried to enter the United States without valid documents and was incarcerated thereafter by immigration officers. She was then given credible fear interviews which she eventually passed.

Upon our retention, we immediately submitted documents to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement to inquire about the status of the bond. To our and our client’s surprise, they set a very high bond of $20,000. Our client wished to have that reduced so we filed a bond redetermination with the Eloy Arizona Immigration Court. Despite her being in jail in Eloy, we communicated with her and tried to gather as much information regarding her relief, equities, criminal record, family, and financial ability to post bond. We contacted our client’s several relatives and friends in New York. We also gathered supporting documents from those relatives, from proofs of their status, residences, to bank statements and tax returns. We also obtained notarized affidavits from them.

On June 15, 2011, we represented our client for the Eloy Arizona Immigration Court bond hearing. At oral arguments, we said that our client was eligible for asylum relief, passed his credible fear interview, was not a flight risk, had established her residence upon release, had established her financial ability to post bond, and that she had ample family ties in the United States who submitted proofs of their residence and copies of their immigration status.  As mentioned previously, the government’s position was a $20,000 bond. Our office argued that a bond of $5,000 would be reasonable in light of the factors under Matter of Patel.  Our office contended that her lack of criminal record, designated address with contact information from her relative in the United States, ability to post bond, and eligibility for asylum relief clearly demonstrate that $5,000 would be reasonable.  The Judge took our arguments and evidence into consideration and a bond of $5,000 was granted. Our client’s relative has thereafter posted bond and she is now out of detention to pursue her 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. 

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

CASE: H-1B Visa Petition
PETITIONER:  Engineering Company
BENEFICIARY: Radio Frequency / Electrical Engineer

Our client is an engineering company that specializes in RFID (Radio Frequency Identification Technology) solutions.  Our client’s office is located near Columbus, Ohio.  They contacted our office in mid-March to seek legal assistance from our office for their foreign employee.  The beneficiary obtained his Bachelor’s Degree in Electrical Engineering in Taiwan and completed his Master’s program in the United States. The proffered position for the Beneficiary is a radio frequency / electrical engineer which qualifies as a specialty occupation.  We argued that this position a “specialty occupation” because the minimum requirement for this position is a Bachelor’s Degree in Electrical Engineering or its equivalent.  Moreover, the applicant for this position must have experience or specific training in RFID technology.

Once retained, our office promptly filed the H-1B visa petition with various supporting documents on April 7, 2011 via the regular processing service. There were no Requests for Evidence during the processing of the H-1B.  Eventually, our client’s H-1B application was approved on June 8, 2011.  On October 1, 2011, he can work for his employer for the next three years on his H-1B status.

Please click here for more H-1B success stories, or here to view all our success stories.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

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

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing for Petitioner’s two minor stepdaughters
LOCATION: Petitioner: Maryland; Beneficiaries: Philippines

Our client is a U.S. citizen who married a Filipina in Maryland. Thereafter, he filed an I-130 Petition for his wife and his wife eventually obtained a green card.  However, his two stepdaughters did not get green cards at the time his wife adjusted her status.  His two minor stepdaughters were residing in Philippines. Apparently, they did not know that the Petition could have also been simultaneously filed for his stepchildren.

Once his wife got her green card, our client filed the I-130 petition on behalf of his two stepdaughters in the Philippines.  He filed the I-130 by himself and the USCIS issued an extensive RFE in October 2010.  Upon the issuance of RFE, our client contacted our firm and sought for legal assistance from us.

We initially set up an appointment with our client at our Washington DC office. He is the CEO of his own company and apparently did not have time to go to DC, so we drove to Columbia Maryland and met him there to discuss the case. He retained our office immediately, and our office started to work on the Response to RFE and Packet 3 and 4 for his stepdaughters.

Our office filed the Response to RFE on November 24, 2010.  In the Response brief, our office fully explained that the marriage between our client and his wife is bona fide and explained why his wife and step-daughters’ petitioners were not filed concurrently.  Everything went smoothly, and the daughters’ I-130 and immigrant visa interview was scheduled on May 4, 2011 at the U.S. Embassy in Manila, Philippines.  The U.S. Embassy in Manila eventually approved the immigrant visas for his stepdaughters.

Our client’s step-daughters are now here in the United States reunited with their mother and step-father.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

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

{ 0 comments }