CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Cameroonian

LOCATION: San Francisco, CA

Our client contacted our office in July 2020 regarding his I-751 application.

He is from Cameroon and he married a U.S. citizen in October 2017. He obtained his 2-year conditional green card in September 2018. His conditional residency terminated in September 2020.

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 July 14, 2020. On July 31, 2020, our office filed the I-751 application to the USCIS. On February 23, 2022, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence. On April 4, 2022, our office filed the Response to RFE to the USCIS. On April 14, 2022, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application. He received her 10-year green card.

{ 0 comments }

Case: I-130/I-485

Potential Issue: Response to Notice of Intent to Deny

Client: Cameroonian

Location: Fayetteville, NC

Our client entered the United States from Cameroon. She married her U.S. citizen husband and they filed an I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application to the USCIS in April 2018. In July 2021, they appeared at the adjustment of status interview at the USCIS Durham Field Office in North Carolina. However, on October 13, 2021, the USCIS issued a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID).  The NOID claimed that there was substantial and probative evidence that the marital union between the Petitioner and Beneficiary was not bona fide.  The NOID pointed out that the submitted documentation of Petitioner and Beneficiary did not establish a bona fide marriage. 

In response to the USCIS’s NOID, our office included multiple supporting documents including, several affidavits from their friends, joint bank account statements, a joint tax return, and several pictures of our client and her husband in several occasions with different people.  Several legal authorities were cited based on particular issues discussed, and on November 5, 2021, we filed the Response to NOID prior to the 30-day deadline.

On February 18, 2022, the USCIS approved our client’s case. Both the I-130 Petition and I-485 Green Card Applications were approved. Our client is now a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

Case: I-130/I-485

Potential Issue: Response to Notice of Intent to Deny

Client: Cameroonian

Location: Fayetteville, NC

Our client entered the United States from Cameroon. She married her U.S. citizen husband and they filed an I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application to the USCIS in April 2018. In July 2021, they appeared at the adjustment of status interview at the USCIS Durham Field Office in North Carolina. However, on October 13, 2021, the USCIS issued a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID).  The NOID claimed that there was substantial and probative evidence that the marital union between the Petitioner and Beneficiary was not bona fide.  The NOID pointed out that the submitted documentation of Petitioner and Beneficiary did not establish a bona fide marriage. 

In response to the USCIS’s NOID, our office included multiple supporting documents including, several affidavits from their friends, joint bank account statements, a joint tax return, and several pictures of our client and her husband in several occasions with different people.  Several legal authorities were cited based on particular issues discussed, and on November 5, 2021, we filed the Response to NOID prior to the 30-day deadline.

On February 18, 2022, the USCIS approved our client’s case. Both the I-130 Petition and I-485 Green Card Applications were approved. Our client is now a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Cameroonian

LOCATION: West Columbia, SC

Our client came to the United States from Cameroon on a B-2 visitor’s visa in August 2016. He has remained in the United States since then.  He married a U.S. Citizen in January 2020 and retained our office on February 20, 2020 for his green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on February 21, 2020.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. Prior to the interview, we prepared our clients over the phone. On January 13, 2021, our client was interviewed at the Charleston, South Carolina USCIS office. Eventually, on January 14, 2021, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Cameroonian

LOCATION: Beaumont, TX

Our client contacted us in August 2019 to seek legal representation for her naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. She came to the United States from Cameroon and she obtained her green card in November 2013.

Her N-400 application was filed on August 29, 2019 with all supporting documents. Prior to her citizenship interview, our office prepared her via conference calls.  On October 1, 2020, our client appeared at the Houston, TX USCIS office for her naturalization interview. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed her interview. On October 14, 2020, her application was approved. Her oath taking is scheduled in which she will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status at Removal Proceeding
CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Columbus, OH (USCIS) / Cleveland, OH (EOIR)

Our client came to the United States in December 2013 on a F-1 student visa from Cameroon. Later, she filed an asylum application and her asylum interview was conducted by the USCIS. Her case was referred to the Cleveland Immigration Court and she retained our office for the representation of her removal proceedings in 2017. 

She married a U.S. Citizen in October 2018.  Our client’s husband filed I-130 petition on behalf of our client, and this I-130 petition was approved by USCIS Columbus Field Office in July 2019. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu, Esq. from our office accompanied our clients.   Once the I-130 petition is approved, our office prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application, pre-hearing memorandum, and other supporting documents to the Cleveland Immigration Court.

On August 19, 2019, Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu represented our client’s at her Individual Hearing for adjustment of status at the Cleveland Immigration Court.  After the hearing, the Immigration Judge granted our client’s adjustment of status relief. Our client’s removal proceeding is terminated simultaneously. Now, our client becomes a green card holder.    

{ 0 comments }

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

CLIENT: US Citizen Petitioner Son; Cameroonian Beneficiary Father in Cameroon

LOCATION: Petitioner: Texas; Beneficiary: Cameroon

I-130 FILED: July 28, 2016

I-130 APPROVED: May 16, 2017

IV APPROVED: May 16, 2018

Our client retained us to bring his father over from Cameroon. He was born and raised in Cameroon, but was naturalized in the United States.

On July 28, 2016, our firm filed the I-130 Petition to the CIS. There were no Requests for Evidence throughout the pendency of the petition. On May 16, 2017, the I-130 Petition was approved. We then started the immigrant visa processing phase of trying to get his father over to the United States.

On January 19, 2018, we filed the immigrant visa packet to the National Visa Center who in turn forwarded our client’s materials to the U.S. Embassy in Yaoundé, Cameroon. An interview notice was set for our client’s father at the U.S. Embassy in Yaoundé, Cameroon, and we prepared him for his interview. On May 16, 2018, the U.S. Embassy in Yaoundé, Cameroon approved and issued his immigrant visa.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status after Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Atlanta, GA (USCIS) / Memphis, TN (EOIR)

Our Cameroonian client came to the United States in December 1999 on a F-1 student visa. In July 2001, he filed an asylum application to the USCIS, was interviewed by the USCIS, and later his case was referred to the Immigration Court.  Thereafter, a Notice to Appear was issued and our client was placed in removal proceedings. After he got the Notice to Appear, he appeared at his initial master calendar hearing at the Memphis Immigration Court with his previous attorney.

His removal proceedings were continued, but he could not appear at his individual hearing in April 2003 due to the hospitalization.  Thus, the Court found him removable and ordered him removed in absentia.  Later, in April 2011, he filed Motion to Reopen with assistance of his previous immigration counsel.  However, this Motion to Reopen was denied by the Court in July 2011.  Thereafter, he contacted our office to determine whether he can file a Motion to Reopen again.  After the consultation, we explained him that the only way the Court can reopen his case is based on changed country conditions in Cameroon.  It is because our client’s second Motion to Reopen can be considered untimely filed and numerically barred.  After the explanation, our client decided to retain our office and retained us on November 22, 2011 for Motion to Reopen based on changed country conditions.

Under immigration law, if an applicant seeks to make an asylum claim and a final order of removal has been entered and the ninety-day filing deadline for motions to reopen has passed, the BIA and the majority of Circuit Courts have found that the applicant may only file the asylum application through a motion to reopen and only under the “changed country conditions” provision of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(i).  Thus, our office prepared the Motion to Reopen based on the changed country conditions in Cameroon.

On March 6, 2012, our office filed the Motion to Reopen with the Memphis Immigration Court. With 15-pages brief, we included a detailed affidavit regarding his involvement in political activist group in Cameroon, several affidavits from his fellow members who confirmed his involvement with the organization.  We claimed that the number of arrests and detentions of his political group members has recently escalated since his original removal hearing in 2003 resulting in changed country conditions.  We also attached a letter from a human rights officer in which he states that he knew our client’s political involvement in Cameroon. Moreover, other supporting documents such as newspaper articles and country report of Cameroon were submitted (24 exhibits).  On March 29, 2012, the DHS filed a Response in Opposition to our Motion.  Nevertheless, on May 2, 2012, the Memphis Immigration Court granted our motion and reopened our client’s case.  

Once his case is reopened, he retained our office again. Our attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu appeared at his master calendar hearing via telephonic appearance and his individual hearing was scheduled on September 29, 2014 at the Memphis Immigration Court.

Our client was persecuted and harmed in Cameroon based on his political opinion and movement.  Our client was scared to go back home to Cameroon, fearing that he will be persecuted based on his political opinion. Moreover, our client’s late father and his uncle were mistreated and harmed in Cameroon due to their political opinion as well.

We helped him file his asylum application and represented him in immigration court hearings. We also asked him to provide supporting documents corroborating his claim, some of which were a letter from his family, colleagues and friends in Cameroon. Our firm also did some research on articles related to his claim, and the type of persecution he will experience in Cameroon if sent back.

Our client’s individual hearing was scheduled on September 29, 2014 at the Memphis Immigration Court. Attorney Sung Hee Yu from our firm prepared him extensively. He also represented our client at his Individual Hearing at the Memphis Immigration Court.

Prior to the hearing, Immigration Judge held a pre-trial conference with Attorney Yu and the DHS counsel. During the pre-trial conference, and all of the possible issues were examined. At the conclusion of the conference, withholding of removal was granted. After the hearing, the Immigration Judge granted Withholding of Removal for our client based on his persecution in Cameroon.

In December 2014, our client married his current U.S. citizen wife. He retained our office again for the I-130 petition. Once we were retained, our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition for our client and filed it to USCIS on August 14, 2015.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on October 3, 2016 at Atlanta USCIS Field Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and his wife for the interview via conference calls. Attorney Yu also accompanied them for their interview. The interview went well, and the I-130 petition was eventually approved on October 11, 2016.

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 Memphis, TN agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on February 24, 2017.  

After his removal proceeding was terminated, our client retained us again for his I-485 adjustment of status application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on April 24, 2017. 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 via conference call. On November 17, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Atlanta, GA USCIS. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu accompanied our clients as well.  After the interview, his I-485 application was approved.  Now, our client became a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Columbus, Ohio

Our client is from Cameroon who came to the U.S. on a F-1 Student Visa in April 2008 to study. Our client currently resides in the greater Columbus area with his current U.S. Citizen wife. They were married in July 2013, and he retained our office on July 11, 2016 for the I-130 petition. Our client’s U.S. citizen wife filed the I-130 petition for our client before, but it was denied. Moreover, our client was placed in removal proceedings in 2010 at the Baltimore Immigration Court and the Court granted withholding of removal relief for our client. Once we were retained, our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition for our client and filed it to the USCIS on July 22, 2016.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on October 18, 2016 at Columbus USCIS Filed Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and his wife for the interview at our office. Attorney Yu also accompanied them for their interview. The interview lasted two hours, but the I-130 petition was eventually approved on the same day of the interview.

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 Baltimore, MD agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on February 10, 2017.  Now, he can file his I-485 adjustment of status application to USCIS to obtain his green card.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Asylum in Immigration Court

CLIENT: Cameroonian

LOCATION: Cleveland Immigration Court

Our Cameroonian client came to the United States on a B-2 visitor’s visa in November 2013 with her minor daughter.  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, but her case was referred to an immigration judge. 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 early January of 2015, and eventually retained our office on January 20, 2015.  

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 student in Cameroon, she became a human rights activist involved in educating and informing fellow students on campus for 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.  Moreover, her father was arrested and detained due to his political opinion.

We helped her prepare 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 family members, colleagues and friends in Cameroon, Cameroonian medical documents of our client’s injury, and her membership certification with the different 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 July 24, 2015 at the Cleveland Immigration Court. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu represented our client at the hearing. During the hearing, our client testified credibly as to her past persecution in Cameroon and likelihood of future persecution.

However, during the cross-examination, the DHS attorney raised an issue of “firm resettlement.” Congress has mandated by statute numerous exceptions and exclusions to the grant of asylum, one being that the applicant has been firmly resettled in another country prior to arriving in the U.S. 8 C.F.R. §§ 2208.13(c)(2)(i)(B). The applicant will be deemed firmly resettled if, prior to arriving in the U.S., he or she entered another country with, or while in that country received, an offer of permanent resident status, citizenship, or some other type of permanent resettlement. 8 C.F.R. § 208.15. The offer must be must be for permanent, not temporary, residence in a third country where the applicant lived peacefully and without restriction. Maharaj v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 961, 969 (9th Cir. 2006).

In fact, prior to her entry to the U.S., our client lived in Denmark for one year. The DHS alleged that she had a permanent residency in Denmark. Nevertheless, our office filed the brief and supporting documents. In the brief, we argued that our client’s visa and “residence cards” in Denmark were all indications of a temporary status, and based on she not being able to meet the permanent residency requirements, she is clearly was never “firmly resettled”, nor was a permanent resident, nor was offered permanent residency in Denmark.

Eventually, on November 25, 2016, 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.

{ 0 comments }