CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client contacted us in April 2016 to seek legal representation for her naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. She came to the United States from China and obtained her green card in May 2011. She retained our office for her naturalization and citizenship N-400 application on April 5, 2016. Our client had health concerns and we argued was eligible for N-648 certification (medical certification for disability exceptions).

The naturalization and citizenship N-400 application was filed on April 26, 2016 with all supporting documents. Our office prepared her before her naturalization interview, and also accompanied her on November 28, 2016 at the Cleveland CIS office. Our client’s history test was waived since her N-648 was granted by the office. Our client did her N-400 interview. Eventually, her naturalization application was approved on November 29, 2016. Her oath taking is scheduled in which she will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: H-1B Visa Extension

PETITIONER:  Physician’s Office in Flushing, NY

BENEFICIARY: Chinese Nurse Practitioner

Our client is a dermatology clinic in Flushing, NY which provides cosmetic and dermatologic treatments for its patients. They contacted our office in July of 2016 to seek legal assistance for its foreign beneficiary’s H-1B extension.

The beneficiary is from China and obtained her Master of Nursing Degree in the United States. She also has a valid Nurse Practitioner License in the State of New York. The proffered position for the Beneficiary was for a Nurse Practitioner which we argued qualified as a specialty occupation. We proffered that the minimum requirement for this position is a Master of Nursing Degree or its equivalent. Moreover, Nurse Practitioner needs the state license as well.  She has been working for the Petitioner on a valid H-1B visa.

Once retained, our firm prepared and eventually filed the H-1B visa petition with various supporting documents on August 16, 2016 via regular processing. Eventually, without any RFE, our client’s H-1B extension was approved on November 22, 2016. Now, the Beneficiary can continue to work for the Petitioner on an H-1B status until September 1, 2019 (until her duration of H-1B status reaches the 6th year mark).

{ 0 comments }

CASE:   I-601A Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States from China in March 2001 without inspection and admission. She made an illegal entry and was inadmissible. She applied for Asylum and Withholding of Removal, and she was granted Withholding of Removal. She married her U.S. citizen husband in 2006 and had U.S. citizen children together. Through our office, she applied for a Motion to Reopen and the Cleveland Immigration Court granted our Motion and reopened our client’s case in 2015. After reopening, with our office’s assistance, her removal proceeding was administratively closed in November 2015 to file a provisional waiver application.

Her U.S. Citizen husband filed an I-130 petition for our client and this I-130 petition was approved in 2009.

However, our client cannot file her adjustment of status application due to her ground of inadmissibility. She needs a waiver of inadmissibility to become a green card holder. Under current law, immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are not eligible to adjust status in the United States must travel abroad and obtain an immigrant visa. Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver of inadmissibility to overcome the unlawful presence bars under section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act before they can return to the United States

The USCIS announced of new policy called provisional unlawful presence waiver. Beginning March 4, 2013, certain immigrant visa applicants who are spouses, children and parents of U.S. citizens (immediate relatives) can apply for provisional unlawful presence waivers before they leave the United States. The provisional unlawful presence waiver process allows individuals, who only need a waiver of inadmissibility for unlawful presence, to apply for a waiver in the United States and before they depart for their immigrant visa interviews at a U.S. embassy or consulate abroad.

The new process is expected to shorten the time U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives while those family members are obtaining immigrant visas to become lawful permanent residents of the United States. Thus, our client would like to apply so called I-601A provisional waiver.

INA § 212(i) provides for a discretionary waiver of the entry without inspection inadmissibility ground. To qualify for the waiver, the alien must establish that his or her US Citizen spouse would suffer extreme hardship if the alien were denied admission. INA § 212(i)(1). In addition to the equities presented, the USCIS may consider the nature of the inadmissibility ground.

There is a seminal BIA case that deals with this waiver.  In Matter of Cervantes, 22 I & N Dec. 560 (BIA 1999), the BIA identified the factors to be considered in determining whether a qualifying relative would suffer extreme hardship if the alien were denied admission.  Those factors include: the presence of LPR or USC family ties both within and outside the United States; the conditions in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate and the extent of the qualifying relative’s ties to that country; the financial impact of departure from the United States; and significant conditions of health, particularly when tied to the unavailability of suitable medical care in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate.

Our client’s I-601A application had a good chance since our client’s U.S. Citizen husband suffers from great degree of psychological hardship. In the I-601A brief and supporting documents, our office included extensive medical reports of her husband.  We argued that if she was removed from the United States, extreme hardship to her husband is clearly foreseeable and evident.  Her husband has ongoing psychological hardship and he would not be able to take care of his own needs and the bulk of their family chores, most importantly taking care of their infant children. Also, it would be extremely difficult for him to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in China in case he joins our client there. 

In our brief, we also argued that our client and her husband have maintained strong family ties in the United States, that her husband will have difficulty in finding the same level of employment in China, that our client has a good employment in the United States, and that her U.S. citizen children and her husband will face extreme financial and emotional difficulties if she is removed.

On May 20, 2016, our client submitted our I-601A waiver application which included the brief in support, her husband’s extensive psychological examination records, and other documents that demonstrated hardship to her husband if she is removed from the United States.

Eventually, her I-601A waiver was approved on November 16, 2016. Now, she can file packet 3 and 4 here in the United States, and goes to China for her immigrant visa interview.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: PERM Labor Certification    
EMPLOYER: Culture Center / Culture School
BENEFICIARY: Chinese
LOCATION: St. Paul, MN

Our client is from China, who is currently staying in the United States on an F-2 status. She has a prospective employer who was willing to do an immigration petition for her, third-preference. Our client has a Bachelor’s degree in Arts Education. After talking to our client, our firm concluded that her employer can petition her as an Early Childhood Creative Programs Director. Based on our client’s educational, professional and working backgrounds, our office determined that she is clearly eligible for EB-3 classification.

Prior to filing PERM, 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 PERM could be filed at least 60 days from the job posting date or 30 days from the last ad. On April 16, 2015, the prevailing wage request was filed.  After we obtained foreign degree evaluation report and Prevailing Wage determination, our office filed the job order on August 11, 2015.  On October 27, 2015, we promptly filed PERM.  Eventually, on March 28, 2016, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB3 position for the Chinese beneficiary.

We then proceeded with the I-140 Petition filing. We submitted the “ability to pay” letter for the I-140 petition application. We included the job offer letter, employer’s financial records, and other necessary supporting documents. The I-140 Petition was filed on July 11, 2016 via premium processing service. However, the USCIS issued Request for Evidence (RFE) on July 25, 2016 and requested the Petitioner’s tax record to demonstrate whether Petitioner has sufficient net current asset to pay proffered wage of beneficiary. On September 29, 2016, our office filed the Response to RFE to USCIS along with Petitioner’s 2015 federal tax record. Eventually, on October 5, 2016, the I-140 EB-3 Petition for our Chinese client was approved. Our client can file her I-485 adjustment of status application once her priority date becomes current.

{ 0 comments }

CASE:  Immigrant Visa / I-601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio / Guangzhou, China (Visa Interview)

Our client came to the United States from China in August 2001 without inspection and admission. She married her U.S. citizen husband in 2007. They have two U.S. citizen children together.  Her U.S. Citizen husband filed an I-130 petition for her on August 1, 2012. This I-130 petition was approved on March 29, 2013.

Our client cannot file for adjustment of status application due to her ground of inadmissibility. She needs a waiver of inadmissibility to become a green card holder. Moreover, our client was placed in removal proceedings, but with our office’s assistance, her removal proceedings were administratively closed in April 2015 to file a provisional waiver application.

Under current law, immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are not eligible to adjust status in the United States must travel abroad and obtain an immigrant visa. Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver of inadmissibility to overcome the unlawful presence bars under section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act before they can return to the United States.

In 2013, the USCIS announced of new policy called the provisional unlawful presence waiver. Beginning March 4, 2013, certain immigrant visa applicants who are spouses, children and parents of U.S. citizens (immediate relatives) can apply for provisional unlawful presence waivers before they leave the United States. The provisional unlawful presence waiver process allows individuals, who only need a waiver of inadmissibility for unlawful presence, to apply for a waiver in the United States.

The new process is expected to shorten the time U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives while those family members are obtaining immigrant visas to become lawful permanent residents of the United States.

INA § 212(i) provides for a discretionary waiver of the entry without inspection inadmissibility ground. To qualify for the waiver, the alien must establish that his or her US Citizen spouse would suffer extreme hardship if the alien were denied admission. INA § 212(i)(1). In addition to the equities presented, the USCIS may consider the nature of the inadmissibility ground.

There is a seminal BIA case that deals with this waiver.  In Matter of Cervantes, 22 I & N Dec. 560 (BIA 1999), the BIA identified the factors to be considered in determining whether a qualifying relative would suffer extreme hardship if the alien were denied admission.  Those factors include: the presence of LPR or USC family ties both within and outside the United States; the conditions in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate and the extent of the qualifying relative’s ties to that country; the financial impact of departure from the United States; and significant conditions of health, particularly when tied to the unavailability of suitable medical care in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate.

Our client’s I-601A application had a good chance since our client’s U.S. Citizen husband and son suffer from a great degree of medical hardship. In the I-601A brief and supporting documents, our office included extensive medical reports of her husband and her son.  We argued that if she was removed from the United States, extreme hardship to her husband is clearly foreseeable and evident.  Her husband has ongoing medical hardships and he would not be able to take care of his own needs and the bulk of their family chores, most importantly taking care of their children. Also, it would be extremely difficult for him to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in China in case he joins our client there.

In our brief, we also argued that our client and her husband have maintained strong family ties in the United States, that her husband will have difficulty in finding the same level of employment in China, that our client has good employment in the United States, and that his U.S. citizen child and her husband will face extreme financial and emotional difficulties if she is removed.

On October 15, 2015, we filed the I-601A waiver application which included the brief in support, her husband and son’s extensive medical examination records, and other documents that demonstrated hardship to her husband if she is removed from the United States. Eventually, without any RFE, her I-601A waiver was approved on February 2, 2016.

Once her I-601A waiver was approved, she retained our office again for her immigrant visa processing. First, our office filed the Motion to Re-Calendar / Terminate Removal Proceedings to the Cleveland Immigration Court to do our client immigrant visa processing work. The Motion was filed on February 16, 2016. The Immigration Court granted our Motion on March 14, 2106.

Thereafter, our office prepared and filed her immigrant visa application on July 25, 2016. Later, the U.S. Embassy in Guangzhou, China informed our office that they scheduled an immigrant visa interview for our client. Our client went back to China to appear at her interview on September 8, 2016. On September 8, 2016, our client appeared at her immigrant visa interview at the Consulate, and the Consulate officer approved her immigrant visa on the same day.

Now, our client can come back to the United States with an approved immigrant visa and she will get her green card in a mail within two months of her entry to the United States.  

{ 0 comments }

Case: I-130/I-485, BIA Appeal

Client: China

Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Our client entered the United States in May 2012 from China with a B-2 visitor visa.  Later, he married his U.S. citizen wife in September 2012. He retained our office on September 12, 2012 for his and his sons’ (petitioner’s two step-sons) adjustment of status applications.

Our office prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Applications on October 9, 2012.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. Prior to the interview, our attorney thoroughly prepared our client via conference calls for their USCIS adjustment of status interview.

On December 19, 2012, our client, his two sons, and his U.S. citizen wife appeared at the Pittsburgh, PA USCIS office for their adjustment interview. The interview was extensive, and the officer was suspicious regarding the bona fideness of our client’s marriage.

On January 14, 2014, 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 is not bona fide.  Moreover, the NOID points out that the submitted documentation of Petitioner and Beneficiary does not establish a bona fide nature of their marriage.

In response to the USCIS’s NOID, our office helped our clients draft an extensive affidavit. Multiple supporting documents and an affidavit from our client were all included as well as letters from their friends and neighbors, joint utility bills, joint insurance, and several pictures of our client and his wife in several occasions with different people.  Several legal authorities were cited based on particular issues discussed, and on February 10, 2014, we filed the Response to NOID prior to the 30-day deadline.

However, the USCIS denied our client’s adjustment of status cases in April 2014. Our clients were frustrated. Their marriage was bona fide. Nevertheless, they decided to re-file their adjustment of status applications. Our office filed the applications again on May 13, 2014.

The USCIS scheduled another interview for our clients. On October 29, 2014, our client, his two sons, and his U.S. citizen wife appeared at the Pittsburgh, PA USCIS office for their adjustment interview again. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well. The USCIS claimed that the relationship between our client and his U.S. citizen wife is not bona fide and was suspicious regarding the purpose of this marriage. The NOID was issued again after the interview, and despite our extensive response, the USCIS denied our clients’ cases again.

After two denials, our client decided to file the appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Our office was retained again, and we filed the appeal to the BIA on March 24, 2015. In our appeal brief, we extensively argued that our client’s marriage to his wife was not entered for immigration purpose. We included several documentations to show that they have maintained their marital life well since the inception of their marriage.

Moreover, our office also filed the I-130/I-485 applications once again on January 8, 2016 before we filed the BIA appeal.

On April 12, 2016, the BIA sustained our appeal and approved the I-130 petition for our client. The BIA disagreed with the USCIS that “the evidence of the record reflects that the Petitioner did not establish that the marriage on which the visa petition is based is genuine. Rather, on the whole, the record contains sufficient evidence of a joint life, and, in general, discrepancies and inconsistencies were satisfactorily explained.”

Eventually, on August 25, 2016, the USCIS approved our client’s I-485 adjustment of status application without the additional interview. The USCIS also approved our client’s two sons’ adjustment of status applications. Now they are green card holders.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in April 2016 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from China and obtained his green card in September 2007.

Once retained, his N-400 application was filed on April 16, 2016 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him. On August 29, 2016, our client appeared at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office for his naturalization interview. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our client as well. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his naturalization and citizenship interview. Eventually, his application was approved on September 1, 2016. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States in November 2014 with a J-1 exchange visitor’s visa from the China. Later, she married a U.S. Citizen in February 2016 and retained our office for her petition and adjustment of status application.

She also asked us to file her daughter’s (Petitioner’s step-daughter) adjustment of status application.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 petition and I-485 adjustment of status application on April 13, 2016. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time. There were no requests for evidence.

Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients in our office. On August 2, 2016, our clients were interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied them at their interview as well. After the interview, our client and her daughter’s green card applications were approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted our office in June of 2015 regarding Response to RFE for his I-751 application.

He is from China and married a green card holder in August 2013. Through his marriage, he obtained a 2-year conditional green card in January of 2014.  His conditional residency was terminated in January 2016.

To comply with immigration requirements, our client and his wife had to file an I-751 Joint Petition to Remove Conditions. They single-handedly filed the I-751 application to USCIS in January 2016.

However, on June 6, 2016, the USCIS issued the Request for Evidence for our client’s I-751 application. The USCIS requested our client to provide more bona fide marital evidence. To get legal assistance, our client retained our office on June 14, 2016.  

Once retained, our office prepared the RFE response. On June 22, 2016, our office filed a Response to RFE to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from his friends and family members, joint bank statements, joint tax records, utility bills, joint lease, and photos of our client and his wife to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

As a result, on July 8, 2016, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application and our client received his 10-year green card.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751 / Waiver of the Joint Waiver Requirement

APPLICANT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted our office in early July of 2015 regarding his pending I-751 filing. He came to the United States from China and he married a U.S. Citizen (her ex-wife) in December 2012.

Through his marriage, he was able to obtain a 2-year conditional green card in July of 2014. Thus, his conditional residency terminated in July 2016. However, our client experienced a lot of difficulties in his marital life with his ex-wife. Unfortunately, their marriage ended in August 2015.  Thus, our client could not file the I-751 application jointly with his ex-wife.

Once our office was retained, we requested a waiver because our client entered into the marriage in good faith, but the marriage was terminated through divorce or annulment before they can file a joint petition. We focused on the supporting documents that he can show and helped him draft an extensive affidavit about their marriage, and why it ended the way it did.

On October 6, 2016, our office filed the I-751 application with various supporting documents (over 18 exhibits and lengthy affidavit) to demonstrate our client’s bona fide marriage with his ex-wife.

In June 2016, the USCIS scheduled an I-751 interview for our client. Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client at our office and informed him of potential issues at the interview.

On June 30, 2016, our client was interviewed for her I-751 application at the USCIS Cleveland, OH Field Office.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our client.  The interview was very extensive.  Nevertheless, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application. Now, he has his ten-year green card.

{ 0 comments }