CASE:   I-601A Hardship Waiver of Inadmissibility

APPLICANT / BENEFICIARY: Mexican

LOCATION: Dayton, Ohio

Our client came to the United States from Mexico in April 2007 without inspection and admission. He married his U.S. citizen wife in April 2016. After they got married, his U.S. Citizen wife filed an I-130 petition for him in June 2016. This I-130 petition was approved on July 29, 2016.

However, our client cannot file for adjustment of status application due to his ground of inadmissibility (entry without inspection and admission). He 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

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 wife suffers from a great degree of medical hardship. In the I-601A brief and supporting documents, our office included extensive medical reports of his wife.  We argued that if he was removed from the United States, extreme hardship to his wife is clearly foreseeable and evident. His wife has ongoing medical hardships and she would not be able to take care of her own needs and the bulk of their family chores, most importantly taking care of their child. Also, it would be extremely difficult for her to get the same level of therapy and satisfactory access to medical services in Mexico in case she joins our client there.

In our brief, we also argued that our client and his wife have maintained strong family ties in the United States, that his wife will have difficulty in finding the same level of employment in Mexico, and that his U.S. citizen child and his wife will face extreme emotional difficulties if he is removed.

On September 19, 2017, we filed the I-601A waiver application which included the brief in support, his wife’s extensive medical examination records, and other documents that demonstrated hardship to his wife if he is removed from the United States. Eventually, his I-601A waiver was approved on May 22, 2018. Now, he can file packet 3 and 4 here in the United States, and would go to Mexico shortly to get his immigrant visa.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: PERM Labor Certification    
EMPLOYER: Chinese Restaurant
BENEFICIARY: Chinese Cook in Venezuela
LOCATION: Ohio

Our client is a Chinese restaurant in Ohio. They do have a prospective employee from Venezuela and they were willing to petition him for a skilled worker, third-preference petition (I-140). Their prospective employee has more than 2 years of experience as a Chinese cook. After talking to our client, our firm concluded that they can petition him as a Chinese Specialty Cook. Our client eventually retained us on January 27, 2017.

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 February 10, 2017, the prevailing wage request was filed.  After we got the PW determination, our office filed the job order on July 14, 2017. On November 3, 2017, we promptly filed PERM. Eventually, on April 19, 2018, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB3 position for the Chinese beneficiary. Now our client can file the I-140 petition.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Dominican

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is from Dominican Republic who came to the U.S. on a B-2 Visitor’s Visa in July 2014.  In November 2016, our client married her current U.S. citizen husband. In December 2016, they filed her green card application. However, the USCIS denied her green card application due to insufficient evidence.

She retained our office for her green card application on May 8, 2017.  Our firm prepared and filed the Adjustment of Status Application on March 12, 2018 along with the approved I-130 petition.  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 as well. On May 24, 2018, our client was interviewed at Cleveland USCIS office. Attorney JP Sarmiento also accompanied our clients as well.  Eventually, on the same day of her interview, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Asylum

CLIENT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client, a Chinese asylum seeker in Cleveland, OH, retained us on January 3, 2018 to help her with her asylum case. She came to the United States in January 2017 with a B-2 visitor’s visa from China. She wanted to seek asylum relief with the US Citizenship and Immigration Service.

While she was in China, she was persecuted and mistreated by the government based on her Christianity belief. She was also persecuted based on her medical conditions as well. She is scared to go back home to China, fearing that she will be persecuted again.

We helped her to prepare for her asylum application, going over several drafts until her claim was as detailed as possible. Names, addresses, dates, and all possible issues relevant to her asylum claim were addressed. We also asked her to provide supporting documents corroborating her claims. Our firm also did some research on articles pertaining to her particular claim, and the type of persecution that Chinese Christian would suffer.

The asylum application was filed on January 9, 2018 which was within one year of her entry to the United States.  Thereafter, the CIS issued an interview notice for her asylum case, scheduled for May 3, 2018 in Cleveland, OH USCIS Asylum Office. Prior to her interview, our office prepared her thoroughly for her case at our office to make sure she was able to address questions the asylum officer would ask. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office also accompanied our client at her interview.

On July 12, 2018, the USCIS approved our client’s asylum case. She is now an asylee and will be eligible to apply for permanent resident status in one year.  

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Egyptian

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in April 2018 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from Egypt and obtained his green card in August 2009.

After retention, his N-400 application was filed on April 27, 2018 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him at our office.  On July 9, 2018, our client appeared at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office for his naturalization interview. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his naturalization and citizenship interview. Eventually, his application was approved on July 12, 2018. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status / Termination of Proceedings
CLIENT: Chinese (Hong Kong)
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States on a valid B-2 visa from Hong Kong in 2002.  Later, she changed her status to F-1 and remained in the United States. She filed an I-485 application as a derivative applicant of her ex-husband in 2007.  However, while the application was pending, our client and her ex-husband were separated. Unfortunately, in 2008, her I-485 adjustment of status application was denied.   She never received the denial notice from the USCIS since she moved to different city in Ohio before her case was denied. Thus, our client never received the Notice to Appear and was not apprised of the fact that she was placed in removal proceedings.  Accordingly, the Detroit Immigration Court issued an in absentia order of removal for our client in August 2010.

In January 2012, our client was picked up by the ICE officers.  She was surprised to find out that she is being held because she had a final order of removal and missed her hearing in August 2010.  She explained her situation, so she was not detained, and was placed on an order of supervision. After this event, our client contacted our firm and eventually retained us in March 2012.  Once we were retained, we asked our client to check with her ex-husband or his relatives whether they received the Notice to Appear for her. We told her that we have to reopen her case first before she can even apply for relief at the Immigration Court.

To rescind the final order, she has to get her case reopened. This is done through a Motion to Reopen filed with the Immigration Judge who gave the final order. Based on this Motion to Reopen, the Immigration Judge can rescind the in absentia order of removal if you are able to show that you did not receive notice of the hearing.

On July 31, 2012, our office filed the Motion to Reopen with the Detroit Immigration Court. Documentation of her address at the date of the final order, a detailed affidavit regarding her addresses and his circumstances around the final order date, documentation of the last address she provided to the immigration service prior to the final order date, and other supporting documents were submitted (20 exhibits). On August 16, 2012, the Detroit Immigration Court granted our motion and reopened our client’s case.

Our client married her Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) husband in August 2012 in Cleveland, OH. Her husband filed I-130 petition on behalf of her after they got married. Eventually, our client’s I-130 petition was approved in December 2013. Our office represented our client since 2012 for her removal proceeding representations and I-130 filing. Her individual hearing was scheduled at the Cleveland Immigration Court as well.  

In April 2016, our office filed a written request to administratively close our client’s removal proceedings to the DHS Cleveland Office.  In a written brief, our office fully explained that our client’s case is not DHS’s priority for the deportation and explained that our client has I-130 approval, no criminal records, has paid taxes, and has family ties in the United States.  Along with the written brief, our office attached I-485 application and its supporting documents as well.

After the review, the DHS counsel in Cleveland was willing to join in administrative closure of our client’s removal proceedings. In May 2016, the Immigration Judge administrative closed our client’s case.

In August 2017, her husband filed a naturalization application and became a U.S. citizen. Our office filed a request to join in a Motion to Terminate proceedings with an attached I-485 application and its supporting documents. The DHS counsel in Cleveland agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Eventually, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on October 24, 2017.

After her proceeding was terminated, our client retained our office again for her I-485 adjustment of status application. Our firm prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on December 6, 2017.  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 June 28, 2018, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu also accompanied our clients. The interview went well, and on July 5, 2018, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: PERM Labor Certification    
EMPLOYER: Dental Group in Cleveland, OH
BENEFICIARY: Indian Endodontist

Our client is from India, who is currently working in the United States as an associate endodontist under her OPT. Her current employer is willing to do an immigration petition for her, second-preference. Our client has a dentistry degree in India which is evaluated as an equivalent degree of Doctor of Dental Surgery degree the United States. She also has a license to practice dentistry in the state of Ohio and has 2 years of residency training in endodontics.  After talking to our client, our firm concluded that her employer can petition her as an associate endodontist. Based on our client’s educational, professional and working backgrounds, our office determined that she is clearly eligible for EB-2 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 August 23, 2017, the prevailing wage request was filed.  After we obtained Prevailing Wage determination, our office filed the job order on November 1, 2017. On February 6, 2018, we promptly filed PERM. Eventually, on June 11, 2018, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB2 position for the Indian beneficiary. Now our client can file the I-140 petition.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Romanian

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in March 2018 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from Romania and obtained his green card in December 2008.

Once retained, his N-400 application was filed on March 12, 2018 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him at our office.  On May 22, 2018, our client appeared at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office for his naturalization interview. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his naturalization and citizenship interview.

However, on May 31, 2018, the USCIS issued  Request for Evidence and requested our client’s previous arrest record. He submitted the requested arrest record immediately. Nevertheless, his application was approved on June 26, 2018. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 based on Approved I-140 (EB-2)

APPLICANT: Korean

LOCATION: Ohio

Our client is an assistant professor from South Korea, who is currently teaching at a state university which was willing to petition her for a second-preference petition (I-140).  Our client has a Ph.D. degree and has worked for this school since 2015. She has maintained her status as an H-1B visa holder in the United States. She had an approved I-140 petition which was filed by her current employer and this I-140 petition’s priority date was July 12, 2016.

In August 2017, she contacted our office and retained us for her I-485 adjustment of status application. Our office filed an I-485 adjustment of status application for our client on October 6, 2017. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment came on time.

Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our client via conference call as well. On June 11, 2018, our client was interviewed at Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office also accompanied our client as well. Eventually, on June 12, 2018, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Romanian

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in March 2018 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from Romania and obtained his green card in January 2008.

Once retained, his N-400 application was filed on April 2, 2018 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him at our office.  On June 12, 2018, our client appeared at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office for his naturalization interview. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his naturalization and citizenship interview. Eventually, his application was approved on June 14, 2018. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }