CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Nigerian                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is from Nigeria who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in June 2015. Since then, he has remained in the United States after his authorized stay period expired.  In January 2016, our client married his current U.S. citizen wife.  He retained our office in October 2016 for his green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on December 20, 2016.  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 April 17, 2017, our client was interviewed at Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney JP Sarmiento from our office also accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, on May 3, 2017, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Filipino

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in January 2017 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from the Philippines and obtained his green card in August 2019.

Once retained, his N-400 application was filed on February 6, 2017 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him at our office.  On April 27, 2017, our client appeared at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office for his naturalization interview. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu accompanied our client as well. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his naturalization and citizenship interview. Eventually, his application was approved on May 5, 2017. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-140 / National Interest Waiver

CLIENT: Korean

LOCATION: Akron, OH

Our client contacted us in October 2015 about the possibility of doing a National Interest Waiver self-petition. He is a researcher from South Korea and he is an exceptional researcher and scientist in the field of polymer engineering

His significant contributions have placed him at the pinnacle of his field of endeavor. Throughout his research career, our client has discovered new ways to synthesize polystyrene/silica composite particles which was highly evaluated by reviewers of various journals and by colleagues and experts in the field. Our client developed and applied two new methods which allow polymer-particle/silica-particle composited can be fabricated without any surface modification.

Upon review of his credentials and qualifications, our office determined that he was qualified for the National Interest Waiver (NIW) category. Being qualified for NIW is beneficial since you would not need an employer nor family member to petition for you for green card purposes. You’d be eligible for a self-petition and unless you are from China or India, in which case you’d still have to wait for priority dates to be current, you would be eligible to apply for adjustment of status (green card) immediately without any lag in priority dates.

As a primer, NIW applicants must have a master’s or higher degree. The landmark immigration case that discusses the standards for NIWs is Matter of New York State Department of Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Comm.1998). This case held that the qualifying applicant must show the following elements in his or her I-140 NIW petition: First, it must be shown that the alien seeks employment in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. Next, it must be shown that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver must establish that the alien will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U. S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. (When we filed this case, Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016) was not issued yet. Thus, we still filed our client’s NIW under NYSDOT standard.)

Our office prepared a 20-page brief for our client’s NIW filing. Our client also obtained 6 letters of recommendation from his colleagues and internationally-recognized scientists. Our office also included his publication records, presentation records, and conference materials in the NIW application. We demonstrated the intrinsic merit of our client’s research in the United States, the national scope of his research, and asserted that our client would serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. His NIW application contained 36 exhibits (Exhibit A to JJ).

Our office filed his I-140(NIW) petition to the USCIS Nebraska Service Center on February 2, 2016. Eventually, on April 28, 2017, the USCIS approved his I-140 petition without any Requests for Evidence.  When we filed his I-140, he concurrently filed his I-485 adjustment of status application. His adjustment of status application will be approved soon as well.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: EB-3 Green Card Approval Based on Approved I-140 (EB-3)

EMPLOYER: Engineering Company

BENEFICIARY: Taiwanese Radio Frequency Identification Engineer

LOCATION: Columbus, OH

Our client is currently working as a Radio Frequency Identification Engineer (RFID) whose current employer was willing to petition him for a third-preference petition (I-140).  Our client has a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in a related field and work experience as well. He has been working for his current employer under an H-1B status. Based on our client’s educational, professional and work background, our office determined that he is clearly eligible for EB-3 classification for his I-140 petition.  Our client eventually retained us in March 2015.

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 the PERM 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.  After we obtained the foreign degree evaluation report, our office filed the job order on August 31, 2015.  On November 11, 2015, we promptly filed PERM.

However, on April 14, 2016, the Department of Labor issued a request for audit. The DOL requested documents from Petitioner to determine whether the recruitment process was done properly. In response to the Audit request, our office prepared the response to Audit brief along with Employer’s declaration, notice of filing, and recruitment documentation on April 29, 2016.  

Eventually, on June 30, 2016, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB3 position for the Taiwanese 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 tax records, and other necessary supporting documents. The I-140 petition was filed on August 22, 2016 via premium processing service. Eventually, on August 31, 2016, the I-140 EB-3 Petition for our Taiwanese client was approved without any Request for Evidence (RFE).

Once the I-140 petition was approved, our client retained our office again for his I-485 adjustment of status application. Our office filed an I-485 adjustment of status application for our client on November 7, 2016. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment came on time.

Eventually, on May 3, 2017, the USCIS Nebraska Service Center approved our client’s adjustment of status application. Now, he finally is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Peruvian                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH
Our client is from Peru who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in September 2016.  In December 2016, our client married his current U.S. citizen wife.  He retained our office in December 2016 for his green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on December 20 2016.  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 at our office as well. On April 3, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients. Eventually, on April 21, 2017, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Filipina                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is from the Philippines who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in December 2015. Since then, she has remained in the United States after her authorized stay period expired.  In December 2016, our client married her current U.S. citizen husband.  She retained our office in December 2016 for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on January 11, 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 as well. On April 13, 2017, our client was interviewed at Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney JP Sarmiento from our office also accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, on the same day of the interview, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-751

APPLICANT: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted our office in May of 2016 regarding her I-751 application.

She is from China and she married a U.S. citizen in February 2014. Through her marriage, she obtained a 2-year conditional green card in August of 2014. Our office helped her in the green card process.  Her conditional residency terminated in August 2016.

To comply with immigration requirements, our client and her husband had to file an I-751 Joint Petition to Remove Conditions. She retained our office on May 16, 2016, and our office prepared an I-751 application for our client with supporting documents.

On June 3, 2016, our office filed an I-751 application to the USCIS with multiple affidavits from her friends and family members, joint bank statements, utility bills, joint leasing documents, and photos of our client and her husband to demonstrate the bona fideness of their marriage.

Once the application was filed, the fingerprint notice was issued two weeks later. Eventually, on April 13, 2017, the USCIS approved our client’s I-751 application without any Request for Evidence (RFE).

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status Based on Approved I-140 (EB-1C Category: Executives and Managers of Multinational Organizations)

EMPLOYER: Multinational Tire Corporation

BENEFICIARY: Korean

LOCATION: Ohio

Our client is the vice president of a multinational tire corporation in Ohio.  He is from Korea, and has worked for its parent company for 12 years in positions of increasing responsibility including that of Research and Development team manager. He came to the United States in February 2013 with an E-2 visa to work for current petitioner company (wholly-owned subsidiary of his previous employer).  He contacted our firm in December 2013, and discussed us his chances of getting a green card.  Based on our client’s educational and professional background and his current position at the worksite, our office determined that he was clearly eligible for the EB-1C classification for his I-140 petition. Our client eventually retained us for his I-140 and subsequent I-485 adjustment of status application.

An employer can petition for its foreign employee under INA § 203(b)(1)(C) if it demonstrates the following: (C) Certain multinational executives and managers – An alien is described in this subparagraph if the alien, in the 3 years preceding the time of the alien’s application for classification and admission into the United States under this subparagraph, has been employed for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation or other legal entity or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof and the alien seeks to enter the United States in order to continue to render services to the same employer or to a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in a capacity that is managerial or executive.

According to the INA §101(a)(44), 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(44) and 8 C.F.R §204.5(j)(2), “executive capacity” means an assignment in an organization in which the employee primarily: (1) Directs the management of the organization or a component or function; (2) Establishes goals and policies; (3) Exercise wide latitude in discretionary decision making; and (4) Receives only general supervision or direction from higher level executives, board of directors or stockholders.

Also, above the mentioned statutes define “managerial capacity” as an assignment with the organization in which the employee personally: (1) Manages the organization, department, subdivision, function or component; (2) Supervises and controls the work of other supervisory, professional or managerial employees, or manages an essential function within the organization or department or subdivision of the organization; (3) Has authority to hire and fire or recommend personnel actions (if another directly supervises employees), or if no direct supervision, functions at a senior level; and (4) Exercises discretion over day-to-day operations of the activity or function.

After our office was retained, we prepared a thorough cover letter and obtained all necessary supporting documents from our client and the petitioning company. In our brief, we clearly demonstrated that our client met the requirements set forth in the INA §203(b)(1)(C).  First, the prospective U.S. employer (Petitioner-Company) has been doing business for at least 1 year.  Second, the prospective employer (Petitioner) in the United States is the same employer or a subsidiary or affiliate of the firm or corporation or other legal entity by which the alien was employed abroad.  Third, if the worker is already employed in the United States, he or she was employed outside the United States for at least 1 year in the 3 years preceding admission as a non-immigrant in an executive or managerial capacity by the petitioner or by its parent branch, subsidiary, or affiliate. Last, the alien is to be employed in the United States in a managerial or executive capacity.

In this case, the Petitioner-company has been doing business for 23 years in the United States. In addition, Petitioner-Company is the wholly-owned subsidiary of its Korean parent company where our client was employed for 12 years. Moreover, our client was employed outside the U.S. for at least 1 year in the 3 years preceding admission as a non-immigrant in an Executive or Managerial Capacity by the Petitioner’s parent company in South Korea.  Our client served as a team manager and later became general manager for the parent company.  He personally supervised and controlled the work of other researchers and engineers for new types and models of tire developments, and was primarily responsible for the company’s various new tires.  Lastly, our client is to be employed in the United States as a vice president for the petitioner.

On the application package, we included a detailed job offer letter, employment verification letter from our client’s previous employer (parent company), an organization chart, and a dispatch order.  Also, we included evidence regarding the relationship between the Petitioner-Company and its Parent company in South Korea.  The evidence included a copy of the certificate of ownership, a copy of the articles of incorporation, a copy the business registration certificate, a copy of the approval for overseas investment, a copy of the annual report and consolidated financial statements.  The I-140 Petition was filed on September 8, 2014.  On March 5, 2015, the I-140 was approved with no Requests for Evidence.  

On November 28, 2016, our office filed an I-485 adjustment of status application for our client and his derivative family members. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment came on time.  On April 14, 2017, the USCIS Nebraska Service Center approved our client’s adjustment of status application.  On the same day, the CIS approved our client’s derivative family members’ adjustment of status applications as well.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Filipino

LOCATION: Columbus, OH

Our client contacted us in October 2016 to seek legal representation for his naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. He came to the United States from the Philippines and obtained his green card in July 2011.

After retention,  his N-400 application was filed on October 24, 2016 with all supporting documents. Prior to his citizenship interview, our office prepared him via conference calls. On March 21, 2017, our client appeared at the Columbus, 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 April 6, 2017. His oath taking is scheduled in which he will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Change of Status from B-2 to F-2

CLIENT: Indian

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came from India on a valid B-2 visa in April 2016. She came here to see her husband who was pursuing his studies in the United States as an F-1 student. Later, she decided to stay in the United States with his wife as F-2, a dependent of an F-1 visa holder. She filed her I-539 change of status application to the USCIS in September 2016. However, she received a Request for Evidence from the USCIS on January 18, 2017. She retained our office for the response to RFE for her case on January 26, 2017.  

Once retained, we helped our client obtain supporting documents for the response to RFE. We prepared the response brief along with evidence to demonstrate that she has properly maintained her B-2 status, did not have intention to file F-2 when she first came, and why she wants to change her status from B-2 to F-2. We filed Response to RFE application along with supporting documents to USCIS on February 9, 2017. Eventually, on February 27, 2017, the Change of Status was approved. Our client is now on F-2 and can stay with her husband in the United States until his studies finishes.

{ 0 comments }