CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Boston, MA

Our client came to the United States from the Philippines on a B-2 visitor’s visa in June 2014. After her authorized stay period expired, she remained in the United States. She married a U.S. Citizen in May 2015 and retained our office for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on October 16, 2015.  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 via conference calls. On May 5, 2016, our client was interviewed at the Boston, Massachusetts USCIS office. The interview went well, but the USCIS requested our clients to submit more bona fide marital evidence. In response to the RFE, our client submitted more bona fide marital evidence to the USCIS Boston Field Office.  Eventually, on May 31, 2016, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-140 (EB-3 Category) / Schedule A / Old Priority Date Retention

EMPLOYER: Nursing / Rehabilitation Center

BENEFICIARY: Filipino Registered Nurse in the Philippines

LOCATION: Des Plaines, IL

Our client’s beneficiary is a registered nurse from the Philippines licensed in the state of Illinois. Currently, he is working at a hospital in the Philippines as a nurse. His prospective employer was willing to petition him for a third-preference employment immigrant visa petition (I-140). Our client also has an approved EB-3 I-140 petition with a priority date of December 2008.

Since he is a registered nurse, he is eligible for “Schedule A” classification. The Department of Labor (DOL) maintains a schedule of occupations in its regulations, Schedule A included, for which the individual permanent labor certification procedure is not required. The schedule of pre-certified occupations is referred to as Schedule A, and is included in DOL regulations at 20 CFR 656.10. Based on an occupation’s inclusion on Schedule A, an employer may file an immigrant visa petition (I-140) directly with the (USCIS) without first going to the DOL for a labor certification. Usually, prior to filing I-140 petitions (EB-2 or EB-3 category), the employer must file a Labor Certification to the Department of Labor. However, for Schedule A cases, the employer does not have to go through the labor certification process. The position of Professional Nurses is included in Schedule A.

Also, under 8 CFR 204.5(e):

“Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.”

As mentioned above, our client’s approved I-140 petition was not denied, was actually approved, and was never revoked at any point. Thus, by virtue of 8 CFR 204.5(e), this succeeding I-140 Petition by our client’s prospective employer for our client is entitled to the previous priority date.

Our client has a nursing degree and has several years of related experience. Our firm told him that his potential employer can petition him as a Registered Nurse under the schedule A category. More importantly, since the priority date of his previous I-140 was current, he can eventually apply for his immigrant visa via consular processing. Our office was retained on September 21, 2016 and started on his Prevailing Wage Request.

We filed the I-140 application on December 18, 2015 via regular processing. We included the job offer letter, the notice of filing, his previous I-140 approval notice, and other necessary supporting documents.  Later, we upgraded our client’s I-140 petition to premium processing. Eventually, on June 2, 2016, the I-140 was approved and it retained our client’s old priority date.  

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Buffalo, NY

Our client came to the United States from the Philippines on a B-2 visitor’s visa in December 2010. After her authorized stay period expired, she remained in the United States. She married a U.S. Citizen in August 2014 and retained our office for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on October 23, 2014.  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 via conference calls. On January 21, 2015, our client was interviewed at the Buffalo, New York USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu, Esq. from our office also accompanied our clients.

The interview went well; however, the USCIS kept this case for a long time without issuance of any RFE or NOID until February of 2016. On February 6, 2016, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) and asked our client to submit updated evidence of their bona fide marriage. On February 11, 2016, our office filed a Response to RFE with lots of bona fide marital evidence that they provided. Eventually, on May 23, 2016, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: L-1A petition extension / I-129

PETITIONER: Adventure Travel Company in the Philippines

BENEFICIARY: Filipino President/CEO in Las Vegas, NV

Our client is an adventure travel company in the Philippines.  They contacted our office in the middle of September 2014 to seek legal assistance for a possible L-1A “new office” petition to send its executive to the U.S. in order to setup a new office. Our office was retained and his L-1A petition and visa were approved in February and March 2015.

The L-1A nonimmigrant classification enables a U.S. employer to transfer an executive or manager from one of its affiliated foreign offices to one of its offices in the United States.  This classification also enables a foreign company which does not yet have an affiliated U.S. office to send an executive or manager to the United States with the purpose of establishing one.

In December 2015, our client contacted our office again for the extension of his L-1A status.

Upon retention, our office prepared and eventually filed the L-1A petition with various supporting documents. The application included a detailed employer support letter, documentation to demonstrate the qualifying corporate relationship between the parent company in the Philippines and the U.S., financial documents, past experience documents, business plan, and physical premises evidence among others. We filed the L-1A extension petition on January 5, 2016.

The USCIS eventually sent a Request for Evidence and requested Petitioner to submit additional evidence to establish ownership and control of the U.S. Entity, physical premises of the U.S. company, and U.S. Entity’s business activities. In response to the RFE, we gathered supporting documents to address all issued and filed the Response to RFE on March 24, 2016.

Eventually, our client’s L-1A application was approved on April 11, 2016. His L-1A status has been extended to March 2018.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)

APPLICANT: Filipina

LOCATION:  Cleveland, OH

Our client contacted us in November 2015 to seek legal representation for her naturalization and citizenship N-400 application. She came to the United States from the Philippines and obtained her green card in May 2008 through her father. Her father became a naturalized citizen before she turned 18. When she went to the U.S. Embassy in the Philippines for her immigrant visa interview, she was told that she automatically became a U.S. citizen because her father became a citizen before she turned 18 (this was wrong because she had no physical presence in the US). Thus, two months after she entered the U.S., she applied for the U.S. passport. She obtained her approved U.S. passport, and thought from then that what she was told at the US Embassy was correct. The passport was actually incorrectly issued.

Later, she applied for an N-600 because she wanted to petition her husband and she needed a naturalization certificate, but it was denied. She was told she had to wait 5 years. So in 2013, she applied for an N-600 again, and she was denied one more time. During her N-600 interview, she explained her situation to the officer and so USCIS learned about the US passport situation. It was then that she was advised to do her N-400 application.

Our client’s N-600 application was denied because she was not a U.S. citizen. The automatic citizenship provision not only requires that her father be naturalized before she turns 18, but also that she be physically present in the US by that time. She did not know about this and she thought what she did was correct because her US passport application was approved. She was told at the U.S. Embassy in the Philippines that she is a U.S. citizen and she applied for her U.S. passport which was approved later.  

The issue in her case is the possibility of “false claim to US Citizenship”, which not only would get her citizenship case denied, but may also place her in deportation. Thus, it was important to thoroughly explain her situation so that fault won’t be attributed to her.

She retained our office on November 5, 2015. The N-400 application was filed on November 20, 2015 with all supporting documents. We included an extensive explanatory memo as well. Prior to her citizenship interview, our office prepared her at our office. On February 2, 2016, our client appeared at the Cleveland, OH USCIS office for her naturalization interview. Attorney JP Sarmiento from our office accompanied our client and explained our client’s complicated situation to the CIS officer. Our client answered all questions correctly and passed her naturalization and citizenship interview. Eventually, her application was approved on April 25, 2016. Her oath taking is scheduled in which she will become a naturalized U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Cincinnati, OH

Our client came to the United States from the Philippines on an F-1 student visa in December 2014. She married a U.S. Citizen in December 2015 and retained our office for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on December 17, 2015.  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 via conference calls. On April 12, 2016, our client was interviewed at the Cincinnati, Ohio USCIS office. Eventually, on April 29, 2016, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Fiancée Visa

PETITIONER: US Citizen in Cleveland Ohio

BENEFICIARY: Filipina

PETITION FILED: August 13, 2015

PETITION APPROVED: September 8, 2015

K-1 VISA APPROVED: April 26, 2016

Our client, a US Citizen Petitioner, met his Filipina fiancée in the Philippines in 2011. They started their relationship, and he visited the Philippines. In 2014, he proposed to her during his trip in the Philippines. After his proposal, he retained our firm to file a fiancée petition for her.

After retention, we informed our client about the necessary supporting documents to demonstrate the bona fide nature of their relationship. Our client retained our office on June 6, 2015. We helped him and his fiancée draft letters in support of the fiancé petition, and we filed the petition on August 13, 2015.

On September 8, 2015, less than a month after the filing, the I-129F fiancée petition was approved. On April 16, 2016, our client’s fiancée appeared at the U.S. Embassy in Manila, Philippines for her K-1 visa interview. The interview went well, and on April 26, 2016, the U.S. Embassy issued her K-1 visa.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Change of Status / I-539
NATIONALITY: Filipina
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is from the Philippines who came to the U.S. on a J-1 exchange visitor visa to work at Holiday Inn as an intern. She consulted with our firm a few weeks before the expiration of her J-1 status. She wanted to continue to stay in the United States for six more months to spend more time here and to travel.  We explained to her that CIS has been more stringent on Visitor status change. Upon retention, we prepare a statement based on her plans if her change of status request is granted. We asked her to provide as much detail as possible as we drafted the statement. We made sure all addresses, contact information, and dates on her statement were complete and accurate. We made sure all her plans were supported by corroborating evidence as exhibits to the application to avoid a possible Request for Evidence by the CIS.  Our office submitted financial documents from her parents in the Philippines as well. We filed the I-539 Change of Status Application on December 8, 2015 and her B-2 status extension was approved on April 4, 2016 with no Requests for Evidence.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Adjustment of Status / 245(i)

CLIENT: Filipino

LOCATION: North Carolina

Our Filipino client came to the U.S. on a B-2 visa in March 2015. Later, his authorized status expired and he overstayed his status. In September 2015, his wife came to the United States on a valid B-2 visa and at the time of her adjustment of status filing, she was still in status.

Our client contacted us around September of 2015 for consultation and sought legal assistance for their adjustment of status. After consultation, we determined that he is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i) and the priority date for his case was current in September 2015.

His brother filed an I-130 petition for him back in 1992. As some of you know, priority dates for Philippine nationals under the family-based immigration category F4 are more retrogressed than other countries. The I-130 petition was approved by the INS in 1992.  However, he could not apply for his green card until his priority date became current.  Therefore, he had to wait for more than 20 years in order to even apply for his green card.

Section 245(i) of the INA allows certain foreign nationals to become permanent residents of the United States despite entering without inspection (EWI) or overstaying (if beneficiary of petitions filed not by an immediate relative). Immigrants are barred from adjusting their status if they entered the United States without first being inspected and admitted by a Customs and Border Patrol officer and if they have either failed to maintain lawful status or been unlawfully employed in the country, with certain exceptions. Section 245(i) was first added to law in 1994 to allow certain people who otherwise would not be eligible to adjust their status to be able to do so upon payment of a $1,000 fine.

Four years later, on January 14, 1998, Congress phased Section 245(i) out of law. Immigrants and their families who had already begun the process of changing their status under Section 245(i) by January 14, 1998 were grandfathered into the section’s benefits. However, this left thousands of otherwise qualified persons who had not begun the process unable to adjust status in the United States. They could not return to their countries to begin the legal process of obtaining their permanent residency in the United States also without being subject to either a three- or a 10-year bar upon returning to the United States.

On December 21, 2000, Congress extended the qualifying date for Section 245(i) benefits to April 30, 2001. This law allowed immigrants who had labor certifications or visa petitions filed on their behalf between 1998 and April 30, 2001, to qualify for adjustment of status. Those who were beneficiaries of petitions filed prior to January 14, 1998 could still adjust despite an EWI record, and those people do not have to meet the December 2000 physical presence requirement.

On September 30, 2015, our office filed an I-485 adjustment of status application under 245(i) for our client and his wife. 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 via conference calls. On April 18, 2016, our clients were interviewed at the Charlotte, North Carolina USCIS office. After the interview, our client and his wife’s green card applications were approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status /  I-140 (EB-3 Category) / Schedule A / Old Priority Date Retention

EMPLOYER: Nursing / Rehabilitation Center

BENEFICIARY: Filipina

LOCATION: Houston, TX

Our client’s beneficiary is a registered nurse from the Philippines licensed in the state of Texas. She came to the United States in 2013 and now she holds her F-1 student status, and her prospective employer was willing to petition her for a third-preference employment immigrant visa petition (I-140). Our client also has an approved EB-3 I-140 petition with a priority date of July 2007.

Since she is a registered nurse, she is eligible for “Schedule A” classification. The Department of Labor (DOL) maintains a schedule of occupations in its regulations, Schedule A included, for which the individual permanent labor certification procedure is not required. The schedule of pre-certified occupations is referred to as Schedule A, and is included in DOL regulations at 20 CFR 656.10. Based on an occupation’s inclusion on Schedule A, an employer may file an immigrant visa petition (I-140) directly with the (USCIS) without first going to the DOL for a labor certification. Usually, prior to filing I-140 petitions (EB-2 or EB-3 category), the employer must file a Labor Certification to the Department of Labor. However, for Schedule A cases, the employer does not have to go through the labor certification process. The position of Professional Nurses is included in Schedule A.

Also, under 8 CFR 204.5(e):

“Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.”

As mentioned above, our client’s approved I-140 petition was not denied, was actually approved, and was never revoked at any point. Thus, by virtue of 8 CFR 204.5(e), this succeeding I-140 Petition by our client’s prospective employer for our client is entitled to the previous priority date.

Our client has a nursing degree and has several years of related experience. Our firm told her that her potential employer can petition her as a Registered Nurse under the schedule A category. Our office was retained on July 28, 2014 and started on her Prevailing Wage Request.

We filed the I-140 application on September 12, 2014 via premium processing. We included the job offer letter, the notice of filing, her previous I-140 approval notice, and other necessary supporting documents.  Eventually, on September 24, 2014, the I-140 was approved and it retained our client’s old priority date.

Then, we proceeded with our client’s I-485 adjustment of status application. We prepared and filed our client’s adjustment of status application along with supporting documents to USCIS on December 12, 2014.

The priority dates of the Eb-3 category for Philippine nationals backlogged. Our client had to wait until the priority date became current. In April 2016, her priority date became current. Eventually, our client’s adjustment application was approved by the USCIS on April 13, 2016.  After a long wait, our client is finally a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }