Fiancé Visa Petition Approved in 28 Calendar Days for Ghanaian Foreign National (Case Approved October 27, 2016- California Service Center).
The client, a U.S. citizen, met her fiancé at a party while in Ghana. Her fiancé proposed this summer and they were eager to get the process started. We discussed the legal fee and timeframe and answered all of the client’s questions via email and phone. The client let us know that she wanted a New Year’s wedding so we told we would expedite the filing to try and get a speedy approval of the I-129F. The client decided to retain us and we prepared the case remotely.
The client worked extra hard to give us all the documents that we requested. While completing our client’s affidavit of support, it came to our attention that she did not meet the minimum poverty guideline requirement. We informed her that she needed to obtain a co-sponsor. Luckily, the client’s mother stepped in to assist.
We filed the I-129F application on September 9, 2016. It was approved 28 days later! Because of the client’s willingness to give us all the documents that we asked for, we were able to get an approval without issuance of a Request for Evidence, which saved time, effort, and cost. We are now waiting for the NVC to issue a case number and invoice so we can proceed with consular processing.
French Foreign National Reinstates Previously Approved I-130 That Was Revoked Under INA §203(g) (Case Approved July 27, 2016- Baltimore Field Office).
The client, born in Afghanistan but a citizen of France, came to our office seeking a way to get work authorization. The client had entered the U.S. several times under ESTA and timely departed each time. On June 30, 1998, client’s father, who was a U.S. citizen, filed an I-130 under the F3 category (married son of a U.S. citizen). The relative petition was approved on January 7, 1999. During client’s last attempt to enter, the client was refused entry due to the approved I-130. The client tried to enter at two other ports of entry, but both efforts were unsuccessful. Finally, the client entered illegally through the Canadian border. Because of his illegal entry, the client could not depart the U.S. to consular process because he had accrued more than 1 year of unlawful presence. Any departure would trigger the 10-year bar. The client was “trapped” in the U.S. for more than a decade.
We contacted the National Visa Center (NVC) to confirm that the relative petition had been revoked. We noted the two dates that NVC had notified the client to adjust status as well as the date it notified him that the approval had been revoked. After additional conversations with our client, we found out that his father had passed away after the petition had been approved. Immediately, we examined the timeline and noticed that the petition was actually revoked upon the petitioner’s death, therefore, it had already been revoked by the time NVC sent the first notice. We argued that NVC’s termination under §203(g) was impossible and requested that USCIS reinstate the I-130 for “humanitarian” reasons. The client has now retained us to file his adjustment of status application, using the reinstated I-130 and pursuant to §245(i).
Despite Having Committed SAW Fraud and Two Denials of Her Naturalization Applications, Lawful Permanent Resident from Nigeria Applies for Naturalization a Third Time, Overturns a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and Gets Naturalized (Case Approved July 21, 2016- Baltimore Field Office).
The client came to us with a complicated immigration history. She had entered the U.S. in the 1980s on a tourist visa. At the time of entry, she was 25 years old. She changed her status to a student so she could go to school. Although she had never worked in agriculture, she was able to find someone who provided false documentation she had been employed as an agricultural worker. By doing so, she was able to obtain a green card through the Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) Program. Over the years, she obtained a medical degree, practiced as a physician, married, and had children.
In 1996, she applied for naturalization without an attorney. At the interview, of her own choice, she decided to tell the truth-that she had never worked under the SAW Program. The officer advised her to withdraw her naturalization application so she signed a statement to withdraw her application. Six years later, she decided to apply for a new green card based on her marriage to a U.S. citizen. This time she filed the case using a well-known attorney. Her marriage-based green card case was denied on the basis that she “was already a lawful permanent resident.”
In 2005, she filed for naturalization a second time, this time with a well-known law firm. She was interviewed, passed the civics and English test, and at the end of the interview, she was given a notice that she would receive a written decision in the mail. Eight months later, she received a Notice of Intent to Deny. Her attorney advised her that he could not respond to the NOID, and instead, advised her to -re-file her marriage-based green card case, and file an I-601, Waiver of Inadmissibility. He advised her to retain an immigration attorney who specialized in waivers. Our client responded to the NOID on her own. She received a denial notice in the mail. Two months later, she received an Oath Ceremony Appointment Notice (it remains unclear why this Oath notice was mailed).
In 2006, she filed Form N-336 to appeal the denial. She appeared for her hearing and at the conclusion, signed a “Record of Sworn Statement” admitting that she did not work as an agricultural worker, was not present in the U.S. during the required period of time, and admitted that she answered “no” to the question on the N-400 that asked whether she had given false information to a government official to obtain an immigration benefit. Afterwards, the officer denied her appeal.
In 2014, client came to Attorney Dawn C. Sequeira to try discuss applying for naturalization a third time. Ms. Sequeira told her that we could either relinquish her green card and start the marriage-based green card case with a waiver, or we could try for naturalization a third time. We all agreed that trying for naturalization would be the best option. Ms. Sequeira filed her case in November of 2014. This time, Ms. Sequeira noted “yes” to the boxes that asked whether my client lied to the government and misrepresented information to obtain an immigration benefit. The application was several inches thick (hundreds of pages). By the time Ms. Sequeira left her old immigration firm, the case had not been decided.
In the first week of August of 2015, USCIS issued a Notice of Intent to Deny that explained how our client committed fraud at the time she obtained her green card and at the time she applied for her 1st and second naturalization applications. Upon the receipt of the NOID, the client’s husband quickly searched the internet to locate Ms. Sequeira and after speaking with her, requested that she resume working on her case. Thrilled at the opportunity, met with the client and spent hours discussing a legal strategy. A NOID response is due within 30 days of issuance so Ms. Sequeira had to act fast.
Under the law, a person who has not obtained lawful permanent resident status lawfully is not eligible to naturalize. Knowing this, Ms. Sequeira used a novel legal strategy. Along with the NOID response, Ms. Sequeira submitted a request for prosecutorial discretion. Ms. Sequeira prepared and filed the NOID response within two weeks. The submission was more than 400 pages and included an attorney memorandum that agreed that our client admitted fraud, but still deserved to naturalize.
In December of 2015, Ms. Sequeira did her first Infopass appointment. The officer said that could expect a decision in February of 2016. In March of 2016, with still no decision issued, Ms. Sequeira did a second Infopass appointment. This time a different officer refused to work on the case since a NOID had been issued and notified the officer that I was requesting a decision. On June 8, 2016, since the case was still pending, Ms. Sequeira contacted the Ombudsman for assistance. On July 14, 2016, the Ombudsman notified us that it had contacted USCIS regarding our client’s case. Finally, on July 21, 2016, we received a personalized email from the adjudicating officer that our client had been scheduled for an Oath Appointment on July 27, 2016.
Ecstatic, Ms. Sequeira personally called our client; her husband answered and she politely informed him that his wife’s case had been approved. Calmly he said, “do you want to tell my wife”? His wife came to the phone asking who it was; Ms. Sequeira stated her name and told her her case had been approved. Before Ms. Sequeira could say tell the client the date of her Oath, the client kept exclaiming “oh my God, oh my God, oh my God…” After composing herself, the client said “my husband is dancing” and a few minutes later, “my husband is still dancing.” Ms. Sequeira told her went over the questions on the back of the Oath Notice and told her how to complete it, question by question.
Our client waited 25 years to become a citizen and it finally happened! This is one of the cases that will remain near and dear to Ms. Sequeira’s heart. We were so grateful that our client took the interest to track Ms. Sequeira down. We commend our client for persevering despite two denials and a NOID and maintaining faith in Ms. Sequeira and Legacy Immigration. This is why we continue to vigorously advocate on behalf of foreign nationals.
Lawful Permanent Resident from Bolivia Overturns Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and Gets Naturalized (Case Approved June 30, 2016- Washington Field Office).
The client came to us with a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) that had been issued on March 3, 2016. The NOID had a deadline of 30 days (due no later than April 3, 2016). The challenging part of this case was that the client approached (and retained) us on April 28, 2016, well beyond the 30-day deadline. We informed the client that we could either file a NOID response or re-file the case. The client opted for us to file a response to try and get an approval. We requested several documents from the client, including bank statements that had to be mailed to her. Given that the NOID deadline already passed, we believed it was crucial to enclose the bank statements and the extra week.
When we created a timeline, we noticed that we could make an argument for administrative error. We noticed that the NOID had been delivered to our client on April 22, 2016 (22 days beyond the deadline) via certified mail. We knew that it was atypical for USCIS to send a NOID via certified mail; the only reason it might do so is if the mail was returned as undeliverable. We provided evidence that our client received all of the other naturalization-related documents (e.g. receipt notice and biometrics notice). Next we showed that our client had not moved. We proved that our client picked up the envelope within a few days of having received the notice left on her door. We also showed that the client retained our firm within days of receiving the NOID. Finally, we proved that the client worked tirelessly to gather crucial documents.
As we examined the facts of the case, we found out that the client had committed adultery and become pregnant by another man about three months before she received her conditional residence from her marriage to her U.S. citizen husband. A paralegal friend advised her not to disclose her son on her I-751, and not to list her son on her tax returns. The client did so.
When it came time to naturalize, the client listed her son on her naturalization application. USCIS issued the NOID alleging that she committed immigration fraud by not listing her son on her taxes or I-751. With our client’s assistance, we drafted a compelling Declaration. We also drafted declarations for her ex-husband and former mother-in-law. In our client’s documents, we found the Record of Sworn Statement from the first naturalization interview.
We submitted a 9-page brief, which included a section that displayed the Q & A from the Sworn Statement. In that section, we listed each question and answer (over 20 of them), and one-by-one, we proved that each answer our client gave was the truth and provided documentation in support of her answer.
We submitted our 450-page NOID response on May 30, 2016. The officer not only accepted our NOID filing, which was nearly three months late, but also approved the case within 30 days of receiving the NOID response.
The success of this case hinged on being meticulous on every part of the case, which started with noticing USCIS’ administrative error and overcoming it so USCIS would accept a 3-month-late filing.
Since our client was so special to us, we called her to tell her that she was going to be put in line for her Oath Ceremony. She was so emotional over the phone that she began crying. She told us she had such an awful day and was going to quit her job, but this news really made her day. We commend our client for working so hard to give us what we needed. She truly deserves to be a U.S. citizen.
U.S. Citizen’s Relative Petition Approved by USCIS in Thirty Days (Case Approved June 30, 2016- Potomac Service Center).
A U.S. citizen filed a relative petition for her Ghanaian spouse. The couple married in April of 2016. We filed the case in May of 2016. The U.S. citizen had been married before. Neither the U.S. citizen nor her spouse had any children. The petition was filed in May, 2016 and approved the next month, on June 30, 2016. Even though the couple had limited documentation, the documentation that we submitted was compelling enough to obtain an approval without the issuance of a Request for Evidence. The couple will now move onto consular processing.
Jamaican Foreign National Obtains Green Card Without Issue Despite Prior Attorney’s Opinion That She Committed Immigration Fraud (Case Approved June 10, 2016- Baltimore Field Office).
The client, a business professional, has been entering the U.S. on a G visa. She never violated immigration law. During her most recent entry, she obtained a tourist visa. Within less than one month, she married her U.S. fiancé. She wanted to file her green card application before her tourist status expired.
Before coming to our law firm, client visited one attorney who informed her that she had “committed immigration fraud” because she did not enter on a fiancé visa. When client came to our law firm, we asked our client what her intent was at the time she obtained the tourist visa and entered the U.S. She told us it was so she could tour different venues to decide whether to marry in the U.S. or outside of the U.S. We explained that as long as she did not have the intent to immigrate at the time she obtained the tourist visa or arrived at the port of entry, she did not commit immigration fraud.
The point we explained to our client was the 30/60- day rule that by which USCIS and DOS abide. We informed our client that we needed to wait beyond 60 days to file the application. We prepared a thorough application and filed the case. The client decided to attend the interview without our representation. Based on the thoroughness of every application we file, we knew the client would not have a problem. The client called us after the interview and said everything went well. The case was approved the very same day!
Salvadoran Foreign National Obtains Green Card Despite Having Entered Without Inspection and Without Having to Leave the U.S. to Consular Process (Case Approved June 14, 2016- Fairfax Field Office). -PART 2 (See Below for Part 1)
This client has a long immigration history dating back to 2003. Client and her brother paid a coyote to help them enter the U.S. illegally. A coyote helped them enter the U.S. at the Arizona border and advised my client, that if caught by Border Patrol, to give a false name and age. At the time, the client was only 16 years old. Border patrol caught my client, and as instructed, she provided a false name and said she was “18” years old. Border patrol sent both of them back to Mexico. A few days later, my client and her brother re-entered the U.S. illegally for the second time. They eventually settled in Virginia.
Client married a U.S. citizen and veteran. A previous attorney filed the I-130 but neglected to inform our client that she would have to depart the U.S. to consular process, and by doing so, she would trigger the 10-year bar, which would require the filing of waiver application. The I-130 was approved in 2009, but client chose not to depart the U.S.
Client came to us desperate to obtain a green card. She had received a DUI conviction and consequently, was placed into removal proceedings. The first step was to get her out of removal proceedings so they could get off the court’s schedule. Through a prosecutorial discretion request, we terminated removal proceedings.
The next issue was to cure the most recent entry without inspection (EWI). So we made a parole-in-place request, which was approved, despite having the DUI conviction (which is unheard of). The grant of parole-in-place is similar to 245i relief in that it excuses the prior unlawful entry and “paroles” the client into the U.S. Client was extremely nervous about her green card interview. We conducted a thorough phone prep with client and her husband. We advised how she should answer the questions about her two unlawful entries. We advised her to be forthright and answer all questions truthfully. We also advised that she bring her LPR sister along to interpret.
The last step was to ensure our client answered all of the interview questions truthfully but without compromising her case. On the morning of the interview, the client was shaking from nerves. We gave her a piece of gum and told her to relax because “the law was on her side.” Once in the interview, when asked about the method of her “last entry into the U.S.,” we intervened before our client could answer. Due to our intervention, the officer instructed us to remain silent during the questioning. The officer did not revisit the question and proceeded with the rest of the questions. As counsel, we wrote down and question and answer in the event that we had to respond to a Request for Evidence or Notice of Intent to Deny. Client submitted additional documentation.
At the end of the interview, we requested whether the officer would recommend the application for approval. The officer informed us that she had everything she needed and did not see any issues. The case was approved on June 14, 2016. After a 13-year struggle, we called client’s husband, who is in law enforcement, to give him the good news and allowed him to surprise our client by telling her she was now a lawful permanent resident!
Highly Qualified Indian Foreign National Obtains of E-Commerce Position with Multinational, Multi-Million Dollar Employer (Case Approved June 8, 2016- Vermont Service Center).
Upon beneficiary’s request, Employer retained our law firm to file a change of employer petition. After reviewing the position summary and specific job duties, we informed the employer that the proposed title would not qualify for a specialty occupation. We requested authorization (and were granted) wide discretion to revise the title and duties. We amended the title and duties in accordance with the beneficiary’s resume.
As is our procedure with all filings, we took the extra step of conducting an online search and noticed that the employer had an old add that contained the position and duties for the prior position. We informed the employer to either revise the advertisement or remove it in the event that USCIS also conducted an online search.
We prepared and filed the LCA and drafted a strong Employer Support letter that demonstrated the employer’s position in the market as the world’s second largest luggage manufacturer. We advised the employer to file the petition via premium processing. After pending for 12 (twelve) days, the case was approved without issuance of a Request for Evidence. The stakes were high since the beneficiary had already tendered her 2-weeks’ notice. Issuance of a Request for Evidence would not only delay the approval, but could result in a denial, which would leave the beneficiary jobless and would cost the employer an invaluable candidate.
DACA Recipient Becomes a Lawful Permanent Resident Despite Entering the U.S. With a Fake Passport and Fake Visa (Case Approved May 31, 2016 – Baltimore Field Office).
Client, a foreign national from India, first came to the U.S. as a child whose relative presented a fake passport and visa to border patrol agents at the port of entry. Client obtained DACA and traveled under Advance Parole. Client already had an approved relative petition but hired our law firm to file her adjustment of status application, prep her to answer questions at the interview, and attend the interview. We prepped the client for one hour and told her exactly what to say. The officer approved the case the same day.
Salvadoran Foreign National Overcomes Government’s Doubts of a Legitimate Marriage and Naturalizes (Case Approved May 20, 2016- Baltimore Field Office).
Client applied for naturalization without an attorney. After the interview, the officer issued a notice with a 30-day deadline to produce documents of a bona fide marriage. Client retained our firm to file the response. We immediately filed a request for an extension. While the request was pending, we worked tirelessly, on a short deadline, and during the Christmas and New Year holidays to obtain evidence of a bona fide marriage. Client was emailing supporting documentation down to the last minute, before we printed the response, and included the evidence in the filing. We made it to Fed Ex right as the delivery truck pulled up. We also assisted the client in preparing a tailored declaration that explained reasons why certain documentation could not be produced and explained issues within the marriage. Finally, we submitted a legal memorandum that tied together all of the evidence and facts cited in the declaration. The client’s case was approved and took his naturalization oath on June 2, 2016. The interesting point is that due to the urgency of the filing, we actually never met the client in person!
Bolivian Foreign National Who Entered the U.S. Illegally (Without Inspection) Obtains Green Card (Case Approved May 9, 2016- Fairfax Field Office).
Client retained our law firm to file the relative petition and green card application. Foreign national was brought to the U.S. as a child. She later obtained DACA and Advance Parole, then departed the U.S., re-entered using Advance Parole and retained our firm to obtain her green card. The problem in this case was how to have our client answer the officer’s questions about her first, illegal entry. We prepped the client thoroughly and attended the interview. We took diligent notes, writing down every question and answer that was spoken in case of any problems. Foreign national was interviewed on May 9, 2016. Thanks to our 1-hour prep session, the client followed our advice and answered the questions exactly as we advised her to do. The case was approved the same day.
Ghanaian Foreign National, Who Was Allowed Only 30 Days to Remain in the U.S. [By Customs and Border Patrol (CBP)], Successfully Extended Her Stay as a Tourist (Case Approved May 5, 2016- California Service Center).
Client arrived in the U.S. on a tourist visa. At the port of entry, a CBP officer allowed her to remain in the U.S. for only one (1) month, presumably due to her frequent visits to the U.S. on a B-2 visa. Client retained our law firm to file a request to extend her tourist status. We assessed the client’s case and based on her extenuating circumstances, believed that she had a strong case to request an extension. We provided the client with a detailed list of documents to support our legal argument. We also submitted an attorney memorandum explaining our client’s special circumstances that required a 5-month extension. The case was approved without a Request for Evidence just a few weeks before the client wished to depart the U.S. and return to her husband and children.
Panamanian Foreign National Gets Naturalized With Expired Green Card (Case Approved April 22, 2016- Fairfax Field Office).
Client, a Panamanian foreign national, was a Permanent Resident since the 1990s. She was divorced from the U.S. citizen through whom she obtained her green card. This was also her husband’s second marriage. She also had an expired green card. We filed her naturalization application and addressed the expired green card issue. Client attended the interview and her case was approved despite having an expired green card. Client will be sworn on June 9, 2016.
U.S. Citizen Obtains Approval for Indian Foreign National Parents Without a Request for Evidence (Case Approved April 13, 2016- Potomac Service Center).
Client retained our law firm to begin the consular processing cases for both of her Indian parents. We filed the relative petitions on January 19, 2016. Since the cases were filed with all required documentation, both cases were approved on April 13, 2016 without issuance of a Request for Evidence. The cases were transferred to the NVC within less than one (1) month. We are now proceeding with consular processing.
Lawful Permanent Resident Obtains I-130 Approval for Jamaican Spouse in About 4 Months (Case Approved March 7, 2016- California Service Center).
Client retained our law firm to begin the consular processing for his Jamaican wife. We prepared a thorough petition. Client did not have the typical sets of documents (such as joint bank account and joint lease), however, we created a tailored list for his case. Client submitted all of the documents. We filed the case and it was approved without a Request for Evidence. Once the priority date is current in a few months, we will proceed with the consular processing part of the case to obtain a green card for our client’s wife.
Indian Foreign National Gets Naturalized After 21-1/2 Year Struggle (Case Approved in March, 2016- Baltimore Field Office).
Client entered the U.S. with her parents when she was 1-1/2 years old on a B-2 tourist visa. The attorney of client’s mother obtained an employment-based green card for client’s mother, but forgot to file Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status pursuant to the rules of the Child Status Protection Act. As a result, our client was placed into removal proceedings. We first met the client when she was 23 years old and were able to obtain a green card for her through cancellation of removal. We were so touched when the client contacted us to file her N-400, Application for Naturalization. Our client was interviewed in March, 2016. We accompanied her to the interview. Her N-400 was approved and we were requested to have her sworn the same day. We stayed for the entire oath ceremony and took pictures and videos of her since her family could not attend. It was such an emotional day for us since we represented the client from removal proceedings, through the green card stage, and finally through to naturalization. Today she is living the American Dream. Clients like her are the reason that we remain so passionate about our practice of immigration law.
Nepali Foreign National Who Married During Removal Proceedings Obtains Green Card (Case Approved in February, 2016- New York Immigration Court & Baltimore Field Office).
Client entered the U.S. in 2009 on a student visa. In August, 2012, client fell out of valid student status. In March of 2013, client’s previous attorney prepared his Form I-589, Application for Asylum and filed it with USCIS. In February of 2013, the asylum application was referred to Immigration Court in New York. On July 23, 2014, client’s previous attorney filed Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative and Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status with USCIS. On July 29, 2014, the day of the client’s Individual Hearing, client’s previous attorney made an oral Motion for Change of Venue to move the Immigration Court case to Maryland. In May of 2014, client married a U.S. citizen.
After being retained, we sent an email to the client’s previous attorney to request a copy of the file. We received a thorough copy of the asylum application, but the only supporting documentation submitted with the relative petition were the forms, a marriage certificate, and one expired lease. Using the client’s alien number, we called the EOIR automated system and discovered that our client’s next Immigration Court was scheduled for May, 2016. We immediately contacted our client and requested that he and his U.S. citizen wife meet with us. At the consultation, we reviewed the client’s asylum application and advised that it would be best to try and win the marriage-based case. While sifting through the paperwork, we found the green card interview notice, which was scheduled for September 2, 2015. We informed the client that they would most likely have to undergo a “Stokes Interview” where they would be separated and asked detailed marital questions. We also informed them that they needed to gather numerous documents that included photos, joint financials, etc.
The client retained us on August 25, 2015. We worked with the client and his wife and met with them every day to prepare them. At the first prep session, we reviewed the additional documentation that we requested at the consultation. We advised them to gather more documentation. At the second prep session, we gave them several pages of Q &As specifically asked for couples who would undergo a Stokes Interview. We went over each and every question honing their answers and building their comfort level. At the third prep session, we reviewed the documentation a third time. We asked additional questions and this time their answers were concise, direct yet thorough. We knew they would do well at the interview.
We accompanied the client and his wife to the interview. As soon as the client and his wife were seated, we submitted our G-28, Entry of Appearance. Since several of the forms had been completed incorrectly, we submitted revised forms. We also submitted several documents in a neat and organized fashion. The officer questioned our clients thoroughly yet they passed the interview with flying colors. Unfortunately, previous counsel failed to submit the I-693, Medical Exam. In an effort to avoid the issuance of a Request for Evidence, we requested that the officer hold off on issuing the same and informed her we would try and submit a medical exam later that day.
We exited the interview and called several civil surgeons. Unfortunately, the client tested positive for latent TB and had to have a follow-up chest x-ray. The officer later issued a Request for Evidence for the sealed medical exam (RFE). About one month later, the client provided us with the sealed medical exam, which we submitted with the RFE. Our client received his green card in February of 2016. This case was particularly complex because client was in removal, former counsel had filed an inadequate petition fraught with errors on the forms, client married while in removal proceedings (higher presumption of marriage fraud), and we had only five (5) business days to have the client gather several documents and prep them for a Stokes Interview.
Bolivian Foreign National Overcomes Request for Evidence and Gets DACA Renewal and EAD Renewal (Case Approved in February, 2016- Nebraska Service Center).
Client retained us on the evening of January 7, 2016 to file a response to a Request for Evidence with a deadline of January 11, 2016; this left us with one business day to file a response that had to reach Lincoln, Nebraska.
Our client had received an approval of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) with the accompanying Employment Authorization Document (EAD). On Form I-821D, Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, our client disclosed that he had received six (6) citations. A Request for Evidence was issued requesting an explanation of these citations and evidence that our client has resolved them.
We had to work extremely fast to obtain the certified copies of final disposition and other supporting documentation. On Friday, January 8th, we obtained certified copies of final dispositions for all of the citations and drafted a memo which addressed each citation and how each citation was non-material to the case. That same day, we sent the response to USCIS, Nebraska Service Center via Fed Ex for delivery on the morning of Monday, January 11th. This case was particularly challenging because we had to obtain the certified copies of final dispositions from Virginia, prepare a legal memorandum, sort through several documents provided by the client, assemble the response, and send it out via Fed Ex all within one (1) day. USCIS received the response on January 11, 2016, and approved our client’s DACA and EAD applications on February 9, 2016.
Latvian Artistic Director of European Repertoire Theatre Approved for O-1B Visa (Case Approved in January, 2016- Vermont Service Center).
We obtained a favorable recommendation from Stage Directors and Choreographers Society (SDC) in New York City. Our client, a New York-based performing arts center, filed Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker via premium processing in January, 2016. The case was approved in thirteen (13) days without a Request for Evidence. We filed the DS-160, Nonimmigrant Visa Application and provided the beneficiary with all of the required documents for the consular interview. We provided all of the information to prepare the beneficiary for the consular interview. The beneficiary attended the consular interview in Italy and received an approval on the same day. The beneficiary’s visa was approved the same day and he picked up his passport the next day.
Latvian Support Personnel of European Repertoire Theatre Approved for O-2 Visas- Positions Included: Tour Manager, Light Technician, Sound Operator, Head Stage Technician, Technical Coordinator, Stage Manager (Case Approved in January, 2016- Vermont Service Center).
We obtained a favorable recommendation from The International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE) in New York City. Our client, a New York-based performing arts center, filed Form I-129 via premium processing in January, 2016. The case was approved in thirteen (13) days without a Request for Evidence. We filed the DS-160, Nonimmigrant Visa Application and provided the beneficiaries with all of the required documents for the consular interview. We provided all of the information to prepare the client for the consular interview (in Italy). The beneficiaries attended the consular interviews in Latvia and received approvals on the same day. The beneficiaries’ passports were ready for pick-up within three days of the approval.
Foreign National Whose H-1B Was Cancelled Taken Out of Removal Proceedings (Case Approved in September, 2015- Baltimore Immigration Court & Baltimore Field Office).
Indian foreign national was placed into removal proceedings in July, 2014 in Maryland. In April, 2015, we obtained an approval of Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative based on marriage to a U.S. citizen. Based on her I-130 approval, we filed a request for prosecutorial discretion, which persuaded DHS to agree to terminate removal proceedings in order to allow our client to adjust status before USCIS. With the government’s consent, we filed a motion to terminate removal proceedings which the Immigration Judge granted in September, 2015. We filed our client’s green card application. Our client recently received work authorization and we are awaiting an interview date.
Salvadoran Foreign National Who Entered Without Inspection (EWI) in 2003 Approved For Parole-in-Place (Case Approved in September, 2015- Fairfax Field Office). -PART 1 (See Above for Part 2)
In 2009, former counsel had obtained I-130 Approval from U.S. citizen spouse but client opted not to file I-601 Waiver of Inadmissibility (which required departure from the U.S. to consular process). In November of 2013, client pled guilty to Driving While Intoxicated in Virginia; this charge led to client being placed in removal proceedings in Virginia. Based on the approved I-130, we filed a Motion to Continue the hearing so we could speak with DHS assigned counsel to agree to administratively close the case. With the government’s consent, we filed a request for prosecutorial discretion which persuaded DHS to agree to administratively close removal proceedings.
When we reviewed the client’s case, we noticed that our client’s U.S. citizen spouse was a retired service member, which made our client eligible for parole-in-place. Since our client entered without inspection, we filed a parole-in-place application in January, 2015. At an Infopass appointment, we spoke to USCIS adjudicating officer who approved the parole-in-place application in September, 2015. With the parole-in-place approval, we avoided having to file the I-601 Waiver of Inadmissibility. Instead, we submitted a request to DHS to agree to terminate removal proceedings since our client was eligible to adjust status. Upon DHS’ agreement, we filed a motion to terminate removal proceedings, which the Immigration Judge granted. This was one of the most complicated cases we handled since we had to overcome unlawful entry, removal proceedings, and a DUI conviction. Client’s green card was approved on June 14, 2016.
Young Indian Foreign National Gets Fiancé Visa Despite Meeting Through Family “Arrangement” (Case Approved in May, 2015- California Service Center).
We filed Form I-129F, Petition for Alien Fiancé for our client, a U.S. citizen young professional. Our client visited his fiancé recently and had photos of their relationship, but not much other documentation (joint financials, etc.). We took a “creative” approach and filed the fiancé petition in April, 2015. We received an approval of Form I-129F in less than one month. Within 30 days, we received the notice from the National Visa Center and since had already notified our client of what we would need to submit to the National Visa Center, we submitted the forms and supporting documents within days. Shortly thereafter, we received the interview notice. Our client attended her interview and received an approval of her fiancé visa the same day. She entered the U.S. married our client and is in the process of adjusting her status to lawful permanent resident (LPR). We were thrilled to be able to assist this young couple in building their new life together as a married couple.