slide
Success Stories
If you need help in any aspect of immigration law, feel free to contact our office. We invite you to view our success stories.
slide
From Our Clients
Please read our compiled reviews from the internet, from Google to AVVO, on what our clients have said about our firm.
slide
Marriage
One of the fastest and most common immigration cases are those based on marriage to a US Citizen.
slide
Family and Relative Immigration
From immigration of children, parents, siblings, to cases involving 245(i), CSPA, and the death of a petitioner, we are here to help.
slide
H-1B
H-1B petitions for employment in specialty occupations, from computer analysts, engineers, nurse managers, accountants, architects, doctors, feel free to contact us.
slide
Asylum
Past persecution or fear of future persecution on account of politics, race, religion, social group, or nationality. Let us guide you in the asylum application process.
Post image for Marriage Based Petition and Adjustment of Status Green Card Approval for Finnish Client in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Finnish                                                                                                       

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is from Finland who came to the U.S. on a F-1 students visa in 2015 to pursue her graduate studies. In April 2017, our client married her U.S. citizen husband.  She retained our office in May 2017 for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on May 22, 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 August 15, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, after the interview, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for VAWA I-360 Petition (Spouse of Abusive USC) Approval for Saudi Arabian Client in Georgia

CASE: I-360 Petition

NATIONALITY: Saudi Arabian

LOCATION: Ohio

Our client is from Saudi Arabia who came to the U.S. on an F-1 Visa in 2010.  She had a U.S. citizen husband who filed an I-130 petition for him. However, their relationship did not work out and they ended up in divorce.

In July 2016, she contacted our office to seek legal representation for her I-360 petition. According to her story, they had to get divorced because her husband was very abusive. With her story and other evidence, our office determined that she would be eligible for a VAWA I-360 self-petition as a spouse of abusive U.S. citizen.

Our client experienced domestic violence and spousal abuse during her marriage. Her husband physically and mentally abused our client throughout the years. Thus, we filed and prepared her I-360 petition, which included 14 exhibits and a detailed brief to the USCIS Vermont Service Center on August 11, 2016.  

Finally, on July 25, 2017, the USCIS Vermont Service Center approved our client’s I-360 petition. With the approved I-360, our client can file her I-485 adjustment of status application to the USCIS for her permanent residency.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Marriage Based Petition and Adjustment of Status Green Card Approval for Chinese Client in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Chinese                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is from China who came to the U.S. on F-1 student’s visa in 2011 to pursue her studies in music. In April 2017, our client married her current U.S. citizen husband.  She retained our office in May 2017 for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on May 16, 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 August 1, 2017, our client was interviewed at Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office also accompanied our clients as well. Eventually, on August 2, 2017, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for After Joint Motion to Reopen and Terminate, Green Card Approval for Pakistani Clients in Philadelphia Pennsylvania

CASE:  Adjustment of Status / Termination of Proceedings after Joint Motion to Reopen
CLIENT: Pakistanis
LOCATION: Philadelphia, PA

Our clients are Pakistani citizens who currently reside in Philadelphia, PA with their U.S. Citizen sons.  Our client entered the United States with valid L-1 and L-2 visas in November 2000.  Later, they were granted withholding of removal in July 2006 by the Philadelphia Immigration Court.  They have remained in the United States thereafter. In November 2013, our clients’ son became a naturalized U.S. citizen. However, for them to get a green card, their case should first be reopened by the Immigration Court for them to apply for adjustment of status either with the Court, or with the CIS should proceedings be terminated after reopening.

In May 2015, our clients contacted our office and sought legal assistance for their immigration matter.  After thorough consultations, our client retained us on May 14, 2015.  Upon retention, we first prepared and filed their U.S. citizen son’s I-130 petitions for them. We filed the I-130 petitions to USCIS on May 20, 2015 and the USCIS approved the I-130s on October 5, 2015. Once the I-130s were approved, we filed Request to Join in a Motion to Reopen for our client to USICE-DHS office in Philadelphia.  Our cover brief explained how they got their withholding of removal status, approval of I-130, and their prima facie eligibility to apply for adjustment of status.

After the long reviewing period, the DHS office in Philadelphia finally agreed to join in Motion to Reopen and an assigned counsel signed on the Motion on April 11, 2016.  Once we received the Joint Motion to Reopen, we filed a Motion to Philadelphia Immigration Court to request reopening of our clients’ cases so that they can apply for adjustment of status. Eventually, on April 28, 2016, the Philadelphia Immigration Court terminated our clients’ removal proceedings.

Once their cases were terminated they retained our office again for their I-485 adjustment of status applications. Our firm prepared and filed the Adjustment of Status Applications and the Employment Authorization Document on June 23, 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 client via conference call. On July 25, 2017, our clients were interviewed at the Philadelphia Pennsylvania USCIS.  The interview went well, and on July 31, 2017, their green card applications were approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Adjustment of Status Green Card Approval Based on K-1 Fiancé Visa for Nigerian Client in Youngstown Ohio

CASE: Adjustment of Status Based on Approved K-1 Visa

CLIENT: Nigerian

LOCATION: Youngstown, OH

Our client came to the United States in November 2016 as a K-1 visa entrant from Nigeria.  Our client is the beneficiary of an approved I-129F petition. He came to the United States as a K-1 Fiancé of a U.S. Citizen whom he married within 90 days of his entry. By law, if you married your petitioner-fiancé within 90 days of your K-1 visa entry, you are eligible to apply for adjustment of status (green card) in the United States.

Our client contacted our office initially in March 2017 and consulted with us for his adjustment of status application. After the retention, our firm quickly prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on April 4, 2017.  Things went smoothly and the receipt notices, and the fingerprint appointment all came on time.  

It is not mandatory to have an adjustment of status interview for an applicant who entered on a K-1 visa.  However, the USCIS may require an interview to test the validity and bona fide nature of the marriage between the Petitioner and Beneficiary. Nevertheless, the USCIS scheduled an interview for our client. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients at our office. On July 25, 2017, our clients were interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied them at their interview as well. After the interview, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for 245i Adjustment of Status Approval for Filipino Client in Indiana

CASE: Employment Based Adjustment of Status (Derivative Applicant) / 245(i)

CLIENT: Filipino

LOCATION: Indiana

Our Filipino client came to the U.S. in June 2001 with a valid B-2 visitor’s visa. He has remained in the United States since then. He married his current spouse in June 2002 and she obtained her permanent residency in 2016 through an employment petition. Our client’s wife was the beneficiary of labor certification that was filed before April 30, 2001 and she was physically present in the United States before December 2000.

Our client contacted us around November of 2016 for consultation and sought legal assistance for his adjustment of status. He was not sure whether he could be a derivative applicant of the adjustment of status based on his wife’s I-140 approval and his eligibility under INA 245(i). Nonetheless, after consultation, we determined that he is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us on December 1, 2016.

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.

However, aforementioned requirements were not met for our client since he was not a beneficiary of any I-130 / I-140 petition which was filed prior to April 30, 2001. He was not also physically present in the United States prior to December 2000. Nonetheless, there is a controlling BIA case for our client’s situation. In Matter of Estrada and Estrada, 26 I&N Dec. 180 (BIA 2013), the BIA held that:

“Although not grandfathered, qualifying after-acquired spouses and children are still able to benefit from section 245(i) of the Act in certain circumstances. The Supplementary Information to the interim rule clarifies that a dependent spouse or child – if eligible under section 203(d) of the Act  – who is accompanying or following to join a grandfathered adjustment applicant is “considered to be grandfathered” if the qualifying relationship existed before the grandfathered alien adjusts his or her status…. Such spouses and children are able to benefit from section 245(i) of the Act by virtue of their status as dependents under section 203(d), which provides that a spouse or child who is accompanying or following to join a principal beneficiary of an immigrant visa is entitled to the same status as that alien. Thus, when a grandfathered alien applies for adjustment of status under section 245(i) as the principal adjustment applicant, his or her dependent spouse or children are eligible to adjust status under that section notwithstanding the fact that they are not grandfathered aliens.

As mentioned above, our client married his wife in June 2002. His wife filed her adjustment of status application by virtue of an approved and current I-140 petition filed for her and invoked INA 245(i) in the process as the principal beneficiary. By virtue of 245(i), our client’s wife obtained her permanent residency in September 2016. Thus, based on Matter of Estrada and Estrada, our office argued that our client is able to benefit from section 245(i) by virtue of his status as spouse who is following to join a principal beneficiary under 245(i) since the qualifying relationship (their marriage in 2002) existed before the grandfathered alien (our client’s wife) adjusted her status (adjustment in 2016 through 245(i).

On December 20, 2016, our office filed his I-485 adjustment of status application and I-485 Supplement A under the 245(i) category for our client.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  Eventually, on July 19, 2017, our client’s I-485 adjustment of status application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Marriage Based Petition and Adjustment of Status Green Card Approval for Indian Client in Philadelphia Pennsylvania

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Indian                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Philadelphia, PA

Our client is from India who came to the U.S. on an F-1 student visa to pursue his undergraduate degree. In January 2017, our client married his current U.S. citizen wife.  He retained our office in February 2017 for his green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on February 13, 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 via conference calls. On July 19, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Philadelphia Pennsylvania USCIS office. Eventually, on July 21, 2017, his green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Marriage Based Petition and Adjustment of Status Green Card Approval for Jamaican Client in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status

NATIONALITY: Jamaican                                                                                                        

LOCATION: Cleveland, Ohio

Our client is from Jamaica who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in August 2010. Since then, she has remained in the United States after her authorized stay period expired.  In June 2015, our client married her current U.S. citizen husband.  She retained our office in November 2016 for her green card application. Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on April 17, 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 July 21, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office also accompanied our clients. Eventually, on the same day of the interview, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Motion to Remand with BIA to Apply for Adjustment of Status and Termination of Removal Proceedings Approved for Moldovan Client in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition
CLIENT: Moldovan
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the United States on a valid J-1 visa from Romania in June 2007. He remained in the United States for a time longer than permitted. Later, he was placed in deportation proceedings due to his overstay and a Notice to Appear was issued. His asylum relief was denied by the Immigration Judge in April 2012, but an appeal was timely filed.  The BIA appeal was pending when our client contacted our office in March 2014.

While the BIA appeal was pending, our client married his U.S. citizen wife in February 2013. His wife filed an I-130 petition for our client on March 7, 2013.  He contacted our office for legal assistance for a Motion to Remand and possible adjustment of status if the Motion is granted.  We explained to him that the Motion to Remand procedure and he retained our office on April 8, 2014. On April 17, 2014, we prepared and filed a Motion to Remand for Adjustment of Status Based on a Pending I-130 on behalf our client. You typically want the I-130 to be approved prior to filing the Motion to Remand, but by submitting the actual I-130 application itself and its supporting documents attached to the Motion, you can show that it is approvable.

In Matter of Coelho, 20 I&N Dec. 464, 473 (BIA 1992), the BIA found that a motion to remand must conform to the same standards as a motion to reopen, where the respondent presents new evidence which would likely change the result of the case. In a Motion to Reopen before the BIA, the Applicant must show that the evidence is material, unavailable at time of original hearing, and could not have been discovered or presented at the original hearing. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1). In this case, the adjustment of status relief was not available for our client at his previous hearing since he was not married his U.S. Citizen wife.  

Our office filed a Motion to Remand for Adjustment of Status based on a pending I-130 to the BIA on April 17, 2014. We argued that our client will be eligible for adjustment of status once the I-130 is approved since he had a legal entry to the U.S., has no criminal records, and has no other grounds of inadmissibility. We also attached lots of bona fide marital evidence between our client and his U.S. citizen wife to demonstrate the I-130 petition is approvable.

While his motion was pending before the BIA, he and his wife appeared for the I-130 interview on May 5, 2014. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our client at our office.  On the day of our client’s I-130 interview, our attorney accompanied them at the Cleveland, OH USCIS. The interview went well, I-130 petition was approved for our client.

On June 6, 2014, the BIA granted our motion, reopened our client’s case, and the record was remanded for further proceedings.

His case was remanded and scheduled for master calendar hearing on July 12, 2017. With the approved I-130 petition, our office filed a request to join in a Motion to terminate proceedings with the I-485 application and supporting documents on July 3, 2017. The DHS counsel in Cleveland, OH agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on July 12, 2017 hearing.  Now, he can file his I-485 adjustment of status application to USCIS to obtain his green card.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Adjustment of Status for Parents Based on I-130 by US Citizen Son Approved for Filipino Clients in Maryland

CASE: I-130 (Petitions for Parents) and Adjustment of Status

CLIENT: Filipinos

LOCATION: Maryland

Our client retained us to petition his parents for a green card. Our client was born and raised in the Philippines, but was naturalized in the United States in 2016. He contacted our office in November 2016 and discussed with us the green card process. His parents are in the United States and have maintained their status (H-1B and H-4). After consultation, he retained our office on November 2, 2016.

Once retained, our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on December 1, 2016 for his parents.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permits all came on time.  Eventually, on July 12, 2017, our client’s parents’ adjustments of status applications were approved. Now, they are green card holders.

{ 0 comments }