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 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 245i Adjustment of Status Approval for Korean Client in Chicago Illinois

CASE: Marriage Based Adjustment of Status / 245(i)

CLIENT: Korean

LOCATION: Chicago, IL

Our Korean client came to the U.S. without inspection and admission by crossing the U.S./Canada border in March 1999. When she came to the United States, she was only 3 years old. Thereafter, she married her U.S. husband in May 2015. Currently, she resides in Illinois with her husband and daughter.

Our client contacted us around February of 2016 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her case. Initially, our office determined that she is eligible for I-601A provisional waiver. However, after the care review of her case and story, we determined that she is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us on February 5, 2016.

The basis of her 245(i) eligibility was that her father was a beneficiary of the labor certification which was filed on April 23, 2001. Therefore, she was a beneficiary of a labor certification filed after January 15, 1998 and before April 30, 2001. Moreover, according to the Robert Bach “Accepting Applications for Adjustment of Status Under Section 245(i) of the “Immigration and Nationality Act” memorandum (“Bach Memo June 10, 1999)

“Section 245(i) defines the term “beneficiary” to include a spouse or child ‘eligible to receive a visa under section 203(d) of the Act’ This applies to spouses or children ‘accompanying or following to join’ the principal alien….

The spouse or child of a grandfathered alien is also grandfathered for 245(i) purposes. This means that the spouse or child is grandfathered irrespective of whether the spouse or child adjusts with the principal. The spouse or child also are grandfathered even after losing the status of spouse or child, such as by divorce or by becoming 21 years of age

Often, a principal alien who has filed a visa petition or labor certification application will have a “child” who reaches the age of 21, and thus no longer meet the statutory definition of child, before the petition or application is approved or the principal alien adjusts status. However, such an “aged-out” beneficiary will remain a beneficiary for the purpose of determining whether he or she may use section 245(i) to adjust status.”

Thus, our client was grandfathered by her father’s Labor Certification, and is eligible for 245(i).

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 April 28, 2016, our office initially filed I-130 petition for our client. While the I-130 petition was pending, our office filed their I-485 adjustment of status applications under the 245(i) category for our client on June 1, 2016.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  We thoroughly prepared our client prior to her interview as well.

On October 31, 2016, our client was interviewed at the Chicago, Illinois USCIS Field Office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu, Esq. from our office accompanied our clients as well. The interview went well, and her adjustment of status application was approved on November 1, 2016. After a long wait, our client is finally a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for 245i Adjustment of Status Approvals for Filipino Couple in North Carolina

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 }

Post image for 245i Adjustment of Status Approval for Indian Client in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: Family Based Adjustment of Status (F2B) / 245(i)

CLIENT: Indian

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client came to the U.S. from India and applied for his permanent residency three times in the past. His past efforts were unsuccessful and applications were denied due to numerous and complex issues (aging out, unlawful presence, priority dates). His U.S. citizen uncle filed an I-130 petition for his father in February 1989. With this I-130 petition, his parents came to the United States and became green card holders. Although our client was a derivative beneficiary of this I-130 petition, at the time of his adjustment of status, our client’s application was denied due to the “aging out” issue. After the first denial, our client’s father filed an I-130 F2B petition for our client and our client’s employer also filed an EB-2 I-140 petition as well. Nevertheless, our client’s adjustment of status application was denied due to the “unlawful presence” that he incurred unbeknownst to him (he changed his status in the U.S. from B-2 to H-1B, but there was a gap).

Our client contacted us around July of 2015 for consultation and sought legal assistance for his adjustment of status. After consultation, we determined that he is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i) since his uncle’s I-130 petition grand-fathered our client’s case. Our client retained us on July 29, 2015.

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.

As mentioned above, our client, despite “aging-out” and despite not having physical presence in December 2000, is eligible to adjust status based on the approved I-130 F2b Petition filed by his father because he is INA 245(i) eligible as the “beneficiary” of an I-130 Petition filed by his uncle to his father in February 1989. We also argued that our client was specifically listed as a derivative beneficiary of this I-130.  Therefore, he is grandfathered under 245(i) and even though he “aged-out”, he remains a beneficiary for purposes of 245(i). Moreover, since the I-130 Petition was filed in February, 1989, which is before January 14, 1998, he does not need to prove physical presence in December 2000.

On August 6, 2015, our office filed his I-485 adjustment of status application under the 245(i) category for our client.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our client as well. On January 7, 2016, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, Ohio USCIS office.  Attorney JP Sarmiento from our office accompanied our client. Eventually, on January 13, 2016, our client’s I-485 adjustment of status application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

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

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

CLIENT: Filipino

LOCATION: Washington

Our Filipino client came to the U.S. in April 1993 on a valid B-2 visitor’s visa when he was a minor. He has remained in the United States since then. In April 2001, his U.S. citizen brother filed an I-130 petition for him. Thereafter, he married his current wife in April 2011. His wife got an approved EB-2 I-140 petition and she later filed her I-485 adjustment of status.

Our client contacted us around May 2015 for consultation and sought legal assistance for his adjustment of status application. He was not sure whether he could be a derivative applicant of the adjustment of status based on his wife’s I-140 approval since he overstayed his status. Nonetheless, after consultation, we determined that he is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us on May 26, 2015.

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.

As mentioned above, our client’s U.S. citizen brother filed an I-130 petition for him back in April 2001. Therefore, he was a beneficiary of an immigrant petition filed after January 15, 1998 and before April 30, 2001 and that I-130 petition was approvable when it was filed. Moreover, he was physically present in the United States on December 21, 2000.

On July 2, 2015, our office filed his I-485 adjustment of status application under 245(i).  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  Eventually, on October 19, 2015, without any requests for evidence, our client’s I-485 adjustment of status application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: Marriage Based Adjustment of Status / 245(i)

CLIENT: Mexican

LOCATION: Ohio

Our Mexican client came to the U.S. without inspection and admission by crossing U.S./Mexico border in October 1999. She has stayed here ever since. She got married to a US Citizen and in 2001 and her husband filed an I-130 for her in March 2001. She gave birth to a U.S. Citizen child thereafter. However, her first husband left her while pregnant, and the I-130 was denied. Yet she remained in the United States. Thereafter, she married her second U.S. husband in July 2008.

Our client contacted us around June of 2014 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her adjustment of status. After consultation, we determined that she is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i), if we can only show physical presence in December 2000. Our client retained us on June 11, 2014.

Prior to retaining our firm, her U.S. citizen ex-husband filed an I-130 petition for her back in March 2001. Therefore, she was a beneficiary of an immigrant petition filed after January 15, 1998 and before April 30, 2001. Though the I-130 was denied, we explained that the I-130 petition was “approvable when it was filed” because they had a child together.

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. They have to prove physical presence in December 2000.

The USCIS has a list of “possible” documents to prove physical presence. However, our client did not have any of these. “Employment records” typically mean pay stubs, or W2s, or any official government document pertaining to work. She had none of those because she just got paid in cash. She cleaned houses when she first came. Thus, we argued that a letter from her ex-employer should suffice as “employment record”. We also wrote that the fact that she got married early in 2001 means that she met her husband in the US at or prior to December 2000. It was a gray area argument but our client was willing to go forth with it.

On November 19, 2014, our office filed their I-485 adjustment of status applications under the 245(i) category.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time. There was no RFEs even.  We thoroughly prepared our client prior to her interview as well.

On February 23, 2015, our client was interviewed at the Cincinnati, Ohio USCIS Field Office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu, Esq. from our office accompanied our clients as well. The interview went well, and her adjustment of status application was approved on February 26, 2015. After a long wait, our client is finally a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Crewman / Seaman C1/D Entry, 245(i) Adjustment of Status (Green Card) Approval for Filipina Client in Anchorage, Alaska

CASE: Adjustment of Status / 245(i)

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Anchorage, Alaska

Our Filipina client came to the U.S. as a crewman in 2002. Her last entry to the United States on a crewman’s landing permit was in November 2002. She has remained in the United States, and she currently resides in Alaska.

Our client contacted us around June of 2014 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her adjustment of status. After consultation, we determined that she is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i) with the approved I-130 petition which was filed by her current U.S. citizen husband. Our client retained us on June 25, 2014.

Prior to retaining our firm, our client was a derivative beneficiary of an I-140 petition for her mother. When the I-140 was filed, our client was only 13 years old which made her a derivative beneficiary. Accordingly, she could be a beneficiary under the INA Section 245(i).

Section 245(i) of the INA allows certain foreign nationals to become permanent residents of the United States despite entering without inspection (EWI), overstaying, and entering on a C1/D crewman / seaman among others. 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 or if they entered on a C1/D (crewman / seaman), 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 and made amendments. 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 July 11, 2014, our office filed her I-485 adjustment of status applications under the 245(i) category for our client with the approved I-130 petition.  However, the USCIS denied our client’s application on August 15, 2014 and claimed that our client was restricted from adjustment of status by virtue of INA Section 245(a) and (c). They were wrong and the denial notice did not mention the fact that our client was ineligible for 245(i). Our client was eligible.

Our office immediately filed a Motion to Reopen (Form I-290B) on August 26, 2014 to the USCIS. In our brief in support, our office argued that our client is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition filed before January 14, 1998, by virtue of the I-140 filed for her mother in 1989 including her as a derivative when she was only 13 years old. The Bach memorandum specifies that even if she is aged out, our client is still considered a beneficiary for purposes of adjudication under INA section 245(i). We also argued that since the petition was filed before January 14, 1998 that our client does not need to prove physical presence in the United States on December 21, 2000.  Eventually, the USCIS approved our client’s I-485 adjustment of status application on December 3, 2014. After a long wait, our client is finally a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for 245i Adjustment of Status Approval for Filipina Client in Virginia

CASE: Adjustment of Status / 245(i)

CLIENT: Filipina

LOCATION: Virginia

Our Filipina client came to the U.S. on an H-1B visa in February 2000. After August 2003, her H-1B visa expired and she overstayed her status. Currently, she resides in Virginia.

Our client contacted us around October of 2010 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her and her minor son’s adjustment of status. After consultation, we determined that she is eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i) and the priority date for her case was current for November 2010. Our client retained us on October 14, 2010.

Prior to retaining our firm, her sister filed an I-130 petition for her back in 1990. As some of you know, priority dates for Philippine nationals under the family-based immigration category are more retrogressed than other countries. The I-130 petition was approved by the INS in 1990.  However, she could not apply for her green card until her priority date became current.  Therefore, she had to wait for more than 20 years in order to even apply for her 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 November 10, 2010, our office filed their I-485 adjustment of status applications under the 245(i) category for our client and her son.  However, the priority date for the F4 category Philippines backlogged. She got work permits though throughout the duration of the 485’s pendency. Our client had to wait until the priority date becomes current. In February 2014, her priority date became current. Eventually, our client and her son’s adjustment application were approved by the USCIS on February 6. 2014.  After a long wait, our client is finally a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

245i Adjustment of Status for Indian Client in Kentucky

by JP Sarmiento on February 11, 2013

Post image for 245i Adjustment of Status for Indian Client in Kentucky

CASE: I-485 approval under the INA 245(i) provision
CLIENT: Indian
LOCATION: Kentucky

Our client is from India who came to the U.S. on a B-2 visitor’s visa in September 2002. Since that time, she never left the United States.

In December 1986, our client’s uncle filed an I-130 (fourth preference) petition for her father.  This I-130 petition was approved.  At the time the I-130 Petition was approved, our client was a minor and was a derivative beneficiary. Our client was not able to immigrate on that petition though because she aged out.

Later, our client’s father filed an I-130 petition on her behalf on January 9, 2006.  This Petition was approved in the same year.

Our client contacted us around September of 2010 for consultation and sought legal assistance for her possible adjustment of status application. Attorney Sarmiento met them in the Washington DC area.

After consultation, we determined that she was eligible for adjustment of status under INA 245(i). Our client retained us in October 2010.

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 those other than 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 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.

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.

Our client was the beneficiary of a petition before January 14, 1998 (as a derivative beneficiary of the F-4 petition filed by her uncle to her father on December 29, 1986), and thus was eligible to adjust under INA Section 245(i) despite her overstay, without any need to show physical presence in the United States in December 14, 2000.

Once retained, our office prepared and filed her adjustment of status application under the 245(i) provision. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices and fingerprint appointment all came on time.  We thoroughly prepared our client prior to her interview as well.

On February 1, 2011, our client was interviewed at the Louisville, Kentucky USCIS Field Office.

Due to the complexity of the case, we made sure the officer was clear about our client’s 245i eligibility. The interview went well; however, the priority date retrogressed before her adjustment of status applicant was approved.

Finally, priority dates opened again. On February 4, 2013 our client’s I-485 application was approved.  She finally became a green card holder.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

captcha

 

For other 245i success stories, please click here.

For other family immigration success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact our office anytime for free consultations.

<a href=”https://plus.google.com/107743308565341841259?rel=author”>Google</a>

<a href=”https://plus.google.com/109631653288081090975″ rel=”publisher”>Google+</a>

{ 0 comments }

CASE:  I-130
CLIENT: Mexican
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is from Mexico who came to the U.S. without inspection and admission in 1988 with her parents. Since that time, she never left the United States.

In November 1991, our client’s father filed an I-130 (F2A) petition for her mother.  This I-130 petition was approved in March 1992.  At the time the I-130 Petition was approved, our client was a minor and was a derivative beneficiary. However, our client’s parents divorced in 2007.  Furthermore, our client was placed in removal proceeding in December 2009.

Around November 2010, our client contacted our office to represent her at removal proceedings. After we reviewed her previous immigration documents, we determined that she might be eligible to adjust her status under INA 245(i) and the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA).  She retained our office on December 1, 2010 and our attorney represented her at her master calendar hearing.  Cancellation of Removal relief was requested and we preserved possible adjustment of status relief through INA 245(i) and CSPA.

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.

Section 3 of CSPA, codified in section 203(h) of the INA, provides that “If the age of the alien is determined to be 21 years of age or older… the alien’s petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition.”

Our client was the derivative beneficiary of her father’s petition for her mother in November, 1991.  Our client is now older than 21. According to Section 3 of CSPA, a new I-130 petition by our client’s father on behalf of our client should automatically retain the priority date of the original I-130 petition, which was November 1991, in which our client was a derivative beneficiary. If this new I-130 is approved with a November 1991 priority date, our client would be eligible to adjust under 245(i) since the priority date is current and the petition was filed before January 1998.  So it was two petitions that saved her case, one for 245i, and the other for adjustment eligibility, retaining the old priority date under CSPA.

On January 11, 2012, our office filed the I-130 Petition with a cover brief (citing the CSPA provision) and other supporting documents.  Her I-130 was approved by the USCIS California Service Center on June 14, 2012 with the old priority date (November 1991).  Now, we can work on terminating her proceedings for CIS adjustment of status.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

captcha

For other 245i success stories, please click here.

For other CSPA success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact our office anytime for free consultations.

{ 0 comments }