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 PERM Labor Certification Approval for Taiwanese Outpatient Services Clinician Beneficiary and Children’s Mental Health and Welfare Agency Petitioner in Columbus Ohio

CASE: PERM Labor Certification    
EMPLOYER: Children’s Mental Health and Child Welfare Agency
BENEFICIARY: Taiwanese Outpatient Services Clinician
LOCATION: Columbus, OH

Our client is a comprehensive children’s mental health and child welfare agency which was willing to petition for an Outpatient Services Clinician position for a second-preference petition (I-140).  Our client’s employee has a master’s degree in Social Administration and is currently working for them under H-1B status. After talking to our client, our firm concluded that this employer can petition her as an Outpatient Services Clinician.  Second preference petitions for Taiwanese people are current, which means that if a PERM Labor Certification for a second preference position gets approved, the I-140 and I-485 could be filed simultaneously. Based on our client’s prospective employee’s educational, professional and working backgrounds, our office determined that she is clearly eligible for EB-2 classification for her I-140 petition.  Our client eventually retained us on November 2, 2016.

Prior to filing PERM, our firm prepared the prevailing wage request, job order, advertisements, internal job posting, recruitment report, and all other steps which are important pre-PERM filing. Take note that PERM could be filed at least 60 days from the job posting date or 30 days from the last ad. On November 8, 2016, the prevailing wage request was filed.  After we obtained determined prevailing wage, our office filed the job order on February 16, 2017.  On July 14, 2017, we promptly filed PERM.  Eventually, on December 4, 2017, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB2 position for the Taiwanese beneficiary. Now our client can file the I-140 petition.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Marriage Based I-130 and I-485 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 a B-2 visitor’s visa in March 2017. In July 2017, our client married her current U.S. citizen husband.  After their marriage, she retained our office for her green card application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on September 14, 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 November 29, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland Ohio USCIS office. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office accompanied our clients. Eventually, on the same day of her interview, her green card application was approved.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Green Card Approval after Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition for Malian Client in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status after Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Malian
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is from Mali who came to the U.S. on an F-1 Student Visa in August 2010 to study. Our client currently resides in the greater Cleveland area with his current U.S. Citizen wife. They were married in January 2015, and retained our office on January 6, 2016 for representation of at the Cleveland Immigration Court. Our client’s wife filed an I-130 Petition for our client with their former immigration lawyer in February 2015.  While the I-130 petition was pending, our client appeared at the Cleveland Immigration Court on January 26, 2016 for his initial master calendar hearing.  Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu from our office represented him at the hearing, did the pleading and sought for adjustment of status relief upon the approval of the I-130 petition.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on June 21, 2016 at the Cleveland USCIS Filed Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and his wife for the interview at our office. Attorney Yu also accompanied them for their interview. The interview lasted two hours, but the I-130 petition was eventually approved on August 25, 2016.

Once the I-130 was approved, our office filed a request to join in a Motion to terminate proceedings with the I-485 application and supporting documents. The DHS counsel in Cleveland agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on January 5, 2017.  

After his removal proceeding was terminated, our client retained us again for his I-485 adjustment of status application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on February 2, 2017. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permit all came on time. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients at our office. On November 28, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Cleveland, OH USCIS. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu accompanied our clients as well.  After the interview, his I-485 application was approved.  Now, our client became a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for J2 IGA (Over 21) Waiver of Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement, Interested Government Agency Approval for Filipino Client in San Francisco California

CASE: J-2 Waiver of Two-Year Foreign Residency Requirement / Over 21-year-old dependent child

NATIONALITY: Filipino

LOCATION: San Francisco, CA

Our client is a citizen of the Philippines who came to the U.S. on a J-2 Visa in November 2015.  He came with his mother who came on a J-1 Visa for her teaching program in the United States. Both were subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement, meaning they had to go back to their home country for two-years before they can apply for permanent residency or some non-immigrant visa such as the H, L, F, and O visas.

After our client came to the United States, he completed his high school and was admitted to the University to pursue his bachelor’s degree. He wanted to change his status from J-2 to F-1 in the United States.

He turned 21 in September 2017. He would like to get a waiver because he wanted to change his status from J-2 to F-1. However, because of his two-year foreign residency requirement, our client cannot change his status in the United States without the fulfillment of requirement or the waiver.

Although J-2 dependents cannot independently apply for a waiver, in cases where a J-2 child reaches 21, the Waiver Review Division may consider requests for waivers on behalf of the J-2 dependent.  The Department of State’s policy allows for that process in instances where the J-2 dependent obtains a divorce form the J-1 principal, the J-1 principal dies, or in cases where the J-2 dependent turns 21, which is our client’s case. In fact, our client turned 21 in September 2017.

Our firm was retained to do his J-2 waiver, and on September 22, 2017, the J-2 Waiver application (Form DS-3035 and supporting documents) was filed to the Department of State. We also sent a request to the DOS to be an interested government agency and recommend this waiver based on the fact that our client reached the age of 21 and was not a dependent of a J-1 visa holder anymore.  Eventually, on October 16, 2017, the DOS recommended to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) that our client be granted a waiver.  On November 14, 2017, the USCIS issued an I-612 approval notice for our client’s waiver request.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for I-140 EB-3 Approval for Korean Taekwondo Coach Beneficiary and Taekwondo (Martial Arts) School Petitioner in Ohio

CASE: I-140 (EB-3)
EMPLOYER: Taekwondo (Martial Arts) School
BENEFICIARY: Korean
LOCATION: Ohio

Our client is a former Taekwondo athlete, who currently studies in the United States. He has a Taekwondo school which was willing to petition him for a third-preference petition (I-140).  Our client has a bachelor’s degree in a related field. After talking to our client, our firm concluded that his potential employer can petition him as a Taekwondo Coach.  Based on our client’s educational, professional and working backgrounds, our office determined that he is clearly eligible for EB-3 classification for his I-140 petition.  Our client eventually retained us on December 27, 2016.

Prior to filing PERM, our firm prepared the prevailing wage request, job order, advertisements, internal job posting, recruitment report, and all other steps which are important pre-PERM filing. Take note that PERM could be filed at least 60 days from the job posting date or 30 days from the last ad. On January 6, 2017, the prevailing wage request was filed.  After we obtained foreign degree evaluation report, our office filed the job order on March 29, 2017.  On July 18, 2017, we promptly filed PERM.  Eventually, on November 1, 2017, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB3 position for the Korean beneficiary.

We then proceeded with the I-140 Petition filing. We submitted the “ability to pay” letter for the I-140 petition application. We included the job offer letter, employer’s tax records, and other necessary supporting documents.

The I-140 Petition was filed on November 13, 2017 via premium processing service. Eventually, on November 21, 2017, the I-140 EB3 Petition for our Korean client was approved without any Request for Evidence (RFE). He can file an I-485 adjustment of status application for his green at any time since his priority dates are current.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Green Card Approval after Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition for Cameroonian Client in Atlanta Georgia

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status after Termination of Removal Proceedings with an Approved I-130 Petition

CLIENT: Cameroonian
LOCATION: Atlanta, GA (USCIS) / Memphis, TN (EOIR)

Our Cameroonian client came to the United States in December 1999 on a F-1 student visa. In July 2001, he filed an asylum application to the USCIS, was interviewed by the USCIS, and later his case was referred to the Immigration Court.  Thereafter, a Notice to Appear was issued and our client was placed in removal proceedings. After he got the Notice to Appear, he appeared at his initial master calendar hearing at the Memphis Immigration Court with his previous attorney.

His removal proceedings were continued, but he could not appear at his individual hearing in April 2003 due to the hospitalization.  Thus, the Court found him removable and ordered him removed in absentia.  Later, in April 2011, he filed Motion to Reopen with assistance of his previous immigration counsel.  However, this Motion to Reopen was denied by the Court in July 2011.  Thereafter, he contacted our office to determine whether he can file a Motion to Reopen again.  After the consultation, we explained him that the only way the Court can reopen his case is based on changed country conditions in Cameroon.  It is because our client’s second Motion to Reopen can be considered untimely filed and numerically barred.  After the explanation, our client decided to retain our office and retained us on November 22, 2011 for Motion to Reopen based on changed country conditions.

Under immigration law, if an applicant seeks to make an asylum claim and a final order of removal has been entered and the ninety-day filing deadline for motions to reopen has passed, the BIA and the majority of Circuit Courts have found that the applicant may only file the asylum application through a motion to reopen and only under the “changed country conditions” provision of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(i).  Thus, our office prepared the Motion to Reopen based on the changed country conditions in Cameroon.

On March 6, 2012, our office filed the Motion to Reopen with the Memphis Immigration Court. With 15-pages brief, we included a detailed affidavit regarding his involvement in political activist group in Cameroon, several affidavits from his fellow members who confirmed his involvement with the organization.  We claimed that the number of arrests and detentions of his political group members has recently escalated since his original removal hearing in 2003 resulting in changed country conditions.  We also attached a letter from a human rights officer in which he states that he knew our client’s political involvement in Cameroon. Moreover, other supporting documents such as newspaper articles and country report of Cameroon were submitted (24 exhibits).  On March 29, 2012, the DHS filed a Response in Opposition to our Motion.  Nevertheless, on May 2, 2012, the Memphis Immigration Court granted our motion and reopened our client’s case.  

Once his case is reopened, he retained our office again. Our attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu appeared at his master calendar hearing via telephonic appearance and his individual hearing was scheduled on September 29, 2014 at the Memphis Immigration Court.

Our client was persecuted and harmed in Cameroon based on his political opinion and movement.  Our client was scared to go back home to Cameroon, fearing that he will be persecuted based on his political opinion. Moreover, our client’s late father and his uncle were mistreated and harmed in Cameroon due to their political opinion as well.

We helped him file his asylum application and represented him in immigration court hearings. We also asked him to provide supporting documents corroborating his claim, some of which were a letter from his family, colleagues and friends in Cameroon. Our firm also did some research on articles related to his claim, and the type of persecution he will experience in Cameroon if sent back.

Our client’s individual hearing was scheduled on September 29, 2014 at the Memphis Immigration Court. Attorney Sung Hee Yu from our firm prepared him extensively. He also represented our client at his Individual Hearing at the Memphis Immigration Court.

Prior to the hearing, Immigration Judge held a pre-trial conference with Attorney Yu and the DHS counsel. During the pre-trial conference, and all of the possible issues were examined. At the conclusion of the conference, withholding of removal was granted. After the hearing, the Immigration Judge granted Withholding of Removal for our client based on his persecution in Cameroon.

In December 2014, our client married his current U.S. citizen wife. He retained our office again for the I-130 petition. Once we were retained, our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition for our client and filed it to USCIS on August 14, 2015.

Our client’s I-130 interview was scheduled on October 3, 2016 at Atlanta USCIS Field Office.  Prior to the interview, our office thoroughly prepared our client and his wife for the interview via conference calls. Attorney Yu also accompanied them for their interview. The interview went well, and the I-130 petition was eventually approved on October 11, 2016.

Once the I-130 was approved, our office filed a request to join in a Motion to terminate proceedings with the I-485 application and supporting documents. The DHS counsel in Memphis, TN agreed to terminate our client’s proceedings. Ultimately, the Immigration Judge granted the Motion to terminate without prejudice on February 24, 2017.  

After his removal proceeding was terminated, our client retained us again for his I-485 adjustment of status application.  Our firm prepared and filed the I-485 Adjustment of Status Application on April 24, 2017. Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices, fingerprint appointment, and work permit all came on time. Prior to the interview, we thoroughly prepared our clients via conference call. On November 17, 2017, our client was interviewed at the Atlanta, GA USCIS. Attorney Sung Hee (Glen) Yu accompanied our clients as well.  After the interview, his I-485 application was approved.  Now, our client became a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Immigrant Visa Approval Based on Marriage, I-130 Petitioner in Virginia, Beneficiary from Jordan

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing (Immigrant Visa) – Marriage-Petition

Our client is a Lawful Permanent Resident (Green card holder) who married his wife in Jordan in 2014.  After the marriage, he came back to the United States to work and wanted to file an I-130 (F-2A category) petition for his wife in Jordan.  He retained our office in October 2015 and our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition on October 30, 2015. This I-130 Petition was approved by the USCIS in February 2016 (the priority date of this petition was October 30, 2015). Once the I-130 petition was approved, he retained us again to bring his wife to the States via consular processing.

Once retained and her priority date became current, we filed the immigrant visa packets to the National Visa Center on November 14, 2016, who in turn forwarded our client’s materials to the U.S. Embassy in Amman, Jordan. An interview notice was set for the client at the US Embassy in Amman, and we prepared her for the interview. On November 2, 2017, the interview was conducted.  Eventually, after the interview, the U.S. Embassy in Amman, Jordan approved and issued her immigrant visa on November 13, 2017.

With the approved immigrant visa, our client’s wife can come to the United States immediately, and she will get her green card within two months of entry.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for EB-1C I-140 Petition Approval after Successful Response to RFE for Chinese General Manager and Child Care Center Petitioner in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: I-140 (EB-1C Category: Executives and Managers of Multinational Organizations)

EMPLOYER: Child Care Center in Cleveland, OH

BENEFICIARY: Chinese

LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

Our client is a Chinese company which has its US subsidiary in the greater Cleveland area.  In 2016, our client acquired a child development center which offered child care services to children from the age of 6 weeks to 12 years old. They contacted our office in the middle of August 2017 to seek legal assistance for a possible L-1A extension for their employee. He came from China in 2016 with his L-1A visa to work as a General Manager. In September 2017, he successfully extended his L-1A status through our legal assistance.

He contacted our firm again in October 2017 and retained us to respond to a Request for Evidence for his I-140 EB1C petition, which was originally filed by a different attorney. In 2016, his current employer filed this I-140 petition under the EB1C category, but the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence. He wanted us to handle his case and retained our office on October 5, 2017.

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

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

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

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

The RFE letter thoroughly requested our client to demonstrate the qualifying relationship between the parent company in China and his current employer. Moreover, the USCIS requested our client to show whether he met the requirement of “one year managerial or executive position abroad.”

On the application package, we included a detailed job offer letter, employment verification letter from our client’s previous employer (parent company), and an organization chart.  Also, we included evidence regarding the relationship between the Petitioner-Company and its Parent company in China.  The evidence included a copy of the certificate of ownership, a copy of the articles of incorporation, a copy the business registration certificate, a copy of the tax records, etc.  Our office filed the Response to RFE on November 3, 2017 with 39 exhibits (A to MM). Eventually, on November 15, 2017, the I-140 petition was approved.  Now, our client can file the I-485 adjustment of status application based on the approved I-140 petition.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for With Rebuttable Presumption of Discontinuation of Residency Argument for Over Six Month Trip, Naturalization Approval for Filipino Client in Cleveland Ohio

CASE: N-400 (Citizenship / Naturalization)
APPLICANT: Filipino
LOCATION: Cleveland, OH

 

Our client contacted us in July 2016 to seek legal representation for his naturalization application. He came to the United States from the Philippines and obtained his green card through a family petition in 2009. He retained our office for his naturalization application on July 16, 2016. He had a lot of trips totaling almost two and a half years out of the past five years. He also had a trip that lasted between six months and one year.

His N-400 application was filed on July 20, 2017 with all necessary supporting documents. We included a brief to rebut the presumption of discontinuation of his residency due to his “over six month” trip.

Our office prepared him for his interview. Our client appeared at his naturalization interview on October 19, 2017 at the Cleveland USCIS Field Office. Attorney JP Sarmiento accompanied our client as well.  Our client answered all questions correctly and passed his citizenship interview. His N-400 was approved on November 9, 2017. His oath taking is scheduled where he will become a U.S. Citizen.

{ 0 comments }

Post image for Green Card Approval (EB-2 NIW) for Korean Polymer Engineering Researcher in Akron Ohio

CASE: I-485 Adjustment of Status / National Interest Waiver

CLIENT: Korean

LOCATION: Akron Ohio

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

Our client is an extraordinary researcher and engineer in the field of polymer engineering; specifically, the development of specialty polymer composites and dispersion technology of nano-particles/pigments. His significant contributions have placed him at the pinnacle of his field. His expertise is in the fields of chemical and materials science research. Throughout his research career, he has discovered new ways to synthesize polystyrene/silica composite particles which was highly evaluated by reviewers of various journals and by colleagues and experts in the field.

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

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

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

Our office filed his I-140(NIW) petition to the USCIS Nebraska Service Center on February 22, 2016. Eventually, on April 28, 2017, the USCIS approved his I-140 petition without any Requests for Evidence.  Our office filed his I-485 application along with his I-140 petition concurrently. On November 16, 2017, the USCIS approved his I-485 application as well. Now, he is a green card holder.

{ 0 comments }