Processing Delays Beneficial in Some Situations. AAO Processing Times. He had been in the United States for nearly 25 years. Most adjustment of status denials are made "without prejudice, " meaning you can file another application for a green card. On March 2, 2023, my case was reopened for consideration and was approved the following day. Facts: In early 2017, a citizen of Mexico came to the firm seeking help from being deported. Because our client never applied for asylum, USCIS did not have jurisdiction over his NACARA application. You May be Interested in... Immigration Q&A. Citizen of Ecuador has his I-360 Special Immigrant Juvenile Status visa approved through nunc pro tunc findings after turning 21 years of age. The Firm's Representation: This case was one of the most difficult cases that the firm has ever handled because the initial outlook for the case was not good at all. Even though the citizen of Guatemala had a green card, he had several convictions for theft and he was inadmissible to enter the United States. The Firm's Representation: Our client had been a green card holder for 27 years, but he had been convicted of two counts of Maryland theft in 1996 and 1997.
If the USCIS does not choose to treat the case as a motion, it forwards the matter to the AAO for an independent review and decision. Feb 2021: ApplicationDate (I-485) July 2021: Admin Closed (I-485) December 2021: Application to reopen & terminate Removal Proceedings April 2022: Removal Proceedings Terminated July 2022: Case Was Reopened (I-485) Feb 11 2023: New Card Being Produced Feb 13 2023: case was approved Feb 14 2023: Card Was Mailed Feb 16 2023: Card was delivered to Attorney Address No Interview! Luckily, that process included documentation from our client's father that professed financial support and paternity of our client, all of which occurred before our client turned 18 years of age. First, the firm helped our client file a bar complaint against his previous attorney. After reviewing our client's criminal history, it was discovered that our client had a theft conviction and a one year suspended sentence, which in the immigration context is an aggravated felony. The firm attended an interview with USCIS, but USCIS would not make a decision on the case, even after two years of waiting. The Firm's Representation: In 2013, the Maryland offense of second degree assault was potentially an aggravated felony under the INA.
The argument for reopening at that point was straight forward. A motion to reopen requires that the applicant provide new facts that are supported by affidavits or other new evidence. The firm specializes is naturalization denials. Case Was Reopened On February 6, 2023, we reopened your Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, Receipt Number MSC, and mailed you a notice. Making matters worse, our client's interviewing officer at USCIS was a recent transfer from California and was not familiar with Maryland law. It may be that any further action is fruitless, but most of the time it is best to file an appeal or motion to reconsider or motion to reopen. The firm told our client that he had to be placed in removal proceedings to get a green card. The citizen of El Salvador sought the firm's help. Nevertheless, the firm has had quite a bit of success reopening old TPS denial cases. Outcome: On September 3, 2019, after two years of litigation in the Maryland State Courts, the USCIS and the U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland, USCIS granted our motion to reopen and granted our client's I-360 SIJS visa. Outcome: On June 6, 2017, the Fourth Circuit remanded our client's case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals to re-consider our client's direct appeal in light of the Fourth's Circuit line of mixed-motive asylum case law. Outcome: On January 28, 2016, three years after the firm started the representation, our client entered the United States with his immigrant visa.
Fortunately, in August 2014, ICE agreed to reopen and terminate our client's removal order. If the USCIS favorably reconsiders, this results in an approval of the case that was previously denied. This option is typically the last resort, as it may put the applicant at risk of deportation. The firm filed the joint motion request in May of 2013. Unfortunately, officers rarely decide to reverse the first officer's decision. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on Answers and comments provided on Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Citizen of El Salvador is granted asylum after the case was remanded from the Fourth Circuit and the Board of Immigration Appeals. Outcome: Our client was granted an INA 212(h) waiver and he was able to retain his green card. The Firm's Representation: Citizenship by operation of law can be very tricky, especially in this case.
All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. We can only recommend that you get an experienced immigration attorney to help you every step of the way. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. It is important to note that you'll need to make sure that you've cleared up whatever underlying problem caused your adjustment of status application to be denied in the first place. Outcome: Our client is now a citizen of the United States. Hopefully, with the firm's help, our client will obtain his permanent residency in the not too distant future.
The firm asserted that our client would be harmed in his home country of Sierra Leone based on his sexual orientation. During the appellate process, the immigration case law changed such that Maryland theft was no longer being considered an "aggravated felony" theft conviction. After taking testimony from our client, the immigration judge adhered to the government's position and granted withholding of removal but denied the application for asylum. Facts: In September 2012, a citizen of El Salvador was desperate to get his green card. Each motion is based on a different set of criteria therefore they are determined separately, and you must provide a basis for both. If applicants can prove that USCIS committed a legal or factual error when denying the application, USCIS may reverse the decision and issue applicants green cards. Thankfully, the Board of Immigration Appeal recognized the strength of our client's claim and reversed the immigration judge's decision. The Firm's Representation: Our client had been placed in removal proceedings. Instead of briefing the issue in the immigration court, the firm simply filed a copy of the order from the criminal court and asserted that our client was now eligible to move forward on his application for cancellation of removal for certain non-permanent residents pursuant to INA 240A(b) since he had no conviction at all. Here, our client received asylum and his wife and children were able to apply for asylum as derivatives. While some aspects of immigration have changed in significant ways in the years since MurthyDotCom began publishing articles in 1994, there is much that is still the same. Comment: Our client was a citizen of Cambodia, a country that refused to issue our client a travel document to return to Cambodia after he had been ordered removed to Cambodia. In some cases, it is possible to challenge a denial decision made by the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on an application or petition for an immigration benefit. The problem was that our client had a conviction for the Maryland offense of identity theft.
He sought the firm's help. Citizen of El Salvador is granted a green card through NACARA after being voluntarily placed in removal proceedings. This individualized approach has served the firm well because so far the firm has never had a Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver denied. In early 2013, our client and his U. citizen wife approached the firm to see what could be done. Our client stated to the firm that he had been advised by an immigration attorney that a conviction for the Maryland offense of identity theft would not affect his immigration status. While in Mexico, our client's father had a child – our client – with a Mexican woman, but they were not married.
Facts: In 2001, a citizen of El Salvador applied for Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The firm then sued USCIS in federal court and asserted that USCIS abused its discretion in denying the motion to reopen pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Even though our client was at the top of his class in a prestigious medical school, his conviction for second degree assault was hindering any residency program from offering him a position. The Firm's Representation: The firm took our client's case and discovered that our client had a viable claim under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The firm persisted with ICE and asked for a re-examination of the request in January 2014. Please follow the instructions in the notice. In addition, at that time ICE had a stated policy that it would not join motions to reopen so that non-citizens could pursue the Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver. Usually, the I-290B is decided within 2 months, and if approved the I-765 and I-131 are reinstated. When your I-485 application is denied by USCIS it is devastating, but not the end of the story. His previous attorney billed him thousands of dollars, but ultimately, the attorney did nothing for the citizen of El Salvador. The Firm's Representation: Our client walked into the firm's office for a consultation at 5:00 pm. The firm received two disturbing Requests for Further Evidence (RFE) from USCIS.
Facts: In July 2012, a citizen of Guatemala entered the United States and was stopped at the border and placed in secondary inspection. The Firm's Representation: A non-citizen who enters the United States illegally generally cannot get a green card here in the United States – illegal entry is a bar to adjusting status to that of a lawful permanent resident. Facts: In March 2014, a citizen of India sought a second opinion on his ability to naturalize even though he had a theft conviction. The firm attended one status hearing with our client in the Immigration Court in January 2013, whereupon a final hearing was set for March 12, 2013.
You are not alone, and we will fight for you. For example, you may be able to opt for other immigration options or make a legal motion to reopen your case – these routes can lead to your petition's approval after NOID. Citizen of El Salvador was granted U. citizenship after three and half years of litigation. The first question is what happened and what is the best course of action. The Firm's Representation: The firm first analyzed whether there was any relief available for our client. The firm had no choice but to seek a belated sentence reduction by way of a coram nobis petition. It also may serve to preserve the age of a beneficiary child under the Child Status Protection Act, if the I-140 ultimately is approved. The firm worked fast and filed a stay of removal with ICE which was granted several days later. The firm subsequently filed an application for naturalization.