Applicant sought out our firm after receiving a misrepresentation finding against him at the consulate for visa stamping. We reviewed his file and were unable to ascertain any factual basis for the fraud/misrepresentation finding. We began directly corresponding with the consulate, and requested information from various government agencies In addition, we consulted with The Office of Visa Services (Visa Office) within the Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs . After about ten months and numerous letters to the consulate, our client’s fraud/misrepresentation finding was removed.
Immigration.com Sample Cases
Our client received a request for evidence, questioning its ability to pay all beneficiaries it petitioned for. We reviewed the company’s tax returns and other relevant financials, and demonstrated to USCIS that the unique totality of circumstances of this particular employer warranted approval. We furnished evidence, including information about the company’s background, its activities and ongoing contracts, and commentary, analyzing the entity’s cash flow metrics, in support. The case was approved after three months.
We filed a Form I-140 petition for a professional cricketer in the EB1A category. This immigration preference category is for foreign nationals of extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics. After receiving an RFE questioning the applicant’s eligibility, we responded with documentation evidencing that the applicant has a level of expertise indicating that he is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. We submitted substantial documentary evidence to show that he qualifies, under several of the explicit and implicit criteria enumerated in the regulations. The petition was subsequently approved.
We recently filed an application for an EAD based on compelling circumstances for a client with a serious, debilitating medical concern. The applicant was on an H-1B status. We provided a petition to USCIS outlining the applicant’s medical history and the ongoing treatment that showed the progression of his illness, which limited his ability to perform his job duties. He was initially placed on short-term disability but as the condition progressed, it was necessary for applicant to be placed on long-term disability. We received a Request for Evidence from USCIS requiring additional documentation to show that the applicant was in compliance with his H-1B status requirements. The case was approved. It took approximately 100 days to obtain the EAD following the initial application.
USCIS denied our client’s Form I-485, alleging that the applicant failed to demonstrate eligibility for adjustment of status because a final disposition regarding a criminal charge under India’s Dowry Laws was not provided. We responded by clarifying to Service the particular facts of this case, and noting that mere criminal accusations without a conviction are not grounds for permanent residence eligibility. In addition, we pointed out that the laws under which the applicant was charged in India, have been widely criticized by international authorities and that public policy considerations, along with other discretionary considerations pointing to the applicant’s moral character warrant reconsideration of the denial. Approximately 11 months after submitting our motion, our client received an interview notice. We accompanied the applicant to his interview, and he received his Green Card after about five months.
Our client received a decision denying his request for naturalization based on allegations that he failed to continuously maintain lawful immigration status since initial entry. Specifically, Service found that the applicant worked at unauthorized locations during his employment with a Petitioner whose owner/CEO pled guilty to visa fraud. We filed an “appeal,” Request for Hearing on Naturalization, arguing that employees of the aforementioned company had no knowledge of the visa fraud scheme and were without fault. In addition, we pointed out that USCIS regulations permit approval of the adjustment of status, if the applicant has been out of status, or worked without authorization, if the aggregate period of such violations does not exceed 180 days, and that equitable considerations dictate approval of the hearing request. The N336 request was granted after approximately one and a half months. Subsequently, we attended the hearing with our client and clarified the applicant’s eligibility. The client’s citizenship application was approved in about three months.
Our client received a NOID after attending his interview to determine eligibility for adjustment of status. After analyzing the applicant’s address history, Service alleged that several years back, the applicant had failed to continuously maintain lawful immigrant status due to a failure to take a full course load as a student on F-1 status. We responded with a detailed letter from the University, explaining that despite the distance education, the school’s academic program structure and the applicant’s attendance records were consistent with regulatory requirements for a full course of study. The case was approved approximately two months after we submitted our response.
We won a case following a Request for Evidence that requested additional proof of the relationship between the entities, verification of employment abroad in a managerial role for one continuous year prior to entering the US, as well as additional details of the proposed managerial position in the U.S. Initially we submitted documentation to establish the relationship between the U.S. and foreign entity that included a share certificate, an organizational chart to show the relationship and owner interest as well as a Master Services Agreement that outlined the working relationship between the two entities. In response to the RFE, we submitted the Articles of Incorporation which indicated the share owner interest as well as the stock transfer ledger. In response to Service’s question regarding employment abroad for one full year, we re-submitted the pay vouchers for the full year as well as a letter from a representative from the foreign entity confirming the beneficiary’s employment for the relevant period of time. We addressed the question regarding the managerial role in the U.S. by supplying the full names, job titles, job duties description, educational level and salary amount for each subordinate as well as a detailed organizational chart showing the hierarchy, a very detailed job duties chart outlining each managerial task and the percentage of time allotted to each task as well as a day-to-day breakdown of a typical day for the beneficiary in his role as a Computer and Information System Manager.
We won a case for an applicant following receipt of a Request for Evidence. We submitted evidence to show that the beneficiary qualified for the category having published scholarly articles, authored a book chapter and acted as the judge of her peers. We noted the impact factor for the journals where her work was published and provided citations details. We provided evidence to show that she was a member of an editorial board. The RFE noted Service’s request for confirmation of the permanent job offer. The university’s employee handbook noted that the position was in fact “permanent” and renewable indefinitely. We provided a letter from the university that also confirmed her position was in fact permanent in nature.