Immigration.com Sample Cases

These are some sample cases from our files. It is impossible for us to present all have done past over 15 years of our practice. But these were some cases that came to mind when we started writing this column 2-3 years ago.
Type of Case: L-1A Extension
Category: L-1A Visa, RFE
Status: Our legal argument combined with the significant volume of corroborating evidence proved successful.

 

We filed an L-1A for a managerial level employee seeking a second two year extension of the beneficiary’s classification as a nonimmigrant intracompany transferee (L-1A) to enable the beneficiary to continue in his position as Director-Product Engineering, a position he had held since the approval of the initial petition. Subsequent to filing the petition we received a Request for Evidence (RFE). We responded and the petition was then approved. The RFE requested additional information regarding the beneficiary’s qualifications, the managerial position abroad (to prove he had at least one continuous year, within the three years prior to his application for admission to the U.S., of full time employment with a qualifying foreign organization (which was the case, as the U.S, company was a 100% subsidiary of the foreign company)), and the proposed managerial position in the U.S. In the response to the RFE we provided extensive narratives and corroborating documents explaining further and beyond what was submitted with the initial L-1A filing. In addition to a response letter we provided extensive corroborating evidence as exhibits that included letters from authorized representatives of both companies that very comprehensively addressed the concerns and which themselves included exhibits. The hurdle here was proving that a second extension was warranted from a legal and factual standpoint.  Our legal argument combined with the significant volume of corroborating evidence proved successful. 

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Category: L-1A Visa, RFE
Status: L-1A Approved

 

We filed an L-1A for a managerial level employee (intracompany transferee) The U.S. company was seeking to employ the beneficiary as Manager - Business Finance. Subsequent to filing the petition we received a Request for Evidence (RFE). We responded and the petition was then approved. One of the challenges in this case included establishing that the foreign entity and the U.S. had a “qualifying relationship” as there was a complex multinational organizational structure that included several subsidiary relationships. Other challenges were proving that the positions in both countries were high senior level functional managerial positions, not routine operational activities, and that they were managed, not performed, by the beneficiary. The positions also had team management responsibilities, requiring the sometimes difficult delineation as to whether each specific job duty fell under personnel (team management) or functional management. The Response to the RFE included further information about ownership and control of the companies and a significant amount of additional detail about the beneficiary’s managerial positions and those of his subordinates and their relationships within the hierarchy of the companies.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Category: L-1A Visa, RFE
Status: L-1A approved

 

We filed an L-1A for an executive/managerial level employee (intracompany transferee). The U.S. company was seeking to employ the beneficiary as a senior vice president. Subsequent to filing the petition we received a Request for Evidence (RFE). We responded and the petition was then approved. One of the challenges in this case included establishing that the foreign entity and the U.S. had a “qualifying relationship” where there is a complex multinational organizational structure that includes several subsidiary relationships. Other challenges were proving that the position in both the U.S. and abroad was both executive and managerial. Our Response to the RFE included further information about ownership and control of the companies and a significant amount of additional detail about the executive/managerial positions abroad and in the U.S. Among other factual and legal submissions, detailed and corroborating information was provided regarding the positions included: narratives with very specific descriptions of beneficiary’s and direct reportees’ job duties, letters from company executives corroborating this information, quarterly reports with salary levels (redacted for privacy), charts showing beneficiary’s detailed job description and the percentage of time spent (and to be spent) on each duty. 

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Category: L-1A Visa
Status: L-1A approved

 

We filed an L-1A for an executive or managerial level employee (intracompany transferee). The U.S. company was seeking to employ the beneficiary as president. There were several legal issues, potential and manifest, including: how to prove the job is managerial or executive when the US operation is a fledgling business; can a majority stockholder be also an employee? What to do when the reporting structure in the foreign corporation is relatively informal?  We were able to anticipate these issues prior to filing, through consultation with our clients, and overcome them with our response to the government. Among other factual and legal submissions, detailed information with supporting documentation was provided about the beneficiary’s direct reportees in both entities, including job title and description, education, experience, and salary. We also provided information about how the beneficiary is and will be  relieved from performing non-executive tasks. Detailed organizational charts for both companies were also provided. The petition was subsequently approved.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Type of Case: B1/B2 Visa
Category: B-2 Visa, B-1 Visa, Fraud/Misrepresentation, General Nonimmigrant Visa
Status: Fraud/Misrepresentation finding removed

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.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Type of Case: Form I-140 (EB2)
Category: EB2 Green Card, Form I-140
Status: Form I-140 approved

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.  

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Type of Case: Form I-140 (EB1A)
Category: EB1 Green Card, Form I-140
Status: Form I-140 approved

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.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Category: Compelling Circumstances EAD
Status: Compelling circumstances EAD 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.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Category: Form I-140, Form I-485
Status: Form I-140 approved

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.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.
Type of Case: Form N-400 Denial
Category: Naturalization
Status: Form N-336 granted; N-400 approved

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.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

Pages