Immigration.com Sample Cases

Our client’s derivative-based Adjustment of Status (AOS) application was denied.  USCIS stated in its denial that the applicant had been out of lawful nonimmigrant status for more than an aggregate amount of 180 days.  We filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and others (Defendants) alleging, inter alia, that our client (the Plaintiff) would have been out of lawful nonimmigrant status for less than an aggregate amount of 180 days had the Defendants adjudicated Plaintiff’s earlier H-1 petition as of the filing date.  In addition, Defendants failed to adjudicate a nonimmigrant visa extension that the Plaintiff filed prior to the H-1 petition.  In our complaint, we sought redress under the Administrative Procedure and Mandamus Acts for DHS’s failure to approve Plaintiff’s H-1 application nunc-pro-tunc.  In addition, we claimed that the Defendants’ denial of Plaintiff’s AOS application was arbitrary, capricious, and unjust.

Our client, a citizen of Taiwan had filed an employment-based adjustment of status application. The Plaintiff's adjustment of status had been pending with the USCIS California Service Center for almost three and one half years. USCIS did not adjudicate his adjustment of status application since they could not get the name check clearance from the FBI. We filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and others including the FBI to compel these agencies to adjudicate Plaintiff's AOS application. The case was filed under the Mandamus and Administrative Procedure Acts.

We requested a reconsideration of a B-1/B-2 visa denial by a US Consulate in India. The applicant and his wife applied for visa to visit their son in the U.S. The wife was granted a 10 year multiple entry visa, but the husband's application was denied based on Section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (possible immigrant). This obviously made no sense. Why would one of the husband-wife applicants be denied while the other one granted the visa?  We requested reconsideration, fully explaining the circumstances in his favor and providing further proof.

We were recently retained to address a strange problem. An H-1 petition was approved, but the parties did not receive the approval notice for two years. The notice was apparently lost in the mail. They submitted an application for a duplicate approval notice, which also was issued and also lost in the mail. The employer then filed an application for an extension of status, which was granted without an I-94 attached to it. CIS considered the beneficiary to be out of status, because the employer had not placed the beneficiary on their payroll for two years. We submitted a motion to reconsider to USCIS as well as a supplemental brief together with an application for extension of H-1 status pointing out the legal implications of CIS decision.