Case of A.B.
A won the DV–Lottery, but her luck ran out when she ran into the “wrong” consul. At her visa interview, the consul drew a triangle and demanded that she calculate the number of degrees in one of the angles. A was confused — she had graduated high school and so met the requirements for the Diversity Visa. (In fact, she was a university student.) But she didn’t know she was going to be tested from her high school math class! She was unable to answer the question. She was then refused under Section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act for not meeting the minimum education qualifications. Compounding her problem, there was less than a month remaining to the expiration of the DV program. After she contacted us, we immediately contacted Washington, alerting them to the consul exceeding his authority by imposing these academic checks. After a brief review, the visa was issued a week before the deadline.
Case of K.M.
Ms. M was stopped at a land border crossing with Mexico many years ago. As a result of that detention, her visa was cancelled, but she was not given any documentation. After that, her visa applications were continuously denied, but she did not understand the reason. So we did a FOIA request for her, and were able to obtain the detailed CBP documentation of the encounter at the border. We were able to advise her for her next visa application and she was able to receive a new visa.
Case of L.N.
Mr. N was stopped at an airport in the US. He was planning to spend substantial time in the US and this aroused suspicion for CBP. The CBP inspector then proceeded to ask him a lot of questions, including about drug use. At the end of the encounter, Mr. N’s visa was cancelled under 22 CFR 41.122(e)(3) and he withdrew his application for admission. The problem was that he was not given the Record of Sworn Statement, and could not recall how he answered certain questions during the interrogation. We then helped him contact the airport, which turned over the Record of Sworn Statement.
Case of V. R.
The I-129 L-1 petition approval of Mr. R. was revoked. The consul officer had questions about the existence of the business and Mr. R’s intentions, recommending the revocation of the approval of the I-129 petition. In response to the USCIS Notice of Intent to Revoke (NOIR), his company filed a reply, but USCIS decided to revoke the I-129 petition approval. Mr. R then contacted us. We filed an appeal with the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office, and after it was approved, we provided him support with his visa application process, ending with the issuance of his L-1 visa.
Case of A.S.
Ms. S was stopped at an airport in the US and had her phone checked. Because of some questionable text messages and photographs on her phone, she was detained and interrogated. She had her visa cancelled, with the CBP officer inscribing 22 CFR 41.122(e)(3) on her visa. She withdrew her application for admission and returned to her home country. Unfortunately, she was not given the CBP Sworn Statement and other documents related to the encounter. She contacted our firm, and we did a Freedom of Information Act request with Customs and Border Protection. At first, CBP did not turn over the documents from the airport encounter. We filed a FOIA appeal, and within one week of filing the appeal, we received the requested documents, including the I-275 Report of Consular Notification, I-867A Record of Sworn Statement in Proceedings, travel log, various TECS documents, and I-213 Record of Deportable/Inadmissible Alien. These documents enabled us to understand and explain the consequences from the airport encounter to her and plan a future visa application.
Case of A.F.
Mr. F was afraid. He was charged with a serious crime, but was able to plea bargain it down to a disorderly conduct. Still, he was worried that he was inadmissible to the United States and would not be able to immigrate along with his children. He said that he was losing sleep and was nervous and anxious for several months. After Mr. F. engaged us for a consultation, we were able to do a “deep dive” on his case and the statute involved. We came to the conclusion that he did not have a conviction for nor admit to a crime of moral turpitude, and so he was not inadmissible. This gave Mr. F peace of mind, and he was able to successfully complete his immigration process and obtain green cards for him and his children.
Case of L.N.
L is a talented IT professional. He was employed by an agency in the US, which seconded him to work at a very large US financial institution. During his time in the US, he held an H-1B visa. But when his status expired and he returned to his home country for a new H-1B visa, the consular officer accused him of lying and finding him inadmissible under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i). The consulate had contacted the financial company, which denied that L had done any work for them. L and his agency in the US then contacted us. We reached out to the in-house counsel of the financial company, who did an internal investigation. Lo and behold, she found that L had indeed worked on-site at one of the locations of the company and had performed a variety of IT services. The company corrected the error and after additional verification by the consulate, the consular officer rescinded the 212(a)(6)(C)(i) decision and issued L a new H-1B visa.
Case of J.P.
J and her parents lived in the US: her father had an employment visa, and J and her mom had dependent visas. J grew up in the US, going to high school and college in the US. But when she turned 21, she aged out — no longer considered a dependent. She wanted to continue her studies in the US, so she contacted us to discuss her options. She was worried that she would be denied a student visa under 214(b) because her parents were still in the US. We helped prepare her student visa application and for the interview. After a short interview, she was issued the visa.
Case of A.B.
A had been a university student in the US. After graduation, she travelled to the UK, where she studied for a year. She returned to her home country and started working for a bank. She then applied for an MBA program in the US, but was denied an F-1 student visa under Section 214(b). She then contacted us to discuss her denial. Because there were some misunderstandings at the interview and some relevant information that had not been considered, we helped to prepare a new DS-160 for her and conducted a mock interview with her. After she re-applied, she was issued the student visa.
Case of M.G.
M was coerced into making a written “Voluntary Statement” at a US consulate in India regarding her marriage. But the consular officer did not give her a copy of the Statement for her records. She then contacted the consulate after the interview, requesting a copy. The consulate refused, stating that according to “U.S. law” the consulate “cannot share the document”. This was wrong. After we interceded and followed up with the consulate and Washington, the Voluntary Statement was sent to us.