Case of R.T.
R was a young professional in his home country who had previously studied in the United States. He had also visited as a tourist. At some point, he was accused of committing a willful, material misrepresentation and permanently barred from the United States. However, it was not clear which US government agency had made the accusation; when it initially made the accusation; and why it had made the accusation. Rather than engage in a guessing game, we reached out on R’s behalf to the consulate which had recently denied his visa and asked for an explanation. Upon receiving our inquiry, the consulate re-opened and reviewed R’s case and after a couple of weeks rescinded the decision. R then applied for another B visa and received it.
Case of T.D.
T had a green card but preferred to live in her home country. She wanted to keep her green card, but did not want to travel to or live in the US. So she arranged for false entry stamps in her passport to “confirm” her travels to the US and maintain her US status. Upon discovery, her green card was taken from her and she was permanently barred from the US under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i). Many years later, T wanted to visit her daughters in the US and required a nonimmigrant waiver to do so. She approached our firm, and we were able to prepare a nonimmigrant waiver package in support of her application. After a long and in-depth interview, the consular officer recommended approval, and three months later, the Department of Homeland Security concurred. She was granted a 5 year waiver, with a multi-entry B visa.
Case of L.M.
Ms. M was denied a visa two times to visit her daughter and newly-born grandson in the United States. Her daughter had arrived in the US on an exchange visa and remained in the US after its expiration before marrying an American citizen. The consular officers denied Ms. M’s visa applications because her daughter had stayed in the US beyond the term of her original visa. After retaining our firm, Ms. M was able to successfully obtain a B-2 visa and visit her daughter and grandson.
Case of D.B.
Ms. B is married to an American man. She had been permanently barred from the United States by a consular officer and advised that she needed a waiver. The standard for granting a waiver — to prove that the American citizen would be subjected to extreme hardship in the event of denial — is a difficult standard to meet. Instead of submitting a waiver application, we challenged the finding that she had committed a crime of moral turpitude as erroneous. After review of our submission by the Advisory Opinion Division of the Visa Office in Washington, the finding was overturned and she was able to join her husband in the US.
Case of K.U. and R.U.
We represented two children, a brother and sister 11 and 8 years old, in helping them obtain humanitarian parole status after being denied visitor visas. This status enabled them to join their mother, who has a green card, in the United States, without having to wait four years. We successfully renewed their parole in the US and later, adjusted their status to permanent residents.
Case of L.M.
We successfully assisted a woman obtain a tourist visa after she had been denied a visa on eight occasions, dating back more than 15 years. She was denied in part because she had given birth in the US and the cost of the delivery was paid for by the state. After reimbursing the state for her expenses incurred, she received a visa.
Case of T.A.
T had been denied three times under 214(b) by the Embassy to travel to the US for medical treatment and cosmetic surgery. Her case was complicated because she was single, young, with no children, and the doctor’s office failed to confirm her appointment when the Embassy inquired. We gathered her personal documentation reflecting her ties and ability to pay the cost of the surgery, as well as an explanation from the doctor about the miscommunication. After reviewing her new application, the Embassy promptly issued to her a 10-year, multi-entry B visa.
Case of N.V. and I.V.
The Vs were a prominent couple: he was a famous ex-hockey player and she was the Director of a large retail outlet. So when they applied for visas to visit their permanent resident daughter, they thought they would receive the visas without any problems. Unfortunately, they thought wrong. Their daughter had not returned to her home country after visiting the US as a student; while a student, she met a US citizen whom she later married. So the consul decided to punish her parents under 214(b), notwithstanding their overwhelming familial, social and economic ties to their home country, including grandchildren, elderly parents, well-paying jobs, and substantial property interests. We then interceded on their behalf, and they were able to receive visas.
Case of Z.R.
Mr. R’s parents won the Green Card Lottery while he was under the age of 21. He immigrated with his family to the US. Later, he returned to his home country, fell in love with Z and married her. Because he was spending the majority of his time outside the US, he was unable to accumulate enough time as a permanent resident to become a US citizen. US immigration law imposes quotas on spouses of green card holders; as a result, long waits to immigrate to the United States are the norm. So Z decided to enter into a sham marriage with an unmarried Lottery winner in order to “expedite” her immigration. The consular officer found out about the sham marriage and permanently barred her for her misrepresentation (Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i)). With our assistance, Mr. R then initiated the process of immigration for his wife and their two children. While the process of immigration for his children was straightforward, we had to prepare an immigrant waiver application for his wife based on the extreme hardship Mr. R would suffer in the event of a denial. After a 6-month review process, USCIS approved the immigrant waiver.
Case of K.P.
In a complicated case K was permanently barred from the United States under 212(a)(6)(C)(i) by an overzealous consular officer who accused K of presenting a bogus job confirmation letter in support of his H-1B application. The consular officer even went so far as to compel K to sign a Voluntary Statement DS-5529 that the letter was not authorized, although K believed that it was. The consular officer referred the petition back to USCIS, recommending the revocation of the approval. But rather than acting on the consular officer’s recommendation, USCIS did nothing — and the validity period expired. We called into question the validity of the Voluntary Statement and the determination of the consular officer. After much deliberation, the 6C decision was overturned.