Posted on April 21, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
I-485 approved for clients’ whose case had been pending since 2006 because of the petitioner’s criminal record. In 2013, the case was erroneously denied by USCIS for failure to respond to a request for evidence and reopened by our office in 2014. USCIS then attempted to revoke the petitioner’s I-130 as a result of his convictions, first through a Notice Intent to Revoke and then through an Amended Notice of Intent to Revoke. Each time our office responded, arguing that the petitioner was eligible to petition his wife and if necessary, eligible for a waiver under the Walsh Act. 10 years later, the case was finally approved.
Posted on April 21, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
Our client’s date of birth was incorrect on his naturalization certificate and passport and for years he unsuccessfully tried to correct this error with Immigration, the Department of State, the IRS and the Social Security Administration. When our office was retained, we filed a lawsuit against Immigration in federal court to force them to amend our client’s naturalization certificate. Within months of filing, our client received his correct certificate in the mail.
Posted on April 21, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
Application for Cancellation of Removal granted for lawful permanent resident with nearly 30 years in the U.S. and a disabled daughter but with a conviction for possession of a controlled substance from 2006, an outstanding warrant for 10 years and an arrest for alien smuggling.
Posted on April 11, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
The Second Circuit vacated the judgment of the district court and remanded, holding that USCIS is required by the INA’s portability provisions to give pre-revocation notice to the beneficiary or to the successor employer that it is revoking an I-140 petition filed by a previous employer.
Posted on April 11, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
DHS published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking concerning certain employment-based immigrant and nonimmigrant visa programs for high-skilled workers. The proposed rule would codify existing agency guidance on the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) and the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 (ACWIA). The rule would also make changes intended to improve stability and job flexibility for certain workers, and would amend regulations governing the processing of applications for employment authorization.
Posted on April 11, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
The Ninth Circuit upheld the BIA, holding that 22 USC §7842, which states that a North Korean national “shall not be considered” a South Korean national for refugee and asylum purposes, does not preclude a finding under INA §208(b)(2)(A)(vi) and 8 CFR §208.15 that a North Korean has “firmly resettled” in South Korea.
Posted on April 4, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
As a result of the FY2016 omnibus appropriations bill passed on December 18, 2015, thesupplemental fees for L-1 and H-1B petitions are increasing for companies that employ 50 or more employees in the United States and have more than 50 percent of their U.S. workforce in H-1B, L-1A, or L-1B nonimmigrant status. Specifically, the previously expired fees for L-1 petitions will increase from $2,250 to $4,500, and the fees for H-1B petitions will increase from $2,000 to $4,000. These supplemental fees must be paid on initial and extension petitions.
Posted on March 21, 2016 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney
The Seventh Circuit granted the petition for review and remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeal (BIA), finding that the Immigration Judge and the BIA erred in holding that the Mexican petitioner, who had been tortured by Mexican police at the behest of the Zetas drug cartel because of an unpaid drug debt and had informed against the cartel to the FBI and the DEA, was not entitled to deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
Brian D. Lerner Immigration Attorney & Deportation Lawyer Blog 