• Hours & Info

    (562) 495-0554
    M-F: 8:00am - 6:00 p.m.
    Sat: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
  • Past Blog Posts

  • https://api.whatsapp.com/send?phone=13104885414

Are you a victim of Crime? Get the U Visa

 

U Visa Immigration Lawyer

A U Visa Immigration Lawyer  can properly prepare the necessary paperwork  and petition if you qualify for a U Visa. This is a visa that is given to victims of certain crimes. It is unfortunate if you are such a victim. However, U Visa Immigration Lawyer states that if you are such a victim, the law permits you to apply for legal status in the U.S. Therefore, what are the crimes that one can be a victim of and apply for the U Visa.

A U Visa Immigration Lawyer that the following crimes will qualify: rape; torture; trafficking; incest; domestic violence; sexual assault; abusive sexual contact; prostitution; sexual exploitation; female genital mutilation; being held hostage; peonage; involuntary servitude; slave trade; kidnapping; abduction; unlawful criminal restraint; false imprisonment; blackmail; extortion; manslaughter; murder; felonious assault; witness tampering; obstruction of justice; perjury; or attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit any of the above mentioned crimes.

A U Visa Immigration Lawyer states that it does not even need to be one of those exact crimes. The U Visa Immigration Lawyer explains that it can be ‘related’ to one of those crimes. Therefore, even if you have not been subject to the exact crime, it is still possible to apply for the U Visa. One of the most difficult parts of applying for the U Visa is getting the necessary certification from a government official. Without this certification, it would not be possible to apply for the U Visa. Essentially, the U Visa Immigration Lawyer, explains that the certification basically explains that you were in fact a victim of the crime, that you assisted and cooperated with the government in regards to this crime and that you will continue to help should it be necessary. Therefore, the U Visa Immigration Lawyer explains that if you did not make a police report and did not help the officers or detectives with the information needed for them to prosecute the person who committed the crime, it will be very difficult to obtain the U Visa. Thus, the U Visa Immigration Lawyer suggests that if you have in fact made a police report and are a victim of crime of one of the enumerated items above, you should consider applying for the U Visa.

The U Visa Immigration Lawyer states that the U Visa is actually a temporary visa for 3 years. However, if you get the temporary U Visa for 3 years, you can them apply for permanent residency. The U Visa allows a wide range of Waivers to be applied for concurrently with the U Visa. A U Visa Immigration Lawyer, explains that unlike many other types of visas that do not permit Waivers, or the Waivers are much more difficult to obtain, the U Visa has more of a relaxed standard for granting the Waivers and allows practically anything to be Waived. For example, the Long Beach immigration lawyer states that you can waive former deportation orders, multiple illegal re-entries, aggravated felonies as well as other crimes and even claiming to be a U.S. Citizenship. There are cases where you might qualify for other forms of relief (adjustment through marriage for example), but you might not be able to get items waived. In that case, the U Visa (if you qualify) would be the better option.

 

The U Visa Immigration Lawyergoes on to explain that In addition to the ability to waive items that are not possible in other areas of immigration law, there is a large net of derivatives that can get U derivative visas if you obtain your visa. Again, the U Visa Immigration Lawyer, explains that the reach and qualification of the derivative beneficiaries is considerably larger than with a normal petition. This is another angle that must be looked at. Thus, even if there are hardly any Waivers that might be necessary, if you have a derivative beneficiary that would otherwise not qualify, then it would also be a good idea to apply for the U Visa in order to get those derivative beneficiaries a chance at becoming legal and getting permanent residency. A U Visa Immigration Lawyer explains that he actually had a case whereby the victim of rape was not the one applying for the U Visa, but rather, the relative of the person whom saw the incident. She was granted the U Visa even though not a direct victim. Thus, the U Visa Immigration Lawyer shows how it is possible to get the U even though you don’t directly fit under one of the categories of eligible crimes.

 

The U Visa Immigration Lawyer explains you must also show that being a victim of the crime has caused you emotional hardship. Thus, U Visa Immigration Lawyer always refers you to a psychologist in order to get an evaluation and report of the emotional damage that you have suffered as a result of being a victim of crime. Thus, when in need of a U Visa, be sure that you have an experienced U Visa Immigration Lawyer to help you.

Immigration Judges cannot be bullies

A case just came down with the following ruling:
Matter of Y-S-L-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2015)

(1) The requirements of the Federal Rules of Evidence with respect to the admission of expert testimony are inapposite to a respondent’s testimony regarding events of which he or she has personal knowledge.

(2) Conduct by an Immigration Judge that can be perceived as bullying or hostile is never appropriate, particularly in cases involving minor respondents, and may result in remand to a different Immigration Judge.

Iranian IJ wins suit

NPR reports that DOJ has agreed to lift an order recusing Los Angeles-based Immigration Judge Ashley Tabaddor from all cases involving Iranian nationals. Last year, Judge Tabaddor sued DOJ, claiming that the order amounted to discrimination and violated her constitutional rights. DOJ also agreed to pay Judge Tabaddor $200,000, and to review its recusal policies.

Not sure when to file for Adjustment?

USCIS posted an announcement on its website informing adjustment of status applicants that they must use the “Application Final Action Dates” chart in the DOS Visa Bulletin for December 2015 for employment-based filings. USCIS stated that family-sponsored adjustment of status applicants may use the “Dates for Filing Visa Applications” chart in the December 2015 Visa Bulletin.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/adjustment/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/adjustment-date/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/adjustment-of-status/

https://californiaimmigration.us/cuban-with-crimes-granted-adjustment/

Are ankle monitors fair?

An article in the New York Times discusses ICE’s use of ankle monitors as a condition of release for women detained in family detention centers. According to the article, federal officials say that using ankle monitors is an economical alternative to detention. Advocates, however, argue that the monitors are stigmatizing as well as unnecessary.

E-Verify expanded

USCIS has rolled out three changes to E-Verify,, including an update intended to make it easier for E-Verify to confirm that employment authorization has been automatically extended for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) beneficiaries, a redesign of the case details page, and an update to Further Action Notices and Tentative Nonconfirmation (TNC) e-mails.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/e-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/e-2-application/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/e-2-approval/

https://californiaimmigration.us/our-immigration-law-firm/

Good decision from BALCA

BALCA vacated the Certifying Officer’s (CO) denial of the employer’s application for labor certification and remanded, holding that the employer verified sponsorship upon signing the statement certifying the conditions of employment on the mailed-in application, even though the CO could not confirm the sponsorship because the CO was unable to make contact with the employer.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca-denial/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/board-of-alien-labor-certification-appeals-balca/

https://californiaimmigration.us/balca-affirms-lc-denial-due-to-notice-of-filing-deficiency/

Sometimes the US is not the land of the free

Politico reports that newly released government records show that, from mid-July 2014 through August 31, 2015, immigration judges issued nearly 2,800 removal orders for child migrants from Central America who were afforded no defense lawyer and only a single hearing. In at least 40 percent of those cases, the defendant was 16 years old or younger, and at least 392 children were 14 or younger. The article quotes AILA

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/immigrationlawyer/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/immigrationattorney/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/american-immigration-attorney/

https://californiaimmigration.us/our-immigration-law-firm/

Writ filed on Injunction Approval

An article in Politico reports that the Solicitor General of Texas wrote to the Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, requesting an extension of 30 days to file a brief in opposition to the government’s petition for a writ of certiorari, which asks the Supreme Court to overturn the injunction blocking DAPA and expanded DACA. The states’ response to the petition for certiorari is currently due on December 21, 2015. The article notes that the Court is rapidly approaching a point in mid-January when it usually announces the last cases to be heard in the current term.

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/writ/

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/writ-of-certiorari/

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/writ-of-certiorari-to-u-s-supreme-court/

https://californiaimmigration.us/writ-of-mandate-approved/

Be Careful and don’t violate a Protective Order

The Tenth Circuit followed Matter of Strydom, holding that violation of an order prohibiting contact with a potential victim satisfies the requirements of INA §237(a)(2)(E)(ii), which provides that a permanent resident is removable if he or she “violates the portion of a protection order that involves protection against credible threats of violence, repeated harassment, or bodily injury.” Accordingly, the court found that the permanent resident petitioner was removable under the statute.