• 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

AAO Finds CSC Overlooked Evidence

The AAO sustained the appeal of an L-1A petition, finding that the beneficiary will be employed in a managerial capacity in his role as senior technical manager in transceiver engineering and that the beneficiary will assume the same position in the U.S. that he currently holds abroad. Courtesy of Clark Trevor.

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

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/administrative-appeals-office-aao-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/administrative-appeals-office-aao/

https://californiaimmigration.us/aao-finds-occupation-of-%e2%80%9cmarket-research-analyst%e2%80%9d-does-not-require-specified-field-study-for-master%e2%80%99s-degree/

The Immigration Reform and when it becomes effective

The immigration reform by President Obama has several different provisions states Brian D. Lerner. Many of those provisions have different dates upon which they will become effective. The immigration reform provides a new DAPA, an expanded DACA, updated Prosecutorial Discretion standards through different priorities, expanded standards for eligibility for the Provisional Waiver and various other matters.

 

Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Attorney states that there are different priorities and exceptions to the those priority standards. The revised guidance shall be effective on January 5, 2015 states Brian D. Lerner. Implementing training and guidance will be provided to the workforce prior to the effective date for the immigration reform. The revised guidance in the immigration reform memorandum applies only to foreign nationals encountered or apprehended on or after the effective date, and aliens detained, in removal proceedings, or subject to removal orders who have not been removed from the United States as of the effective date. Therefore, Brian D. Lerner suggests that if you are in Removal Proceedings right now, it might be a good idea under immigration reform to request a continuance from Immigration Court until after January 15, 2015.

Nothing in the immigration reform guidance is intended to modify USCIS Notice to Appear policies, which remain in force and effect to the extent they are not inconsistent with the immigration reform memorandum. The actual Memorandum put out by Jeh Johnson actually rescinded many prior memos. Brian Lerner states that the official memorandum actually have been rescinded:

 

“Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the Apprehension, Detention, and  Removal Of Aliens,” (ICE, John Morton, Mar. 2, 2011), “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Civil Enforcement Priorities  of the Agency for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens,” (ICE, John  Morton, June 17, 2011),  “Case-by-Case Review of Incoming and Certain Pending Cases,” (ICE, Peter  Vincent, Nov. 17, 2011) , “Civil Immigration Enforcement: Guidance on the Use of Detainers in the Federal,  State, Local, and Tribal Criminal Justice Systems,” (ICE, Dec. 21, 2012) , “National Fugitive Operations Program: Priorities, Goals, and Expectations,” (ICE,  Dec. 8, 2009) , “Policies for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants,” (Nov. 20, 2011).

Watch Brian D. Lerner speak about immigration reform enforcement priorities

Brian Lerner states that Immigration reform has made it that the following memoranda remain in effect:  “Revised Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear  (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Removable Aliens,” (USCIS, Nov. 7,  2011) and “Prosecutorial Discretion: Certain Victims, Witnesses, and Plaintiffs,” (ICE, John Morton, June 17, 2011).

 

Thus, Brian Lerner notes that since so many of the prior policy memorandum have been revoked and are no longer in effect, it only shows how much more important the new policy memo on enforcement and removal of aliens and priorities of removal will be. In fact, the memorandum makes clear that all of the divisions under the Homeland Security will and should follow the mandates of the memorandum.


Immigration reform is here and while there are more than 15 governors suing President Obama claiming that the immigration reform is unconstitutional, there are far more Professors, businesses, have written their support for the immigration reform. Maybe, states Brian D. Lerner, the immigration reform will move Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill. Maybe this executive order leading to certain immigration reform will be the precursor to a much bigger and much broader immigration reform.

Court Says BIA Erred in Looking Outside the Record to Rule on Consequences of Conviction

The Ninth Circuit held that the BIA erred in looking outside the record of the conviction to conclude that the petitioner was convicted of spousal abuse under California Penal Code §273.5(a) and remanded for the BIA to consider whether the petitioner is eligible for the petty offense exception under INA §212(a)(2)(A)(ii).

The new immigration reform bill makes changes to prosecutorial discretion

The immigration reform bill just issued by President Obama is actually not a ‘bill’ per se, but rather, an executive order. One part of the order was a comprehensive memo by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security that changed, altered and made in some respects clearer the priorities for deporting people and/or putting people in deportation proceedings.

Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Attorney, states that the immigration reform bill that deals with priorities has three major parts. The highest priority is referred to as Priority 1, second highes t is Priority 2 and of course the third and least preference is Priority 3. Therefore, states Brian Lerner, if you will be requesting prosecutorial discretion and you are under Priority 3 of the immigration reform bill, you should have the highest chance of success.

Priority 3 of the immigration reform bill states as follows: Priority 3 (other immigration violations): Priority 3 aliens are those who have been issued a final order of removal on or after January 1, 2014. The immigration reform bill states that aliens described in this priority, who are not also described in Priority 1 or 2, represent the third and lowest priority for apprehension and removal. Hence, states Brian Lerner, it is listed by the Secretary of Homeland Security that is the lowest priority. This is quite interesting, because usually somebody with a prior removal order will get one of the highest priorities from immigration.

Resources should be dedicated accordingly to aliens in this priority according to the immigration reform bill. Priority 3 aliens should generally be removed unless they qualify for asylum or another form of relief under our laws or, unless, in the judgment of an immigration officer, the alien is not a threat to the integrity of the immigration system or there are factors suggesting the alien should not be an enforcement priority. Unfortunately, it is this part of Priority 3 of the immigration reform bill that gives most concern. It puts a great deal of discretion in the officer at the lowest levels the ability to basically believe that removing somebody is always an enforcement priority. Brian Lerner states that it is this section that also is the most ambiguous and unclear. Perhaps in the months to come before the regulations are issued, there will be clarification as to this last part of Priority 3.

Brian D. Lerner explains in more detail the immigration reform bill and its reference to a ‘final order of removal’. It is necessary, explains Brian Lerner to know what is meant by the term ‘final order of removal’. An order of removal made by the immigration judge at the conclusion of proceedings under section 240 of the Act shall become final: (a) Upon dismissal of an appeal by the Board of Immigration Appeals; (b) Upon waiver of appeal by the respondent; (c) Upon expiration of the time allotted for an appeal if the respondent does not file an appeal within that time; (d) If certified to the Board or Attorney General, upon the date of the subsequent decision ordering removal; (e) If an immigration judge orders an alien removed in the alien’s absence, immediately upon entry of such order; or (f) If an immigration judge issues an alternate order of removal in connection with a grant of voluntary departure, upon overstay of the voluntary departure period, or upon the failure to post a required voluntary departure bond within 5 business days. Brian Lerner states that if the respondent has filed a timely appeal with the Board, the order shall become final upon an order of removal by the Board or the Attorney General, or upon overstay of the voluntary departure period granted or reinstated by the Board or the Attorney General.

The immigration reform bill does give a lot of hope to the families and to foreign nationals here in the U.S. However, Brian Lerner states there are ambiguities in the Priorites memo and you should get an experienced attorney to help you.

Priority #2 of immigration reform bill latest news give 2nd tier for enforcement of deportations

The immigration reform bill latest news is very good news for people who are here in the U.S. illegally. There is an expanded DACA, a new DAPA and a completely new memo on prosecutorial discretion and when to exercise the authority to put someone into removal proceedings and to try to deport them.

 

The new memo, explains Brian D. Lerner based upon the immigration reform bill latest news is divided into priorities. Basically priority 1 is who gets put into removal proceedings and who is targeted for deportation. As you would expect, claims Brian D. Lerner, it would be those with various kinds of crimes and those who have committed aggravated felonies.

 

However, there are other priorities in the immigration reform bill latest news. Priority 2 consists of (misdemeanors and new immigration violators). The immigration reform bill latest news states that aliens described in this priority , who are also not described in Priority 1, and Brian D. Lerner states that this represents the second-highest priority for apprehension and removal. Note it is the 2nd highest which means that it will be easier to get a Prosecutorial Discretion request granted.

 

The immigration reform bill latest news states on priority 2 that resources should be dedicated

accordingly to the removal of the following:

 

(a) aliens convicted of three or more misdemeanor offenses, other than minor traffic offenses or state or local offenses for which an essential element is the alien’s immigration status, provided the offenses arise out of three separate incidents. Brian Lerner states that this element seems to be met whether it is significant or insignificant misdemeanor offenses (unless of course we are talking only about traffic offenses).

 

The immigration reform latest news lists the second subcategory under Priority 2 as follows:  (b) aliens convicted of a “significant misdemeanor,” which for this purpose

is an offense of domestic violence ; sexual abuse or exploitation; burglary; unlawful possession or use of a firearm; drug distribution or  trafficking; or driving under the influence; or if not an offense listed above, one for which the individual was sentenced to time in custody of 90 days or more (the sentence must involve time to be served in custody, and does not include a suspended sentence). Thus, the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner states that assuming the particular situation does not fall under subcategory(a), that only a single crime will permit satisfying the requirement of this section under Priority 2.

 

The immigration reform latest news for the differing priorities lists the third subcategory as follows:  (c) aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States after unlawfully entering or reentering the United States and who cannot establish to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that they have been physically  present in the United States continuously since January 1, 2014. Brian D. Lerner explains that this element is quite interesting in that it does not outright put somebody who entered illegally in this preference of priority 2 removals. Rather, it would seem based upon the language of the immigration reform latest news that if you can properly show you have been in the U.S. since January 1, 2014, that you will not fall under this section.  While it might not be clear, the immigration reform latest news does seem to imply that if you re-entered illegally after a deportation order that it could be argued you do not fall under this subsection.

 

The immigration reform latest news gives the last element of what makes Priority 2 of  enforcement as follows: (d) aliens who, in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, USCIS

District Director, or USCIS Service Center Director, have significantly abused the visa or visa waiver programs. Brian Lerner states that this element both gives more room to argue that prosecutorial discretion should be mandated to not deport these people, but on the other side, it does give a significant amount of discretion to the immigration officer to put the person into deportation proceedings.

 

The immigration reform latest news states that these aliens listed in Priority 2 should be removed unless they qualify for asylum or another form of relief under our laws or, unless, in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, CBP Sector Chief, CBP Director of Field Operations, USCIS District Director, or users Service Center Director, there are factors indicating the alien is not a threat to national  security, border security, or public safety, and should not therefore be an enforcement priority. Therefore, the immigration reform latest news shows that there is certain room in Priority 2 to argue there should not be deportation.

 

Immigrant Rights Groups Sue over Artesia Deportation Process

The American Immigration Council, the ACLU, the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, and the National Immigration Law Center filed a complaintagainst the federal government, challenging its policies which deny due process to refugee mothers and children being detained in Artesia, NM. The complaint asks the court to halt deportations, calling Artesia a “deportation mill,” created to send Central American mothers and children home to face certain harm, without any meaningful opportunity to be heard. 

Deportation

Best deportation attorney

Deportation attorney

Winning a deportation

Visa petition case

http://ow.ly/xlVRo (1) In a visa petition case involving the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-248, 120 Stat. 587, the petitioner bears the burden of proving that he has not been convicted of a “specified offense against a minor.”

Immigrant Visa petition

Visa petitions

U visa petition

Visas 

Another win for the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner

http://ow.ly/wOHEf Another win for the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner:
Client with a prior order of removal, 2 DUIs and 3 DV convictions was granted a $9,000 bond by Immigration Judge. Client was detained in excess of 6 months pending a decision on his reasonable fear interview and a prior I-589 that was never adjudicated.

I-589 form

Immigration Attorney near me

An Immigration Lawyer can help you

Our Immigration Law Firm

The EB-1 Cap

http://youtu.be/jhFdyQwi0Vo
The EB-1 Category – No PERM Required.

EB-1 Cap

EB-1 application

EB-1 meaning

Our Immigration Law firm

BIA on §237(a)(1)(H)

http://ow.ly/vx9wD BIA on §237(a)(1)(H) Waiver Eligibility
In an unpublished decision, the BIA agreed with the IJ that the respondent was statutorily eligible for a waiver of deportability under §237(a)(1)(H) as a matter of discretion, even though he failed to disclose his time in the Serbian Army on his refugee application.

237 (a) (1) (H)

237 meaning

237 eligibility

Our immigration Law Firm