• 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

Another win for the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, APC

Another win for the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, APC: Green card holder father petitioned on clt’s behalf while she was a single child, but she was married by the time she entered. So CIS denied clt’s N-600 b/c there are no visas for married children of LPR’s. But this was a mistake since clt’s father petitioned, then he naturalized, then clt got married, and then she entered. So when clt was in removal proceedings, DHS agreed that clt was eligible and that clt’s visa category changed from 2nd preference visa category to 3rd preference visa category at entry. Proceedings were terminated.

A visa

Immigration visa

Visa program

Visa application

New Win for the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, APC

New Win for the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, APC: In absentia MTR granted by IJ . Client was ordered removed after her case was transferred from Missouri to Los Angeles and then she failed to appear. The Notice of Hearing was sent to her correct address but she did not receive it.

Removal

Removal order

Removal proceedings

Removal and Immigration

 

 

 

A new case re: Motions to Reopen

To be timely, petitioner’s motion to reopen had to be filed within 90 days of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ initial merits determination, not within 90 days of the denial of his motion to reconsider.
Soria Vega v. Holder – filed July 19, 2010

Motion to reopen

Motion to reopen meaning

MTR and immigration

Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner

Please help me Public intoxication, Citizenship

Please help me Public intoxication, Citizinship – Avvo.com http://ping.fm/Xesuq

Acquisition of citizenship

Citizenship 

US citizenship 

Citizenship application

Should I complain to CBP?

Why I was offered only 15 days?! Why suddenly a rude and aggressive supervisor had to handle the case?!Should I complain to CBP? – Avvo.com http://ping.fm/4x3ed

CBP

Customs border protection 

CBP meaning 

CBP commissioner

If my spouse with L2 visa can continue to stay in US when I finish my job and go back to my home country ( I have L1-B visa)?

If my spouse with L2 visa can continue to stay in US when I finish my job and go back to my home country ( I have L1-B visa)? – Avvo.com http://ping.fm/BgH2q

L1-B visa

L-1 intracompany transferee petition

L1-B visa meaning

L-1 intracompany transferee 

Nijhawan changes what is an Aggravated Felony

NIJHAWAN changes Criminal Conviction Analysis

The manner in which Immigration Attorneys used to analyze whether a particular conviction is an aggravated felon has changed. It is necessary to look into the newly issued Supreme Court case NIJHAWAN to find out what must be done by the Immigration Attorneys and what should be done to try to help the criminal defendant. First, however, you should know the basic facts of this case. First, it was a defendant that committed fraud. In Immigration Law, it specifically states that an aggravated felony is one whereby the defendant commits fraud upon someone else in which the deceit to the victim is more than $10,000.

In this particular case, there was no amount specified in the judgment as to the amount that the victim suffered. However, in other documents in the file and in other parts of the proceedings there was information that the amount the victim suffered was $1,000,000U.S.. Therefore, the issue becomes what can the Immigration court, BIA or Circuit Courts look at in order to determine whether an aggravated felony as put forth under Immigration Law has been committed. Under the old TAYLOR analysis, it was quite limited what could or could not be looked at by the Immigration court to determine this. Without going into too much detail, there was analysis as to whether the it should be a ‘categorical’ or ‘non-categorical’ approach.

Nijhawan put forth a different type of analysis dealing with ‘circumstances’. Words such as “crime,” “felony, and “offense” sometimes refer to a generic crime (a “categorical” interpretation), and sometimes refer to the specific acts in which an offender engaged (“circumstance- specific” interpretation). The basic argument favoring the “categorical” interpretation rests upon the Taylor case. The categorical analysis rests heavily on interpretation of the statute, a breakdown of the language in the statute of the crime that was committed and an analysis as to whether the federal definition of the crime matched the actual crime the defendant was convicted under.

In Nijhawan, the Supreme Court stated that the Immigration Attorneys in this case would have to use the circumstance specific interpretation, not the categorical interpretation. Here, the analysis does not fall on the language of the statute, but the circumstances which is anticipated by the language of the statute. Thus, whereby Nijhawan was arguing that the Immigration Court should only be allowed to look at the charging documents, abstract of judgment and other very specific documents, the Supreme Court disagreed. The decision of the Supreme Court was unanimous. Thus, it will probably not be overturned anytime soon.

To make clear, Nijhawan states that in this particular case, the $10,000 threshold is NOT an element of the crime, and therefore, the categorical approach is not applicable. The jury in this case found Nijhawan guilty, but nowhere in any of the crimes that he was convicted is the amount of the deceit to the victim an element of the crime. If it is ‘element’ specific, then we must look at the specific facts giving rise to the conviction, not the statute itself. Keep in mind that the categorical approach is when looking at the general definition of the crime itself and still can be used if an elemental analysis is not called for.

As for documents that are permitted, it seems that under the Nijhawan ‘circumstance’ specific interpretation, the door has been opened considerably. Specifically, plea agreements, stipulations and the like will be admissible for the Immigration Court to be able to see. Thus, it seems that it has become more difficult for Immigration Attorneys to try to argue that certain crimes are not aggravated felonies. However, it does seem to fall on whether a particular crime involves using the categorical approach, or the elemental approach. As to which approach to use and as to which crime falls under either approach, I am certain there will be much litigation in the future.

Aggravated felony

Aggravated felonies

Aggravated felony meaning

Aggravated felon gets proceedings terminated

More Update on VAWA Facts

More VAWA facts: 212(a)(9)(c) is not a permanent bar; 212 and 601 waivers available at local office; EWI is OK; Public charge relaxed by completing I-864W; 212(i) Waivers do not need qualifying relative and 212(h) Waivers need not show hardship.

VAWA

VAWA Attorney

VAWA meaning

If your husband is beating you get a VAWA Attorney LA to file a VAWA application for you

Denials of I-140s for 3rd Preference Professionals

The Nebraska Service Center Liaison Committee prepared a practice pointer based on several reports of denials on I-140 petitions for third preference professionals.

Form I-140

Form I-140 meaning

Petition for alien worker 

Forms I-129 and I-140 

You can file a Join Motion to Reopen with the EOIR

U Visas: You can file a Join Motion to Reopen with the EOIR

Motion to reopen 

Join in a motion to reopen

Justifying a motion to reopen 

Motion to reopen is one of the best ways…