• 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

What is Conditional Resident?

A conditional permanent resident under section 216(a) of the Immigration

and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1186a(a) (2006), who is seeking to remove the
conditional basis of that status and who has timely filed the petition and
appeared for the interview required under
section 216(c)(1), does not need a separate section 216(c)(4) hardship waiver if
the petitioning spouse died during the 2-year conditional period.

Conditional residence meaning

Conditional permanent resident

Removal of the conditional residence

Conditional resident, find an Immigration attorney 

Drug Offense Removability Upheld

U.S. SUPREME COURT

-Criminal Law and Procedure-
State court’s upholding of jury instructions and forms that made clear that for jury to recommend a death sentence, jury had to unanimously find each of the aggravating factors outweighed any mitigating circumstances–but did not say the jury had to determine the existence of each individual mitigating factor unanimously–was not contrary to and was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. Defense counsel’s allegedly deficient closing argument was not prejudicial to defendant where government had presented extensive and graphic evidence of multiple murders, defendant’s boastful and unrepentant confessions, and his threats to commit further violent acts; defense counsel referred to the mitigating evidence and appealed to the jurors’ sense of humanity; defense experts’ detailed testimony regarding defendant’s mental illness was fresh in the jurors’ minds; and defendant did not describe any other mitigating factors counsel could have mentioned.
Smith v. Spisak – filed January 12, 2010
Cite as 08-724
Full text http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0110%2F08-724

NINTH U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

-Civil Procedure-
A modification order entered after a preliminary injunction has dissolved is void ab initio because at that time there was no preliminary injunction to be modified. A district court cannot prospectively modify an injunction that is not in effect, nor may a district court modify a preliminary injunction nunc pro tunc retroactively to expand or vitiate rights parties have already accrued under an injunction. If a preliminary injunction is dissolved, then a modification of that preliminary injunction cannot stand because it was entered in error.
U.S. Philips Corporation v. KBC Bank N.V. – filed January 12, 2010
Cite as 08-56296
Full text http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0110%2F08-56296

-Criminal Law and Procedure-
State’s admitted failure to disclose impeachment material relating to the credibility of a prosecution witness was not prejudicial in light of extensive impeachment material already available to defendant and where materials did not provide an independent basis for impeaching that witness. Defendant’s admission that counsel was “diligent and thorough” in attempting to locate a potential witness was fatal to his claim that failure to locate the witness constituted ineffective assistance. Evidence–that defendant was in possession of victim’s property one day after murder victim was last seen alive, described victim to authorities, and told a third party he would deny being near the scene of the crime if questioned and asked third party to destroy victim’s credit cards–taken as a whole, was sufficient to allow a rational jury to return a conviction for first-degree murder. Where record indicated that defendant was not successful in bringing out certain relevant mitigating evidence during state habeas proceedings, district court erred in focusing on defendant’s lack of success as opposed to the reasonableness of his efforts to develop such a record in state court. Absent a clear indication in the record that state court applied an unconstitutional nexus test, either as a method of assessing the weight of mitigating evidence or as an unconstitutional screening mechanism to prevent consideration of any evidence, state court did not commit constitutional error. State courts imposing or reviewing capital sentences are not required to provide an exhaustive discussion of all mitigating evidence presented as long as record indicates they reviewed such evidence. Evidence of defendant’s acquisition and use of victim’s property rationally supported application of a pecuniary gain aggravating factor; where state courts determined that single aggravating factor was sufficient to sustain death penalty under the facts of the case, it was unnecessary to review challenges to other aggravating factors for federal habeas purposes.
Schad v. Ryan – filed September 11, 2009, amended January 12, 2010
Cite as 07-99005
Full text http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0110%2F07-99005

-Immigration Law-
Board of Immigration Appeals did not err in holding that petitioner’s conviction under California Health and Safety Code Sec. 11379(a) for selling a controlled substance qualified as a basis for removability under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II)–which makes removable any alien “convicted of a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law…of a State…relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of title 21)”–where petitioner did not dispute that substance involved in conviction was methamphetamine, a controlled substance.
Hernandez-Aguilar v. Holder – filed November 25, 2009, amended January 12, 2010.

Drug charges and immigration

Drug offense

Drug trafficker 

Drug offense removability uphelod 

Marriage based visa denial procedure

A seminar will begin this month to assist clients on how to proceed when a denial is issued a seminar will be provided. This seminar will discuss concrete strategies and advice on how to proceed when your marriage-based or fiancé(e) visa application is denied at the consulate. Registration is open until 11:59pm, Monday, February 7.

Marriage based – visa petition

Marriage and immigration

Are you getting married with a US citizen?

Marriage based visa denial procedure

Denial of petitions and removal are issued for drug conviction

Removal qualifications are clarified under new standards of of petitions. CA9 denied petition, finding conviction under Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11379(a), qualifies for removal, so long as substance involved is determined to have been controlled substance under the modified categorical approach.

Order of removal

Removal proceedings

Removal order: it anything that can be done?

BIA rules on withholding of removal

CA2 Holds that 8 USC § 1429 Bars Adjudication of Naturalization Application While Removal Proceedings are Pending

The Court held that 8 U.S.C. § 1429 bars DHS from considering a naturalization application where removal proceedings are pending. Thus, an immigration judge may not make a finding of prima facia eligibility for naturalization. As a result, individuals in removal proceedings may not avail themselves of 8 U.S.C. § 1239.2(f). (Perriello v. Napolitano, 09/01/09).

Naturalization application

Naturalization meaning

Naturalization certificate

US citizenship 

Deportation/Removal Case Terminated

Removal Proceedings Terminated. Person was placed into removal proceedings after he applied for Naturalization.

Client charged as an aggravated felon for his 1998 Domestic Battery conviction.

We were able to show that this crime does not qualify categorically as a crime of violence and therefore, a crime of domestic violence.

In addition, the conviction documents served by the government did not establish that client had been convicted of a crime of violence.

Removal order

Removal proceedings

Removality 

Find a good Immigration Attorney to help you

Convictions of violence and battery charges in those applying for immigration petitions

In regards to recent battery and family violence charges of those applying for immigration petitions the BIA remanded, finding respondent’s family violence battery conviction is not aggravated felony crime of violence because term of imprisonment of at least 1 year was not imposed. Matter of Kim (BIA 2010).

Family petitions

Immigration petitions 

Petitions for family members

Our Immigration Law Firm

Save Years of Waiting time with a National Interest Waiver

Question: I have many years of experience doing the work that I do and I’m very good at it. However, I do not want to wait years for a PERM visa number to be available. Are there any other options for getting a green card employment based visa?

Answer: Actionally there is another option for getting a green card employment based visa. It is called a National Interest Waiver. In these types of cases known as EB-2 cases, the employer offering the foreign national employment must file the preference petition on Form I-140, except when the alien is seeking an exemption from the job offer requirement, in which case the the foreign national or any person on his or her behalf may file the petition. To be exempt from the job offer requirement, the USCIS must determine that an exemption would be in the national interest. Hence the name ‘national interest waiver’ as a way of getting a green card employment based visa. A labor certification or PERM is not required if the job offer requirement is waived. In 1998, the government designated its first precedent decision discussing the standards governing national interest waiver requests. The case which was decided NYSDOT did make it quite difficult to get a National Interest Waiver for getting a green card employment based visa approved. The decision established stricter standards for obtaining national interest waivers than those applicable in the past. Getting a green card employment based visa meant for many having to wait years for the visa number to become current. For years, the government had declined to issue a comprehensive and controlling definition of national interest and instead had advised the Service Centers to treat petitions involving national interest waiver requests on a case-by-case basis. This made it difficult for attorneys to prepare the national interest waiver. It made it necessary to look at all options for getting a green card employment based visa. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) had issued several non-binding decisions after enactment of the national interest program that elaborated on the applicable standard. The AAO took the position that the alien’s admission must provide a benefit to the country beyond a “prospective national benefit” which all exceptional ability and advanced-degree aliens must establish prior to their admission. In the years immediately after the enactment of the national interest waiver provision, the legacy INS had granted such waivers with some frequency relying in part on these early AAO decisions. In more recent years, however, the Service Centers began applying a more exacting standard to such requests requiring petitioners to establish, for example, that the alien possesses unique knowledge, abilities, or experience that set him or her apart from others in the field. The 1998 precedent decision continued this trend. Under the standards, it is critical that the National Interest Waiver be prepared with an abundance of evidence and exacting arguments to try to get the case approved. If successful, years of waiting time will be avoided.

Question: What must be established to get a National Interest Waiver so that other options for getting a green card employment based visa need not be considered?

Answer: The AAO held that the three factors must be considered when evaluating a request for a national interest waiver. First, the petitioner must establish that the alien’s proposed employment is in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. The importance of the occupation or the field of endeavor must be established as a threshold requirement. If a particular field of endeavor is related to an important national goal, this requirement should not be difficult to meet. If this is met you will not need to see what other options exist for getting a green card employment based visa. Eligibility for a national interest waiver is not established, however, solely by a showing that the alien’s field of endeavor has intrinsic merit. Blanket waivers for national interest waivers do not exist. Each must be approved seperately.

Second, the national interest waiver must be shown that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. If this can be shown, then getting theis type of green car employment based visa becomes much easier. The emphasis of this factor is on the existence of a national goal that the alien’s proposed undertaking will promote. Merely serving a regional, local, or private interest is not sufficient. The correlation between the national goal and the alien’s activity need not be direct, however. For example, in the 1998 case, the beneficiary’s occupation-the proper maintenance and operation of New York’s bridges and roads connecting the state to the national transportation system-met this threshold. While the alien’s employment was limited to a particular geographic area, the AAO noted that New York’s bridges and roads connect the state to the national transportation system. The proper maintenance and operation of these bridges and roads therefore serve the interests of other regions of the country.

Finally, it must be established that the “significant” benefit derived from this particular alien’s participation in the “national interest” field of endeavor “considerably” outweighs the “inherent” national interest in protecting U.S. workers through the labor certification process. This would be the key in getting the national interest waiver for this type of green card employment based visa. This standard sets up a balancing of interests, with the national interest in the labor certification process weighing in on one side as a strong adverse factor in granting the national interest waiver.

Thus, to get the national interest waiver is not easy. However, when you weigh putting together a good petition with a chance of success verses waiting years for other types of green card employment based visas, it is a good alternative to try to obtain residency.

National interest waivers 

National interest waiver meaning

Save years of waiting time with a national interest waiver

Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, APC

What is Child Citizenship Act of 2000?

On October 30, 2000, President Clinton signed into law H.R. 2883, the Child Citizenship Act of 2000. The new law permits foreign-born children—including adopted children —to acquire citizenship automatically if they meet certain requirements. It becomes effective on February 27, 2001. This is citizenship immigration, not naturalization.

Which Children Automatically Become Citizens Under the New Law?

Beginning February 27, 2001, certain foreign-born children—including adopted children—currently residing permanently in the United States will acquire citizenship automatically. The term “child” is defined differently under immigration law for purposes of naturalization than for other immigration purposes, including adoption. To be eligible, a child must meet the definition of “child” for naturalization purposes under immigration law and must also meet the following requirements:

  • The child has at least one United States citizen parent (by birth or naturalization);
  • The child is under 18 years of age;
  • The child is currently residing permanently in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the United States citizen parent;
  • The child is a lawful permanent resident;
  • An adopted child meets the requirements applicable to adopted children under immigration law; and
  • Acquiring citizenship automatically means citizenship acquired by law without the need to apply for citizenship. A child who is currently under the age of 18 and has already met all of the above requirements will acquire citizenship automatically on February 27, 2001. Otherwise, a child will acquire citizenship automatically on the date the child meets all of the above requirements.

Is the Law Retroactive? Is Automatic Citizenship Provided for Those Who Are 18 Years of Age or Older?

No. The new law is not retroactive. Individuals who are 18 years of age or older on February 27, 2001, do not qualify for citizenship under this law, even if they meet all other criteria. If they choose to become U.S. citizens, they must apply for naturalization and meet eligibility requirements that currently exist for adult lawful permanent residents.

Will Eligible Children Automatically Receive Proof of Citizenship—Such As Citizenship Certificates and Passports?

No. Proof of citizenship will not be automatically issued to eligible children. However, if proof of citizenship is desired, beginning February 27, 2001, parents of children who meet the conditions of the new law may apply for a certificate of citizenship for their child with INS and/or for a passport for their child with the Department of State.

What Will INS Do With Currently Pending Applications for Certificates of Citizenship?

For pending applications filed to recognize citizenship status already acquired, INS will continue to adjudicate such applications under the relevant law applicable to the case. For applications that required INS approval before an individual could be deemed a U.S. citizen, INS will adjudicate those cases under current law until February 27, 2001. On February 27, 2001, INS will adjudicate those cases under the new law and for applicants who automatically acquire citizenship as of the effective date, INS will issue certificates of citizenship reflecting the person’s citizenship as of that date.

Is Automatic Citizenship Provided for Children (Including Adopted Children) Born and Residing Outside the United States?

No. In order for a child born and residing outside the United States to acquire citizenship, the United States citizen parent must apply for naturalization on behalf of the child. The naturalization process for such a child cannot take place overseas. The child will need to be in the United States temporarily to complete naturalization processing and take the oath of allegiance.

To be eligible, a child must meet the definition of “child” for naturalization purposes under immigration law3, and must also meet the following requirements:

  • The child has at least one U.S. citizen parent (by birth or naturalization);
  • The U.S. citizen parent has been physically present in the United States for at least five years, at least two of which were after the age of 14—or the United States citizen parent has a citizen parent who has been physically present in the United States for at least five years, at least two of which were after the age of 14;
  • The child is under 18 years of age;
  • The child is residing outside the United States in the legal and physical custody of the United States citizen parent;
  • The child is temporarily present in the United States—having entered the United States lawfully and maintaining lawful status in the United States;
  • An adopted child meets the requirements applicable to adopted children under immigration law; and
  • If the naturalization application is approved, the child must take the same oath of allegiance administered to adult naturalization applicants. If the child is too young to understand the oath, INS may waive the oath requirement.

Child citizenship act

Adopted child

Child citizenship act meaning

US child – citizenship

Who is Eligible to Apply?

To be eligible to file a self-petition (an application that you file for yourself for immigration benefits) you must qualify under one of the following categories:

Spouse: You may self-petition if you are a battered spouse married to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. Unmarried children under the age of 21, who have not filed their own self-petition, may be included on your petition as derivative beneficiaries.

Parent: You may self-petition if you are the parent of a child who has been abused by your U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse. Your children (under 21 years of age and unmarried), including those who may not have been abused, may be included on your petition as derivative beneficiaries, if they have not filed their own self-petition.

Child: You may self-petition if you are a battered child (under 21 years of age and unmarried) who has been abused by your U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident parent. Your children (under 21 years of age and unmarried), including those who may not have been abused, may be included on your petition as derivative beneficiaries


There are numerous immigration laws that could result in the denial of this visa if not properly prepared.  If the petition is put together correctly and professionally by a qualified immigration law firm, the chances of approval is greatly increased.

Battered spouse Attorney

Battered spouse process

Battered spouse petition, questions and answers

Battered spouse petition approved