Immigration Court Grants Green Card to Client After Appeals Court Overturns Deportation Order

Last week, an Immigration Judge in York, Pennsylvania granted our client’s green card case after a long legal battle that had kept him in jail for almost one year.  Our client came to the U.S. many years ago and had a green card through his mother.   He came to the U.S. when he was a small child, and does not even remember his home country.  However, he never became a citizen, and when he was 21, he had been convicted of a marijuana offense.  Marijuana is illegal and there are strict criminal penalties for selling marijuana.  Also, immigrants are often deported for marijuana crimes even though U.S. citizens may not even get jail time for some of these crimes.  Drug crimes usually make it impossible to avoid deportation.  There are only a few limited exceptions to this rule.  For example, someone who has been convicted of possessing (not selling) less than 30 grams of marijuana can apply for a waiver.  Some waiver cases are granted, but some are denied, so even if an immigrant is eligible to apply under this exception, the immigrant may not get a green card.  Also, other immigrants, like our client, who already had a green card for more than 7 years may be eligible to keep their green card if they have a conviction for possessing drugs by applying for what is called cancellation of removal.  However, any immigrant convicted of selling any type of drug is usually not legally eligible to apply for cancellation of removal. Our client was convicted of selling marijuana, and when he was first arrested by immigration officers, his family spoke with many lawyers who told him that there was nothing he could do and advised him to just accept a deportation order and be deported as soon as possible.  However, these lawyers were not aware of a rare exception under the law that allows certain immigrants who are convicted of selling marijuana to apply for cancellation of removal.  The exception is complicated and difficult to understand and is set forth in three different appeals court decisions.  The important thing to understand is that sometimes, there is an exception to a rule and lawyers are paid to know these exceptions.  If we did not know of this exception, our client might have just given up and been deported. Because the case was complicated, the Immigration Judge denied the case after our first trial, and we had to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals.  We knew this would take many more months, but our client has a wife and two step children that treat him as their father in the U.S., and he was willing to fight the case as long as it took.  After five months, the appeals court issued its decision which agreed with our arguments and overturned the deportation order.  The appeals court sent the file back to the Immigration Judge for a new decision and last week, the judge granted our client's cancellation of removal application, released our client from jail and gave him his green card back. While our client was convicted of selling drugs, he has turned his life around since then.  His conviction was when he was 21 years old and he has learned a lot since then.  He had completed his high school diploma, started taking college classes, and was a good father to his step-children.  Many Americans believe that all immigrants who commit crimes should be deported, but this case is a perfect example of how many immigrants deserve a second chance in life. We are confident that our client will prove to be a good man, a good husband, and a good father, and eventually a good citizen of the U.S.

I-601 Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility Approved for Client by Immigration Judge and Relief from Removal Proceedings Granted

We  represented a client in removal proceedings who had been deemed inadmissible under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).  “Inadmissibility” refers to a person’s ineligibility to receive a visa or to enter the United States.  The INA specifies many grounds of inadmissibility under Section 212.  Our client was inadmissible because he was convicted of a crime of moral turpitude.  Our immigration laws and regulations do not define exactly what a crime of moral turpitude is.  However, case-law generally refers to it as “conduct which is inherently base, vile, or depraved, and contrary to the accepted rules of morality and the duties owed between persons or to society in general … it is the nature of the act itself and not the statutory prohibition of it which renders a crime one of moral turpitude.” This quote was taken from Matter of Franklin, 20 I&N Dec. 867, 868 (BIA 1994), aff’d, 72 F.3d 571 (8^th Cir. 1995). In this particular case, our client was convicted of counterfeiting goods, which is considered to be a crime of moral turpitude.  This crime made him inadmissible.  He had filed for a green card based upon a marriage to a US Citizen without the assistance of an attorney.  He was unaware that he needed to file an I-601 Waiver Application and following his interview he was only given 30 days to submit a Waiver Application.  He did not provide sufficient evidence to show his wife would suffer extreme hardship if he were removed from the U.S. and USCIS denied his Waiver Application and placed him into removal proceedings.  Furthermore, he was detained without the opportunity for bond because of his criminal grounds of inadmissibility.  We renewed his Form I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility before the Immigration Judge under Section 212(h) of the Immigration & Nationality Act.  To be eligible for the 212(h) Waiver, a person must demonstrate extreme hardship that goes beyond the normal hardship faced by a US Citizen or Permanent Resident spouse of parent if the alien were removed from the United States.  Our firm submitted a detailed package including a report from a clinical psychologist establishing the extreme hardship that our client’s wife would face if he was removed back to his home country.  Following detailed courtroom testimony about the extreme hardship, the Immigration Judge granted the Waiver and also granted our client relief from removal proceedings and  adjusted his status to a permanent resident of the United States.

In-Absentia Removal Order Re-Opened and Removal Proceedings Terminated

Our firm provided immigration representation to an individual who had originally entered the United States using a visitor visa. He overstayed his visa and was placed  into removal proceedings but he had no knowledge of the removal proceedings as the Notice to Appear was mailed to an incorrect address.  Our client was deported in absentia but did not know it.  He eventually married a US Citizen and applied for a green card without attorney representation.  At his green card interview he was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and taken to prison.  Our client's wife contacted us and we filed a Motion to Reopen the in absentia order which provided an automatic stay of our client's removal.  Based upon significant legal research about the improper procedure followed by the Department of Homeland Security in issuing our client a Notice to Appear to an incorrect address, the Immigration Judge reopened our client's deportation order.they were issued in absentia. He never received a Notice to Appear. Therefore, our client’s spouse only found out about his removal proceedings when he received a notice of denial for Form I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status and Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative that his wife had previously filed for him. Our firm then prepared and filed a new Form I-130, and a detailed Evidence Package that included documents establishing the bona fides of the marriage. At the immigration hearing, the judge terminated the removal proceedings to allow our client to apply to adjust status of permanent resident directly with USCIS.  Our client recently received his green card.

Getson & Schatz Wins Case in Front of Immigration Judge for Previously Denied I-751

Getson & Schatz, P.C. provided immigration representation to a client whose spouse petitioned for her to obtain a green-card through their marriage. The couple married in 2005. The spouse received conditional residency status for 2 years.  Although their marriage was entered in good faith, the marriage ended in divorce in 2007.  Our client had previously filed Form I-751 seeking a waiver of the joint filing requirement without the assistance of an attorney but it was denied.  Our client was placed into removal proceedings and she retained our services.  We prepared and filed a new Form I-751 Petition to Remove the Conditions of Residence, along with an extensive evidence package that demonstrated that the marriage had been entered into in good faith.  The evidence package included affidavits from the client as well as the client’s ex-husband’s family members and friends attesting to the bona fides of the marriage.  We convinced family members of the client’s ex-husband to attend the proceedings. The Immigration Judge approved the renewal of our client's I-751 waiver petition.  With our help, our client obtained permanent resident status.

Green Card Application Approved for Client in Removal Proceedings Who Had Previously Been Ordered Removed in Absentia

Our client is a native of Barbados who married a United States citizen in 2003.  They have 3 United States citizen children.  Our client had utilized the services of a non-lawyer to file her initial green card application.  The green card application was not prepared properly and was denied.  Our client had changed her address after the filing of the green card application the non-lawyer told our client he would notify the Immigration Service of the address change but never did.  When the green card application was denied our client was placed into removal proceedings but she never received the notice that she had to attend a hearing in Immigration Court because the Immigration Service sent the notice to her old address.  Our client was ordered removed in absentia.  Several years later, our client was arrested and detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for failing to depart the United States following the removal order which she did not even know about.  Our client’s family retained us for assistance and we immediately filed a motion to re-open the in absentia removal order which automatically stayed the removal.  We also filed a bond motion for our client to be released from detention.  We successfully re-opened the in absentia removal order on the basis that our client did not receive notice of her hearing and our client was granted a bond by the Immigration Judge.  Once she was released from prison we represented her husband in the filing of Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative on her behalf and filed a new I-485 adjustment of status application on her behalf.  The I-130 Petition was approved and we thereafter filed a motion to terminate removal proceedings which was granted.  The file was transferred to USCIS where our client was interviewed by a USCIS Officer on her I-485 adjustment of status application and the application was approved.  Our client went from having a final order of removal against her to being a Permanent Resident of the United States.

Client Smuggled on the Golden Venture Ship Granted Green Card After 17 Years

On June 6, 1993, the Golden Venture, a cargo ship carrying 282 immigrants being smuggled from China, crashed at Rockaway, New York, near New York City.  The passengers paid about $5,000 each to their smugglers and promised to work off an additional $30,000 when they reached the U.S.  They were given one ration of rice and peanuts a day and were kept in dirty storage containers. As the ship crashed, many of the immigrants fell into the ocean.  They had been at sea for 112 days with little food or water, and lots of abuse from vicious snakeheads.  The water was cold, and many of the immigrants were very weak due to the length of their trip and their mistreatment and lack of food.  Ten of them were unable to survive in the cold and rough water, and drowned that day. Those who survived were arrested by immigration officials and sent to immigration jails.  Most of them applied for political asylum, but many lost their cases and spent many years in jail awaiting their deportation.  About 140 were deported to China and about 50 more were sent to other countries that accepted them.  Some won their asylum cases in immigration court, and others lost their cases, but were eventually released from jail by order of President Clinton in 1997.  A client of ours who was smuggled on the Golden Venture came to us about 4 months ago, recommended to him by a friend who had been smuggled to the United States on a different ship and who had already received his green card.  This new client from the Golden Venture explained that he had been released from jail and had been reporting his address to immigration as required by law for many years.  He had received a letter ordering him to go to the Deportation Office at the Immigration Service’s headquarters at 16^th and Callowhill Street in Philadelphia and was afraid that he would be arrested.  He was married to a U.S. citizen and they had children together, but a previous attempt to reopen his court case had been denied.  Our client’s previous lawyer had not understood the current law regarding green card applications for immigrants with deportation orders.  A new Board of Immigration Appeals that we reported on late last year allows certain immigrants with final orders of deportation to apply for a green card directly to the immigration service without reopening their court cases.  There are too many factors to discuss in this article, but this client qualified.  We sent him to his deportation office appointment with a legal memorandum explaining that he was eligible to apply for a green card according to an appeals court decision and provided a copy of the decision for the officer to read.  Our client was relieved when the officer let him go home and he returned to our office to begin working on his green card application. We filed his green card application soon after the appointment and his interview was scheduled only two and a half months later.  Our client received his green card after the interview and has now become one of the only, or possibly the only person to survive the Golden Venture and get a green card even after a final order of deportation.  Shortly after he received his green card, we received a call from his Congressman’s office which informed me that they were unaware of any other immigrants from the Golden Venture receiving green cards after losing their appeal.  We explained how the law applies to this particular situation, and the Congressman’s assistant thanked me and said that she was very surprised.  Unfortunately, for the many immigrants who came on the Golden Venture who were already deported, and for the 10 that drowned, it is too late.  Hopefully, there are other survivors who are still in the U.S. who will be able to get their green cards as our client did.

Waiver Case Reopened and Granted at U.S. Consulate

Any immigrant with a deportation order from an Immigration Court could be arrested and deported even if married to a U.S. citizen.  Under certain circumstances, an Immigration Court may reopen such a case, but motions to reopen are often denied.  Further, certain people with deportation orders can apply directly to the Immigration Service for a green card, but their applications could be denied due to their deportation order, or due to use of a fraudulent passport, or a fraudulent asylum application.  If their application is denied, they could be arrested and deported.  Situations like this are very dangerous, and many immigrants get bad advice from non-attorneys and bad attorneys who promise them they can get green cards, and who often make mistakes that get their clients arrested and deported.  We have seen many such cases over the last decade. Certain spouses of U.S. citizens who have been deported can return to the U.S.   Unfortunately, the process is very long and complicated.  If someone has been deported, they are not allowed to reenter the U.S. for ten years unless they apply for a waiver, which is basically an application for forgiveness, and if that waiver is approved by the Immigration Service.  We recently had a waiver approved for a man who was deported a few years ago, and we are now waiting for his final interview in Guangzhou so that can return to the United States to take care of his wife and children who have been separated from him since his deportation.  Certain people have other problems in their cases that may make it even more difficult to return to the U.S., such as fraud charges, and findings by an Immigration Judge that they lied to the Court in their asylum application.  Still, the situation is not always hopeless as many people believe if you have a good attorney that knows the process, and does a good job of preparing the application for a waiver. The husband and family of a woman who was deported in 2006 came to us three weeks ago and handed us a decision denying her waiver which she needed to return to the U.S.  Their previous lawyer, from a well known law firm, had not been careful in preparing the waiver.  The waiver application was based on hardship to the U.S. citizen husband due to his mother having cancer.  His mother had surgery for breast cancer in 2007 and the doctor had told her that the cancer was gone.  By the time the waiver application was submitted, she had started to feel sick again, but had not been diagnosed by a doctor, so there was no proof that the cancer had returned. Our client’s previous lawyer should have explained to the family that they needed to get medical evidence that the cancer had returned before filing the waiver, but instead, he simply filed the case with the old medical evidence from 2007.  Also, the lawyer helped our client’s husband write a statement, but the statement did not explain how our client had helped to take care his father in 2005 when he was sick and died of cancer.  This was an important factor because it showed how our client would continue to help the family through difficult times and care for her husband’s mother while she was undergoing cancer treatment.  After our client’s previous lawyer filed the waiver application, his mother’s illness became worse and her physical condition became much weaker.  She lost weight and eventually, her doctors found cancer in her liver.  When a waiver case is still pending, a lawyer should always submit new evidence if it makes the case better.   Our client’s lawyer did not do anything after filing the waiver even though the case could have been much stronger if he had submitted new evidence including medical records and reports regarding medical treatment in our client’s country which is far worse than the U.S. We immediately obtained a current report from the doctor treating the cancer, and lab reports proving that the cancer had spread to the liver.  We also submitted evidence from college medical journals explaining the specific type of cancer and the chances that someone with this type of cancer would survive.  We prepared a lengthy statement for our client’s husband explaining how important it was for our client to be in the United States to help care for his mother and to help him through his depression as well as his financial problems.  We provided evidence that he had filed for bankruptcy by getting a letter from his bankruptcy lawyer.  On Thursday, we submitted this and other evidence to the U.S. consulate in Vienna, Austria, requesting that the waiver be reopened.  By Monday, we received an email from the consulate informing us that the waiver had been granted.  Our client was told that she would be scheduled for another interview in about two weeks and we expect her to be back to the U.S. within one month.  Many people in her situation would have given up after the first denial, but with immigration, you never know what the final result will be.  With some hard work and attention to detail, the odds can be in your favor.

Individual Previously Deported Granted Waiver to Return to U.S. Early

A client faxed to us a letter she had received from the Guangzhou Consulate.  This client had hired us to try to bring her husband back to the U.S. after he was deported and was subject to the 10 year bar for unlawful presence.  We had requested the Immigration Service to send his file to Guangzhou so that he could apply for the waiver at the consualte that would have to be granted for him to be allowed to return to the U.S. and he had submitted the application and a large package of evidence and statements that we had helped his wife and family prepare.  The letter she faxed us was a decision granting his waivers, meaning that he will almost certainly receive his visa to return to the U.S. at his next interview.  Now, he is just waiting for a notice for his final interview to pick up his visa.  The wait has been very long, but our clients are extremely happy, knowing that very few people who have been deported have been able to return to their families in the U.S. Many Americans and even many immigrants believe that as long as you are married to a U.S. citizen you can get a green card.  While we believe the law should allow any immigrant married to a U.S. citizen to get a green card as long as the immigrant has no criminal history, the law currently allows the immigration service to deport many immigrants in this situation.  For example, if an immigrant entered the U.S. without inspection, meaning that he or she just walked or was driven across the border of Mexico, he cannot apply for a green card under any circumstances.  Immigrants such as this were only allowed to apply for green cards under a special law called 245(i) that required a labor petition or a family petition to be submitted prior to April 30, 2001.  Any immigrant who has entered the U.S. without being inspected since then, or who did not have a petition filed by the deadline, simple cannot apply for a green card from within the United States. Also, any immigrant with a deportation order from an Immigration Court, could be arrested and deported even if married to a U.S. citizen.  Under certain circumstances, an Immigration Court may reopen such a case, but motions to reopen are often denied.  Further, certain people with deportation orders can apply directly to the Immigration Service for a green card, but their applications could be denied due to their deportation order, or due to use of a fraudulent passport, or a fraudulent asylum application.  If their application is denied, they could be arrested and deported.  Situations like this are very dangerous, and many immigrants get bad advice from non-attorneys and bad attorneys who promise them they can get green cards, and who often make mistakes that get their clients arrested and deported. Certain spouses of U.S. citizens can return to the U.S., however.  Unfortunately, the process is very long and complicated.  If someone has been deported, they are not allowed to reenter the U.S. for ten years unless they apply for a waiver, which is basically an application for forgiveness, and if that waiver is approved by the Immigration Service.  Most people who are deported need two separate waivers, one that is filed with the Immigration Service in the U.S. and one that is filed with the consulate at their interview.  Both waivers must be approved to allow someone to return to the U.S. after being deported.  Some lawyers do not understand that two separate waivers are required, and if only one of the two waivers is properly filed, this can cause a long delay in processing times. Certain people have other problems in their cases that may make it even more difficult to return to the U.S., such as fraud charges, and findings by an Immigration Judge that they lied to the Court in their asylum application.  Still, the situation is not always hopeless as many people believe if you have a good attorney that knows the process, and does a good job of preparing the applications, they can be approved.  Getting two waivers approved as we did is a true success story.

Chinese Christian Asylum Granted in Removal Proceedings

Our firm has represented many Chinese Christians in their applications for asylum due to persecution from the Chinese government for their practice of religion.  Most of our clients come from poor villages in China.  Our most recent victory in Immigration Court came when a Philadelphia Immigration Judge granted asylum to our client, a middle aged Chinese man who is a member of a Christian church in Philadelphia.  He became a Christian later in life after meeting a pastor who owned a store that he as doing business with.  This man invited him to attend his house church and introduced our client to the Bible and the Christian religion.  He began attending church regularly, and also attended a Government registered church to see what that was like.  As many of you know, churches in China are required to register with the Government, and if they do not, the Government considers them to be illegal.  Many unregistered house churches are shut down by the police and their members are arrested, imprisoned, and even beaten by the police. Christianity has become more accepted in China, but the Government seems to be allowing it to expand only through Government registered churches.  When our client attended a Government chuch, he learned that the pastor preached obedience to the Government and told the church members that it was important for them to follow the One Child Policy.  Our client decided that these ideas were not religious and that they were not appropriate for discussion in church.  For these reasons, he decided to only attend the unregistered house church even though it was illegal. After he had attended church for about five months, police learned of the house church, and came one Sunday to shut it down.  The police confiscated the church members’ bibles, arrested them, and took them to the police station.  They were questioned one by one before being required to sign a statement promising to never attend church meetings again.  After that, the church members decided that it was too dangerous to hold meetings at the same house as before, and for that reason, our client agreed to allow the chuch to hold meetings at his own house. Holding meetings at his own house took a lot of courage, but our client had become very dedicated to his religion, and was willing to accept the consequences.  Unfortunately, the police eventually discovered that our client was holding church meetings on Sunday evenings.  When they came to the house, he was able to help his fellow church members escape through the back door.  Our client was arrested by the police and he was detained, questioned, and even beaten before being released 10 days later. Before leaving China, he was forced to report to the Government once a week, and police came to his house many times, embarrassing him and his family.  He left China soon after, and came to our office to apply for asylum.  Now that he has been granted asylum, his wife and child will be able to join him to live in the U.S. and we are helping him prepare petitions for them which we will be filing by next week.  The first immigrants to the U.S., known as the Pilgrims, came from England to escape religious persecution just as our client did.  Americans do not always realize that the stories of today’s immigrants are not very different from the stories of their ancestors who immigrated to this country from their homeland many years ago.

Getson & Schatz, P.C. Wins Deportation Case based upon Section 245(i) Employment-Based Grandfathering for Employee and Separated Spouse

Our client and his spouse were both placed in removal proceedings for having overstayed their B-2 status.  Our client had an approved labor certification application filed prior to April 30, 2001 which grandfathered him and his derivative spouse under Section 245(i).  An I-140 Petition had been approved based upon the approved labor certification application, the priority date was current, and the employer who had filed the original labor certification application was prepared to hire our client in the position upon his receipt of United States Permanent Resident Status.  The Immigration Judge granted our client a green card based upon the Section 245(i) labor certification and also granted a green card to his derivative spouse even though the two were not living together because of marital difficulties.  Our client and his spouse were still legally married and testified to the Immigration Judge that they had been married for many years and had been living together at the time of the labor certification application in 2001 but had experienced marital difficulties and had separated.  The Immigration Judge found the spouse to be properly grandfathered under Section 245(i) and eligible for adjustment of status.

Use the form below to submit
your information and we
will contact you shorty.

Full Name

Email

Message