June 18, 2008

J-1 Visa and the Exceptional Hardship Waiver - a Favorable AAO decision

A recent decision by the AAO shows how difficult, but not impossible, it is to satisfy the “exceptional hardship” requirement for obtaining a waiver of the requirement that a J-1 nonimmigrant exchange visitor return to her home country for 2 years before being eligible for an immigrant visa. Exceptional hardship in waiver cases is often very difficult to establish because “exceptional” means just that: exceptional. It’s something far beyond just the usual anxiety, loneliness and financial hardship that would be suffered by any loving family members who might be forced to separated from each other.

In this AAO case, the J-1 visa holder was required by regulation to return to her home county, the Philippines, because under the law, all J-1 exchange visitors who come to U.S. to receive graduate medical education must return home for two years before they can apply for permanent residency, unless certain waivers apply. In this case, the only waiver that was available was the “exceptional hardship” waiver. This required her to show that her departure “would impose exceptional hardship upon the alien’s [U.S. citizen or permanent resident] spouse or child”.

The AAO started its analysis by asking whether exceptional hardship would be suffered by the applicant’s spouse or child if the circumstances forced them to travel abroad with the applicant to the applicant’s home country. Just because they chose to stay in the U.S. while the applicant was required to return home, would not show “exceptional hardship”.

Even then, even if exceptional hardship abroad were shown, the AAO said that it still must be shown that the U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse or child would suffer “exceptional hardship” here in the U.S. if the applicant simply went home alone.

In this case, the applicant offered evidence of exceptional hardship to the California Service Center of the USCIS but her application was denied. Fortunately, the AAO ruled in her favor in her appeal.

It first held that her U.S. citizen children would suffer exceptional hardship if they went to the Philippines with their mother. One child has bronchial asthma which would have worsened in the Philippine environment, the children lived in the U.S their whole lives, did not speak Tagalog and would be subject to kidnappings as U.S. citizens. The applicant wisely submitted affidavits and much documentary evidence about conditions in the Philippines.

The AAO was also satisfied . . . . .

Continue reading "J-1 Visa and the Exceptional Hardship Waiver - a Favorable AAO decision" »

May 13, 2008

Orozco v. Mukasey – Does Fraudulent Entry Make One Ineligible for Adjustment of Status?

On March 25, 2008, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a non-citizen who enters the U.S. by fraudulent means is statutorily ineligible for adjustment of status because that non-citizen has not been “admitted.” The case is Orozco v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 1068(9th Cir. 2008). In this case, the non-citizen entered the U.S. through a checkpoint where he was inspected but he did so with someone else’s green card. He then married a U.S. citizen who filed an I-130 on his behalf and the I-130 was approved. Sometime thereafter he was put in removal proceedings where he tried to adjust his status to permanent residency because of his marriage and the approved I-130 and he asked for a 212(i) fraud waiver.

The Immigration Judge denied Orozco’s application for adjustment on the grounds that to adjust status, one must have been lawfully “admitted” to the U.S. and because of his fraudulent entry, Orozco was not “lawfully admitted”. The IJ held that the law defines "admission" as the "lawful entry of the alien into the U.S. after inspection and authorization".

The IJ ruled that the 212(i) fraud waiver, even if granted, wouldn’t change the lack of “admission”. The BIA affirmed and the federal court then upheld the IJ and the BIA.

The court’s ruling is binding law in the 9th Circuit only and, in fact, a federal court in the 2nd Circuit ruled completely differently (Emokah v. Mukasey).

On May 12, 2008, the 9th Circuit stayed its ruling for 60 days to allow the parties to file for rehearing so this ruling may not be the last word in the Circuit. Certainly if the case does hold up, one issue for future cases will be whether Orozco controls only where the non-citizen affirmatively enters the U.S. in a fraudulent manner--that is, knowing full well that his documents are counterfeit, as opposed to someone who presents himself at a point of entry with a fraudulent document but is waived through without actually showing it.

I’ll up the post when there is a decision on any re-hearing.

April 2, 2008

Visa Waiver Overstay and Adjustment of Status – Momeni v. Chertoff is a Problematic Case out of California

On March 31, 2008, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a problematic case in a Visa Waiver overstay case that may now present difficulties for others who overstay their 90 day period of authorized stay and then want to adjust their status. The case is Momeni v. Chertoff (No. 07-55018).

Under the Visa Waiver Program, citizens of certain countries can enter the U.S. for 90 days without a visa with the condition that the visitor waive his or her right to contest removal (other than on the basis of asylum). The “no-contest” provision of the Visa Waiver Program is fundamental; if someone could enter under the VWP and then contest removability, it would defeat the whole purpose of the Program which is to make it easy for certain nationals to come to the U.S., spend their tourist dollars, and then leave without all the red-tape involved in visa issuance. . . . .

Continue reading "Visa Waiver Overstay and Adjustment of Status – Momeni v. Chertoff is a Problematic Case out of California" »

February 9, 2008

I-485 and FBI Fingerprint Check Delays – USCIS Issues New Guidance

On February 5, 2008, the USCIS issued new guidance on the issue of adjudicating certain applications, including I-485 adjustment of status applications, where an application is otherwise approvable and the FBI name check has been pending for more than 180 days. The new guidance was issued in the context of the settlement of a lawsuit in federal court in Philadelphia that challenged the government on the issue of unreasonably long delays in FBI name checks.

The new guidance directs adjudicators to approve the I-485 and proceed with issuing the green card even without the completed FBI name check.

The new guidance also directs adjudicators to do the same for I-601 waiver applications, I-687 applications for temporary status under Section 245A and I-698 applications for permanent residency under Section 245A.

Importantly, the new guidance does NOT apply to delays in adjudicating N-400 applications for naturalization. That’s because, according to the USCIS, if an I-485, for example, is approved but the FBI name check later reveals a problem, the USCIS can always revoke the approval and, if necessary, start removal proceedings against the applicant. With an approved N-400 naturalization, however, it is extremely difficult for the USCIS to go back after a problem is found, to then try to denaturalize the U.S. citizen.

This is a welcome change in policy. What would also be a welcome change would be a real commitment on the part of the government to completing FBI background checks for N-400 naturalization applicants in a more timely manner so that their lengthy adjudicating delays can be avoided too.

As an update edit to this posting here is a February 20, 2008 USCIS Question and Answer sheet on the new policy.

December 13, 2007

Green Cards ( Form I-551 ) Without Expiration Dates Are Still Valid, At Least for Now

On December 11, 2007 the USCIS issued a Statement confirming that green cards without expiration dates are still completely valid despite apparent rumors to the contrary. A green card is more technically a Form I-551. Here's the USCIS Statement.

As I discussed in an earlier posting back in August of this year, the USCIS announced that it will eventually require that anyone who holds a green card without an expiration date obtain a new green card, via the filing of Form I-90. However, the USCIS hasn’t published a final rule yet and until that happens, green cards without expiration dates are still valid.

I still recommend that anyone holding such a green card file the I-90 application now in order to avoid the inevitable delays that will occur when the USCIS publishes its final rule and then everyone files at once.

December 3, 2007

New Philadelphia Fingerprinting/Biometrics Location

It appears that the location of the local Philadelphia USCIS fingerprinting/biometrics office (more formally the USCIS Philadelphia Application Support Center) is moving from its present location at 120 North 8th Street in Center City Philadelphia to 10300 Drummond Road in Philadelphia. A quick Mapquest search shows that the new location is basically opposite the Northeast Philadelphia Airport in between Grant Avenue and Woodhaven Road.

I have not seen a formal announcement about this; I just know that new fingerprinting/biometrics notices are going out with the Drummond Road address being stated as the location.

When and if something more formal is announced, I'll post it.

October 3, 2007

Green Card Diversity Visa (DV) 2009 Lottery Now Open

The Green Card Diversity Visa (DV) 2009 Lottery online entry begins today, October 3, 2007, at Noon EDT and ends at Noon EST on December 2, 2007. The DV Lottery provides for up to 55,000 Diversity Visas every fiscal year to be made available to individuals from certain countries with low rates of immigration to the United States. A computer-generated, random lottery drawing chooses selectees and the visas are distributed among six geographic regions. More Diversity Visas go to the regions with lower rates of immigration and no Diversity Visas going to nationals of countries that have sent more than 50,000 immigrants to the U.S. over the past five years.

Here is a list of countries whose nationals are NOT eligible: BRAZIL, CANADA, CHINA (mainland-born), COLOMBIA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, ECUADOR, EL SALVADOR, GUATEMALA, HAITI, INDIA, JAMAICA, MEXICO, PAKISTAN, PHILIPPINES, PERU, POLAND, RUSSIA, SOUTH KOREA, UNITED KINGDOM (except Northern Ireland) and its dependent territories, and VIETNAM. Persons born in Hong Kong SAR, Macau SAR and Taiwan are eligible.

The rules for entry and eligibility are simple but they are also strictly enforced. Entries must be done electronically--no paper entries will be accepted. The eligibility requirements and the rules for entry can be found here and the Department of State's fraud warnings about the program can be found here.