Our Success Stories | Immigration Lawyer in Orange, CA

Complaint under Administrative Procedures Act (APA)

Our client had filed an I-130 Alien Relative Petition for her husband and step children. The USCIS denied the petition after an extensive investigation into the case and multiple site visits to the couples home where the couple lived. The USCIS Decision stated the reason for the denial of I-130 petitions were that the marriage was not bonafide. Our client’s appealed the USCIS Decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The BIA dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, our client contacted our office and retained our office to file an action with the United States District Court. We filed a complaint under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) against the USCIS and Department of Homeland Security and were able to successfully obtain a remand of the case back to the USCIS on behalf of our client.

Complaint for Mandamus

Our client had filed an I-485 Application to Adjust Status to a Permanent Resident on her own. The application was pending for over 4 years when our client came to our office. She retained our office to try and get the USCIS to work on her case and schedule an interview. We filed a complaint with the United States District Court against the USCIS and Department of Homeland Security and were able to successfully get the USCIS to work on her case and schedule an interview for her after 4 years of waiting.

Application for Citizenship with Conviction for Controlled Substance

Our client was convicted of a controlled substance offense. He was a Permanent Resident but wanted to obtain his US citizenship but knew that his conviction could be an issue. He retained our office to obtain and review his criminal record and represent him in his Naturalization application. After filing the application, his application was approved and he lived his lifelong dream of becoming a US Citizen.

Our client was convicted for receiving stolen property and sentenced to over one year in state prison. He was a Permanent Resident and hired another attorney to assist him to file for Naturalization to become a US Citizen. His prior attorney never advised him that his conviction for receiving stolen property was considered an Aggravated Felony under US Immigration Laws and he was permanently barred from establishing good moral character under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 316(a)(3) which is a requirement to becoming a US Citizen. In other words, he did qualify for Naturalization and the other attorney allowed him to file the application anyways.

To make matters worse, under INA Section 237(a)(2(A)(iii) made him subject to deportation from the US and filing the application brought this fact to the attention of the Department of Homeland Security. After our client received the decision on his N-400 application denying his application for Naturalization, he contacted our office. Mr. Le reviewed his file and advised him that there were laws in place that could make it so that he was no longer deportable and allow him to obtain US Citizenship.

Thereafter, he retained our office. We filed a motion to vacate his conviction for receiving stolen property under CA Penal Code section 1473.7. The criminal court granted our motion and the conviction was set aside. The criminal case was eventually dismissed and our client was no longer convicted of an Aggravated Felony and his Felony Conviction under CA State law no longer existed as well. All of his rights (right to own a gun, public assistance, etc.) that were taken away due to the Felony Conviction were restored.

He then hired us to assist him in his application for Naturalization. The application was approved by the USCIS and our client is now a US Citizen.

Our client had a conviction from his past.  He had married the love of his life overseas and after their marriage, filed an I-130 spousal petition with the USCIS to bring her to the US to live with him permanently.  The USCIS sent our client a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and he submitted a response.  The petition was later denied as the USCIS cited the Adam Walsh Act as the reason for the denial.  Years went by and our client wanted to try again, and he re-filed his petition.  Again, the USCIS sent our client a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID).

Thereafter, our client contacted our office and retained us.  We pulled his files and researched his case and submitted a legal brief and evidence in response to the USCIS’s NOID arguing that his conviction was not subject to the provisions in the Adam Walsh Act and that Adam Walsh Act did not apply to his case.  The USCIS subsequently agreed and approved the I-130 petition.