luu_law

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced USCIS to Reverse a Wrongful H-1B Denial for Client That Was Previously Associated with Dream Chase Technology LLC (December 2025)

Mon, 22 Dec 2025 18:39:57 GMT

In December 2025, our office successfully sued USCIS in federal court, forcing USCIS to completely reverse course, and approve our client's H-1B petition in just three (3) weeks after filing our lawsuit and our emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”).

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Dream Chase Technology LLC (“Dream Chase”). Unbeknownst to our client, Dream Chase was flagged by the Department of Homeland Security and USCIS. Specifically, in the Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID") sent to our client, USCIS stated “Systems checks have revealed that Dream Chase Technology LLC operates a pay-for-experience letter scheme.” Based solely on that allegation, USCIS denied our client’s H-1B petition, including both the specialty occupation and change of status from F-1 to H-1B.

Since 2020, after NBC Bay Area's investigation exposed companies with questionable practice such as Findream and Integra, USCIS has relentlessly pursued former students that were previously associated with Findream, Integra, and other similar possible shelf companies. These companies appeared to be legitimate staffing or technology companies. Some used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian or Chinese students to pay for trainings in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. These companies allegedly promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on their promises and received job offers from them. USCIS has relentlessly issued Requests for Evidence, interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Many of the students and former students also received revocation of F-1 visas and H-1B visas.

The petitioning employer, an established company in the San Francisco Bay Area, filed an I-129 Petition for their employee's H-1B status. USCIS issued an RFE and NOID on the issue of the employee's maintenance of status . USCIS requested substantial documentation regarding the employee's F-1 OPT employment history. Among the previous F-1 OPT employers was Dream Chase. The employer's immigration counsel responded to the RFE and NOID with substantive supporting documents and evidence, such as email correspondence with Dream Chase and proof of trainings, which USCIS mostly disregarded. USCIS then arbitrarily claimed that just because the employee was previously employed by Dream Chase, which was flagged by the USCIS system, the employee was somehow guilty of material misrepresentation and fraud based solely on association. USCIS also completely failed to adjudicate the petition to reclassify the employee as an H-1B nonimmigrant worker in a specialty occupation.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our clients. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that USCIS’s misapplication of the law was the sole basis of the denial. Furthermore, by not addressing the substantive content of our clients' I-129 petition and documents concerning the request for H-1B classification, USCIS’s decision on its face was patently unresponsive to the administrative record.

Due to the imminent harm to our clients, our firm took aggressive action to protect our client's rights. We filed a lawsuit against USCIS in federal court in the Northern District of California. We also pursued an emergency motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order to expedite the hearing. Within days after we notified the government of our motion, USCIS reopened our client’s I-129 petition, and just three weeks after we filed our lawsuit, USCIS completely reversed course and approved our client’s H-1B petition. Our firm is extremely pleased with the result we achieved for our clients.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, Dream Chase Technology LLC, Vetro Technologies, Inc., AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, Dash Technologies, Inc. or XCG Design Corp in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you, identify potential issues early, and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Related Success Stories on other OPT employers:

Successfully Reversed Immigrant Visa Denial Without Filing I-601 Waiver for Former Member of Communist Party (November 2025)

Mon, 22 Dec 2025 06:10:07 GMT

In November 2025, our office successfully reversed an immigrant visa denial and rendered the U.S. Consulate’s request for an I-601 Waiver moot for a client applying for an immigrant visa. Our client was the beneficiary of an approved family based immigrant petition based on a parent child relationship.

Our client had previously joined the Communist Party as a mandatory condition of employment with a state owned enterprise. The client’s membership spanned more than twenty years during their employment. The client had no ideological beliefs, political convictions, or leadership involvement in the Party and remained only a passive member. After retirement, the client stopped paying membership dues and no longer attended any meetings or activities associated with the Party. Unfortunately, the client did not obtain formal documentation certifying termination of Party membership.

The client attended an immigrant visa interview at the U.S. Consulate. Following the interview, the Consulate requested detailed written responses regarding the client’s past Communist Party membership. At that time, the client was not represented by an attorney. After submitting responses to the consular officer, the client was issued a visa denial pursuant to INA section 212(a)(3)(D). The U.S. Consulate further requested that the client apply for an I-601 Waiver of Inadmissibility with USCIS.

Under U.S. immigration law, prior membership in a totalitarian party such as the Communist Party may result in a finding of inadmissibility, often leading to visa refusal and the requirement to file an I-601 Waiver. These waiver applications frequently involve lengthy processing times and prolonged family separation. Based on our experience, I-601 waivers for former Communist Party members can take at least one year to process, and USCIS publicly indicates that processing may take more than three years.

Due to the anticipated delay, the client contacted our office for legal assistance. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team conducted a thorough review of the case history. Through strategic legal advocacy, carefully crafted legal arguments, and comprehensive supporting evidence, we demonstrated that the client qualified for statutory exceptions under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

As a result of our advocacy, including direct communication with the U.S. Consulate and multiple follow ups, the Consulate withdrew the visa denial, determined that an I-601 Waiver was no longer required, and cleared the client for immigrant visa issuance.

We are pleased to have successfully assisted our client in overcoming this complex legal issue and enabling family reunification in the United States without unnecessary delay.

N-336 and N-400 Naturalization Approved After Previous Denial Based On Former F-1 Student’s Past Enrollment With Neo-America Language School and Walter Jay MD Institute. (September 2025)

Mon, 13 Oct 2025 13:56:13 GMT

In September 2025, the USCIS Field Office in Santa Ana, California reversed its prior denial and

approved our client’s Form N-400 application for naturalization in just ONE day. Our client has

been scheduled for naturalization ceremony.

Our client’s original denial was based on allegations that our client was barred from

Naturalization due to past enrollment with the fraudulent schools Neo-America Language

School (“Neo”) and Walter Jay MD Institute (“WJI.”) between 2012 and 2014. USCIS also

alleged that our client gave false testimony during the Naturalization process, citing minor

inconsistencies in their recollection of events that occurred more than a decade ago.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team assisted the client in filing their Form N-336,

Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings. We submitted a detailed

legal memorandum, supporting evidence, and prepared our client well before their N-336

hearing.

We also raised the arguments that any discrepancies in our client’s testimony were due solely

to the passage of time and did not rise to the level of false testimony under INA § 101(f)(6). Our

client had no knowledge of the institutions’ fraudulent activities and reasonably relied on their

SEVP certification, which indicated federal compliance at the time of their enrollment.

At the hearing, the reviewing USCIS officer interviewed our client extensively, but our client was

well prepared and was able to respond to the officer’s questions.

We are pleased to learn that just ONE day after our client’s N-336 hearing, USCIS reversed its

previous N-400 denial, and scheduled our client for a naturalization ceremony.

Successfully Obtained INA 212(d)(3) Non-Immigration Visa Waiver and Request to Expedite for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC. (January 2025)

Wed, 08 Oct 2025 11:54:56 GMT

In January 2025, U.S. Department of State approved our client’s application for nonimmigrant

waiver and request for expedited visa processing based on humanitarian concerns. Our client

returned to the U.S. just a few weeks after their visa interview.

Our client was found to be inadmissible due to an unfortunate experience with a company

called Integra Technologies LLC. (“Integra”). During our client’s participation in the OPT

program in 2017, our client accepted a remote, unpaid internship.

In 2023, after living in the U.S. for nearly eight years, first as an F-1 student and then as an H-1B

skilled worker, our client was informed that they must attend a visa interview at the U.S.

Consulate in India in order to complete their application to transfer to a new employer. At the

visa interview on mid-2023, our client was informed for the first time that their F-1 visa had

been revoked in 2020 based on their previous employment with the company Integra.

Importantly, the U.S. government did not uncover the fraudulent nature of the company until

2018; several years after our client had already left the company.

The denial left our client stranded in India and barred them from rejoining their spouse, in the

U.S. Our client also lost their job as a result of the Consulate’s visa denial. In order to be

reunited with their spouse, our client applied for multiple visa appointments without success.

When our client reached out to our office, attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team

submitted our client’s H-4 visa application, which included a request for a waiver of

inadmissibility. Among many other arguments we advanced for our clients, we provided

substantial evidence to show that our client poses no threat to the interests or security of the

United States. Their conduct underlying the inadmissibility finding was an isolated incident that

occurred several years ago and was neither serious nor intentional in nature. Our client’s

primary purpose for returning to the United States is to reunite with their spouse and begin

building a family, a goal that underscores their strong personal and humanitarian ties to the

country.

We are very pleased that U.S. State Department agrees with our positions and issued our

client’s visa in just a few weeks after their interview so that they could reunite with their family.

Success Story: I-601 Waiver for Association with Findream Approved in 3 Weeks (December 2024)

Wed, 08 Oct 2025 11:26:30 GMT

In December 2024, USCIS Chicago field office approved our client’s Form I-601, Application for

Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility, just three weeks after our firm submitted the waiver

application. Our client received their green card immediately after the I-601 approval.

Our client had been deemed inadmissible based on alleged prior misrepresentations and/or

fraud in connection with a previous association with the fraudulent employer Findream, LLC, as

detailed in a USCIS Request for Evidence (RFE.) Specifically, USCIS alleged that the client

submitted a fraudulent Form I-20 and a false employment letter in support of the STEM OPT

application.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu conducted a thorough review of the client’s case file and the

surrounding factual circumstances related to Findream, LLC. Upon careful analysis, our firm

concluded that the client qualified for the waiver of inadmissibility for misrepresentation and

fraud. We promptly prepared and submitted a detailed RFE response, including extensive

supporting documentation, to establish the client’s eligibility for the waiver.

Our submission clearly demonstrated that the denial of admission would cause extreme

hardship to the client’s spouse, a U.S. lawful permanent resident. Accordingly, the client was

eligible for the I-601 waiver. We further argued that USCIS should exercise favorable discretion

in adjudicating the waiver due to numerous positive factors in the client’s case.

Our team worked diligently to expedite the submission directly to USCIS. As a result of our

strong advocacy, USCIS approved the I-601 waiver just three weeks after submission.

We are pleased to have secured a favorable outcome for our client in record time.

Naturalization Approved on Appeal (N-336) Despite Omission of Children on Diversity Visa Application (July 2023)

Sun, 31 Aug 2025 16:01:21 GMT

In July 2023, our client’s N-400 naturalization application was approved after our office filed an

N-336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings. Our client is now a

U.S. citizen.

Our client, originally from Ghana, immigrated to the United States through the Diversity Visa

Program. After living in the U.S. for many years, they applied for naturalization. However, the

USCIS field office in Fairfax, VA denied their application, claiming the client had not been

lawfully admitted to the United States. USCIS based this decision on the client’s failure to

disclose their children on the original diversity visa application years earlier. In essence, USCIS

argued that the omission constituted a material misrepresentation, making the client ineligible for naturalization.

Following this denial, the client contacted our office for assistance. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and

our legal team accepted representation and promptly filed Form N-336, Request for a Hearing on

a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings (under Section 336 of the INA). This type of hearing,

similar to a naturalization interview, gives applicants and their attorneys the opportunity to

challenge legal or factual errors made by USCIS.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu worked closely with the client to develop persuasive legal arguments

and compile supporting documentation. We argued that USCIS’s claim that our client

intentionally misled the government was unfounded. The omission of the children’s names was

the result of a genuine misunderstanding of the diversity visa application questions, not an

attempt to obtain an unfair advantage. Importantly, the omission did not result in the client

receiving any immigration benefit they were not otherwise entitled to.

We further demonstrated that our client consistently acted in good faith, making every effort to

comply with immigration requirements. We also highlighted that even the U.S. Department of

State had acknowledged that the diversity visa instructions were unclear, often causing

confusion. On that basis, we argued it was unjust to penalize the client for an unintentional

misunderstanding.

After thoroughly reviewing the appeal and the full record, a senior USCIS officer overturned the

denial and approved the client’s application. We are pleased to have successfully secured a

favorable outcome for our client.

Related Success Stories on N-336 and USCIS Reversal of N-400 Denial:

Naturalization Approved Despite Prior Federal Conviction for Structuring Transactions 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)(3)

Thu, 28 Aug 2025 12:41:06 GMT

In June 2025, our office successfully assisted a client in obtaining naturalization despite a federal

conviction under 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)(3) — structuring a financial transaction to avoid currency

reporting requirements.

At the time of the incident, our client was a college student and was working parttime at a small

business. One of their supervisors obtained cashier’s checks from a bank and made them payable

to the client, who then cashed the checks on two separate occasions. Our client was not aware of

any wrongdoings, was not personally benefited from the transactions, and was just simply

following instructions from their employer. However, in the interest of timely resolved this legal

issue, our client pled guilty to structuring and attempting to structure financial transactions to

evade federal reporting requirements for amounts exceeding $10,000.

When the client sought our assistance, Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team developed

strong arguments demonstrating that this decades-old conviction should not prevent the client

from becoming a U.S. citizen. We argued that the offense was not fraudulent or deceptive in

nature and therefore did not fall within the categories of crimes that typically bar naturalization,

such as those involving fraud, drugs, firearms, or money laundering.

We further emphasized that the conviction did not meet the legal definition of an “aggravated

felony” or a “crime involving moral turpitude,” both of which can disqualify an applicant from

naturalization. Because the conviction was essentially a reporting violation and did not result in

jail time, it lacked the seriousness necessary to affect immigration status.

In addition to the legal arguments, we highlighted the client’s decades of good conduct since the

conviction. The client has lived a law-abiding life, avoided further legal issues, and consistently

contributed to their family and community. They met all statutory requirements for

naturalization, including the standard of good moral character over the preceding five years.

W e were very pleased to celebrate with our client as they took the Oath of Allegiance in

September 2025, officially becoming an American citizen.

Related Success Stories on Naturalization and N-366:

Successfully Assisted Client with Removing 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Inadmissibility Findings for past association with AZTech through LegalNet in just ONE day (May 2025)

Mon, 26 May 2025 05:47:13 GMT

In May 2025, our office successfully assisted a client in removing an inadmissibility finding under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (misrepresentation and fraud) through LegalNet. Our client is currently awaiting visa issuance by the U.S. Consulate in Hyderabad, India.

As an F-1 international student, our client participated in the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program and was hired by AZTech. Unbeknownst to our client, AZTech appeared to be a possible shell company. AZTech used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for training in exchange for temporary employment, seemingly to fulfill F-1 OPT requirements. It appears AZTech falsely promised training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on these promises and received job offers from AZTech.

Following NBC Bay Area's investigation exposing the questionable nature of various OPT companies, USCIS and the Department of State have relentlessly pursued former students associated with companies like AZTech. USCIS has issued Requests for Evidence (RFEs), Notices of Intent to Deny (NOIDs), and conducted interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, all alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Many students and former students also experienced the revocation of their F-1 and H-1B visas. Some were fortunate enough to receive a non-immigrant visa INA 212(d)(3) waiver of inadmissibility, but these waivers require renewal every few years.

Previously, our client was briefly associated with AZTech as an unpaid intern during their OPT. The internship was a disappointment, and our client left for another opportunity. Many years later, when our client returned to India to apply for an H-1B visa, their visa application was refused because the U.S. Consulate found them inadmissible due to misrepresentation and fraud under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) stemming from their association with AZTech. Fortunately, the U.S. Consulate recommended an INA 212(d)(3) waiver, and our client was able to return to the U.S.

In 2025, our client returned to India and applied for another H-1B visa. The U.S. Consulate again denied the visa application but recommended a waiver. This time, however, our client’s visa application was pending for over three months, and their employer became increasingly frustrated with the delayed return.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on the representation to assist our client. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. The firm is very pleased to learn that just ONE day after we contacted LegalNet with a clear explanation and an attorney legal memo addressing our client's past association with AZTech, LegalNet responded. They informed us that, upon further review, our client’s ineligibility under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) has been removed, and the Consulate will contact our client directly with further instructions on how to proceed.

We are very pleased to learn that we were able to obtain a positive result for our client in record time. If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, Reuters Technology Group, or XCG Design Corp in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you, identify potential problems early in your case, and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Latest Success Stories:

Successfully Obtained H-1B Visa for Client Previously Denied an H-1B Extension Due to Past Association with Apex IT Systems Inc. (Feb 2025)

Wed, 26 Feb 2025 22:24:22 GMT

In February 2025, our office successfully assisted a client in obtaining their H-1B visa from the U.S. Consulate in Hyderabad, India. Our client was forced to leave the U.S. and apply for an H-1B visa due to the denial of their H-1B extension. In the denial, USCIS claimed that our client made false statements and failed to maintain their status while on OPT with Apex IT Systems Inc. ("Apex IT").

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Apex IT.

Unbeknownst to our client, a USCIS investigation later revealed that Apex IT was a fraudulent organization. In response, USCIS has relentlessly pursued former students associated with Apex IT, issuing Requests for Evidence ("RFE") and Notices of Intent to Deny ("NOID") alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Notably, in some RFEs and NOIDs, USCIS asserted that former students should have known that Apex IT's address was a Mexican restaurant in a strip mall. USCIS faulted the students for failing to recognize this and denied many of their STEM OPT or H-1B applications.

While our client was still in the U.S., their employer timely filed for their H-1B extension. USCIS then issued a NOID alleging that our client had committed misrepresentation and fraud and had failed to maintain status during their F-1 OPT period. Our client’s employer’s immigration counsel assisted them in responding to the NOID. However, USCIS denied the extension application, forcing our client to return to India to apply for an H-1B visa stamp.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist the client with the visa application process. We conducted multiple mock interviews to ensure the client was well-prepared. Our office also prepared a legal brief, the client’s statement, and supporting documents to firmly establish that our client had not made any misrepresentations to the U.S. government regarding their past OPT employment. Furthermore, the record clearly demonstrated that our client had maintained valid status during their F-1 OPT period and, therefore, should not be found inadmissible.

We are pleased to report that one week after our client’s consular interview, their H-1B visa was approved, and they are now on their way back to the U.S.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, XCG Design Corp, or Apex IT Systems Inc. in any capacity, it is crucial to consult with an experienced immigration attorney immediately. Early consultation can help identify potential issues in your case and develop a strong strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Successfully Assisted a Client in Obtaining an Immigrant Visa After F-1 OPT with Smoothies Technology, Inc.

Wed, 26 Feb 2025 20:56:39 GMT

In June 2024, our office represented a client in overcoming allegations of misrepresentation and fraud related to their association with Smoothies Technology Inc. As an F-1 visa holder, a foreign student is permitted to study in the United States. F-1 visa holders are eligible to extend their stay through Optional Practical Training (OPT), a program that allows students to obtain temporary employment in their field of study.

Unbeknownst to many F-1 international students, FINDREAM founder Weiyun “Kelly” Huang and the corporations she established were convicted of conspiracy to commit visa fraud in 2020. Huang used deceptive means to lure students into paying for her services in exchange for securing temporary employment to fulfill OPT requirements. FINDREAM falsely promised training services, networking opportunities, and internships that appeared to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students fell victim to the fraud perpetrated by Huang and her accomplices.

Following the convictions of the perpetrators, USCIS has relentlessly pursued student victims of this fraud as “knowing co-conspirators” if they were previously employed by FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading Inc., Andwil LLC, Wireclass, New Beast, Smoothies Technology Inc., and ApexIT Technologies Inc.

After our client’s F-1 OPT period ended, they returned to their home country for nearly a decade. In 2024, when they applied for an immigrant visa, they initially underwent a routine immigrant visa interview at the U.S. Consulate. However, they later received an email from the Fraud Prevention Unit requesting a secondary interview.

During the secondary interview, the client was subjected to multiple interrogations and ultimately faced the denial of their immigration petition. The Fraud Prevention Unit officer accused our client of being a co-conspirator with Smoothies Technology Inc. and expressed disbelief in their testimony. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on the case to assist the client in overcoming the misrepresentation allegations. We strategically guided them in rebutting the willful misrepresentation and fraud allegations made by USCIS. The evidence we presented sufficiently demonstrated that the client had not made false representations to obtain a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. Even if any false statement had been made, it was neither willful nor material, thereby overcoming all allegations.

A finding of misrepresentation or fraud has severe immigration consequences. It can render a non-citizen inadmissible for life, potentially imposing a permanent bar to obtaining permanent residency unless USCIS grants a waiver at its discretion. Our firm is pleased to share that after the secondary interview, our client was scheduled for a third interview, during which their immigrant visa was approved and issued.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, XCG Design Corp, Andwil LLC, Wireclass, Codersdata LLC, New Beast, Smoothies Technology Inc., or GlobalITExperts in any manner or capacity, it is crucial to consult with an experienced immigration attorney. Professional legal guidance can help identify potential issues early and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Our office has became aware that in many instances, F-1, H-1B visa holders or even green card holders, most from India and China, are being refused admission at the U.S. port of entry, issued Notice of Intent to Deny or Request for Evidence, interviewed by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, subjected to expedited removal orders, and finding of inadmissibility for misrepresentation and fraud, if they previously held work authorization by association with above companies.

Latest Success Stories on Findream:

Successfully Overcame NOID and Green Card for Client That Was Previously Associated with Tellon Trading, LLC ( Oct 2024)

Sat, 01 Feb 2025 00:19:11 GMT

In October 2024, our office successfully overcame a very difficult Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID") of I-485 Application to Adjust Status for a client who was previously associated with Tellon Trading, LLC (“Tellon Trading”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in OPT program and was hired by Tellon Trading as an intern. Our client was promised an exciting internship with accommodating remote work arrangement.

Unfortunately, unbeknownst to our client, Tellon Trading was flagged by the news as part of a

scheme to deceive students, particularly Chinese students, looking for employment or internships to maintain their F-1 OPT status. Questionable companies like Findream used elaborate means to reel students into their schemes. These companies often advertise themselves as a valid and legal entity with valuable connections to prestigious employers and companies.

Tellon Trading was flagged by NBC Bay Area’s investigation along with five other companies that hired employees through the OPT program, including Abroad Intellect Capital, Acuty, Findream, Smoothies Technology and New Beast with possible abuse of the OPT program.

After convictions of Kelly Huang, the perpetrator of FINDREAM fraudulent scheme, USCIS and State Department have relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny, interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud, if the student previously held work authorization by association with above companies.

Our client was applying for their employment based green card through their employer. During the I-485 interview, they were questioned extensively regarding their internship with Tellon Trading. Our client was subsequently issued a NOID for their association with Tellon Trading. USCIS accused our client of failure to maintain continuous status and misrepresentation, which renders our client's ineligible for adjustment of status.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client addressing any potential allegations of misrepresentation and fraud stemming from her association with Tellon Trading. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. Furthermore, our client did not have a break in continuous status, and even if they did, our client is eligible for INA 245(k) waiver. The firm is very pleased to learn that our client's green card was issued less than 12 weeks after we submitted our response.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, and Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, XCG Design Corp in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Related Stories:

Successfully Obtained STEM OPT For Student That Was Previously Associated With Apex IT Systems Inc.(Oct 2024)

Tue, 28 Jan 2025 07:14:11 GMT

In October 2024, our office successfully obtained a STEM OPT EAD for a student who was previously associated with Apex IT Systems Inc. ("Apex IT").

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Apex IT. Unbeknownst to our client, USCIS's investigation revealed that Apex was a fraudulent organization. USCIS has relentlessly pursued former students who were associated with Apex IT, issuing Requests for Evidence ("RFE") and Notices of Intent to Deny ("NOID") alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Notably, in some RFEs and NOIDs, USCIS claimed that the former student should have known that Apex IT's address was that of a Mexican restaurant in a strip mall. USCIS faulted the students for not recognizing this and denied many of their STEM OPT or H-1B applications.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on the case to assist our client. Our office prepared a legal brief, the client's statement, and supporting documents to firmly establish that our client had not made any misrepresentations to the U.S. government regarding their past OPT employment and should not be found inadmissible.

We are pleased to report that USCIS approved our client's STEM OPT application after months of significant processing without issuing an RFE or NOID.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, XCG Design Corp, or Apex IT Systems Inc. in any capacity, it is crucial to consult with an experienced attorney immediately. Early consultation can help identify potential issues in your case and develop a strong strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Success Story: Federal Lawsuit Forced USCIS to Concede and Reverse Course on An Improper Denied I-130 and I-485 Petitions (March 2024)

Sun, 12 May 2024 07:33:10 GMT

In a March 2024 decision, the USCIS San Jose Field Office reversed its previous denials of our client's I-130 US Citizen's Petition for Spouse and I-485 Green Card Application as a result of our lawsuit in federal court, Northern District of California.

Our client, a U.S. Citizen (USC), filed an I-130 spousal petition on behalf of his wife, a citizen of Kenya. The non-US citizen spouse (Beneficiary) simultaneously filed a Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (the “I-485 application”), to become a Legal Permanent Resident.

Because the Beneficiary stated in previous immigration filings, such as the B1/B2 tourist visa and asylum application, that she was “married” to the father of her children in Kenya, USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) regarding the termination of the marriage.

In response to the RFE, our clients provided evidence that the Beneficiary was never legally married in Kenya and that cohabitation is not considered a legal marriage in either Kenya or California, where the marriage with the USC spouse was celebrated. However, USCIS denied the I-130 petition and the I-485 application, finding that our client was not eligible for an immediate relative visa because they failed to prove that the Beneficiary was never married before.

Our clients filed a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, asking USCIS to reopen or reconsider the I-130 Denial (“I-290B MTR”) based on extensive evidence and legal arguments that the Beneficiary was never legally married to the father of her children under Kenyan law.

Nevertheless, USCIS denied the I-290B MTR (“I-290B Denial”), asserting that only evidence from the “Registrar General” of Kenya had legal authority to establish that the Beneficiary “had never been married in all of Kenya.” Despite submitting all relevant case law, accompanying memoranda of points and authorities, and supporting documentation on the issue of the validity of the Beneficiary's marital status, USCIS remained unresponsive to the record and legal authorities as submitted. The I-290B Denial refused to grant any weight to the additional evidence that our clients submitted.

Our clients were faced with the options to refile their case or submit an appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). Both options would entail extremely long processing times with no clear resolution. The clients were then referred to our office for an evaluation.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu devised an aggressive litigation strategy to immediately advance our client's case in federal court to seek timely adjudication of the matter. We filed a lawsuit on behalf of our clients in federal court against USCIS, challenging its wrongful decision to deny our clients' I-130 and I-485 petitions.

Within 60 days after filing the lawsuit, an US Attorney from US Department of Justice headquarter in Washington D.C. informed our office that the USCIS San Jose Field Office had reopened the I-130 and I-485 petitions, and approved our client's green card. The government did not even file an opposition or a response to our lawsuit.

The firm is extremely pleased with the complete victory of our federal lawsuit. Our client has received her green card and safely remained with her husband in the U.S. When facing wrongful denials by USCIS, holding the government accountable in the federal court has proven to empower families, individuals, and businesses. Our firm has found it to be the most effective approach in getting immigration cases adjudicated or reverse a wrongful denied decision.

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced U.S. State Department to Reverse a Wrongful Denial of an H-4 Visa Application for A Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (April 2024)

Wed, 10 Apr 2024 13:12:24 GMT

In April 2024, our office successfully sued U.S. Department of State ("DOS") in federal court, forcing DOS to completely reverse course, and approved our client's H-4 visa application.

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Integra. Unbeknownst to the client, Integra appeared to be a possible shell company. Integra used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for training in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. Integra allegedly promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on Integra's promises and received job offers from Integra.

After NBC Bay Area's investigation exposed Integra's questionable nature, USCIS and DOS have relentlessly pursued the former students that were previously associated with Integra. USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Many of the students and former students also received revocation of F-1 visa and H-1B visa from DOS.

In 2020, our client received a terrible shock when two DHS officers knocked on the door of their home in Seattle, Washington. The officers asked our client if they had ever been associated with a company called Aztech and told them to make themselves available for an interview. Our client had never heard of such a company. After the officers left, our client researched the company name, discovering that Aztech was associated with Integra, and both companies were under investigation for visa fraud. Our client later left the U.S. and relocated to Canada for a job. However, their spouse remains in the U.S. as a H-1B visa holder.

Having been forced to maintain separate households in separate countries for three years, our client sought our office's assistance with their H-4 visa application be united with their spouse in the U.S.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our clients. Our office filed a new H-4 application for our client and submitted 145 pages of supplemental information to firmly establish that our client did not make any misrepresentation to the U.S. government regarding their past OPT employment and they should not be found inadmissible. Our client then attended an interview at the U.S. Consulate and provided a packet of supporting documents. Following the interview, our client received a telephone call from the consular officer, informing them that their visa would be denied and no waiver was recommended.

The Consulate provided no further explanation for its decision, nor did it reveal the grounds for refusing to recommend a waiver of inadmissibility. Due to the imminent harm to our clients, our firm took an aggressive approach to protect our client's rights. We filed a lawsuit against DOS in federal court, Seattle, Washington state.

The firm is very pleased to learn that as a result of our lawsuit, DOS has completely reversed course and approved our client H-4 visa application. Our client has recently returned to the U.S. safely. We're extremely pleased that we have reached a complete victory for our clients.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, and Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, XCG Design Corp, ApexIT in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Successfully Obtained Post Conviction Relief Pursuant To CA Penal Code 1473.7 and Terminated Removal Order in Immigration Court For Client With Multiple Convictions (February 2024)

Mon, 08 Apr 2024 06:03:20 GMT

In a September 2022 decision, San Francisco Immigration Court granted our client’s Motion to Reopen and Terminate Removal Proceeding because our client is no longer removable due to the vacate and reduction of our client's criminal convictions. Department of Homeland Security filed a lengthy 20 pages opposition to our motion. However, the immigration judge ruled on our favor.

Our client is a permanent resident. Unfortunately, he had a difficult youth. As a young adult, he made a series of mistakes that led to two criminal convictions. The first was a burglary conviction when he was 18 (Cal. Pen. Code § 460). This led to a deportation order against him in immigration court.

In 2006, when he was involved in a tragedy. He was unfortunately at the scene when an acquaintance of his hurt someone, resulting in that person losing his life. Our client did not participate in this act of violence or even in the planning of it, he just happened to be in the same car. On the advice of his public defender at the time, he accepted a plea deal and pled no contest to conspiracy and accessory after the fact along with sentence enhancements (Cal. Pen. Code §§ 32, 182(a)(1), 667(b)-(i)/1170.12). At the time, no one advised our client of the immigration consequences of pleading no contest to those charges. Had he known that the plea could endanger his immigration status and potentially bar him from becoming a U.S. citizen, he never would have entered the plea.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu took on representation and determined that the best approach to regain our client's permanent residency and perhaps naturalization is by Post Conviction Relief under California state law. Our office approached the Santa Clara District Attorney Office and filed a motion in the criminal court pursuant to Pen. Code, §§ 1473.7 to vacate the client’s convictions due to substantial and procedural defect of client’s criminal proceedings.

Fortunately, we were able to come to an agreement with the District Attorney office and entered into a Stipulation and Order where the Santa Clara County Superior Court issued an order, legally invalidated our client's conspiracy conviction and the enhancements, because the failure to warn our client of the immigration consequences of his criminal plea is procedural defect in the criminal proceeding, violated his constitutional right, and prejudiced his ability to “meaningfully understand, defend against, or knowingly accept the . . . adverse immigration consequences” of the conviction. Cal. Pen. Code § 1473.7. Thus, his conspiracy and enhancement convictions were vacated, and he pled guilty instead to a second count of accessory after the fact (Cal. Pen. Code § 32). Following the court’s order, his 2006 conviction was converted to two counts of misdemeanor accessory after the fact (Cal. Pen. Code § 32) with a combined total sentence of 364 days. The Santa Clara Superior Court also found that our client had successfully completed his probation and paid all fines and fees; accordingly, the sentence was deemed served and his probation was terminated.

Following the Santa Clara Superior Court’s order, our office successfully moved the Immigration Court to terminate removal proceedings against him despite the government's fierce objection. His successful motion to reopen and terminate removal proceedings was based on two grounds:

(1) legal changes rendered his 2003 burglary conviction a non-deportable offense; and

(2) following the Santa Clara Superior Court’s orders, the 2006 convictions are not deportable

offenses either. Under these circumstances, “material change[s]” in the law or fact underlying the

removability grounds warranted termination of the removal proceedings. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(v).

Because our client's remaining conviction are neither inadmissible or deportable, in terminating removal, the Immigration Court removed the final barrier to our client's naturalization. The firm is extremely please of the result we were able to achieve for our client. Our client's naturalization application is now pending.

Finding Your Way Out of Walter Jay M.D. Institute Scam (February 2024)

Thu, 07 Mar 2024 15:21:21 GMT

In February 2024, our office assisted a client in overcoming allegations in a Request for Evidence (RFE) pertaining to their past association with the fraudulent school, Walter Jay M.D. Institute.

As an F-1 visa holder, a foreign student is permitted to study in the United States. Our client registered for classes with Walter Jay M.D. Institute and paid substantial tuition under the good faith belief that they would receive a qualified education. Unbeknownst to our client and other F-1 international students, Walter Jay M.D. Institute, a school suspected of committing immigration fraud associated with Prodee University/Neo-America Language School Network of schools, charged students tuition but did not require them to attend classes.

The Prodee University/Neo-America Language School Network of schools was owned and operated by an individual named Hee Sun "Leonard" Shim. Leonard Shim and his co-conspirators, Eun Young "Jamie" Choi and Hyung Chan "Steve" Moon, were indicted in March 2015 for visa fraud and conspiracy for engaging in a "pay-to-stay" scheme. In this scheme, Leonard Shim charged "tuition" to maintain F-1 status for students but did not provide actual classes. Leonard Shim admitted to issuing Form I-20s to F-1 students to enroll in the Prodee Network and submitted falsified transcripts and fraudulent bank statements to immigration officials. He was convicted in February 2017.

During our client’s I-539 extension of their H-4 status proceeding, the client was issued an RFE regarding Walter Jay M.D. Institute fraud. USCIS seemed to allege that our client’s past innocent association with Walter Jay M.D. Institute could render them ineligible to extend their H-4 status and potentially make her inadmissible.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client in overcoming status violation allegations and navigated the client to establish that they did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws.

A finding of misrepresentation or fraud has severe immigration consequences. It would render a non-citizen inadmissible for life, possibly resulting in a permanent bar, and unable to obtain permanent residency until the inadmissibility is waived at the discretion of USCIS. Our firm is very pleased to learn that USCIS has approved our client's I-539 application, and our client’s H-4 status has been extended.

If you were a victim of Walter Jay M.D. Institute or The Prodee University/Neo-America Language School Network in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to advise you immediately and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Related Stories:

N-336 and N-400 Naturalization Approved After Previous Denial Based On Former F-1 Student’s Past Enrollment With Neo-America Language School and Walter Jay MD Institute. (September 2025)

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced USCIS to Reverse a Wrongful Denial of an I-485 and I-601 Waiver Application for past CCP member (February 2024)

Tue, 06 Feb 2024 17:05:38 GMT

In February 2024, our office successfully sued USCIS in federal court, forcing USCIS to completely reverse course and approve our client's I-485 Application to Adjust Status.

Our client is the principal beneficiary of an approved employment-based petition. At the I-485 Adjustment of Status interview, our client was found inadmissible because he was previously a member of the Chinese Communist Party. USCIS issued a Request for Evidence requesting an I-601 Waiver to waive their inadmissibility.

The client reached out to our office for assistance. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu reviewed our client’s case file and the factual circumstances surrounding their membership in the Communist Party. Attorney Nguyen Luu determined that our client is qualified for the exceptions enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Our office prepared a substantive memorandum of law and extensive supporting documents to establish that our client is qualified for the exceptions, and therefore should not have been found inadmissible. However, even if they were found to be inadmissible - a point we did not concede - our client is still eligible for a green card because they would be eligible for the I-601 Waiver. We submitted a response to USCIS, and out of an abundance of caution, we also filed an I-601 Waiver application.

Unfortunately, USCIS denied both the I-601 Waiver and the I-485 application. USCIS' denial was clearly erroneous and arbitrary because it was based on incorrect legal standards. Specifically, USCIS claimed that our client did not demonstrate sufficient extreme hardship to their LPR spouse for the I-601 Waiver. Furthermore, USCIS improperly gave less weight to a properly issued confirmation of Party membership termination.

The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that USCIS’s misapplication of the law was the sole basis of the Denial. This was a material error of law. The Denial completely ignored basic legal concepts regarding the level of hardship required for an I-601 Waiver application. It is well-settled law that extreme hardship is not required in this context. By making such an obvious contradiction of the black letter law in the Denial, USCIS violated its duty under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to engage in “reasoned decision-making.” ( Michigan v. EPA , 576 U.S. 743, 750 (2015); 5 U.S.C. § 701, et seq.) Under the APA, USCIS must refrain from making decisions that are “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.” (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), emphasis added.) Furthermore, by not giving full weight to the evidence on the record, USCIS’s Decision on its face was “patently unresponsive” to the administrative record.

Due to the imminent harm to our clients, our firm took an aggressive approach to protect their rights. We filed a lawsuit against USCIS in federal court, the Southern District of New York. Notably, this was the same court that previously found it would not have jurisdiction to hear challenges of the I-485 applications. Regardless, as one district judge's decision was not binding, we presented compelling arguments in favor of the court's jurisdiction in our lawsuit. The firm is very pleased to learn that as a result of our action, USCIS completely reversed course, re-opened, and approved our client's I-485 application. As USCIS conceded that our client was not inadmissible as they qualified for the exceptions, USCIS did not even reopen the I-601 Waiver.

As we emerge completely victorious in this litigation, we are reminded that when the government fails to apply the correct law or follow its own regulations, it will be held accountable in the court of law. Our firm will not hesitate to take aggressive action in federal courts to hold the government to the highest standard.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Successfully Reversed Previous Denial of I-485 Green Card Application for past member of Communist Party (January 2024)

Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:44:24 GMT

In a January 2024 decision, the USCIS New York Field Office approved our client’s I-485 green card application approximately one week after the I-485 interview, despite a previous denial.

Our client is the beneficiary/spouse of an approved family-based petition. During the previous I-485 Adjustment of Status proceeding in 2023, our client was found inadmissible because they were a former member of the Chinese Communist Party. USCIS denied our client's I-485 application. The former attorney prepared the I-290B Notice of Appeal or Motion with USCIS, but it was also denied.

As our client was at risk of deportation, they contacted our office seeking assistance with the denial. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu reviewed the client’s case file and the factual circumstances when they joined the Communist Party. Attorney Nguyen Luu determined that our client is qualified for the exceptions enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act. Furthermore, our client is also qualified for the I-601 Waiver.

Our office prepared a substantive memorandum of law and extensive supporting documents to establish that our client is qualified for the exceptions; hence, they should not have been found inadmissible. As a precaution, we also submitted an I-601 Waiver application with substantial evidence and legal arguments. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu also conducted mock interview with our client to prepare them for the I-485 interview.

Just one week after our client's interview at USCIS for their I-485 application filed by our office, they received an online notice that their I-485 application was approved and the green card is being produced. Our client could remain united with their family and is waiting the green card in the mail.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Successfully Assisted a Client Who Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies Inc. to Obtain H-1B Visa from US Consulate in India ( November 2023)

Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:56:58 GMT

In November 2023, our office assisted a client in obtaining their H-1B visa at the U.S. Consulate in India.

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Integra. Unbeknownst to the client, Integra Technologies Inc., Andwill, and Wireclass appeared to be possible shell companies. These companies used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for training in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. They allegedly promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on their promises and received job offers from them.

After NBC Bay Area's investigation exposed Integra, Andwill, and Wireclass's questionable nature, USCIS relentlessly pursued former students who were previously associated with Integra, Integra, Wireclass, and AZTech. USCIS issued Requests for Evidence, Notices of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), and conducted interviews with USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Many of the students and former students also had their F-1 and H-1B visas revoked.

Previously, in 2022, our client’s H-1B and Change of Status petition was denied due to their past association with Integra. Our office assisted our client with filing a lawsuit in federal district court challenging the wrongful denial. Within 2 weeks after we filed our lawsuit, USCIS reversed course and approved the H-1B petition and Change of Status application.

In 2023, our client returned to India to visit family and submitted their H-1B visa application at U.S. Consulate. Although initially, our client was eligible for interview waiver, they were subsequently scheduled for an interview. Knowing that many other visa applicants have been denied of visas stemming from their association with these OPT employers, our office proactively prepared the client for the interview by reviewing the case file and conducting mock interviews with our client. As expected, our client was questioned on their past association with Integra. Since our client was well-prepared, after a few days, they were issued a visa. The firm is very pleased with the results we have achieved for our client.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, or XCG Design Corp in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney immediately to advise you and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Related Stories:

Successfully Obtained I-485 Approval for Client That Failed to Recall Past Employment with Findream During I-485 Interview ( October 2023)

Sat, 11 Nov 2023 14:57:15 GMT

In October 2023, our office successfully obtained green cards for a client who was previously associated with FINDREAM, LLC (“FINDREAM”), but failed to remember their brief association during two I-485 interviews.

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by FINDREAM. Unbeknownst to them, FINDREAM founder Weiyun “Kelly” Huang and the corporations she founded were convicted of conspiracy to commit visa fraud in 2020. Huang used elaborate means to entice students to pay for her services in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F1 OPT. FINDREAM falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students fell victim to the fraud perpetrated by Huang and her accomplices.

After the convictions of the perpetrators, USCIS relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS issued Requests for Evidence ("RFE"), Notices of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), and conducted interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud if the student had previously held work authorization by association with the above companies.

Our client had their initial USCIS interview in June 2022, during which they faced repeated questions about their connection to Findream, a company they could not recall due to a brief association more than 8 years ago. Our client felt that the USCIS officer appeared to pressure them to admit a connection with Findream and they were conspiring with Findream to engage in immigration fraud.

Subsequently, our client was invited for a second interview at the USCIS office. During the second interview, our client was shown SEVIS records of Findream employment, which they still could not recollect their association. Our client was obliged to sign a statement, but the officer never explained what the statement was for.

After the interview, our client sought the record and found an email confirming their Findream employment. They believe their association lasted no more than a few days in 2014, and they never even started their employment with Findream. Fearing that their misstatement to USCIS might cause a denial of their I-485 application, the client reached out to our office for help.

Concerned that USCIS might accuse our client of making false statements and finding them inadmissible when our client denied their past association with Findream during the I-485 interview, Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation. Our office assisted our client in making a timely and voluntary retraction of any inadvertent misstatements made during their adjustment of status interviews. Our office promptly prepared a supplemental client’s statement and attorney legal memo to request that USCIS remove from consideration any misstatements as our client genuinely could not recall that they had an association with Findream more than 8 years ago.

While the process took significant time due to its complex nature, our patience paid off. Months later, the USCIS Officer called our office and informed the attorney that she had reviewed our firm’s submission and will be approving the I-485 application. The firm is very pleased to learn that we were able to persuade USCIS that our client did not commit misrepresentation during the I-485 interview, and their brief association with Findream was not part of the visa fraud conspiracy.

Related Stories:

Common Questions about Building a Positive Client-Lawyer Relationship

Tue, 10 Oct 2023 22:38:01 GMT

Legal matters can be stressful, and hiring a lawyer is often a necessary step to navigate through the complexities of the legal system. While there are countless resources available on how to hire a lawyer, it's equally important to understand how to maintain a positive and respectful client-lawyer relationship. In this blog post, we'll discuss the importance of respecting your lawyer and accepting the fees quoted.

1. Does your lawyer have any expertise?

Your lawyer is a legal professional with years of education and experience. When you hire them, you're essentially tapping into their knowledge and skills to help you with your legal matters. Respect their expertise by listening to their advice, even if it differs from your initial expectations. A good lawyer will always have your best interests in mind.

2. Is there effective communication?

Effective communication is key to any successful relationship, including the one you have with your lawyer. Be open and honest about your legal concerns, goals, and expectations. The more information you provide, the better your lawyer can understand and address your needs.

3. Do you understand the fee structure?

Before you begin working with your lawyer, make sure you have a clear understanding of their fee structure and billing practices. Don't hesitate to ask questions to clarify any doubts. Once you've agreed upon the fees, respect the agreement and be prepared to pay accordingly.

4. Is there a need to micromanage?

While it's natural to be concerned about your legal case, avoid the urge to micromanage the process. Lawyers have multiple clients and responsibilities, and they need time to work on your case effectively. Trust that they are diligently working on your behalf.

5. Are responses timely?

Lawyers often work with deadlines and rely on you for information and documents. Be prompt in responding to their requests. Delays on your part can not only hinder your case's progress but also lead to increased fees due to the additional time required.

6. Do you understand expectations?

Legal matters can be complex and time-consuming. Be realistic about the timeline and expectations for your case. Understand that your lawyer may not always be able to drop everything to address your concerns immediately.

7. Is there constructive feedback?

If you have concerns or questions about your case, address them in a constructive and respectful manner. Lawyers appreciate clients who are engaged and willing to discuss their legal matters. Constructive feedback can help improve the working relationship and the quality of service.

8. Are you following the legal advice given?

While the final decisions about your case are ultimately yours to make, give serious consideration to the advice and recommendations of your lawyer. Ignoring their counsel can have consequences for your legal situation.

Conclusion

Building a positive client-lawyer relationship is essential for a successful legal outcome. By respecting your lawyer's expertise, following these guidelines, and accepting the agreed-upon fees, you can ensure a smoother and more productive legal experience. Remember, a collaborative approach between you and your lawyer can lead to a more favorable resolution of your legal matters.

If you ever have concerns or questions about the fees or the conduct of your lawyer, don't hesitate to address them professionally and constructively. A strong and respectful client-lawyer relationship is built on open communication and trust.

Successfully Assisted a Client Who Was Previously Associated with Andwill to Obtain H-1B Visa from US Consulate in India

Sun, 17 Sep 2023 17:52:10 GMT

In September 2023, our office assisted a client in obtaining their H-1B visa at the U.S. Consulate in India.

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Andwill. Unbeknownst to the client, Andwill and Integra Technologies Inc. appeared to be possible shell companies. These companies used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for training in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. They allegedly promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on their promises and received job offers from them.

After NBC Bay Area's investigation exposed Integra and Andwill's questionable nature, USCIS relentlessly pursued the former students who were previously associated with Integra, Integra, and AZTech. USCIS issued Requests for Evidence, Notices of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), and conducted interviews with USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Many of the students and former students also had their F-1 and H-1B visas revoked.

Previously, in 2020, during their I-765 Application for STEM OPT Extension, our client received a Request for Evidence regarding their past association with Andwill. Our client became aware of issues associated with Andwill employment. When our client traveled to India to visit family, they were scheduled for an interview at the U.S. Consulate in India in connection with their H-1B visa. Our client reached out to our office, requesting assistance with the visa interview.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client. Our attorney carefully reviewed our client's case documents, immigration history, and timeline. Our office conducted mock interviews with our client to prepare for the visa interview. As expected, two U.S. Consular officers interviewed our client regarding their past association with Andwill. Since our client was well-prepared, they were issued a visa. The firm is very pleased with the results we have achieved for our client.

Related Stories:

Successfully Overcame Request for Evidence ("RFE") for Client That Was Previously Associated with ARECY LLC ( August 2023)

Tue, 05 Sep 2023 04:59:07 GMT

In August 2023, our office successfully assisted a client in obtaining her F-1 OPT, who was previously associated with ARECY, LLC (“ARECY”).

As an F1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by ARECY as an intern. Our client was promised an exciting internship with an accommodating remote work arrangement.

Unbeknownst to her, ARECY was flagged by NBC Bay Area’s investigation, along with five other companies that hired employees through the OPT program, including Abroad Intellect Capital, Acuty, Findream, Smoothies Technology, and New Beast, with possible abuse of the OPT program.

After the convictions of Kelly Huang, the perpetrator of the FINDREAM fraudulent scheme, USCIS, the State Department, and Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS issued Requests for Evidence, Notices of Intent to Deny, and conducted interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud if the student previously held work authorization by association with the above companies. The US Consulate and CBP also revoked visas and expedited the removal of these individuals.

Our client was applying for F-1 OPT for her graduate program. USCIS issued a Request for Evidence regarding her past employment with ARECY LLC during the Post Completion OPT and STEM OPT approximately 7 years prior.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on the representation to assist our client in addressing any potential issues stemming from her association with ARECY, LLC. The firm is very pleased to announce that with our assistance, the RFE was successfully overcome, and our client received her I-765 approval in just less than 4 weeks after we submitted our response.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, and Tellon Trading, Inc., ARECY, CG Max Design Corporation, or XCG Design Corp in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits or traveling outside the U.S.

Related Stories:

Successfully Obtained H4 Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC after THREE previous H-1B denials (August 2023)

Sun, 20 Aug 2023 00:25:20 GMT

In August 2023, our office successfully obtained H4 status for a client who was previously associated with Integra Technologies LLC (“Integra”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Integra. Unbeknownst to our client, Integra appeared to be a possible shell company. Integra used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for trainings in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. It appears that Integra falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on Integra's promises and received job offers from Integra.

After NBC Bay Area's investigation exposing Integra's questionable nature, USCIS has relentlessly pursued the former students that were previously associated with Integra. USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Many of the students and former students also received revocation of F-1 visa and H-1B visa.

Previously, our client had THREE approved H-1b petitions from various employers. In all three H-1B petitions, USCIS issued Request for Evidence (RFE) on the issue of maintenance of status and alleged misrepresentation and fraud related to Integra. Ultimately, in all H-1B petitions, USCIS approved the specialty occupation classification portion, but denied our client's change of status portion for reasons relating past association with Integra. When our client then sought the assistance of our office to change status from F-1 to H-4.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. The firm is very pleased to learn that just within just eight weeks after we have submitted our I-539 application with a clear explanation and attorney legal memo addressing our client's past association with Integra, USCIS has approved our client H-4 status.

Latest Success Stories on Integra:

Success Story: I-485 Application Approved within 14 days after Responding to RFE for Client That Was a Past Member of Chinese Communist Party (July 2023)

Thu, 03 Aug 2023 06:09:58 GMT

In a decision made in July 2023, the USCIS San Jose Field Office approved our client's I-485 application and issued the green card approximately 14 days after the firm submitted the response to USCIS’s Request for Evidence (“RFE”)

Our client is the beneficiary of an approved employment-based petition. Without requesting an interview, the USCIS San Jose Field Office issued a Request for Evidence that requested documents and information regarding our client’s past membership with the China Communist Party (“CCP”).

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu meticulously reviewed the client’s case file and the factual circumstances surrounding their Communist Party membership. We determined that our client qualified for the exceptions outlined in the Immigration and Nationality Act. Working swiftly, our legal team prepared a substantive memorandum of law along with extensive supporting documents to establish the client’s eligibility to the exceptions. As a result, the client should not have been deemed inadmissible. Despite lacking written proof of the termination of Party membership, this does not hinder our client from meeting the eligibility criteria for the 5-year past membership exception. Additionally, our client was also eligible for the exceptions related to non-meaningful and involuntary membership. Consequently, our client did not need to file the I-601 Waiver application.

Our firm acted aggressively to expedite our filing directly to the USCIS in order to prompt a decision. Merely 14 days after our submission, the USCIS approved our I-485 application and issued her green card.

The firm is highly pleased to have achieved a favorable resolution for our client in a remarkably short period of time.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Successfully Re-obtained H-1B Visa for Client That Was Previously Associated with DEALFAR ( Oct 2022)

Sun, 11 Jun 2023 18:44:06 GMT

In October 2022, our office successfully assisted a client in reobtaining their H-1B visa after it was revoked by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) due to their previous association with DEALFAR, LLC ("DEALFAR").

As an F1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by DEALFAR as an intern. Our client was promised an exciting internship with an accommodating remote work arrangement.

Unbeknownst to the client, DEALFAR was flagged by NBC Bay Area's investigation, along with five other companies that hired employees through the OPT program, including Abroad Intellect Capital, Acuty, Findream, Smoothies Technology, and New Beast, for possible abuse of the OPT program.

After the convictions of Kelly Huang, the perpetrator of the FINDREAM fraudulent scheme, USCIS and the State Department relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as "knowing co-conspirators." USCIS issued Requests for Evidence, Notices of Intent to Deny, and interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud if the student previously held work authorization through association with the above companies.

On our client's return trip to the U.S. from China, they sought to enter under their unexpired H-1B visa. Unfortunately, CBP placed our client on secondary inspection and extensively questioned them about their internship with DEALFAR. Our client was confused and distressed by this unexpected line of questioning regarding a company they had been briefly employed by many years prior. The following day, our client's H-1B visa was revoked. For several months, they were unable to come back to the U.S. until they contacted our office seeking assistance.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on the representation to assist our client in addressing potential allegations of misrepresentation and fraud stemming from their association with DEALFAR. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to obtain a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event that a false statement was made, it was not willfully made, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that our client's H-1B visa was approved again.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, or XCG Design Corp in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Related Stories:

Successfully Overcame H-1B Extension NOID for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (June 2023)

Sat, 10 Jun 2023 21:52:47 GMT

In June 2023, our office successfully overcame a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) for an H-1B extension of status for a client who had been previously associated with Integra Technologies LLC ("Integra") for almost 6 months.

As an F1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Integra. Unbeknownst to him, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was investigating companies in the State of Delaware that were facilitating Post-Completion OPT and STEM OPT fraud by providing false employment verifications to F-1 students in order to obtain immigration benefits, even though no actual work was performed for the companies. These false employment verifications were being sold to students for a fee. As part of this investigation, Integra Technologies was discovered to be providing false employment documentation.

Integra used elaborate means to entice mainly students from India to pay for trainings in exchange for temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. Integra falsely promised our client training services, networking opportunities, and internships that were perceived as legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on Integra's promises and received job offers from Integra.

Our client had no knowledge of Integra's true nature until he received a NOID from USCIS. When a NOID is issued, it means that USCIS is prepared to deny the immigration petition. However, USCIS allows the applicant an opportunity to present documents to overcome USCIS's allegations that the applicant is inadmissible for misrepresentation and fraud due to their past association with Integra during their F-1 OPT period. Furthermore, USCIS alleged that Integra Technologies did not offer legitimate employment and that our client violated the terms and conditions of their OPT and failed to maintain their F-1 nonimmigrant status.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on the representation to assist our client. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to obtain a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event that a false statement was made, it was neither willfully made nor material, thus overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is pleased to announce that just under 2 months after submitting our NOID Response, USCIS approved our client's H-1B extension of status.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, or XCG Design Corp in any capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney who can provide immediate advice and identify potential problems early in your case, as well as develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Related Stories:

Successfully Overcame H-1B RFE for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (April 2023)

Mon, 24 Apr 2023 03:02:00 GMT

In April 2023, our office successfully overcame a H-1B extension of status for a client who was previously associated with Integra Technologies LLC (“Integra”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Integra. Unbeknownst to him, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) investigated companies in the State of Delaware that were facilitating Post-Completion OPT and STEM OPT fraud by providing false employment verifications to F-l Students to obtain immigration benefits when they did not actually perform any work for the companies. These false employment verifications were sold to students for a fee. As part of this investigation, Integra Technologies was discovered to be providing false employment documentation.

Integra used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for trainings in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. Integra falsely promised our client to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on Integra's promises and received job offers from Integra.

Our client had no knowledge of Integra's true nature and until he received a Request of Evidence from USCIS requesting documents regarding his past association with Integra during his F-1 OPT period in connection with his I-129 Extension of Status of his H-1B visa. USCIS alleged that Integra Technologies did not offer legitimate employment and that our client violated the terms and conditions of his OPT and did not maintain his F-l nonimmigrant status.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made, nor material, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that within just within a few weeks after we have submitted our RFE Response, USCIS approved our client H-1B extension of status.

Related Stories:

Successfully Obtained I-485 Approval for Client That Was Previously Associated with CloudParticle (March 2023)

Fri, 24 Mar 2023 03:15:17 GMT

In March 2023, our office received an I-485 approval notice for a client who was previously associated with CloudParticle.

As a F1 visa international student many years prior, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by CloudParticle. During their initial’s I-485 green card interview in 2022, USCIS heavily questioned our client on their past employment with CloudParticle. Due to the extended passage of time, our client was not prepared and was not able to accurately recount the facts surrounding their past association with CloudParticle.

At the end of the interview, at the request of the USCIS Officer, our client felt that they had to change the response on their I-485 application and essentially admitted that they: 1) worked in the U.S. without authorization; 2) submitted fraudulent documents to the U.S. government to obtain immigration benefits; 3) lied or misrepresented information to the U.S. government obtain immigration benefits.

After the interview, our client immediately contacted our office and sought assistance. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team proactively reviewed the facts of our client’s case and determined that our client did not work in the U.S. without authorization and nor made willful misrepresentations to the U.S. Government.

Our client was in great risk to be found inadmissible for misrepresentation and fraud. If our client was unable to overcome the finding of inadmissibility, they would be required to file an I-601 Extreme Hardship waiver.

Our team immediately prepared our clients' statements, attorney legal memo, and presented evidence to support a finding that our clients did not intentionally make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws and they are eligible to adjust status. We worked with our client to accurately recounting their employment and immigration history. We also assisted client to timely retract any misstatement made during their 2022 I-485 interview. We promptly submitted a supplemental package to USCIS.

After receiving our office’s supplemental memorandum and supporting documents, USCIS scheduled our client for a second interview. Ultimately, our client’s I-485 was approved within 4 weeks. The firm is very pleased to learn that USCIS accepted our legal arguments.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, and Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, XCG Design Corp, CloudParticle in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Related Stories:

Your Naturalization Application Has Been Pending Over 120 Days After Interview? The Government Might Have to PAY YOU For the Delay. (Dec 2022)

Tue, 21 Feb 2023 07:12:28 GMT

In a December 2022 agreement with USCIS, not only the government APPROVED our client’s N-400 application, but the government also agreed to PAY our client a substantial sum of attorney fees for its failure to adjudicate our client’s naturalization application within 120 days after the interview. Our firm is extremely pleased with the results of our advocacy efforts on behalf of our client, who has been unduly burdened with delays in her case for almost 2 years.

While it seemed to be common for USCIS to take quite some time to issue a decision in a naturalization case after the applicant has his/her interview, it is by no mean legally proper. As the law requires, after the interview, USCIS has only 120 days to issue a decision. If no decision is issued after 120 days, the applicant may request judicial review of his/her application in U.S. Federal District Court.

Our client already had her interview and received an approval notice of her N-400 application. Our client was waiting for her swearing-in ceremony. However, for reasons unknown to our client, USCIS arbitrarily reopened her N-400 application and issued a notice claiming that it intended to deny our client N-400 application. Furthermore, USCIS incomprehensibly stated that it would schedule another interview. While our client patiently waited for USCIS to schedule her interview and despite our client’s multiple attempts to submit inquiry with USCIS, her re-interview notices never came.

Once our client retained our office, attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team aggressively filed an action in federal court, Northern District of California. Generally, if the federal court takes over the adjudication of the N-400 application, the court most likely would order a “remand” of the matter back to USCIS for decision issuance. In that instant, the applicant becomes a “prevailing party” which he/she is entitled to attorney fees and cost from the government.

As a result of our aggressive approach, within 60 days after USCIS was duly served with our action, the agency offered to pay our client’s attorney fees and promptly issued a swearing-in ceremony appointment. Our client is now a U.S. Citizen.

If your case has been stalled for too long, do not accept USCIS’s response that your case is “pending review” at face value. Federal litigation has proven to empower families, individuals, and businesses. Our firm has found it to be the most effective approach in getting immigration cases adjudicated or reverse a wrongful denied decision.

Related success:

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced USCIS to Reverse a Wrongful Denial of an H-1B petition for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (Dec 2022)

Fri, 23 Dec 2022 18:30:46 GMT

In December 2022, our office successfully sued USCIS in federal court, forcing USCIS to completely reverse course, and approved our client's H-1B petition in just ONE day after filing our lawsuit.

As an F-1 visa international student, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Integra. Unbeknownst to the client, Integra appeared to be a possible shell company. Integra used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for trainings in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. Integra allegedly promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on Integra's promises and received job offers from Integra.

After NBC Bay Area's investigation exposed Integra's questionable nature, USCIS has relentlessly pursued the former students that were previously associated with Integra. USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud. Many of the students and former students also received revocation of F-1 visa and H-1B visa.

Our client is an established company in the San Francisco Bay Area. Our client filed an I-129 Petition for their employee's H-1B status. USCIS issued an RFE on the issues of the employee's Maintenance of Status. Particularly, USCIS requested substantial documents regarding the employee's F-1 OPT employments. Among the previous F-1 OPT employers was Integra Technologies Inc. The employer's immigration counsel responded to the RFE with over 500 pages of supporting documents and evidence, which USCIS mostly disregarded. USCIS then arbitrarily claimed that the employee was not eligible to Change Status because his F-1 visa was already revoked, and denied the I-129 petition regardless. USCIS also completely failed to adjudicate the petition to reclassify the employee as an H-1B non-immigrant worker in a specialty occupation.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our clients. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that USCIS’s misapplication of the law is the sole basis of the Denial. This was a material error of law. The Denial completely ignored basic legal concepts of visa revocation and immigration status . It is well settled law that a revocation of a visa does not also revoke valid immigration status for someone already present in the US. By making such an obvious contradiction of the black letter law in the Denial, USCIS violated its duty under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to engage in “reasoned decision making.” Michigan v. EPA , 576 U.S. 743, 750 (2015); 5 U.S.C. § 701, et seq. Under the APA, USCIS must refrain from making decisions that are “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A) (emphasis added). Furthermore, by not addressing the substantive content of our clients' I-129 Petition and documents concerning the request for H-1B classification, USCIS’s Decision on its face was “patently unresponsive” to the administrative record.

Due to the imminent harm to our clients, our firm took an aggressive approach to protect our client's rights. We filed a lawsuit against USCIS in federal court, Northern District of California. We also pursued an emergency motion, Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order to expedite the hearing. The firm is very pleased to learn that within just ONE day after we notified the government of our motion, USCIS completely reversed course, and approved our client H-1B petition. Our firm reached a complete victory for our clients. The firm is extremely pleased with the results we have achieved.

Latest Success Stories on Integra:

Successfully Obtained H4 Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC after TWO previous denials (November 2022)

Thu, 24 Nov 2022 15:48:54 GMT

In November 2022, our office successfully obtained H4 status for a client who was previously associated with Integra Techonologies LLC (“Integra”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in the OPT program and was hired by Integra. Unbeknownst to her, Integra appeared to be a possible shell company. Integra used elaborate means to entice mostly Indian students to pay for trainings in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F-1 OPT. It appears that Integra falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F-1 students relied on Integra's promises and received job offers from Integra.

Previously, our client applied for H-4 status as a spouse of an H1-B visa holder by filing form I-539 Application to Change Status. USCIS denied her I-539 two times for reasons relating to her past association with Integra. Our client then sought the assistance of our office.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made, nor material, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that within just three months after we have submitted our I-539 application, USCIS has approved our client H-4 status.

Related Stories:

Successfully Obtained THREE I-485 Approvals for Clients That Were Previously Associated with FINDREAM

Thu, 24 Nov 2022 13:49:44 GMT

In November 2022, on the same day, our office received THREE I-485 approval notices for three clients who were previously associated with FINDREAM, LLC (“FINDREAM.”)

As a F1 visa international students, our clients participated in the OPT program and was hired by FINDREAM. Unbeknownst to her, FINDREAM founder Weiyun “Kelly” Huang and the corporations she founded was convicted of conspiracy to commit visa fraud in 2020. Huang used elaborate means to entice students to pay for her services in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F1 OPT. FINDREAM falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F1 students fell victim to the fraud perpetrated by Huang and her accomplices.

After convictions of the perpetrators were rendered, USCIS has relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud, if the student previously held work authorization by association with above companies.

In light of current USCIS's policy, Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team proactively prepared our clients for their I-485 interviews. Our team prepared our clients' statements, attorney legal memo, and presented evidence to support a finding that our clients did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws and they are eligible to adjust status. Our firm also conducted mock interviews and accompanied our clients to their I-485 interviews.

The firm is very pleased to learn that USCIS approved all THREE of our clients I-485 applications.

Related Stories:

Another N-336 Success: Naturalization Approved After N-336 Hearing! (September 2022)

Fri, 11 Nov 2022 01:25:32 GMT

In September 2022, USCIS Field Office in San Jose, CA reversed their previous denial of our client's naturalization application, and approved our client's N-400 application. Our client is now a U.S. Citizen.

Previously, USCIS denied our client’s N-400 application claiming that our client is barred from naturalization because his 2005 conviction under Cal. Pen. Code § 32, Accessory After the Fact, constitutes an aggravated felony as obstruction of justice under INA § 101(a)(43)(S). Based on this misstatement, USCIS wrongfully concluded that our client was unable to demonstrate good moral character, and denied his application for naturalization.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client filing the N-336, Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings (Under Section 336 of the INA.) An N-336 hearing is very similar to a regular naturalization hearing. The Applicant or his or her attorney is allowed to make their case regarding the issues that had led to the initial denial of form N-400.

Our firm prepared a substantive legal memo, supporting documents, and appeared at the hearing interview with our client. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that USCIS’s mischaracterization of Cal. Pen. Code § 32 is the sole basis of the Denial. This was a material error of law. The Denial completely ignored binding precedent here in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It is well settled that a conviction for accessory after the fact under Cal. Pen. Code § 32 is never an aggravated felony under INA § 101(a)(43)(S). Valenzuela Gallardo v. Barr , 968 F.3d 1053 (9th Cir. 2020).

By making such an obvious contradiction of black letter law in the Denial, USCIS violated its duty under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to engage in “reasoned decision making.” Michigan v. EPA , 576 U.S. 743, 750 (2015); 5 U.S.C. § 701, et seq. Under the APA, USCIS must refrain from making decisions that are “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A) (emphasis added).

The reviewing USCIS Officer, who was required to be a higher rank officer by law, conceded during the interview that USCIS was wrong in denying our client's N-400 application and promptly approved our client's N-400 application.

We are very pleased that we were able to successfully achieve a favorable result for our clients.

Successfully Responded to RFE and Obtained H-1B Extension for Client That Was Previously Associated with Masswell and CG Max Design ( September 2022)

Tue, 13 Sep 2022 16:14:00 GMT

In September 2022, our office successfully assisted a client responding to a Request for Evidence ("RFE") and obtained approval for H-1B visa extension who was previously associated with Masswell Development Group, Inc ("Masswell") and CG Max Design Corp (“CG Max”) in just TWO days.

Our client is a high level senior staff employed by a large organization faced with a RFE based on prior association with Masswell and CG Max. Client consulted with their company lawyers and several outside counsels, all advising the client to withdraw the H-1B extension application, essentially leaving the client with no recourse for permanent residency.

As an F-1 visa international students, our client participated in OPT program and was hired by Masswell and CG Max as an intern. Our client was promised exciting internships. Unbeknownst to client, both Masswell and CG Max were flagged by NBC Bay Area’s investigation along with other companies that hired employees through the OPT program, including Abroad Intellect Capital, Acuty, FINDREAM, Smoothies Technology, and New Beast with possible abuse of the OPT program.

After convictions of Kelly Huang, the perpetrator of FINDREAM fraudulent scheme, USCIS, State Department, and Customs and Border Protection have relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny, interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud, if the student previously held work authorization by association with above companies. US Consulate and CBP have also been revoking visas and expedited removed these individuals.

After client retained our office, an immediate response was prepared and submitted addressing all allegations. Within TWO DAYS of our submission of the RFE Response, our client's H-1B extension was approved and client does not need to do Consular Processing for their H-1B visa stamp. Hence, eliminating the risk of denial of entry to the U.S.

Luu Law takes tremendous pride in delivering results to clients, based on our thorough evaluation and analysis of the case matter. Every case matter is different and requires a full evaluation on its own merits before a legal strategy is put in place. We aggressively advocate for our clients and do not settle for accepting denials. If you are faced with a denial or you have been advised by your company lawyer that there is no remedy for you, seek a consultation with our team to get an expert analysis of your case. Our team is skilled, experienced, and results driven.

Related Stories:

Successfully Reversed Previous Denial of N-400 Naturalization Application through Post Conviction Relief (August 2022)

Sun, 21 Aug 2022 17:10:52 GMT

In August 2022, USCIS Field Office in Fresno, CA swiftly approved our client's naturalization application and conducted a swearing-in ceremony for our client in just less than 4 weeks. Our client is now a U.S. Citizen.

Previously, USCIS denied our client's earlier applications TWICE largely due to his misdemeanor convictions in 1998, 2000, and 2001. USCIS claimed that these convictions constituted crimes involving moral turpitude (CIMTs) which would bar our client from establishing good moral character. USCIS also faulted our client for failing to disclose all of the arrests, concluding that the omission reflects upon the client's moral character. Finally, USCIS also alleged that our client has an active warrant for arrest by immigration authorities, outstanding since 2006. According to USCIS, the warrant disqualified our client from the good moral character requirement for naturalization. In connection with the warrant, a Notice to Appear (“NTA”) was issued, alleging that our client was subject to removal from the United States based on his convictions.

Due to the client’s convictions, our client was not only deportable, and inadmissible but also ineligible for naturalization. Our client faced the great risk of being placed in a deportation proceeding at Immigration Court.

Our attorneys immediately conducted a thorough review of the client’s court records and previous defense counsel’s files. We determined that client’s criminal proceedings contained substantial and procedural defects that violated our client’s constitutional rights.

Our office contacted the District Attorney's Office and filed a Motion to Vacate along with supporting evidence to establish that client’s constitutional rights were violated. We were able to convince the District Attorney to enter into an agreement to vacate certain convictions and dismissed certain charges. Through a series of legal maneuvers and carefully crafted stipulations and orders, our client no longer has deportable convictions.

Subsequently, our attorneys accompanied client to the naturalization interview in Fresno Field Office. We provided USCIS with a substantive legal memo explaining how the vacated convictions have no immigration consequences. Generally, if a conviction is vacated for reasons unrelated to the merits of the underlying criminal proceedings, such as for equitable, rehabilitation, or immigration hardship reasons, a vacated conviction remains a conviction for immigration purposes. But because our client’s convictions were vacated due to substantial procedural defects in the underlying criminal proceeding pursuant to CA Penal Code 1016.5, it eliminates all immigration consequences. Furthermore, any remaining convictions are immigration neutral and do not render our client deportable, inadmissible, or ineligible for naturalization.

USCIS agreed with our position and approved our client’s petition for naturalization less than 30 days after the interview. We are extremely pleased that we were able to achieve a favorable result for our clients successfully.

Related Stories:

Immigration Case Taking Forever? Holding the Government Accountable in Court Might Be the Most Effective Way to Bring the Case to Final Resolution. (August 2022)

Tue, 16 Aug 2022 18:01:53 GMT

In an August 2022 approval decision, USCIS approved our clients' I-130 Petition for Alien Relative and provisionally approved our clients' I-485 Application to Adjust Status (pending medical examinations) as a direct result of our Mandamus lawsuit. Our firm is extremely pleased with the results of our advocacy efforts on behalf of our clients, who have been unduly burdened with delays in their cases for almost 6 years.

When immigration cases are not being adjudicated by USCIS in a timely manner for unwarranted reasons, the law allows the Petitioner to file a Writ of Mandamus petition with the United States Federal District Court to compel USCIS’s action. A Mandamus action simply seeks a court order to compel the government to act when no such action has taken place. A Mandamus action does not request the court to approve the immigration petitions.

Our clients have had their I-130 and I-485 pending for over 6 years. Our client, a U.S. Citizen Petitioner filed I-130 Petitions to sponsor the client's spouse and step-children for green card applications. The case was stalled in administrative processing for almost 6 years with no apparent justification. Our clients submitted multiple online inquiries to USCIS website, but USCIS's response was “Pending Review”.

Our firm filed a Writ of Mandamus and an Administrative Procedure Act action on behalf of our clients in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and USCIS challenging the agency's unreasonable delay. In less than 30 days after we have served the agencies with our Mandamus petition, the agency approved our client's I-130 Petitions and provisionally approved our clients' I-485 applications pending the medical examinations. Our clients received their green cards within less than 60 days after we filed our action.

Filing a Writ of Mandamus against the government is a complex proceeding but, sometimes by holding the government accountable in court, is the most effective way to bring quick resolution to a long pending immigration case.

Related success:

Success Story: I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved within 3 days (May 2022)

Mon, 01 Aug 2022 04:34:58 GMT

In a May 2022 decision, USCIS San Francisco Field Office approved our client’s I-601 Waiver Application and approved client’s I-485 green card application in record time, approximately 3 days after the firm submitted the I-601 Waiver application.

Our client is the beneficiary of an approved employment-based petition. At the I-485 Adjustment of Status interview, our client was found inadmissible because it was claimed that client was previously a member of the Chinese Communist Party. USCIS issued a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) requesting an I-601 Waiver to waive his inadmissibility.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu carefully reviewed the client’s case file and factual circumstances regarding Communist Party membership. Our firm determined that the client qualified for the exceptions enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act and worked swiftly to prepare a substantive memorandum of law and extensive supporting documents to establish client’s eligibility, hence client should not have been found inadmissible.

Our firm worked aggressively to expedite our filing directly to the USCIS to render a decision. Only THREE days after our submission, USCIS approved our I-601 Waiver and the I-485 approval was received on the same day.

The firm is very pleased that we have obtained favorably resolution for our client within record time.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Successfully Reversed Previous Denial of N-400 Naturalization Application (February 2022)

Fri, 10 Jun 2022 05:53:08 GMT

In February 2022, USCIS Field Office in San Jose, CA scheduled our client for his naturalization interview. Our client is now a U.S. Citizen.

Previously, USCIS denied our client’s N-400 application claiming that our client was barred from naturalization due to his previous felony criminal convictions that exceed $10,000 in restitution. Thus, he was not eligible for naturalization.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client filing his new N-400 application. Our firm prepared a substantive legal memo, supporting documents, and appeared at the hearing interview with our client. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that our client our client's previous convictions were vacated pursuant to California Penal Code 1016.5, therefore all immigration consequences were eliminated.

Generally, if a conviction is vacated for reasons unrelated to the merits of the underlying criminal proceedings, such as for equitable, rehabilitation, or immigration hardship reasons, a vacated conviction remains a conviction for immigration purposes. ( See Matter of Pickering , 23 I&N Dec. 621 (BIA 2003).) However, if a conviction is vacated because of a “procedural or substantive defect” in the underlying criminal proceedings, then the conviction is not considered a “conviction” for immigration purposes and cannot serve as a basis for removability. A conviction vacated under Cal. Pen. Code, § 1016.5 effectively renders the conviction non-existent for immigration purposes due to substantial procedural defect in the underlying criminal proceedings.

During the N-400 interview, attorney Nguyen D. Luu explained to the USCIS Officer the ramification of California Penal Code 1016.5 and that our client is eligible for naturalization because he has no criminal convictions for immigration purposes. The Officer approved our N-400 application on the same day.

We are very pleased that we were able to successfully achieve a favorable result for our clients.

Related Stories:

Successfully Obtained O-1 Visa for Client That Was Previously Associated with ARECY LLC ( MAY 2022)

Mon, 09 May 2022 01:50:39 GMT

In April 2022, our office successfully assisted a client in obtaining her O-1 visa who was previously associated with ARECY, LLC (“ARECY”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in OPT program and was hired by ARECY as an intern. Our client was promised an exciting internship with accommodating remote work arrangement.

Unbeknownst to her, ARECY was flagged by NBC Bay Area’s investigation along with five other companies that hired employees through the OPT program, including Abroad Intellect Capital, Acuty, Findream, Smoothies Technology, and New Beast with possible abuse of the OPT program.

After convictions of Kelly Huang, the perpetrator of FINDREAM fraudulent scheme, USCIS, State Department, and Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") have relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny, interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud, if the student previously held work authorization by association with above companies. US Consulate and CBP has also been revoking visas and expedited removed these individuals.

Our client was returning to the U.S. from a short trip abroad. When she presented herself to CBP at the U.S. airport, she was interviewed and questioned extensively regarding her internship with ARECY, LLC. Her O-1 visa was subsequently revoked and CBP officer denied her admission to the U.S. For several weeks, she was unable to come back to the U.S. until she contacted our office seeking for assistance.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client addressing any potential allegations of misrepresentation and fraud stemming from her association with ARECY, LLC. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that with our assistance, our client was able to have her O-1 visa reissued from the U.S. Consulate. During her return trip to the U.S., our client was briefly interviewed by CBP agent again, however since the issue was resolved at the U.S. Consulate, our client was granted entry back to the U.S.

Related Stories:

Success Story: Naturalization Approved After N-336 Hearing! (January 2022)

Sat, 30 Apr 2022 21:58:01 GMT

In January 2022, USCIS Field Office in San Jose, CA scheduled our client for his naturalization interview. Our client is now a U.S. Citizen.

Previously, USCIS denied our client’s N-400 application claiming that our client made false statements and misrepresentations to the U.S. Government regarding his biological children born abroad. USCIS then claimed that due to the failure to disclose the children, our client was not able to establish that he is a person of good moral character. Therefore he was not eligible for naturalization.

Our firm prepared a substantive legal memo, supporting documents, and appeared at the hearing interview with our client. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that our client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. Even if any false statements were made, they were not made during the statutory period (e.g., 5 years before the filing of form N-400.) Furthermore, our firm advanced the argument that our client’s conduct and acts outside the statutory period cannot bar a finding of good moral character because there has been reform of character and the earlier conduct and acts are not relevant to a determination of our client’s present moral character.

The reviewing USCIS Officer, who was required to be a higher rank officer by law, and also happened to be an attorney, conducted a thorough review of our arguments and evidence presented. The Officer ultimately approved our N-336 application.

We are very pleased that we were able to successfully achieve a favorable result for our clients.

Success Story: Overcame NOID and Obtained H4 Status Extension for Client That Was Previously Associated with FINDREAM for 3 years (January 2022)

Fri, 04 Feb 2022 21:38:57 GMT

In January 2022, our office successfully obtained H4 status extension for a client who was previously associated with FINDREAM, LLC (“FINDREAM”) for three years.

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in the STEM OPT program and was hired by FINDREAM. Unbeknownst to her, FINDREAM founder Weiyun “Kelly” Huang and the corporations she founded was convicted of conspiracy to commit visa fraud in 2020. Huang used elaborate means to entice students to pay for her services in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F1 OPT. FINDREAM falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F1 students fell victim to the fraud perpetrated by Huang and her accomplices.

Previously, our client already obtained H4 status as a spouse of an H1B visa holder. During her H4 extension application, USCIS issued a NOID alleging that our client had made material misrepresentations and committed fraud with respect to her association with FINDREAM.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client responding to the NOID. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. The firm is very pleased to learn that within just 30 days after we have submitted our NOID response, USCIS has approved our client H4 extension application.

Related Stories:

Success Story: I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved within 3 weeks (November 2021)

Fri, 04 Feb 2022 19:46:05 GMT

In a November 2021 decision, USCIS Salt Lake City Office approved our client’s I-601 Waiver Application and approved client’s I-485 green card application in record time, approximately 3 weeks after the firm submitted the I-601 Waiver application.

Our firm worked aggressively to expedite our filing directly to the USCIS to render a decision. Only THREE weeks after our submission, USCIS approved our I-601 Waiver and a subsequent I-485 approval was received.

The firm is very pleased that we have obtained favorably resolution for our client within a relatively short time.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Successfully Obtained H-1B Visa and Green Card for Client That Was Previously Associated with DEALFAR ( Jan 2022)

Thu, 06 Jan 2022 08:39:28 GMT

In January 2022, our office successfully obtained H-1B visa for a client who was previously associated with DEALFAR, LLC (“DEALFAR”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in OPT program and was hired by DEALFAR as an intern. Our client was promised an exciting internship with accommodating remote work arrangement.

Unbeknownst to her, DEALFAR was flagged by NBC Bay Area’s investigation along with five other companies that hired employees through the OPT program, including Abroad Intellect Capital, Acuty, Findream, Smoothies Technology and New Beast with possible abuse of the OPT program.

Our client was applying for her H-1B extension visa at an U.S. Consulate abroad. During the consular interview, she was questioned extensively regarding her internship with DEALFAR. She was subsequently issued a Request for Evidence for her association with DEALFAR. For several months, she was unable to come back to the U.S. until she contacted our office seeking for assistance.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client addressing any potential allegations of misrepresentation and fraud stemming from her association with DEALFAR. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that our client's H-1B visa was promptly approved less than 8 weeks after we submitted our response.

* Update: In June 2022, with our assistance, our client successfully obtained her green card. Our attorney appeared with the client during the Adjustment of Status interview and advocated on our client's behalf. We also submitted a legal memo and documents in support of our client. The client's I-485 form was approved just within 2 weeks of the interview. We are extremely very pleased of the result.

Related Stories:

Successfully Corrected Date of Birth on Naturalization Certificate in New Jersey Federal District Court (December 2021)

Fri, 24 Dec 2021 16:54:54 GMT

In December 2021, the Federal District Court of New Jersey issued an order granting our client's petition to correct his date of birth on Naturalization Certificate.

Our client was a refugee from Vietnam. During his immigration process, his date of birth was recorded incorrectly. As he fled Vietnam without any legal documents, he was unable to provide proof of his true date of birth. In an attempt to correct his important vital record, he initiated various legal proceedings and appeals with state and federal agencies such as USCIS, Department of State, Administrative Appeal Office, Department of Social Security, and DMV . Over the course of almost 40 years, our client's attempt to correct his date of birth was to no avail.

Client then retained our office . Attorney Nguyen D. Luu reviewed client's immigration record and assisted client with the petition. Our firm is pleased to successfully petition the federal court to restore our clients' corrected vital information. USCIS's previous denial of our client's N-565 form has been reversed by the court order. Client is now waiting to have his new Naturalization Certificate re-issued.

Resources:

Successfully Overcame RFE and Obtained H1B Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with FINDREAM ( Sept 2021)

Tue, 28 Sep 2021 22:36:44 GMT

In September 2021, our office successfully obtained another H1B status for a client who was previously associated with and defrauded by FINDREAM, LLC (“FINDREAM”).

After convictions of the perpetrators were rendered, USCIS has relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS has issued Request for Evidence ("RFE"), Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID"), interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud, if the student previously held work authorization by association with above companies.

During the adjudication of our client's H1B extension - I-129 Petition, USCIS issued a RFE alleging that our client had made material misrepresentations and committed fraud with respect to her association with FINDREAM during her STEM OPT period.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client responding to the RFE. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that our client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made, nor material, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that within just 10 days after we have submitted our RFE response, USCIS has approved our client's I-129 petition.

Related Stories:

Successfully Overcame NOID, Re-obtained H4 Status, and Green Card for Client That Was Previously Associated with SINOCONTECH

Thu, 23 Sep 2021 23:47:31 GMT

In September 2021, our office successfully obtained H4 status for a client who was previously associated with and defrauded by SINOCONTECH and FINDREAM, LLC (“FINDREAM”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in the STEM OPT program and was hired by SINOCONTECH, an affiliated entity of FINDREAM. Unbeknownst to her, FINDREAM founder Weiyun “Kelly” Huang and the corporations she founded was convicted of conspiracy to commit visa fraud in 2020. Huang used elaborate means to entice students to pay for her services in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of F1 OPT. FINDREAM falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F1 students fell victim to the fraud perpetrated by Huang and her accomplices.

Previously, our client already obtained H4 status as a spouse of an H1B visa holder in 2019 by filing form I-539 Application to Change Status. Then in 2020, USCIS on its own motion, reopened our client's I-539 application and issued a NOID alleging that our client had made material misrepresentations and committed fraud with respect to her association with SINOCONTECH and FINDREAM.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client responding to the NOID. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made, nor material, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that within just 90 days after we have submitted our NOID response, USCIS has re-approved our client I-539 application.

Update - June 2022 : After our client re-obtained her H-4 status, USCIS issued a Request for Evidence for our client's I-485 application on SINOCONTECH association. Our office assisted the client responding to the RFE and attended the I-485 interview with our client. Her I-485 was approved on the same day. We are extremely pleased with the result.

Related Stories:

Getting Your Immigration Case Out of the Blackhole of "Administrative Review" - Writ of Mandamus Successfully Forced USCIS to Adjudicate Delayed I-130 Petition (September 2021)

Mon, 20 Sep 2021 01:04:24 GMT

In a September 2021 approval decision, USCIS approved our client's I-130 Petition for Alien Relative as a direct result of our Mandamus lawsuit. Our firm is extremely pleased with the results of our advocacy efforts on behalf of our client, who has been unduly burdened with delays in his case for almost 5 years.

Specifically, a federal judge may order USCIS to take immediate action on pending immigration petitions if there was unreasonable delay. Although there are no specific parameters on how long a petitioner must wait before taking action to file with the court, clients should seek proper advice from an immigration specialist to evaluate whether a Mandamus action is warranted. Generally, once an immigration petition has been pending for over two years, it may be time to consider filing a Writ of Mandamus.

In 2016, our client, a U.S. Citizen Petitioner filed I-130 Petitions to sponsor the client's spouse and step-child for a green card application. The case was stalled in administrative processing for almost 5 years with no justification. Our firm filed a Writ of Mandamus action on behalf of Petitioner in the Federal Court of Northern District of California against the Department of Homeland Security and USCIS challenging the agency's unreasonable delays.

Within 60 days after USCIS was duly served with our Mandamus action, the agency issued an audacious and brazen Notice of Intent to Deny ("NOID") approximately 95 pages in length. Our firm immediately took action to respond to the NOID and submitted as part of our case in chief a substantive legal memo and supporting evidence addressing each of USCIS's blatantly implausible allegations.

As a result of our aggressive approach and response to the case, in less than 14 days after USCIS received our NOID responses, the agency approved our client's I-130 Petitions in record time.

Filing a Writ of Mandamus against the government is a complex proceeding but, if carefully considered, the action may bring effective results. Our firm has extensive experience litigating Writ of Mandamus actions in federal courts. If your case has been stalled for too long, a Mandamus action should be considered to move your case forward.

Related success:

We won on Appeal against USCIS for an improper denied Petition for Spouse (June 2021)

Fri, 16 Jul 2021 21:52:02 GMT

In a May 2021 decision rendered by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), Attorney Nguyen D. Luu obtained a rare decision from the BIA reversing a USCIS denial decision of form I-130.

The BIA reversed USCIS’s previous denial decision and remanded the matter. Our client is a U.S. Citizen. He filed an I-130 Petition Alien Relative or his wife. The couple was interviewed by US Consulate Officers abroad in connection with their immigrant visa application. Unfortunately, due to some inconsistencies in the couple's testimonies, US Consulate denied the visa application and their I-130 petition was revoked by USCIS.

In the revocation decision, USCIS claimed that the couple did not have a bona fide marriage. After reviewing the record, Attorney Nguyen Luu, filed form EOIR-29 and appealed the denial decision with the BIA and submitted a supporting legal brief. The appeal briefs clearly established that our clients have met the burden of proof of bona fide marriage and USCIS erred in revoking the visa petition as a matter of law and decision was unfair, lacked common sense, abuse of discretion, arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law.

In its decision, the Board stated: " On this record, including the response to the NOIR, we cannot affirm a finding that the record demonstrates good and sufficient cause for revocation. Thus, we will remand the record for the Director to reevaluate her findings. "

The Board subsequently reversed the USCIS's decision and remand the matter back to USCIS. We are very pleased that we were able to successfully achieve a favorable result for our clients.

Other success story:

EOIR-29 Appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals GRANTED (Sept 2018)

Successfully Obtained H1B Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with FINDREAM

Fri, 16 Jul 2021 21:48:01 GMT

In July 2021, our office successfully obtained H1B status for a client who was previously associated with and defrauded by FINDREAM, LLC (“FINDREAM”).

As an F1 visa international students, our client participated in OPT program and was hired by Findream as an intern. Our client was promised an exciting internship with accommodating remote work arrangement while he was taking professional exams.

Unbeknownst to him, FINDREAM founder Weiyun “Kelly” Huang and the corporations she founded was convicted of conspiracy to commit visa fraud in 2020. Huang used elaborate means to entice students to pay for her services in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of OPT. FINDREAM falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F1 students fell victim to the fraud perpetrated by Huang and her accomplices.

After convictions of the perpetrators were rendered, USCIS has relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.” USCIS has issued Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny, interviews by USCIS Fraud Detection Officers, alleging misrepresentation and fraud, if the student previously held work authorization by association with above companies.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client addressing any potential allegations of misrepresentation and fraud stemming from his association with FINDREAM. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made, thereby overcoming all potential allegations. The firm is very pleased to learn that our client's H1B petition was promptly approved without any RFE, or NOID.

Related Stories:

Finding Your Way Out of FINDREAM and SINOCONTECH FRAUD Allegations

Tue, 04 May 2021 19:55:25 GMT

During 2021, our office represented a client to overcome allegations of misrepresentation and fraud pertaining to the client’s association with FINDREAM, LLC (“FINDREAM”). As an F1 visa holder, a foreign student is permitted to study in the United States. F1 visa holders are eligible to extend the visa by “OPT”, participating in a program that requires students to obtain temporary employment.

Unbeknownst to F1 international students, FINDREAM founder Weiyun “Kelly” Huang and the corporations she founded was convicted of conspiracy to commit visa fraud in 2020. Huang used elaborate means to entice students to pay for her services in exchange for obtaining temporary employment to fulfill the requirements of OPT. FINDREAM falsely promised to provide training services, networking opportunities, and internships perceived to be legitimate employment opportunities. Many F1 students fell victim to the fraud perpetrated by Huang and her accomplices. After convictions of the perpetrators were rendered, USCIS has relentlessly pursued the student victims of fraud as “knowing co-conspirators.”

During our client’s I-485 adjustment of status proceeding, client was subjected to several interrogations by USCIS investigating FINDREAM fraud. Without legal representation, Client was in USCIS custody, faced with possible criminal conviction and an ultimate denial of client’s immigration petition.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu and our legal team took on representation to assist our client to overcome the misrepresentation allegations and navigated client to rebut the willful misrepresentation and fraud allegations from USCIS. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client did not make false representations to procure a benefit under U.S. immigration laws. In the event there was a false statement made, it was not willfully made and not material, thereby overcoming all allegations.

A finding of misrepresentation or fraud has severe immigration consequences. It would render a non-citizen inadmissible for life, possibly a permanent bar, and unable to obtain permanent residency until the inadmissibility is waived at the discretion of USCIS. Our firm is very pleased to learn that USCIS has approved our client's I-485 application and a green card is being produced. The USCIS adjudicating officer even personally called and spoke to attorney Nguyen D. Luu to inform the attorney of her decision. We are pleased to learn that a Notice of Intent to Deny could have been issued but for our office's supplemental legal memo to address the potential inadmissibility, USCIS never issued the NOID.

If you were previously associated with FINDREAM, SINOCONTECH, Integra Technologies, AZTech Technologies, and Tellon Trading, Inc., Arecy, CG Max Design Corporation, XCG Design Corp, Andwil LLC, Wireclass, Codersdata LLC, New Beast, Smoothies Technology Inc., and GlobalITExperts in any manner or capacity, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to immediately advise you and to identify potential problems early in your case and develop a strong case strategy before applying for any immigration benefits.

Latest Success Stories on Findream:

Could an I-601 Waiver be Granted on the Basis of "Public Interest" Alone? Yes, it could. (April 2021)

Sun, 02 May 2021 17:54:50 GMT

In April 2021, our office successfully assisted a client obtaining an approval of his I-601 Waiver Application just 4 months after we filed the application. Our client is a beneficiary of an approved employment-based petition from a major U.S. technology company. Client was seeking to adjust his status from H1B to Permanent Residency. Client previously joined Chinese Communist Party as a student and his membership was terminated over 10 years prior. Our client has no belief or convictions of communism.

Pursuant to Immigration laws and regulations, past membership of a totalitarian party, such as the Communist Party, results in an applicant being inadmissible to the U.S. and ineligible to receive permanent residency. USCIS routinely issues Request for Evidence ("RFE") for an approval of I-601 Waiver application, Notice of Intent to Deny, and Denial Decision. This results in additional delays to clients seeking to adjust their status in the U.S.

At the time of filing the I-485 green card application, our client's Party membership was terminated over 10 years before the date of filing the application. Thus, client was eligible for the Five Year Exception of Past Membership, and should not have needed a submission of I-601 Waiver form. Unfortunately, client's employment based counsel was unable to successfully persuade USCIS to accept his Exception of Past Membership argument. Hence, client was issued an RFE which USCIS rejected client's claim that his membership was terminated 10 years prior, and required that our client to have an approval of his I-601 Waiver.

Our client then sought the assistance of attorney Nguyen D. Luu in exploring his legal options. Client was very concerned because his employment counsel advised him that he was not eligible to file the I-601 Waiver application due to the lack of qualifying relative.

When reading the law correctly, our client could also be eligible for the I-601 Waiver approval if his admission is in the public interest. He does not need a qualifying relative. Our office submitted a substantive legal memo and supporting documents to establish that our client meets the requirements for Relief for Non-meaningful Association, Relief for Non-voluntary Membership, Relief for Past-Membership, and Waiver for Public Interest. We are pleased that we were able to obtain client's I-601 Waiver approval based on the Public Interest argument in just 4 months after filing without any additional RFE.

Conclusion : If you are applying for adjustment of status and you were a member of the Communist Party, you should be aware that USCIS is applying strict enforcement policy on finding of inadmissibility. Further, it appears that USCIS is increasingly refused to accept applicants' claims of exceptions to inadmissibility. Specifically, in this instance, our client submitted a one page declaration based on a template provided by his employment based counsel. USCIS nevertheless still found him inadmissible even though his membership was terminated over 10 years before.

It is highly advisable that you submit a well-drafted persuasive declaration, legal brief, and supporting document to establish your eligibility to the exceptions at the initial filing of your I-485 application. Failure to do so might increase your risk of receiving a Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny, or even a Denial Decision, which might cause delays and complications to your filing.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Obtained Green Card for Past Member of Communist Party Without Filing an I-601 Waiver Application (March 2021)

Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:09:40 GMT

In March 2021, our office successfully assisted a client obtaining her green card without filing an I-601 Waiver Application. Our client is a beneficiary of an approved employment-based petition. Client was seeking to adjust her status from H1B to Permanent Residency. Client previously joined Chinese Communist Party as a student. Our client has no belief or convictions of communism.

Pursuant to Immigration laws and regulations, past membership of a totalitarian party, such as the Communist Party, results in an applicant being inadmissible to the U.S. and ineligible to receive permanent residency. USCIS routinely issues Request for Evidence for an approval of I-601 Waiver application, Notice of Intent to Deny, and Denial Decision. This results in additional delays to clients seeking to adjust their status in the U.S.

At the time of filing the I-485 green card application, our client's Party membership was not terminated at least 5 years before the date of filing the application. Thus, client was not eligible for the Five Year Exception of Past Membership. Regardless, we submitted a substantive legal memo and supporting documents to establish that our client meets the requirements for Relief for Non-meaningful Association and Relief for Non-voluntary Membership.

We are pleased that we were able to persuade USCIS that our client is not inadmissible because she is qualified for the exceptions to overcome the presumption of inadmissibility. Thus, USCIS issued an approval of our client's green card application and did not request our client to first obtaining an I-601 Waiver, or attending an interview.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Success Story: Federal Lawsuit Forced USCIS to Concede and Reverse Course on An Improper Denied I-130 Petition (February 2021)

Tue, 23 Feb 2021 05:32:24 GMT

In a February 2021 approval decision, USCIS granted, expedited, and transferred our client's I-130 Petition to the National Visa Center (“NVC”) for visa processing in record time (less than 6 days from the time of our Noticed Receipt.) Our firm is extremely pleased with the results of our advocacy efforts on behalf of our client, who has been unduly burdened with delays and separation from his family for over 4 years.

In 2017, Petitioner (U.S. Citizen) filed an I-130 spousal petition based on marriage. USCIS approved the I-130 petition and the case was sent for consular processing. However, during the immigrant visa application interview, the visa was denied, claiming the marriage was not valid due to the Petitioner’s inability to produce a valid divorce decree from his previous marriage. The case file was sent back to USCIS for revocation. By June 2020, USCIS finally issued a revocation of the I-130 petition wrongfully alleging that Petitioner’s marriage was null and void.

Previously, litigation in the state court took place where Petitioner’s original divorce matter convened. Petitioner successfully sought the family court’s ruling Nunc Pro Tunc of Petitioner’s divorce termination. Despite the efforts to submit all relevant case law, accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, and supporting documentation on the issue of validity of Petitioner’s divorce decree, USCIS remained patently unresponsive to the record and legal authorities as submitted.

Petitioner was faced with options to refile the I-130 or submit his appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA.”) Both options would entail extremely long processing times with no clear resolution. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu devised an aggressive litigation strategy to immediately put forth the Petitioner’s case in federal court to seek timely adjudication of the matter.

On August 2020, our firm filed a lawsuit on behalf of Petitioner in federal court against the Department of Homeland Security and USCIS challenging USCIS’s wrongful decision based on the agency acting arbitrary and contrary to the laws in adjudicating Petitioner’s case. Shortly after USCIS was duly served with our lawsuit, the opposition (government attorney) immediately contacted our office regarding our cause of action. Through substantial efforts in negotiating a favorable stipulation, USCIS agreed to reverse course and concede on issues of law and fact to support the validity of Petitioner’s marriage pursuant to California law. Conditions put forth required USCIS to expedite the adjudication of our client’s new I-130 petition. As a result of our zealous representation, just less than 6 days after USCIS accepted our I-130 Petition, the case matter was approved and immediately transferred to the National Visa Center for consular processing. Petitioner’s spouse is waiting to be scheduled for the immigrant visa interview, which is expected to be promptly approved.

While the law entrusts the government with vast powers to adjudicate immigration petitions, this power is not without limit. The Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) requires the government to adjudicate cases in a non-arbitrary and non-capricious manner. USCIS is not permitted to apply laws not authorized by regulation or agency practice, as it would constitute an improper ultra vires action. Furthermore, the agency cannot ignore or discount the evidence on the record without a rational basis, as such discourse would be arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.

Conclusion: When an immigration petition is denied, it is imperative to consult with an experienced immigration attorney to consider all avenues of relief, including federal litigation, which may be one of the effective approaches to shorten the processing time. While filing an appeal, form EOIR-29 or I-290B with the BIA or Administrative Appeals Office (“AAO”) is an option, this may lead to much longer processing times, resulting in additional delays to your case.

NOTE : These success stories provide general information only. They are not legal advice for any individual case or situation. Each legal case is different and case examples do not constitute a prediction or guarantee of success or failure in any other case. The sharing or receipt of this information does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Successfully Overturned USCIS's N-565 Denial Decision and Obtained Court Order Correcting Dates of Birth on Naturalization Certificates (December 2020)

Sun, 07 Feb 2021 20:42:50 GMT

In December 2020, the Federal Court of Northern District of California issued an order granting our client's petition to correct her date of birth on Naturalization Certificate.

Our client was a refugee from Vietnam. During her immigration process, her date of birth was recorded incorrectly. As she fled Vietnam without any legal documents, she was unable to provide proof of her true date of birth. In an attempt to correct her important vital record, she initiated various legal proceedings with various state and federal agencies. Over the course of almost 40 years, our client's attempt to correct her date of birth was to no avail.

At one point, o ur client's form N-565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (“USCIS”) to correct her date of birth on the Certificate of Naturalization was also denied.

Resources:

Success Story: I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved (Oct 2020)

Tue, 27 Oct 2020 07:19:33 GMT

In an October 2020 decision, USCIS’s San Francisco Office approved our client’s I-601 Waiver Application and approved client’s I-485 green card application without issuing any Request for Evidence ("RFE").

Our client was the derivative beneficiary of an approved employment-based petition. At the second I-485 Adjustment of Status interview, our client was heavily questioned by the USCIS officer. Despite raising the Non-Meaningful Association and Involuntary Membership exceptions to Past Membership of Communist Party on the advice of her employment based counsel, USCIS still found our client inadmissible and issued a Request for Evidence requesting an I-601 Waiver to waive her inadmissibility.

Client then sought assistance from our office. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu carefully reviewed the client’s case file and factual circumstances regarding Communist Party membership. Our firm determined that the client qualified for the exceptions enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act and worked swiftly to prepare a substantive memorandum of law and extensive supporting documents to establish client’s eligibility, hence client should not have been found inadmissible. Due to the time constraint of the Request for Evidence, we also submitted client's I-601 Waiver application to meet the deadline demanded by the RFE.

Subsequently, USCIS approved our I-601 Waiver and I-485 application without issuing any further RFE. The firm is very pleased that we have obtained favorably resolution for our client within a relatively short time.

Conclusion : If you are applying for adjustment of status and you were a member of the Communist Party, you should be aware that USCIS is applying strict enforcement policy on finding of inadmissibility. Further, it appears that USCIS is increasingly refusing to accept applicants' claims of exceptions to inadmissibility. Specifically, one of our clients submitted a one page declaration based on a template provided by his employment based counsel. USCIS nevertheless still found him inadmissible even though his membership was terminated over 10 years before.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Làm Sao Để Sửa Ngày Sinh Trong Hộ Chiếu Hoa Kỳ và Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch?

Sun, 20 Sep 2020 04:32:36 GMT

Click here for English.

Chúng tôi thường được hỏi việc thay đổi ngày sanh trong Hộ Chiếu Hoa Kỳ hoặc Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch có khả thi hay không. Nhiều thân chủ đã từng nộp đơn N-565 với Sở Di Trú Hoa Kỳ để sửa lại ngày sinh trong Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch, nhưng bị Sở Di Trú từ chối. Tình huống này thường xuyên xảy ra. Tuỳ theo từng hoàn cảnh, luật Hoa Kỳ có cho phép sửa đổi ngày sanh trong Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch.

1.QUÝ VỊ NỘP ĐƠN NHẬP TỊCH HOA KỲ LÚC NÀO?

Điều đầu tiên cần xác định là quý vị nộp đơn nhâp quốc tịch Hoa Kỳ khi nào, trước hay sau ngày 01 tháng 10 năm 1991?

2.TRƯỚC NGÀY 01 THÁNG 10 NĂM 1991?

Nếu nộp đơn nhập tịch trước ngày ngày 01 tháng 10 năm 1991, quý vị có thể quay lại Tòa Án Liên Bang nơi nhập tịch và nộp đơn thỉnh nguyện lên Toà Án Liên Bang để sửa lại ngày sanh.

Một đơn thỉnh nguyện đúng sẽ phải ghi lý do vì sao ngày sanh bị sai và tiến trình khắc phục sự sai sót này. Về hình thức đây sẽ là một đơn dựa theo Quy tắc 60 (b)(6) của Luật Quy Tắc Dân Sự Liên Bang . Nhưng cũng có lúc đơn thỉnh nguỵện sẽ dựa vào án lệ. Như trong trừơng hợp T oà Án Liên Bang Bắc California , trong vụ án Trinh vs. Sở Di Trú Hoa Kỳ, Toà tuyên bố rằng Toà có thẩm quyền để sửa lại ngày sanh trong Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch.

Quan trọng nhất là đơn phải nộp kịp thời, không có giấu hiệu gian lận, có lý do thuyết phục ngày sanh bị sai và bằng chứng tin cậy về ngày sanh mới.

3. SAU NGÀY 01 THÁNG 10 NĂM 1991?

Nếu nộp đơn nhập tịch từ ngày 01 tháng 10 năm 1991 trở đi, quý vị phải nộp Đơn xin thay thế Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch (Mẫu N-565) cho Sở Di Trú Hoa Kỳ (USCIS).

Theo luật Liên Bang , Sở Di Trú chỉ cấp lại Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch nếu Sở Di Trú có sai sót về ngày sanh của quý vị.

Nếu sai sót từ phía quý vị, trước tiên phải xin lệnh từ Tòa Án Tiểu Bang hoặc những giấy tờ khác theo luật định về việc sửa đổi ngày sanh. Sau đó quý vị có thể nộp đơn xin thay Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch với ngày sanh chính xác.

4.KẾT LUẬN

Việc thay đổi ngày sanh trong Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch và hộ chiếu Hoa Kỳ không phải là hiếm. Trên thực tế, đây là một tiến trình phức tạp. Nếu quý vị cần sửa đổi Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch, đặc biệt là Giấy Chứng Nhận do Tòa Án Liên Bang cấp trước ngày 01 tháng 10 năm 1991, quý vị nên kham thảo với luật sư di trú chuyên nghiệp đã từng thành công trong những trường hợp này để loại bỏ những sai sót đáng tiếc làm mất thời gian và công sức của quý vị.

Mọi thắc mắc vui lòng liên lạc Tổ Hợp Luật Sư LUU LAW, P.C 772 N 1st St, San Jose, CA 95112 . www.luulaw.com . Email: staff@luulaw.com . (408) 975-9321 .

How To Correct Your Date of Birth on U.S. Passport or Certificate of Naturalization?

Sat, 19 Sep 2020 23:49:36 GMT

We were often asked if what happen if the date of birth on Certificate of Naturalization or U.S. Passport is not correct and would it be possible to correct it. In many cases, clients filed form N-565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), but USCIS denied the N-565 applications.

Mistakes happen and for many reasons, which may be no fault of their own, dates of births were recorded incorrectly on our clients’ Naturalization Certificates. The good news is U.S. Immigration law does allow for the change of date of birth in some special circumstances. While there are many legal criteria for a successful action, the key questions we must ask are:

1.WHEN DID YOU APPLY FOR NATURALIZATION?

The first thing we need to determine is WHEN you applied to become a U.S. Citizen. Before or after October 1 ^st , 1991?

2.BEFORE OCTOBER 1ST, 1991?

If you applied for naturalization before October 1 ^st , 1991, you would need to return to the Federal District Court or in some cases, state courts where you were naturalized and file a petition with the court to amend your date of birth.

A proper petition would need to state the reasons why the date was incorrect and document any attempt have been made to correct the mistake. In general, this would be a motion based on Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Procedure or the state court's local rules of procedures . However, in some jurisdictions, the motion would also be based on case precedent s . For instance, in Northern District of California , the Court ruled that it has subject matter jurisdiction to amend naturalization certificate issued before October 1, 1991.

It is important to note that the petition has to be filed as soon as practically possible. The petitioner must show that there is little or no evidence that the petitioner acted fraudulently or in bad faith either when he or she later sought to amend the certificate of naturalization. And, there is reliable evidence supporting the birth date that the petitioner now alleges is correct.

3.AFTER OCTOBER 1ST, 1991?

If you applied for naturalization after October 1 ^st , 1991, you have to file form N-565 Application for Replacement Naturalization Document with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS.)

Federal regulations provide that USCIS can only issue new certificate with new date of birth if USCIS makes a mistake.

In some cases, you might be able to replace your Certificate of Citizenship by first obtaining certain state court orders, or other corrected vital documents, and file form N-565 with USCIS.

4.CONCLUSION

It is not uncommon to correct your date of birth on the Certificate of Naturalization and U.S. Passport. In practice, it is a complex process. If you need to correct your Certificate of Naturalization, especially when your certificate was issued by the Federal District Court before October 1 ^st , 1991, you should consult with an experienced immigration attorney, who had successes in this type of petition in order to avoid unnecessary mistakes.

Resources:

Successfully Corrected Dates of Birth on Naturalization Certificates in Northern District Court of California (July 2020)

How To Correct Your Date of Birth on U.S. Passport or Certificate of Naturalization?

Successfully Correct Dates of Birth on Naturalization Certificates in New Jersey Federal District Court (December 2021)

Successfully Overturned USCIS's N-565 Denial Decision and Obtained Court Order Correcting Dates of Birth on Naturalization Certificates (December 2020)

Obtained Immigrant Visa for Past Member of Vietnam Communist Party Without Filing I-601 Waiver (July 2020)

Wed, 22 Jul 2020 04:36:10 GMT

In July 2020, our office successfully assisted a client obtain an immigrant visa without filing of an I-601 Waiver Application. As the beneficiary of an approved family-based petition based on marriage, client was seeking an immigrant visa. Client previously joined Vietnam Communist Party as demanded by her employer, a state-owned enterprise. Our client has no belief or convictions of communism.

Pursuant to Immigration laws and regulations, past membership of a totalitarian party, such as the Communist Party, results in an applicant being inadmissible to the U.S. and ineligible to receive permanent residency. US Consulates routinely make visa denials and request that the applicant obtain an I-601 Waiver approval with USCIS, in order to determine eligibility for issuance of the immigrant visa. This denial results in additional delays to clients seeking to reunify with their loved ones in the United States.

We are pleased that we were able to persuade US Consular Officer that our client is not inadmissible because she is qualified for the exceptions enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act to overcome the presumption of inadmissibility. Therefore, Consular Officer issued a visa approval and did not request our client to first obtaining an I-601 Waiver.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Successfully Corrected Dates of Birth on Naturalization Certificates in Northern District Court of California (July 2020)

Wed, 22 Jul 2020 03:31:46 GMT

We recently celebrated some big wins in federal district court. As the REAL ID Act goes into effect, more people encounter problems with the inconsistency of their date of birth in the naturalization certificate and their birth certificates. Our firm is pleased to successfully petition the federal court to restore our clients' corrected vital information.

Our clients filed form N-565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (“USCIS”) to correct their dates of birth on the Certificate of Naturalization. USCIS denied their N-565 applications due to lack of jurisdiction. Clients then retained our office.

Correcting dates of birth on Naturalization Certificates is a challenging and difficult process for many, especially clients that arrived to the U.S. as refugees or asylees seeking humanitarian protections. For many reasons, which may be no fault of their own, dates of births were recorded incorrectly on clients’ Naturalization Certificates.

Pursuant to the current Federal Regulations, USCIS is only permitted to change the date of birth on the Naturalization Certificate if USCIS committed a clerical error in preparing the certificate. See 8 CFR 338.5(a) . If it was not rendered USCIS’s error, the government’s position was to deny any and all requests for obtaining a replacement. Subsequent forms of relief after a denial may include submission of an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Office (“AAO”), or to seek various civil remedies through State Court. Most of these efforts result in very little success to achieving a date of birth correction on Naturalization Certificates.

The implications of having an incorrect date of birth on one’s Naturalization Certificate can result in severe loss of benefits and raises eligibility determinations for clients seeking a REAL ID driver's license. Fortunately for clients naturalized by the federal district court, the federal court retains sole authority to amend naturalization orders. We are very pleased that we were able to successfully obtained favorable court orders correcting clients' date of birth.

Clients faced with this dilemma should consult with an experienced Immigration attorney to review the facts of the case and to determine whether the case merits a viable action in federal court to correct this important vital biographical data.

Resources:

Application for Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status GRANTED – Attorney Successfully REVERSED Previous Denial of I-485 green card application - Client Received Green Card (May 2020)

Tue, 19 May 2020 06:29:20 GMT

In a May 2020 decision, our firm received USCIS’s approval decision of client’s I-485 Application, and successfully reversed a USCIS’s previous denial decision.

Our client was a beneficiary of an I-130 petition filed by the spouse. Client was represented by previous counsel in which the I-485 Adjustment of Status application was submitted concurrently with the I-130 petition. After the initial interview, USCIS denied client’s I-130 Petition and I-485 Adjustment of Status application claiming the marriage was not bona fide.

Our office was immediately consulted to assist with the client’s denial to obtain a green card. Attorney Nguyen D. Luu put forth a strategic plan of action to overcome the denial and successfully prepared the client for the subsequent Immigration interviews. A solid case was put forth supported by the submission of credible evidence. Client’s green card application was approved within 90 days after Attorney Nguyen D. Luu accompanied client to the interview.

Our firm's specialty has always been reversing previous wrongful denial decision and we are extremely pleased that we were be able to successfully assist our client to obtain Permanent Residence status after a wrongful denial.

I-601 Waiver Granted for Daughter of LPR Parents in Record Time (May 2020)

Tue, 19 May 2020 06:18:43 GMT

In a May 2020 decision, USCIS Service Center in Lincoln Nebraska approved an I-601 Application our office filed on November 2019, approximately five months after submission.

Client is a beneficiary of an immigration petition filed by her U.S. citizen father. Client’s parents are Legal Permanent Residents (“LPR.”) After years of waiting for the visa priority to become current, client was finally interviewed by U.S. Consulate for the immigrant visa only to be found inadmissible for misrepresentation due to her previous marriage with a US Citizen Spouse. Unfortunately, client’s inadmissibility resulted due to client’s failure of responding to a previous Notice of Intent to Revoke from USCIS. Had the client been properly advised or represented by an experienced immigration attorney, client would have known to take proper precautions that would not have deemed her inadmissible.

After our firm was hired to assist the client, Attorney Nguyen D. Luu vigorously prepared the case to overcome inadmissibility, by presenting a strong case fully supported by duly executed affidavits, documentary evidence, and persuasive legal briefs to establish extreme hardship.

USCIS approved the case within just 5 short months. The client did not face any further delay by having proper legal representation, and USCIS did not issue any Request for Evidence. Client is currently in the process of finally receiving the immigrant visa to reunite with family members in the US after several years of delays.

I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved within 7 weeks (March 2020)

Tue, 19 May 2020 05:54:29 GMT

In a February 2020 decision, USCIS’s Santa Ana Office approved our client’s I-601 Waiver Application and approved client’s I-485 green card application in record time, approximately 7 weeks after the firm submitted the I-601 Waiver application.

Our client is the beneficiary of an approved family-based petition. At the I-485 Adjustment of Status interview, our client was found inadmissible because it was claimed that client was previously a member of the Chinese Communist Party. USCIS issued a Request for Evidence requesting an I-601Waiver to waive his inadmissibility.

Our firm worked aggressively to expedite our filing directly to the USCIS Section Chief to render a decision. Only seven weeks after our submission, USCIS approved our I-601 Waiver and a subsequent I-485 approval was received.

The firm is very pleased that we have obtained favorably resolution for our client within a relatively short time.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

Successfully Defend California Penal Code 1473.7’s Effectiveness to Eliminate Immigration Consequences for Criminal Convictions and Terminated Client’s Deportation Proceeding (February 2020)

Tue, 19 May 2020 05:49:06 GMT

In a February 2020 decision, our firm successfully prevailed on our Motion to Terminate Deportation Proceeding in Immigration Court despite the Department of Homeland Security’s opposition.

Our client was placed in removal proceedings for multiple misdemeanor and felony convictions involving grand theft in violation of California Penal Code § 484/487(a). Because these convictions are considered Crimes of Moral Turpitude, Immigration law rendered the client deportable. Our office represented the client to vacate the criminal convictions based on violations of our client’s constitutional rights and due process under the law, pursuant to California Penal Code §1473.7.

Our attorneys then moved the Immigration Court to terminate the removal proceedings because our client no longer had the criminal convictions that rendered the client deportable. The Department of Homeland Security vehemently opposed our Motion and submitted a considerably lengthy brief citing Matter of Thomas and Thompson, 27 I&N Dec at p. 683. as its principal authority, wrongfully asserting that CA Penal Code §1473.7 did not effectively eliminate immigration consequences of criminal convictions, rendering the client deportable.

Our firm worked aggressively to advance further legal arguments in our reply brief to the Immigration Court and successfully obtained the Court’s approval, granting our request to terminate removal proceedings over the government’s opposition. California Penal Code §1473.7 remains an effective vacatur to eliminate immigration consequences in cases where the immigrants’ constitutional rights were violated.

The firm is very pleased to successfully defend CA Penal Code §1473.7 validity in Immigration Court with respect to immigration law. The firm strongly believes that when a person’s constitutional rights were violated during a criminal proceeding, the vacated conviction should not be considered unfavorable against the immigrant.

Successfully Obtained Marriage Based Green Card for Client Even When the Couple Was No Longer Living Together and the Marriage Might Not Be Viable at the Time of the Interview (January 2020)

Thu, 05 Mar 2020 08:10:04 GMT

In a January 2020 decision, USCIS San Jose Field Office approved our client I-130 Petition for Spouse of US Citizen and I-485 Application for Adjustment of Status.

Client is a beneficiary of an immigration petition filed by her US Citizen husband. Shortly before their Adjustment of Status interview, client and her husband become separated and living apart. Client’s marriage might not be viable at the time of the Adjustment of Status interview.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu worked closely with client and her husband to prepare supporting letters and documentary evidence to establish that client's marriage was bona fide at the inception of their marriage.

In our memorandum of law presented to the Adjudicating Officer at the interview, Attorney Nguyen cited relevant legal authorities and successfully argued that a finding of bona fide marriage is predicated on the couple’s intention to establish a life together at the time the marriage was entered.

Therefore, even if the couple is living in separate apartments, or their marriage is nonviable at the time of the adjustment of status interview, it does not mean their marriage was not bona fide.

Despite the unusual circumstances, USCIS recognized the marriage as bona fide and approved the petitions. Three weeks after the interview, Client received her green card. The firm is extremely pleased that USCIS rendered a favorable decision.

When Faced with a USCIS Denial Concerning an Alleged Misrepresentation or Fraud, We Aggressively Fight to Reverse the Finding without filing I-290B form (December 2019)

Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:58:48 GMT

During September 2019, a client was faced with a denial of her green card application and would have been subjected to removal proceedings. Client was married to a US Citizen and received a Request for Evidence pertaining to her I-485 Adjustment of Status application. USCIS claimed that client was inadmissible due to willful misrepresentation and fraud on her Non-Immigrant Visa application and would be required to submit her I-601 Waiver Request. Client was previously represented by another attorney. Client faced a time sensitive deadline and needed immediate relief to safeguard her immigration status in the United States and came to Luu Law.

USCIS erroneously determined that the client’s US Address history was not consistent in the records submitted by her and her intended US destination on her Non-Immigrant Visa application was willfully inconsistent. Client was neither afforded an opportunity to address the alleged inconsistencies nor was this issue brought up during her interview. Our team took on representation to assist the client to overcome the misrepresentation allegations and successfully navigated the client to rebut the willful misrepresentation and fraud findings of USCIS. We contacted the Section Chief directly without filing Motion to Reopen I-290B form. The evidence presented sufficiently supported a finding that the client was not excludable on the true facts. Under the applicable law, using the FAM balancing test, client’s alleged misrepresentations alone, balanced against the additional facts in the case, deemed that even if there was a misrepresentation, it was not controlling to a final decision of her eligibility to receive a visa.

December 2019: USCIS reversed its finding of inadmissibility, withdrew its request for I-601 Waiver and granted a favorable decision. Luu Law expects that the client’s green card will be processed expeditiously now that the inadmissibility issue has been rendered moot.

Related Stories:

I-751 Waiver Petition GRANTED – Attorney Successfully REVERSED Previous Denial (October 2019)

Wed, 16 Oct 2019 15:38:12 GMT

In an October 2019 decision, Attorney successfully persuaded USCIS to reverse its previous denial and approved client’s I-751 Waiver Petition based on Good Faith Marriage but Ended in Divorce.

Our client had a bona fide marriage. She filed a joint I-751 petition with her husband without the assistance of counsel in 2013. The couple was subsequently interviewed by USCIS in 2015. While the petition is pending for adjudication, unfortunately client's marriage fell apart. Client filed for divorced and hired an attorney to assist her with the refiling of a new I-751 Waiver Petition based on good faith marriage.

Subsequently in 2017, USCIS issued a lengthy Notice of Denial and Termination of Status denying client’s I-751 petition. USCIS found client’s testimony was not credible and did not meet the burden of proof.

In 2018, client then refiled her I-751 petition without assistance of counsel. Our office was retained in 2019 to assist client with preparing a supplemental memorandum of law, supporting evidence, and preparing client for the interview. Just 3 months after we submitted our package, client appeared for an interview at USCIS San Jose Field Office and her I-751 Waiver Petition was approved. The firm is very pleased that we were able to assist client to overturn the I-751 denial and obtained successful result for client after many years of waiting.

Recent Success:

Obtained Post Conviction Relief and Terminated Deportation Proceeding pursuant to Petty Offense Exception - Client received Green Card back (September 2019)

Fri, 06 Sep 2019 00:25:30 GMT

In a September 2019 decision, San Francisco Immigration Court granted our client’s Motion to Terminate Removal Proceeding pursuant to Petty Offense Exception. The government did not even oppose our motion. Our client received his green card back during the hearing.

Our client is a permanent resident. Client was convicted California Penal Code, section 487, subdivision (a) (felony grand theft) and Penal Code, section 484-666, petty theft with a prior offense, a misdemeanor. These two convictions are both crimes involving moral turpitude (CIMT) rendering the client deportable and inadmissible.

On his way back to the U.S. after a short trip abroad to visit family, client was placed in deportation proceeding and was charged with a ground of inadmissibility for a crime of moral turpitude.

Our office approached the District Attorney Office and filed a motion in the criminal court pursuant to Pen. Code, §§ 1016.5 and 1473.7 to vacate the client’s felony grand theft conviction due to substantial and procedural defect of client’s criminal proceeding. Client’s felony conviction was subsequently vacated.

Since client only has one CIMT misdemeanor conviction, client is eligible for Petty Offense

Exception. A noncitizen is automatically not inadmissible under the Petty Offense Exception if (1) they have committed only one CIMT; (2) the offense has a maximum potential sentence of a year or less; and (c) a sentence of six months or less was actually imposed.

Our office filed a Motion to Terminate Removal Proceeding with the Immigration Court on the basis that client is not removable pursuant to Petty Offense Exception. The government did not oppose our motion.

The Immigration Judge granted our motion to terminate the removal proceeding and client received his green card back during the hearing.

Successfully Obtained Post Conviction Relief and U.S. Citizenship for Client with Aggravated Felony Convictions

Sun, 18 Aug 2019 08:29:53 GMT

In an August 2019 decision, USCIS approved our client’s naturalization petition.

Our client had multiple felony convictions: felony possession for sale of a controlled substance (HS 11378); felony credit card theft (Penal Code 484e); felony burglary (Penal Code 459); and felony forgery (Penal Code 475(a).)

Due to client’s convictions, client was not only deportable, inadmissible, but also ineligible for naturalization. Under the Trump’s administration current policy, client faced great risk of being placed in deportation proceeding at Immigration Court.

Our attorneys immediately conducted thorough review of client’s court records and previous defense counsel’s files. We determined that client’s criminal proceedings contained substantial and procedural defects that violated client’s constitutional rights.

Our office contacted the District Attorney Office and filed a Motion to Vacate along with supporting evidence to establish that client’s constitutional rights were violated. The District Attorney did not object to our motion and the court granted our motion. All of client’s convictions were vacated and all charges were dismissed.

Subsequently, our attorneys accompanied client to the naturalization interview. We provided USCIS with a legal memo explaining how the vacated convictions have no immigration consequences. Generally, if a conviction is vacated for reasons unrelated to the merits of the underlying criminal proceedings, such as for equitable, rehabilitation, or immigration hardship reasons, a vacated conviction remains a conviction for immigration purposes. But because our client’s convictions were vacated due to substantial procedural defects in the underlying criminal proceeding, it eliminates all immigration consequences.

USCIS agreed with our position and approved our client’s petition for naturalization less than 60 days after the interview.

Successfully Obtained Post Conviction Relief and Defended Client Against Deportation Proceeding for Aggravated Felony Conviction

Fri, 16 Aug 2019 09:15:45 GMT

In an August 2019 decision, San Francisco Immigration Court granted our client’s Motion to Terminate Removal Proceeding despite the government’s opposition. Our client is to receive the green card back.

Our client is a permanent resident. Client was convicted for violations of Welfare and Institutions Code 10980(c)(2) (welfare fraud), a felony, and P.C. 118 (perjury), a felony. Client was ordered to pay restitution in an amount over $10,000.

On the way back to the U.S. after a short trip abroad to visit family, client was placed in deportation proceeding and was charged with a ground of inadmissibility for a crime of moral turpitude.

Since the welfare fraud is an aggravated felony for a crime of fraud or deceit with a loss to the victim of more than $10,000, client is not eligible for immigration reliefs such as Cancelation of Removal and Inadmissibility Waiver.

Subsequently, together with client’s criminal counsel, our office successfully obtained Post Conviction Relief for client. Client’s criminal convictions were vacated.

Our office filed a Motion to Terminate Removal Proceeding with the Immigration Court on the basis that client’s conviction was vacated due to substantial defect of the underlying criminal proceeding. Thus, client was no longer removable. The government filed an opposition to our motion.

Ultimately, the Court sided with our client and granted our motion to terminate the removal proceeding. Client is in the process to receive the green card back.

USCIS Request for an I-601 Waiver of Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Withdrawn Without Filing I-290B form- Client Received Green Card

Sun, 30 Jun 2019 01:40:20 GMT

In a June 2019 decision, USCIS’s San Francisco Field Office withdrew its request for an I-601 Waiver Application and approved client’s I-485 green card application just approximately 2 weeks after the attorney submitted the request.

Our client is the derivative beneficiary of an approved employment-based petition. At the I-485 Adjustment of Status interview, our client was found inadmissible because she was previously a member of the Chinese Communist Party. USCIS issued a Request for Evidence requesting an I-601 Waiver to waive her inadmissibility.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu reviewed our client’s case file and the factual circumstances when she joined the Communist Party. Attorney Nguyen Luu determined that our client is qualified for the exceptions enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Our office prepared a substantive memorandum of law and extensive supporting documents to establish that our client is qualified for the exceptions, hence she should have not been found inadmissible. We submitted a request to USCIS to reconsider its position and withdraw its Request for Evidence of the I-601 Waiver via a direct communication with the Section Chief. We did not file a Motion to Reopen, form I-290B.

Only 15 days after our submission of the request, USCIS withdrew its Request for Evidence of the I-601 Waiver. Our client received an online notice that her I-485 application was approved. She is now currently awaiting the green card in the mail.

See our successes:

Policy Alert:

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party (October 2nd, 2020)

I-601 Waiver Granted for Daughter of LPR Parents

Fri, 10 May 2019 01:40:21 GMT

In a May 2019 decision, USCIS Service Center in Lincoln Nebraska approved an I-601 Application our office filed on July 2018.

Client is a beneficiary of an immigration petition filed by her U.S. citizen sister. Her parents are Legal Permanent Residence (“LPR.”) After 12 years of waiting for her visa priority to become current, she was interviewed by U.S. Consulate for her immigrant visa.

After the interview, she was found inadmissible for misrepresentation due to her previous marriage with a US Citizen spouse over 10 years before. Unfortunately, this happened because her marriage ended in a divorce and the couple relied on the assistance of a document preparer who did not prepare them properly for the Consular interview.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu works closely with the client and her family to prepare supporting letters, documentary evidence, and a persuasive legal memorandum to establish that client’s LPR parents would suffer extreme hardship if they have to relocate to their home country.

The I-601 application was well documented and USCIS approved it within just 10 months. Client is in the process of receiving her immigrant visa to reunite with her family in the US.

Divorce-Based I-751 Waiver Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence GRANTED IN 3 MONTHS

Sat, 23 Mar 2019 01:40:24 GMT

In a March 2019 decision, USCIS approved client’s I-751 Waiver within 3 months after attorney submitted a request to convert client’s I-751 Joint Petition to a Waiver Petition without issuing a Request for Evidence or requiring our client to appear at an interview.

Our client had a bona fide marriage. Client originally filed a joint petition with her husband. The parties were interviewed jointly, then separately by USCIS. USCIS Officer stated during the interview that they did not believe the marriage was real and alleged marriage fraud. However, USCIS refused to render a decision and client’s case was then pending for over 2 years. Client hired a document preparer to submit additional documentation, but the case continued to be pending for almost another year. Unfortunately, the marriage fell apart due to reasons of infidelity and gambling problem. The parties finally separated and filed for divorce. After the divorce is finalized, client hired our office to handle the petition.

Our office submitted a request to USCIS to treat the pending joint petition as a waiver petition pursuant to USCIS Policy Memorandum.

In our petition, we provided a legal brief, substantial evidence, and credible witness statements to address the false allegations of marriage fraud in client’s previous interview. Subsequently, we are pleased to learn that we had successfully persuaded USCIS in our client’s favor. Client received her green card only 3 months after we submitted our waiver request.

Recent Successes:

Motion to Reopen a Denial Decision GRANTED without filing I-290B form

Sat, 02 Feb 2019 08:08:02 GMT

In late 2018, a client came to our office seeking professional help with the denial of his I-130 Petition and I-485 Application to Adjust Status for his wife.

Client and his wife married in their home country one year before. Right after their wedding, the couple traveled to the U.S. for their honeymoon. Client subsequently filed a petition for his wife to adjust her status from a B1/B2 tourist visa to a Permanent Resident. They relied on the assistance of a document preparer to submit their petition.

After waiting for one year, an interview was scheduled, but client did not attend the interview because he did not receive the interview notice. With his document preparer’s limited assistance, his I-130 and I-485 Petitions were subsequently denied.

When client retained our office, we immediately filed a Motion to Reopen Sua Sponte with USCIS via a dedicated channel for immigration attorneys WITHOUT filing form I-290B Motion to Reopen and paying the $675 filing fee.

After an in-person meeting with a USCIS Supervisor, we received an approval of our Motion to Reopen Sua Sponte just 6 weeks after filing our motion. USCIS withdrew its previous denial decision, reopened the I-130 and I-485 petitions, and scheduled the new interview just within a few weeks.

We assisted the clients with the preparation of their interview. We conducted mock interviews and prepared witness statements and supporting documents to prove bona fide marriage as the document preparer did not submit any documentation.

During the interview, we were able to convince the USCIS officer the merits of our clients’ marriage and the petition was approved immediately at the interview. Client received their approval notice just within 10 days after the interview in February 2019.

EOIR-29 Appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals GRANTED

Fri, 21 Sep 2018 01:40:30 GMT

In a September 2018 decision rendered by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), Attorney Nguyen D. Luu obtained a rare decision from the BIA reversing a USCIS denial decision of form I-130.

The BIA reversed USCIS’s previous denial decision and remanded the matter. The client is a U.S. Citizen. He filed an I-130 Petition Alien Relative and I-485 Adjustment of Status for his Wife. The couple was interviewed by USCIS in connection with their application for an excruciating 6 hours.

After the interview, the interviewing Officer issued a denial decision stating that the couple’s testimony was not credible. After reviewing the record, Attorney Nguyen Luu, appealed the denial decision with the BIA and submitted a supporting legal brief.

The appeal briefs clearly established that the clients have met the burden of proof of bona fide marriage and USCIS erred in denying the visa petition as a matter of law and decision was unfair, lacked common sense, abuse of discretion, arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law.

Attorney Nguyen Luu presented substantial evidence and extensive supporting documents showing that the USCIS interview officer abused her discretion in adjudicating the client’s petition. For instance, during the interview, the Officer clearly imposed her opinion about what a "real' marriage is or should be or how parties in such a marriage should behave. Then in her decision letter, the Officer:

(1) misstated the couple’s testimonies on many occasions;

(2) arbitrarily selected certain evidence but failed to take into account other positive evidence;

(3) failed to properly document the facts of the case;

(4) completely invented a set of statements of fact made by the parties during a purported interview, when in fact, the record reflects that there was no such interview took place;

(5) misstated the Receipt number of the Petitioner I-130 on the denial letter;

(6) as one of her most outrageous and strangest conduct, the Officer advised the client that he had no right to appeal her denial decision of his I-130 petition in an attempt to circumvent the client from having her decision's reviewed by the BIA.

The Board subsequently reversed the Officer’s decision and remand the matter back to USCIS.

I-290B Motion to Reopen GRANTED – Attorney Successfully Argued Client Was Not Inadmissible for Misrepresentation and Fraud

Thu, 16 Aug 2018 01:29:16 GMT

During early 2018, a client came to our office seeking professional help with the denial of her I-601 Waiver of Fraud and Misrepresentation and form I-485 Application to Adjust Status. She was not previously represented by an attorney and this was her first attempt to obtain legal assistance for her case.

Client first traveled to the U.S. pursuant to a B1/B2 tourist visa. She regrettably took advice from a document preparer and marked on the visa application form that she was still married to her ex-husband, even though she was divorced many years prior.

On her second trip to the U.S., she met her current husband at church, the church in which they eventually got married. She relied on the assistance of a document preparer and filed the I-130 Petition for Alien Relative and the I-485 Application for Adjustment of Status. The document preparer failed to identify the misrepresentation issues on the client’s previous visa application. Consequently, during the adjustment of status interview, USCIS found that she was inadmissible to due fraud and misrepresentation on her visa application pertaining to her marital status. USCIS issued a Request for Evidence requiring the client to obtain a I-601 Waiver application.

Client again relied on the assistance of the document preparer who submitted a deficient I-601 Waiver application without any credible evidence to support her petition. Naturally, the I-601 application along with the I-485 was denied.

After a careful review of the client’s case matter at Luu Law, Attorney Nguyen D. Luu advised the client regarding her options for her I-601 Application and the I-290B Motion to Reopen. The facts of the case at hand warranted the immediate filing of the I-290B Motion to Reopen with the local USCIS. The case required a detailed and thorough memorandum of law submitted along with credible evidence to establish that the client’s misrepresentation of her marital status was not material and the misrepresentation did not terminate a line of inquiry relevant to her eligibility. We cited appropriate authority and established that the client had other ties to her home country that merited a favorable consideration, and the misrepresentation should have not been considered to be material. We further established that even if it was found to be a material representation, the client refuted the presumption that she was statutorily disqualified. After a few months, our Motion to Reopen approved and the client was in the process of receiving her green card. USCIS rendered a favorable decision based on the case matter submitted by Luu Law, PC.

April 2019 Update: Client has received her green card and has closed this extraordinary difficult chapter of her life with the assistance of Attorney Nguyen Luu. Luu Law, PC. is pleased with results of the client’s case.

Please see below for our other similar results:

Application for Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status GRANTED – Attorney Successfully REVERSED Previous Denial of I-485 green card application - Client Received Green Card

Wed, 08 Aug 2018 01:40:23 GMT

In an August 2018 decision, Attorney received USCIS’s approval decision of client’s I-485 Application, and successfully reversed a USCIS’s previous denial decision.

Our client was a beneficiary of a K1 Fiancée visa petition from her spouse. When she arrived in the U.S., she married her husband and filed form I-485 Adjustment of Status application. After the couple’s interview, USCIS denied client’s I-485 Adjustment of Status application claiming the marriage was not bona fide.

Client hired our office to explore her options. After Attorney Nguyen Luu reviewed client’s record, denial decisions, and previously submitted supporting documents, Attorney Nguyen recommended a refile of the adjustment of status application.

Our office prepared an application with substantial supporting documents and witnesses’ statements. Attorney Nguyen conducted extensive mock interviews with client to prepare for the interview at USCIS and accompanied client to the interview. During the interview, the USCIS Officer again questioned the couple’s marriage, but ultimately approved the application. Client received her green card in August 2018.

Divorce-Based I-751 Waiver Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence Waiver GRANTED

Sun, 01 Jul 2018 07:00:00 GMT

In a July 2018 decision, USCIS approved client’s I-751 Waiver within 5 months of filing without issuing a Request for Evidence or requiring client to appear at an interview.

Our client had a bona fide marriage. However, her ex-spouse was controlling and client did not have access to the family’s finances. During a bitter divorce proceeding, the ex-spouse falsely accused her as engaging in immigration marriage fraud. Client’s ex-spouse went so far as sending letters and spoke to a USCIS officer in person in an attempt to derail client's immigration case.

In our petition, we were able to provide evidence and credible witness statements to address false allegations. Subsequently, we are pleased to learn that USCIS believed our client and issued her permanent green card.

Recent Successes:

I-601 Waiver Granted For Criminal Conviction

Thu, 08 Mar 2018 02:29:14 GMT

On a March 2018 decision, USCIS Service Center in Lincoln Nebraska approved an I-601 Application waiving the client’s criminal conviction.

Client was a Norwegian citizen and applied for an immigrant visa as a derivative beneficiary. After the interview, he was found inadmissible by the US Consulate in Stockholm for committing a crime of moral turpitude pursuant to section 212(a))(2)A(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The unfortunate incident which stemmed the conviction happened over 18 years ago and it was one isolated incident.

After consulting with the client, Attorney Nguyen D. Luu, reviewed the client’s family and employment history and determined that client has a strong likelihood to win approval for I-601 Waiver of Inadmissibility.

Attorney Nguyen D. Luu works closely with the client and his family to prepare witnesses’ supporting letters, documentary evidence, and a persuasive legal memorandum to establish that client met the statutory requirements and deserved a favorable exercise of discretion from USCIS.

The I-601 application was well documented and USCIS approved the application without issuing any request for further evidence. US Consulate has since issued the client’s immigrant visa to reunite with his family in the US.

I-751 Waiver Petition GRANTED – Attorney Successfully REVERSED Previous Denial - Deportation Proceeding TERMINATED

Sat, 02 Dec 2017 08:00:00 GMT

In a December 2017 decision, Attorney received USCIS approval decision of client’s I-751 Waiver Petition, and successfully reversed an USCIS’s previous denial decision.

Our client had a bona fide marriage. She filed a joint I-751 petition with her husband without the assistance of counsel in 2010. The couple was subsequently interviewed by USCIS in 2011. During the interview, USCIS separated the couple and questioned them individually. Subsequently, in just two months later, USCIS issued a lengthy 10 pages denial letter detailing all inconsistencies in the couple’s testimonies and alleged marriage fraud.

Then, just in the next two months, USCIS placed our client in removal proceeding with San Francisco Immigration Court. Client hired an attorney to represent her in the removal proceeding.

After 4 years of waiting and multiple exhausting court days with Immigration Court with no significant results, client’s marriage unfortunately fell apart. Client filed for divorce, then came to our office in 2015 seeking to substitute counsel.

Our office then filed an I-751 waiver petition based on good faith marriage. We also filed a Motion to Administratively Close the proceeding with Immigration Court and appeared with client at her Master Calendar hearing. The Immigration Judge granted our motion and client no longer needed to appear in court.

As expected, USCIS issued a Request for Further Evidence in 2015, which our office assisted client preparing an extensive response. In 2017, attorney appeared at the interview with client at San Francisco USCIS Field Office. Within 4 weeks after the interview, client received the approval of her I-751 and her 10-year green card.

Attorney immediately filed a Motion to Terminate with Immigration Court and it was immediately granted. The firm is very pleased that we were able to assist client to overturn a denial with serious wrongful allegation of marriage fraud. We were also very excited to assist client to obtaining her citizenship.

Recent Successes:

I-751 Battered Spouse Waiver Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence Waiver GRANTED

Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:00:00 GMT

In an August 2016 decision, USCIS approved form I-751 Waiver based on abuse or battering by the U.S. Citizen Spouse. The approval came without a Request for Evidence or a request for an interview.

Our client had a bona fide marriage. She was also a victim of domestic violence and deportation threats by her U.S. spouse. Her US spouse was controlling and physically abusive toward client. Our firm assisted client to obtain a restraining order against her abusive spouse. We also gathered extensive evidence to document the abuse. Her I-751 Petition was approved within one year. Client received her permanent resident card in August 2016.

Recent Successes:

I-290B Appeal To AAO on an I-601 Waiver GRANTED

Thu, 01 May 2014 07:00:00 GMT

In a May 2014 decision rendered by the Administrative Appeal Office (AAO), Attorney Nguyen D. Luu obtained a Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility based on grounds of extreme hardship. The AAO withdrew its previous denial decision and granted the matter on appeal.

The client was denied adjustment of status and was found inadmissible on grounds of immigration fraud and misrepresentation. Prior to retaining attorney Nguyen Luu, the client did not have adequate legal representation and prior counsel failed to meet the legal burden by presenting sufficient evidence. Subsequently, the client filed multiple I-601 Waivers and were denied by USCIS due to lack of evidence establishing extreme hardship.

After obtaining legal representation from attorney Nguyen Luu, the firm was able to assist the client to obtain copies of the client’s immigration record. Thereafter, the legal team, led by Attorney Nguyen Luu, appealed the denial decision and presented substantial evidence and extensive supporting documents comprising of witnesses’ affidavits, State Departments reports on the client’s home country, medical evaluation, and various other evidence including a supporting legal brief.

Waiver decisions are discretionary and extremely rare to win during the appeal’s proceeding. Generally, AAO does not overturn discretionary decisions on I-601 waivers. However, on the I-290B Motion to Re-Open filed by the firm, the AAO found that counsel presented sufficient evidence to establish extreme hardship and reversed its previous denial. The firm is extremely pleased that AAO rendered a favorable decision in granting the waiver.

Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility cases can be difficult to establish and the clients should seek adequate legal resource to understand the process involved. Clients should carefully research their options for legal representation. Difficult cases should be thoroughly analyzed and reviewed by experienced immigration attorneys to avoid removal or deportation.

Subsequently on a March 2016 decision, after months of follow-ups, USCIS has finally admitted that its denial decision on clients’ I-601 application was made in error. Client received her green card.

luu_law

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced USCIS to Reverse a Wrongful H-1B Denial for Client That Was Previously Associated with Dream Chase Technology LLC (December 2025)

Successfully Reversed Immigrant Visa Denial Without Filing I-601 Waiver for Former Member of Communist Party (November 2025)

Related Success Stories:

N-336 and N-400 Naturalization Approved After Previous Denial Based On Former F-1 Student’s Past Enrollment With Neo-America Language School and Walter Jay MD Institute. (September 2025)

Related Success Stories:

Successfully Obtained INA 212(d)(3) Non-Immigration Visa Waiver and Request to Expedite for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC. (January 2025)

Related Success Stories:

Success Story: I-601 Waiver for Association with Findream Approved in 3 Weeks (December 2024)

Related Success Stories:

Naturalization Approved on Appeal (N-336) Despite Omission of Children on Diversity Visa Application (July 2023)

Naturalization Approved Despite Prior Federal Conviction for Structuring Transactions 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)(3)

September 2025, officially becoming an American citizen.

Successfully Assisted Client with Removing 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Inadmissibility Findings for past association with AZTech through LegalNet in just ONE day (May 2025)

Successfully Obtained H-1B Visa for Client Previously Denied an H-1B Extension Due to Past Association with Apex IT Systems Inc. (Feb 2025)

Successfully Assisted a Client in Obtaining an Immigrant Visa After F-1 OPT with Smoothies Technology, Inc.

Successfully Overcame NOID and Green Card for Client That Was Previously Associated with Tellon Trading, LLC ( Oct 2024)

Successfully Obtained STEM OPT For Student That Was Previously Associated With Apex IT Systems Inc.(Oct 2024)

Success Story: Federal Lawsuit Forced USCIS to Concede and Reverse Course on An Improper Denied I-130 and I-485 Petitions (March 2024)

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced U.S. State Department to Reverse a Wrongful Denial of an H-4 Visa Application for A Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (April 2024)

Successfully Obtained Post Conviction Relief Pursuant To CA Penal Code 1473.7 and Terminated Removal Order in Immigration Court For Client With Multiple Convictions (February 2024)

Finding Your Way Out of Walter Jay M.D. Institute Scam (February 2024)

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced USCIS to Reverse a Wrongful Denial of an I-485 and I-601 Waiver Application for past CCP member (February 2024)

Successfully Reversed Previous Denial of I-485 Green Card Application for past member of Communist Party (January 2024)

Successfully Assisted a Client Who Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies Inc. to Obtain H-1B Visa from US Consulate in India ( November 2023)

Successfully Obtained I-485 Approval for Client That Failed to Recall Past Employment with Findream During I-485 Interview ( October 2023)

Common Questions about Building a Positive Client-Lawyer Relationship

Successfully Assisted a Client Who Was Previously Associated with Andwill to Obtain H-1B Visa from US Consulate in India

Successfully Overcame Request for Evidence ("RFE") for Client That Was Previously Associated with ARECY LLC ( August 2023)

Successfully Obtained H4 Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC after THREE previous H-1B denials (August 2023)

Success Story: I-485 Application Approved within 14 days after Responding to RFE for Client That Was a Past Member of Chinese Communist Party (July 2023)

Successfully Re-obtained H-1B Visa for Client That Was Previously Associated with DEALFAR ( Oct 2022)

Successfully Overcame H-1B Extension NOID for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (June 2023)

Successfully Overcame H-1B RFE for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (April 2023)

Successfully Obtained I-485 Approval for Client That Was Previously Associated with CloudParticle (March 2023)

Your Naturalization Application Has Been Pending Over 120 Days After Interview? The Government Might Have to PAY YOU For the Delay. (Dec 2022)

Federal Lawsuit Successfully Forced USCIS to Reverse a Wrongful Denial of an H-1B petition for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC (Dec 2022)

Successfully Obtained H4 Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with Integra Technologies LLC after TWO previous denials (November 2022)

Successfully Obtained THREE I-485 Approvals for Clients That Were Previously Associated with FINDREAM

Another N-336 Success: Naturalization Approved After N-336 Hearing! (September 2022)

Successfully Responded to RFE and Obtained H-1B Extension for Client That Was Previously Associated with Masswell and CG Max Design ( September 2022)

Successfully Reversed Previous Denial of N-400 Naturalization Application through Post Conviction Relief (August 2022)

Immigration Case Taking Forever? Holding the Government Accountable in Court Might Be the Most Effective Way to Bring the Case to Final Resolution. (August 2022)

Success Story: I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved within 3 days (May 2022)

Successfully Reversed Previous Denial of N-400 Naturalization Application (February 2022)

Successfully Obtained O-1 Visa for Client That Was Previously Associated with ARECY LLC ( MAY 2022)

Success Story: Naturalization Approved After N-336 Hearing! (January 2022)

Success Story: Overcame NOID and Obtained H4 Status Extension for Client That Was Previously Associated with FINDREAM for 3 years (January 2022)

Success Story: I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved within 3 weeks (November 2021)

Successfully Obtained H-1B Visa and Green Card for Client That Was Previously Associated with DEALFAR ( Jan 2022)

Successfully Corrected Date of Birth on Naturalization Certificate in New Jersey Federal District Court (December 2021)

Successfully Overcame RFE and Obtained H1B Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with FINDREAM ( Sept 2021)

Successfully Overcame NOID, Re-obtained H4 Status, and Green Card for Client That Was Previously Associated with SINOCONTECH

Getting Your Immigration Case Out of the Blackhole of "Administrative Review" - Writ of Mandamus Successfully Forced USCIS to Adjudicate Delayed I-130 Petition (September 2021)

We won on Appeal against USCIS for an improper denied Petition for Spouse (June 2021)

Successfully Obtained H1B Status for Client That Was Previously Associated with FINDREAM

Finding Your Way Out of FINDREAM and SINOCONTECH FRAUD Allegations

Could an I-601 Waiver be Granted on the Basis of "Public Interest" Alone? Yes, it could. (April 2021)

Obtained Green Card for Past Member of Communist Party Without Filing an I-601 Waiver Application (March 2021)

Success Story: Federal Lawsuit Forced USCIS to Concede and Reverse Course on An Improper Denied I-130 Petition (February 2021)

Successfully Overturned USCIS's N-565 Denial Decision and Obtained Court Order Correcting Dates of Birth on Naturalization Certificates (December 2020)

Success Story: I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved (Oct 2020)

Làm Sao Để Sửa Ngày Sinh Trong Hộ Chiếu Hoa Kỳ và Giấy Chứng Nhận Nhập Tịch?

How To Correct Your Date of Birth on U.S. Passport or Certificate of Naturalization?

Obtained Immigrant Visa for Past Member of Vietnam Communist Party Without Filing I-601 Waiver (July 2020)

Successfully Corrected Dates of Birth on Naturalization Certificates in Northern District Court of California (July 2020)

Application for Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status GRANTED – Attorney Successfully REVERSED Previous Denial of I-485 green card application - Client Received Green Card (May 2020)

I-601 Waiver Granted for Daughter of LPR Parents in Record Time (May 2020)

I-601 Waiver of China Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Approved within 7 weeks (March 2020)

Successfully Defend California Penal Code 1473.7’s Effectiveness to Eliminate Immigration Consequences for Criminal Convictions and Terminated Client’s Deportation Proceeding (February 2020)

Successfully Obtained Marriage Based Green Card for Client Even When the Couple Was No Longer Living Together and the Marriage Might Not Be Viable at the Time of the Interview (January 2020)

When Faced with a USCIS Denial Concerning an Alleged Misrepresentation or Fraud, We Aggressively Fight to Reverse the Finding without filing I-290B form (December 2019)

I-751 Waiver Petition GRANTED – Attorney Successfully REVERSED Previous Denial (October 2019)

Obtained Post Conviction Relief and Terminated Deportation Proceeding pursuant to Petty Offense Exception - Client received Green Card back (September 2019)

Successfully Obtained Post Conviction Relief and U.S. Citizenship for Client with Aggravated Felony Convictions

Successfully Obtained Post Conviction Relief and Defended Client Against Deportation Proceeding for Aggravated Felony Conviction

USCIS Request for an I-601 Waiver of Communist Party Member Inadmissibility Withdrawn Without Filing I-290B form- Client Received Green Card

I-601 Waiver Granted for Daughter of LPR Parents

Divorce-Based I-751 Waiver Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence GRANTED IN 3 MONTHS

Motion to Reopen a Denial Decision GRANTED without filing I-290B form