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)

May 26, 2025

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:















RECENT POSTS