We are thinking to file for a joint motion to reopen now that the I-130 is approved, is it better to go strait to the BIA, or ask the Office Of Chief Council first? We understand that each case is diferent, but what % of cases are reopened?, when the only problem to overcome is illegal presence for 10 years and entry with a photo sub. passport, (not a US passport) all other factors in the case are very possitive.
If you're filing a joint motion, it's best to get the ICE attorney to agree to it and sign off first. If it is in fact a "joint motion" and ICE has agreed to it, it is very likely that the BIA or IJ will grant it. See an attorney.
Avvo doesn't remunerate me for this response, and I'm only offering limited advice based on the few facts given me in your question. I am not your lawyer solely because I answer this question or respond to any follow-up comments. If you want to hire me or are interested in a low cost or free consultation, please contact me. Otherwise, please don't expect a further response. We need an actual written agreement to form an attorney-client relationship. It's impossible to fully evaluate a legal problem without a comprehensive consultation and review of all the facts and documents at issue.
1 found this helpful
3 lawyers agree
There is really no clear answer with this. It really all depends on the particular circumstances of your case.
Contact immigration attorney Gintare Grigaite at 646-407-2331. Answers on AVVO do not constitute legal advice and do not form attorney-client relationship. Always consult an attorney for a legal advice.
These are case specific. It sounds like you have a double problem. Note that unlawful presence can only be overcome with a waiver or 245(I) and so the motion may be futile. The false passport also needs a waiver.
4 lawyers agree
This depends. We've won several MTR's in both avenues. We generally learn about the family, the underlying criminal and immigration history and advise you accordingly. Each case is different because each person is different.