Seattle, WA
Immigration Lawyer at Seattle, WA
Practice Areas: Immigration, Asylum
OUTCOME: My client is a lawful permanent resident for life
I successfully argued that an asylee who filed for AOS should not be subject to the two year home residency requirement after I received an erroneous request for evidence from USCIS to show why my clie ... nt should not be subject to INA 212(e)
OUTCOME: My client is now a proud American citizen
I assisted a client who was charged with a Crime of Moral Turpitude after filing his naturalization application prose. I effectively argued that such a charge should not bar my client from becoming a n ... aturalized United States citizen.
OUTCOME: The foreign national spouse is now a lawful permanent resident of the United States of America
I was retained by a couple who got married two years ago here in the United States and filed for AOS application. USCIS requested for them to appear for a second marriage based green card interview whe ... n they jointly filed to remove condition on permanent residence of the foreign national spouse. I effectively addressed the red flags in the application, such as the age gap of the couple, and argued that the couple entered into a bona fide marriage.
OUTCOME: I was able to get the case cleared from the UNHCR protection unit and the case was transferred to the UNHCR resettlement for processing.
I had the privilege of working in the protection unit of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. I handled a case of an Eritrean refugee whose resettlement case to the U ... nited States was put on hold for years at the protection unit due to the overly-broad application of the “material support to terrorist organizations” bar. I was able to effectively argue that the refugee in question has never been a member or solicited members or funds to the organization. The refugee simply expressed his ideological support to the organization’s ideas as he understood them. The refugee never provided material support, in a form goods, services, or funds. I was also able to argue in the alternative that even if the refugee had provided material support, which he did not he would still not be inadmissible given that he did not know or should not reasonably have known that the organization was a terrorist organization due to his subjective circumstance of lack of education and involvement in politics, fulfilling the exemption requirement set under, INA section 212 (a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI)(dd).