Irving, TX
Immigration Lawyer at Irving, TX
Practice Areas: Immigration
OUTCOME: Case was administratively closed
Respondent was placed in Immigration Removal Proceedings. I was able to get the Govt to agree to administratively close his case due to his lack of criminal history and his four U.S. Citizen children.
OUTCOME: Case was administratively closed
Respondent was placed in Immigration Removal proceedings after pleading guilty to a third degree felony. I was able to get the Govt to agree to administrative closure due to his long presence, his U.S. ... citizen children, and his good moral character.
OUTCOME: Case was terminated to allow client to adjust status
Bangladeshi national was put into Immigration removal proceedings after overstaying a student visa. Respondent was married to a U.S. Citizen and was eligible to adjust status. Govt agreed to terminate ... proceedings after I-130 was approved.
OUTCOME: Case was administratively closed
Respondent had several recent criminal convictions. I was able to negotiate with the Govt to get his case closed due to his wife's U-visa status and three young children.
OUTCOME: Won 42A case
Client was an LPR from Mexico with multiple DWI convictions and Cocaine convictions was placed into removal proceedings. Argued that client had rehabilitated and should therefore be granted relief unde ... r 42A.
OUTCOME: 42B relief was granted
Represented Mexican national with two DWI convictions in a Cancellation of Removal (42B) case. Had over 15 years of continuous presence and 1 U.S. Citizen daughter
OUTCOME: 42A relief was granted
Represented an Afghani national in a 42A LPR Cancellation of Removal case. This individual had been convicted of two theft convictions and several DWIs.
OUTCOME: 42A relief was granted
Cancellation of Removal for an LPR (Mexican National) with a drug conviction and a DWI conviction.
OUTCOME: Case was closed by the Gov't and client was released from Immigration detention without paying a bond
LPR was placed in removal proceedings and was being held mandatory detention due to a CIMT conviction within 5 years of his lawful admission.
OUTCOME: The Court granted the motion to reopen.
Filed a motion to reopen for client based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
