Is immigration finally loosening the requirements for Adam Walsh Act cases?
In the past month immigration has approved at least four AWA cases. Are they finally starting to treat these claims fairly?
Recent AWA ApprovalsOur firm has filed countless AWA appeals in the Federal District and Circuit Courts. We have also successfully challenged denials before the Administrative Appeals Office (“AAO”). There is no doubt obtaining an approval for an AWA case is one of the most difficult objectives in immigration law. However, the tide on this may finally be turning as it seems in the last two weeks immigration has approved at least four AWA cases that we know of.
Our CasesIn one of the cases the client received an initial denial. We challenged this in Federal District court and ultimately in the Circuit Court of Appeals. We than refiled and were finally able to push immigration to approve his case. We were able to bolster the evidence in his case but besides that nothing extraordinary was done. He was still the same person with the same wife and same conviction.
In another case the client had several arrests and convictions, including one involving a gun. Yet we were able to put together a very strong case for approval and after multiple Notices of Intent to Deny an interview was scheduled. The client was interviewed by a supervising officer and she pulled no punches. She asked several questions about his criminal record. Luckily our firm had prepared him for these questions and was at the interview to make sure things worked out.
Of course each case is different and there is no guarantee of success with any AWA case. They are notoriously difficult cases but this is why a flurry of approvals is so promising, particularly given the facts of the cases.
It may mean that the current administration is easing AWA restrictions so now would definitely be the time to file. Likewise, if you have had a case denied it may be a good time to plan on refiling. As already discussed one of the cases approved was a case which was refiled and specifically address the reasoning in the previous denial.