Sample Cases from our office

These are some sample cases from our files. It is impossible for us to present all have done past over 15 years of our practice. But these were some cases that came to mind when we started writing this column 2-3 years ago.

In this case, the petitioning green card holder filed forms I-130 and I-485 for her second husband, whom she had been married to for less than five years since obtaining her lawful permanent resident status based on her first marriage, which was to a U.S. citizen. That marriage ended in a divorce. In such instances there is a rebuttable presumption that the prior marriage was fraudulent.  There is an exception if five years have passed from the petitioner's adjustment or if the petitioner can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the first marriage was entered into as a bona fide marriage. A notice of intent to deny (NOID) was issued following the couple’s interview with a Service Officer.  Since five years had not passed, we assisted Petitioner in responding to the NOID and proving by clear and convincing evidence that her prior marriage was not fraudulent. The detailed response included many documents regarding the bona fide nature of the first marriage, such as photographs, extensive wedding and pre and post wedding details along with many affidavits. We requested USCIS to withdraw its intention to deny and resume processing. Shortly after filing the NOID response, Beneficiary received his green card.

Status: We requested USCIS to withdraw its intention to deny and resume processing. Shortly after filing the NOID response, Beneficiary received his green card.

 

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------

We assisted in the filing of an H-1B petition for a newly established company in the healthcare industry for a computer and information systems manager. We received a request for evidence (RFE), asking for details about the employer and questioning the employee’s qualifications. Oddly, the RFE specifically questioned the credentials of the professor, who had assessed the employee’s educational background and experiential qualifications. Although evidence, such as detailed experience letters, could not be obtained due to a lapse in time, we were able to procure updated letters from the university attesting to the professor-evalutor’s credentials, and a new evaluation. Our detailed response, describing the additional evidence and context led to the case being approved.

Status: Our detailed response, describing the additional evidence and context led to the case being approved.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------

We were approached by an employer in the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry to respond to an RFE (Request for Evidence) for an Operations Research Analyst. The RFE indicated that the job duties were vague, and did not allow the USCIS to ascertain the minimum requirements for the position, or determine whether it constituted a specialty occupation. We responded with painstaking detail, elaborating the job duties and providing considerable context about the employer and the strict FDA (Food and Drug Administration) regulations that they are required to operate under.  We also included significant corroborating evidence, including detailed letters from industry experts, expounding on the positional requirements and complexity of the job. The petition was approved.

Status: We also included significant corroborating evidence, including detailed letters from industry experts, expounding on the positional requirements and complexity of the job. The petition was approved.

 

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------
Type of case: L-1A Extension
Category: L-1A Visa, RFE

We filed an L-1A for a managerial level employee seeking a second two year extension of the beneficiary’s classification as a nonimmigrant intracompany transferee (L-1A) to enable the beneficiary to continue in his position as Director-Product Engineering, a position he had held since the approval of the initial petition. Subsequent to filing the petition we received a Request for Evidence (RFE). We responded and the petition was then approved. The RFE requested additional information regarding the beneficiary’s qualifications, the managerial position abroad (to prove he had at least one continuous year, within the three years prior to his application for admission to the U.S., of full time employment with a qualifying foreign organization (which was the case, as the U.S, company was a 100% subsidiary of the foreign company)), and the proposed managerial position in the U.S. In the response to the RFE we provided extensive narratives and corroborating documents explaining further and beyond what was submitted with the initial L-1A filing. In addition to a response letter we provided extensive corroborating evidence as exhibits that included letters from authorized representatives of both companies that very comprehensively addressed the concerns and which themselves included exhibits. The hurdle here was proving that a second extension was warranted from a legal and factual standpoint.  Our legal argument combined with the significant volume of corroborating evidence proved successful. 

Our legal argument combined with the significant volume of corroborating evidence proved successful.
DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------
Category: L-1A Visa, RFE

 

We filed an L-1A for a managerial level employee (intracompany transferee) The U.S. company was seeking to employ the beneficiary as Manager - Business Finance. Subsequent to filing the petition we received a Request for Evidence (RFE). We responded and the petition was then approved. One of the challenges in this case included establishing that the foreign entity and the U.S. had a “qualifying relationship” as there was a complex multinational organizational structure that included several subsidiary relationships. Other challenges were proving that the positions in both countries were high senior level functional managerial positions, not routine operational activities, and that they were managed, not performed, by the beneficiary. The positions also had team management responsibilities, requiring the sometimes difficult delineation as to whether each specific job duty fell under personnel (team management) or functional management. The Response to the RFE included further information about ownership and control of the companies and a significant amount of additional detail about the beneficiary’s managerial positions and those of his subordinates and their relationships within the hierarchy of the companies.

L-1A Approved
DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------