Past Cases

We post cases we think that represent some value to our clients and viewers.  They are usually appealed decisions from federal courts, Board of Immigration Appeals and Administrative Appeals Office.  Sometimes we also post cases that are not appealed if they can be educational to our clients and viewers.

1.  In re Guang Li FU, 23 I&N Dec. 985 (BIA 2006), a BIA precedent decision established that 237(a)(1)(H) waiver is available to alien who was not in possession of valid immigrant visa but did not commit fraud.  Prior to this case, alien would not receive waiver under this provision because  ICE would not charge the alien with fraud if it thought the alien would seek waiver under this law.  To read the case, please click the link here.

2. In a precedent decision in which our firm represented the petitioner, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Zhang v. Ashcroft rejected immigration judge’s finding that the respondent could avoid persecution by practicing his belief in the privacy of his own home.  The court states that to require respondent “to practice his belief in secret is contrary to our basic principles of religious freedom and the protection of religious refugees”.  This case is very important in that the Asylum Office cannot deny  asylum application by asking an applicant to practice his belief at home in order to avoid persecution. To read the case, please click the link:   

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1458856.html

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/type,CASELAW,USA_CA_9,CHN,41c6d2fe4,0.html

3.  BIA remanded San Francisco CIS Field Director’s decision.

Board of Immigration Appeals recently remanded an I-130 appeal for further proceedings.  We represented our client in his I-130 petition.  CIS denied his petition.  The attached decision from BIA outlined the basic facts of the case and CIS flowed decision denying the I-130 visa petition. (Click to see)

So far, we have been successful in all of our BIA appeals from San Francisco CIS denials.

4. BIA remands: BIA has found that the immigration judge committed “clear error in finding the respondent to be not credible”. The BIA set aside the Immigration Judge’s adverse credibility determination as clearly erroneous. Now the respondent has another chance to win his asylum in court. (Click to see)

5. We won an appeal for our extraordinary ability petition for client: Administrative Appeal Office (AAO) recently sustained our appeal and granted the I-140 petition. Client is a famous Chinese commentator. His I-140 was denied by the Service Center after RFE. We successfully overcame the grounds stated in the denial and won the appeal. For the AAO decision, please click to see.

6. BIA grants our Motion to Reopen and Remand 7 years after deportation order was issued.

Board of Immigration Appeals granted our motion to reopen and remand in a case where our client was represented by another counsel who committed terrible error which prejudiced client in her removal proceedings.  The BIA found that although the motion is untimely, we submitted sufficient evidence to toll the deadline based on ineffective assistance of counsel claim against the attorney.

 Within 5 months of the remand, we successfully helped our client to receive permanent resident status based on her marriage to an LPR husband. (Click to see)