Proving extreme hardship to U.S. citizen husband
A Filipino client had married a U.S. citizen, had two young children, but could not adjust status. We filed a I-601A, proving extreme and unusual emotional and financial hardship to her U.S. citizen husband (minor children are not considered for extreme hardship applications). It was approved, and our client was able to return to the Philippines and obtain her visa to enter the U.S. legally, allowing her to adjust her status (green card).
Another client from Mexico had a similar dilemma where the mother of two toddlers was illegal, but her husband is a U.S. citizen so we filed I-601A for her. We were able to successfully prove extreme and unusual emotional and financial hardship to her U.S. citizen husband in both scenarios: were she deported to Mexico, and were the whole family to emigrate to Mexico with her. With the approval, our client can return to Mexico and return with a valid visa. After she re-enters the U.S., we can file for adjustment (green card).
Overcoming marriage denial
A Chinese client had remarried the same spouse, but the spouse’s immigrant petition was denied. We analyzed the case, discovered a mistake made by USCIS, and appealed the denial. In the end, the client was able to obtain permanent residency.
Proving parental obligations for approval
Mexican client entered the US legally, but was out of status (illegal status) for almost twenty years. When his daughter came of age, she applied for his green card, but USCIS denied the case. It was a rare situation where USCIS determined that the client had not met his parental duties to qualify as a “parent” beneficiary. We appealed the decision, but the appeal was denied. In the end, we guided the client to provide a large amount of evidence and refiled. The client then received his green card. Afterwards, the client retained us to help file for his sibling and children.
Green card despite Lost passport and I-94
Lum Law Group helps man with lost passport to obtain Legal Permanent Resident status. Lum Law Group has helped a husband obtain his permanent resident card despite the fact that his original passport and evidence of legal entry in the U.S. was lost, and the government had lost evidence of his entry. Lum Law Group, by examining the problem from a new angle, provided sufficient supporting evidence to establish that the individual had entered the U.S legally and could therefore adjust his status as a permanent resident. The result was successful approval of his change of status to a legal permanent resident.
Turning around an L-1 denial
Chinese client’s L1-visa case was denied and their representative referred the client to us. We appealed the denial and obtained an approval. We then helped the client adjust status. The client’s son was accepted to a prestigious university, which doubted whether the client could obtain permanent residency within one year. We provided the university all immigration documents to prove that the client and family did not have fake green cards.
Obtaining asylum for Romanian divorcee
Romanian asylum case approved after eight (8) long years of perseverance. Client came in with a fake US passport to escape from her ex-husband.
Overturning a denial based on a court interpreter’s mistake
A Chinese client had filed for asylum on his own, which was transferred to the courts. The client came to us for assistance. We requested the audio records from the client’s court case and found the court interpreter had made a colossal mistake. We then appealed the denial with BIA using the court audio records as evidence and won the appeal. The client obtained relief and was later able to adjust status.
Successful cancellation of removal of LPR
Recently, Lum Law Group helped a grandmother with permanent resident status to obtain cancellation of removal of a legal permanent resident, retaining her status as a permanent resident. Lum Law Group successfully argued that the client had long since overcome the issues that placed her status at risk, and had focused on a life as a productive individual that cared equally for her parents, husband and children in their times of need. Happily, our client will now complete the process of obtaining her citizenship.
Voluntary departure granted, but client didn’t depart
One of our oldest clients from over ten years ago had been denied multiple times. We were able to file motions to allow him to remain in the US. He was in removal proceedings and even his Motion to Reopen was denied. At the time, he chose voluntary departure and had to wait ten years before it was possible to adjust status. He then married a US citizen, had children, but had to wait ten years before he could adjust status due to the Voluntary Departure. We recently filed I-130 for the client and a Motion to Reopen and terminate his removal proceedings.
Successful Cancellation of Removal for Indonesian client
Indonesian client was in removal proceedings. Client’s spouse was already deported. We requested Cancellation of Removal based on the client’s unique situation, which was granted. The Client was able to adjust status and receive permanent residence.
Overcoming deportation based on criminal record
Client received green card in the 70s, but she did not apply for citizenship. The client had a felony charge and was in deportation proceedings. Client came to our office for immigration court representation, and Mr. Albert C. Lum was able to successfully defend her in court. We filed I-601 for the client and she was able to reinstate her green card.
Remand on behalf of an Indonesian asylee
Albert C. Lum obtained a grant of asylum for an Indonesian Asylum Applicant after a remand of the case by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Mr. Lum successfully argued on remand that the original evidence submitted was sufficient for a grant of asylum after the original decision was overturned because the court at that time was not definite as to whether sufficient evidence had been provided for a grant of asylum.
[Case Law] Gilda Altagracia Abreu-reyes, A.k.a. Gilda A. Desmith, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent, 292 F.3d 1029 (9th Cir. 2002)
Congress does not define a tax offense as fraud or deceit, and therefore it cannot be an Aggravated Felony. Thereby, the Respondent cannot be deemed inadmissible for a tax offense. Read about Mr. Lum’s case that became case law.
Lai Haw Wong et al., Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent, 474 F.2d 739 (9th Cir. 1973)
An erroneous admission is not the fault of the Respondent. Read about the decision here.
[Case law] ARTHER DEYKE KASONSO v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.
The Tenth Circuit erred in following the courts of appeals that reject “disfavored group analysis” instead of the four courts of appeals that apply that analysis. Read more about Mr. Lum’s case that became case law.
Albert Justin Lum, representing the plaintiff, settled a patent infringement matter brought in the United States District Court, Central District of California.