From deportation to permanent residency, read about some of our successful immigration defenses before U.S. Courts.

In Re: I.A.L. (BIA Nov. 2016), Board of Immigration Appeals holding IJ erred in pretermitting Respondent’s application for cancellation of removal for certain nonpermanent residents (EOIR42-B) based on a plea of guilty for domestic violence did not qualify as a categorical crime of violence under section 240A(b)(1)(C) of the Act. (Remanded to Cleveland, OH Immigration Court and on subsequent appeal).

HERNANDEZ LARA v. LYNCH (2015)

Seventh Circuit granted the Petition for Review finding the Board of Immigration Appeals applied the incorrect legal standard in determining what evidence met the preponderance of evidence standard. Client was eventually granted lawful permanent residency before the immigration judge.

SODHI v. HOLDER (2009) (Unpublished Decision)

Second Circuit granted petition for review and case remanded to the Immigration Court which had denied reopening client’s case for failure to appear at his deportation hearing. We argued that client never received proper notice of his hearing date and circumstantial evidence existed which reflects client would have appeared at his scheduled hearing
had he received proper notice. Second Circuit concluded “ We find compelling evidence that the BIA overlooked circumstantial evidence in its failure to discuss any such evidence. Therefore, it is appropriate to vacate and remand this case.”

HAMDAN v. MUKASEY (2008)

Seventh Circuit granted petition for review holding “the IJ completely misunderstood Hamdan's claim of future persecution based on imputed political opinion, a mistake that caused the IJ both to ignore Hamdan's actual argument and to favor irrelevant facts when denying Hamdan's request for relief.” Withholding of removal to Israel claim remanded to immigration court.

. 

ALEXANDROV v. GONZALES (2006)

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals granted Petition for Review. The court found that the lower courts had violated client’s due process rights. Furthermore, the immigration judge’s adverse credibility finding was not supported by substantial evidence. The court vacated the immigration judge’s frivolous asylum application finding which allowed client to apply for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.