While Ahmad & Associates has successfully completed hundreds of cases in many areas of immigration law, below are some samples of complex cases in which we have succeeded.
Our client was initially on TN visa from Canada. He was stopped at the border when renewing and was informed that he did not qualify for TN as his duties were outside the scope of the TN that he had previously been granted. We then filed an E2 visa for him, through a small franchise in which he had 51% ownership. This was quickly approved.
A Roma client (male) was granted withholding of removal from Romania as the immigration judge found his testimony of past persecution to be credible. He had been physically beaten on numerous occasions and incarcerated by the Romanian police. The DHS counsel argued that he could relocate to a third safe country as Romania is under the EU. The issue or relocation is presently on appeal.
Our client from Pakistan feared retribution from the Taliban, given that he had worked with the Pakistani army in locating Taliban strongholds. The Immigration Judge found his testimony credible and also found that he could not relocate to any other area of Pakistan given the fact that he had been “blacklisted” by the Taliban. He was granted asylum at his Merits hearing.
A Venezualan client was arrested at the port of entry. As he was classified as an arriving alien, he was required to complete his asylum case from inside the detention center. Our office aided his family in collecting numerous documents to support his fear of return based on the present political climate in Venezuela. We then aided him in preparing his own affidavit with several drafts until we felt it was satisfactory to present to the Immigration Judge. The judge, during the Merits hearing, complimented the extent of supporting evidence our office had collected in supporting his claim. Also, given that the client had prepared his testimony through several practice sessions with our attorneys, he was very well prepared for the Merits hearing, and was thereafter granted relief in the form of asylum.
Case of former Mexican soldier who filed for asylum, based on the fact that he had been approached by Narco-traffickers who needed his military training to help them in illegal criminal activity. As he refused to cooperate, he categorized him into a Particular Social Group (PSG) of “former Mexican soldier who was threatened to aid cartels based on his training.” The Immigration Judge found the category to be viable and found the threats to his life significant to grant him asylum from Mexico.
A client who had entered illegally over ten years ago, married a US citizen spouse. We filed a marriage case (I-130) which was approved. Thereafter because he had entered illegally, we were required to file a 601a waiver. These waivers are very difficult to prove and require a large amount of evidence to be compiled and filed in a very organized way. In preparing the waiver, we compiled affidavits, financial records, medical history and even psychological evaluations pertaining to the hardships the family would face. Our office was aware that the standard utilized by USCIS is very difficult to meet. We were pleased after 6 months of processing the case was approved. Our office’s track record in obtaining grants of 601 waivers is very high, as we continue to succeed in these cases.
Our client, originally from Nigeria, entered the U.S. on a visitor visa but overstayed his visa. He was then arrested by ICE and placed in immigration proceedings at a detention center. As he had not filed any other applications with the USCIS, he had very little chance of being released from custody. Our office prepared his application for bond, included several letters of recommendation from friends and family as well as a letter of support, as to where he would reside should he be released. During the bond hearing we were also able to explain to the immigration judge that he did qualify for another form of relief. Based on our detailed bond packet and representation at the bond hearing, our client was able to receive bond, and has since been released.
Our client from Brazil did not initially qualify for Cancellation of Removal as she did not have the requisite 10 years in the U.S. and so she intended to seek voluntary departure on the day of her Merits hearing. However, based on the recent Third Circuit ruling in Guadulupe vs. Attorney General, No. 19-2239, 3rd Circ., 2020, the Court of Appeals found that a Notice to Appear without a specific date and time of service did not cut off the 10 year physical presence requirement. As such our client did qualify for cancellation of removal, as she had, at the time of the Merits hearing, accrued 10 years. The case was then postponed for the submission of an application for cancellation.