Denver Immigration Attorney, Denver County, Colorado. Denver
Removal Deportation Attorney, Denver County, Colorado. Denver Green
Card Attorney, Denver County, Colorado. Denver Citizenship Attorney,
Denver County, CO.
Removal Deportation Attorney, Denver County, Colorado. Denver Green
Card Attorney, Denver County, Colorado. Denver Citizenship Attorney,
Denver County, CO.
What's New
Immigrating to U.S. becomes much costlier
Many fees to skyrocket by end of the month — $1,010 for a green card
Telemundo and MSNBC.com
Updated: 5:42 p.m. MT July 20, 2007
Immigrants could end up paying thousands of dollars more to enter and
stay in the country after July 30, when dozens of application fees will
double or even triple, sparking opposition from a broad coalition of
activists and a rush by immigrants to submit their paperwork before the
little-publicized changes take effect.
Altogether, 39 fees will rise an average of 66 percent, but some of the
largest increases will come in charges for the most basic documents
immigrants must seek. Most notably, the fee to apply for a green card,
establishing legal residence in the United States, will almost triple, from
$395 to $1,010.
Applying for citizenship will rise from $400 to $675. It cost $90 as recently
as 1991.
The increases are expected to raise an extra $1.1 billion a year for U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, which is required to
cover its costs with the fees it collects from the hundreds of thousands of
foreigners who seek residency and citizenship each year.
Simply put, “we need the money,” USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez said.
“To do nothing is to invite organizational disaster, because we are just not
covering the cost of doing business.”
High cost of immigrating
Fees for 39 immigration applications and documents will rise sharply on
July 30. Among them:
Permanent residence (green card)
Old fee: $395
New fee: $1,010
Application for citizenship
Old fee: $400
New fee: $675
Petition for a non-immigrant worker
Old fee: $190
New fee: $320
Travel document application
Old fee: $170
New fee: $305
Special immigrant petition
Old fee: $190
New fee: $375
Employment authorization
Old fee: $180
New fee: $340
Petition for alien fiance(e)
Old fee: $170
New fee: $455
Petition for alien relative
Old fee: $190
New fee: $355
Even after Divorce, the Marriage-Based Applicant Eligible for I-
485 Approval
http://www.greencardfamily.com/news/news2008/news2008_1104.htm
The Court's opinion in Choin v. Mukasey reflects the important lessons
that an agency decision can be overturned by a higher court and that
challenging a negative decision can result in a favorable ruling.
However, one of the reasons that the Federal Court was able to use its
interpretation of the law is that the BIA decision was not
particularly detailed and, thus, it was not given deference that might
otherwise have been given to a lower court's interpretation of the
law.
Generally, under immigration law, it is risky for a person to assume
that s/he can obtain any immigration benefit based upon a family
relationship, if the family relationship no longer exists.
On August 12, 2008, in Choin v. Mukasey, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit ordered the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to
consider Yelena Choin's Form I-485 Application for Adjustment of
Status based upon marriage, even though she was no longer married to
her U.S.-citizen husband. Generally, a foreign national spouse who is
filing for permanent residence based upon marriage to a U.S. citizen
must still be married at the time of the green card approval.
The Court found an exception to this for spouses who enter the U.S. on
the K-1 fiancé/e visa. This interpretation is limited to a K-1 fiancé/
e of a U.S. citizen. There is a specific section of law that addresses
the adjustment of status of K-1s and it is the wording of that section
that led to the conclusion reached by the Court.
The Choin case involved a woman who originally entered the United
States lawfully on a K-1 fiancée visa and married her U.S. citizen
sponsor. As readers of MurthyDotCom and the MurthyBulletin may recall
from our Overview: K Visas for Fiancé/es and Spouses of USCs, the law
provides that a foreign national engaged to a U.S. citizen can enter
the United States in K-1 status for 90 days, within which time the
couple is to marry. Based on that marriage, the foreign national
spouse is eligible to file the I-485 to become a lawful permanent
resident (LPR), commonly referred to as a green card holder. This is
exactly what occurred in this case.
However, before the I-485 was acted upon, Ms. Choin and her husband
divorced. The divorce occurred on April 9, 2001. The USCIS denied the
adjustment or I-485 on August 27, 2001 because of the divorce.
Thereafter, Ms. Choin was placed in removal (formerly deportation)
proceedings. Ms. Choin fought the effort to remove her from the U.S.,
first appealing the decision of the Immigration Judge (IJ) to the
Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and ultimately filing an appeal
with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On August 12, 2008, the Court
ruled for her and ordered the BIA to process her I-485 consistent with
their interpretation of the law, allowing her to become a Conditional
LPR, valid for two years, notwithstanding the divorce.
The Court's opinion was based on the language and interpretation of
Section 245(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This
section specifies that a foreign national who enters the U.S. in K-1
status can only adjust to conditional LPR status (and not regular LPR
status) by filing an I-485 application based on marriage to the U.S.-
citizen sponsor of the K-1. Conditional LPR status is valid for two
years, unless the conditions are removed based upon the filing of an
application to remove the conditions.
http://www.greencardfamily.com/news/news2008/news2008_1104.htm
COURT ISSUES FINAL ORDER IN SURVIVING SPOUSE CLASS
ACTION
A district court issued a decision in Hootkins v. Napolitano, No. 07- 05696
(C.D. Cal. April 28, 2007), finding that it is bound by Sixth and Ninth Circuit
decisions holding that a spouse of a deceased U.S. citizen is an
“immediate relative” under INA § 201(b)(2). See Freeman v. Gonzales,
444 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2006); Lockhart v. Chertoff, 561 F.3d 611
(6th Cir. 2009).
The court declined to apply Freeman and Lockhart to plaintiffs outside of
these circuits.
The court also rejected the government’s narrow application of Freeman
to Ninth Circuit plaintiffs, as set forth in a 2007 USCIS Memorandum,
instead finding that Freeman applies to cases in which an adjustment
application was not filed prior to the U.S. citizen spouse’s death.
Finally, the court held that 8 C.F.R. § 205.1(a)(3)(C)(2), which revokes an I-
130 on the death of the petitioner, is invalid.
Read more about this case at AILF’s Other Litigation Issue Page,
http://www.ailf.org/lac/clearinghouse_otherissues.sht ml#hootkins.
Prosecutor Apology Ends Iraqi’s ‘Nightmare’
Posted Aug 24, 2007, 09:43 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss
A federal prosecutor has apologized to an Iraqi refugee who was
improperly arrested and jailed for failing to register under a special
system.
U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sullivan of the Western District of Washington said
the arrest was because of a good-faith mistake by Border Patrol Agents,
the New York Times (reg. req.) reports. Sullivan signed the apology and
joined the American Civil Liberties Union to vacate an initial court ruling in
the case, the ACLU announced yesterday.
Abdulameer Habeeb had been jailed and tortured in Iraq under the
leadership of Saddam Hussein. He was arrested in 2003 when he
stepped off an Amtrak train to stretch his legs near the Canadian border.
Immigrating to U.S. becomes much costlier
Many fees to skyrocket by end of the month — $1,010 for a green card
Telemundo and MSNBC.com
Updated: 5:42 p.m. MT July 20, 2007
Immigrants could end up paying thousands of dollars more to enter and
stay in the country after July 30, when dozens of application fees will
double or even triple, sparking opposition from a broad coalition of
activists and a rush by immigrants to submit their paperwork before the
little-publicized changes take effect.
Altogether, 39 fees will rise an average of 66 percent, but some of the
largest increases will come in charges for the most basic documents
immigrants must seek. Most notably, the fee to apply for a green card,
establishing legal residence in the United States, will almost triple, from
$395 to $1,010.
Applying for citizenship will rise from $400 to $675. It cost $90 as recently
as 1991.
The increases are expected to raise an extra $1.1 billion a year for U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, which is required to
cover its costs with the fees it collects from the hundreds of thousands of
foreigners who seek residency and citizenship each year.
Simply put, “we need the money,” USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez said.
“To do nothing is to invite organizational disaster, because we are just not
covering the cost of doing business.”
High cost of immigrating
Fees for 39 immigration applications and documents will rise sharply on
July 30. Among them:
Permanent residence (green card)
Old fee: $395
New fee: $1,010
Application for citizenship
Old fee: $400
New fee: $675
Petition for a non-immigrant worker
Old fee: $190
New fee: $320
Travel document application
Old fee: $170
New fee: $305
Special immigrant petition
Old fee: $190
New fee: $375
Employment authorization
Old fee: $180
New fee: $340
Petition for alien fiance(e)
Old fee: $170
New fee: $455
Petition for alien relative
Old fee: $190
New fee: $355
Even after Divorce, the Marriage-Based Applicant Eligible for I-
485 Approval
http://www.greencardfamily.com/news/news2008/news2008_1104.htm
The Court's opinion in Choin v. Mukasey reflects the important lessons
that an agency decision can be overturned by a higher court and that
challenging a negative decision can result in a favorable ruling.
However, one of the reasons that the Federal Court was able to use its
interpretation of the law is that the BIA decision was not
particularly detailed and, thus, it was not given deference that might
otherwise have been given to a lower court's interpretation of the
law.
Generally, under immigration law, it is risky for a person to assume
that s/he can obtain any immigration benefit based upon a family
relationship, if the family relationship no longer exists.
On August 12, 2008, in Choin v. Mukasey, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit ordered the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to
consider Yelena Choin's Form I-485 Application for Adjustment of
Status based upon marriage, even though she was no longer married to
her U.S.-citizen husband. Generally, a foreign national spouse who is
filing for permanent residence based upon marriage to a U.S. citizen
must still be married at the time of the green card approval.
The Court found an exception to this for spouses who enter the U.S. on
the K-1 fiancé/e visa. This interpretation is limited to a K-1 fiancé/
e of a U.S. citizen. There is a specific section of law that addresses
the adjustment of status of K-1s and it is the wording of that section
that led to the conclusion reached by the Court.
The Choin case involved a woman who originally entered the United
States lawfully on a K-1 fiancée visa and married her U.S. citizen
sponsor. As readers of MurthyDotCom and the MurthyBulletin may recall
from our Overview: K Visas for Fiancé/es and Spouses of USCs, the law
provides that a foreign national engaged to a U.S. citizen can enter
the United States in K-1 status for 90 days, within which time the
couple is to marry. Based on that marriage, the foreign national
spouse is eligible to file the I-485 to become a lawful permanent
resident (LPR), commonly referred to as a green card holder. This is
exactly what occurred in this case.
However, before the I-485 was acted upon, Ms. Choin and her husband
divorced. The divorce occurred on April 9, 2001. The USCIS denied the
adjustment or I-485 on August 27, 2001 because of the divorce.
Thereafter, Ms. Choin was placed in removal (formerly deportation)
proceedings. Ms. Choin fought the effort to remove her from the U.S.,
first appealing the decision of the Immigration Judge (IJ) to the
Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and ultimately filing an appeal
with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On August 12, 2008, the Court
ruled for her and ordered the BIA to process her I-485 consistent with
their interpretation of the law, allowing her to become a Conditional
LPR, valid for two years, notwithstanding the divorce.
The Court's opinion was based on the language and interpretation of
Section 245(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This
section specifies that a foreign national who enters the U.S. in K-1
status can only adjust to conditional LPR status (and not regular LPR
status) by filing an I-485 application based on marriage to the U.S.-
citizen sponsor of the K-1. Conditional LPR status is valid for two
years, unless the conditions are removed based upon the filing of an
application to remove the conditions.
http://www.greencardfamily.com/news/news2008/news2008_1104.htm
COURT ISSUES FINAL ORDER IN SURVIVING SPOUSE CLASS
ACTION
A district court issued a decision in Hootkins v. Napolitano, No. 07- 05696
(C.D. Cal. April 28, 2007), finding that it is bound by Sixth and Ninth Circuit
decisions holding that a spouse of a deceased U.S. citizen is an
“immediate relative” under INA § 201(b)(2). See Freeman v. Gonzales,
444 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2006); Lockhart v. Chertoff, 561 F.3d 611
(6th Cir. 2009).
The court declined to apply Freeman and Lockhart to plaintiffs outside of
these circuits.
The court also rejected the government’s narrow application of Freeman
to Ninth Circuit plaintiffs, as set forth in a 2007 USCIS Memorandum,
instead finding that Freeman applies to cases in which an adjustment
application was not filed prior to the U.S. citizen spouse’s death.
Finally, the court held that 8 C.F.R. § 205.1(a)(3)(C)(2), which revokes an I-
130 on the death of the petitioner, is invalid.
Read more about this case at AILF’s Other Litigation Issue Page,
http://www.ailf.org/lac/clearinghouse_otherissues.sht ml#hootkins.
Prosecutor Apology Ends Iraqi’s ‘Nightmare’
Posted Aug 24, 2007, 09:43 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss
A federal prosecutor has apologized to an Iraqi refugee who was
improperly arrested and jailed for failing to register under a special
system.
U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sullivan of the Western District of Washington said
the arrest was because of a good-faith mistake by Border Patrol Agents,
the New York Times (reg. req.) reports. Sullivan signed the apology and
joined the American Civil Liberties Union to vacate an initial court ruling in
the case, the ACLU announced yesterday.
Abdulameer Habeeb had been jailed and tortured in Iraq under the
leadership of Saddam Hussein. He was arrested in 2003 when he
stepped off an Amtrak train to stretch his legs near the Canadian border.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Law Office of James S. Sarpong, LLC
"Counsel to Immigrants, their Families, and their Employers."
© Law Office of James S. Sarpong, LLC. All rights reserved. Note: Some articles,
definitions, and terms on this website were reproduced from other sources, and
have been so stated/credited. Disclaimer: The information you obtain at this site
is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for
individual advice regarding your own situation.
definitions, and terms on this website were reproduced from other sources, and
have been so stated/credited. Disclaimer: The information you obtain at this site
is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for
individual advice regarding your own situation.
| LOJSS - Expertise, Integrity, Results. |
Denver Colorado Immigration Lawyer, Aurora Boulder Green Card Attorney, K-1
Visa, K-3, Asylum, Naturalization/Citizenship, Deportation/Removal, Family &
Employment based Visas/Adjustment of Status, denver colorado immigration
attorney, attorneys, co naturalization lawyer, lawyers, visas law firm, wyoming,
wy, idaho, id, colorado springs, fort ft collins, boulder, greeley, vail, aspen,
grand junction, pueblo, summit county, immigration, naturalization, asylum,
citizenship, employment visa, h-1, h-2 uscis, ins, immigration attorney,
immigration lawyer, employment visa, green card, h1b visa, l1, eb1, adjustment
of status, outstanding, professor, researcher, green card, fiancee, national
interest waiver.
Visa, K-3, Asylum, Naturalization/Citizenship, Deportation/Removal, Family &
Employment based Visas/Adjustment of Status, denver colorado immigration
attorney, attorneys, co naturalization lawyer, lawyers, visas law firm, wyoming,
wy, idaho, id, colorado springs, fort ft collins, boulder, greeley, vail, aspen,
grand junction, pueblo, summit county, immigration, naturalization, asylum,
citizenship, employment visa, h-1, h-2 uscis, ins, immigration attorney,
immigration lawyer, employment visa, green card, h1b visa, l1, eb1, adjustment
of status, outstanding, professor, researcher, green card, fiancee, national
interest waiver.
Phone: 303-991-5756 Email: info@sarponglaw.com
| Call/ Email us to set up an appt for a 20min FREE & CONFIDENTIAL CONSULTATION -- 303-991-5756. info@sarponglaw.com |
Even/ Wknd Appt. Flat Fees/ Retainers Payment Plans |
| What's New Refugees cause worry about Mich. economy By JEFF KAROUB, Associated Press Writer 2 hrs ago Immigrating to U.S. becomes much costlier Many fees to skyrocket by end of the month — $1,010 for a green card |
For: Aurora, Cherry Creek,
Centennial, Denver, or
Englewood, Commerce
City, Lakewood, Littleton,
Parker, Louisville,
Broomfield, Highlands
Ranch, Thornton, or
Westminster, Colorado U.S
Immigration Attorney or
Lawyer Services; You May
Contact Us.
Centennial, Denver, or
Englewood, Commerce
City, Lakewood, Littleton,
Parker, Louisville,
Broomfield, Highlands
Ranch, Thornton, or
Westminster, Colorado U.S
Immigration Attorney or
Lawyer Services; You May
Contact Us.
The Law Office of James S.
Sarpong, LLC is a Denver,
Colorado based US
Immigration Law Firm that
has several office locations
throughout the Front Range
and the Denver Metro Area,
and provides immigration
law services to clients
throughout the United
States (U.S.) and the world,
including Colorado (CO),
Wyoming (WY), Idaho (ID),
Denver, Arvada, Aurora,
Boulder, Colorado Springs,
Fort Collins, Greeley,
Highlands Ranch,
Lakewood, Longmont,
Pueblo, Westminster,
Cheyenne, Jackson Hole,
Sheridan, Rock Springs,
Boise, Idaho Falls, Nampa,
Pocatello, Denver County,
Adams Country, Arapahoe
County, and Jefferson
County.
Sarpong, LLC is a Denver,
Colorado based US
Immigration Law Firm that
has several office locations
throughout the Front Range
and the Denver Metro Area,
and provides immigration
law services to clients
throughout the United
States (U.S.) and the world,
including Colorado (CO),
Wyoming (WY), Idaho (ID),
Denver, Arvada, Aurora,
Boulder, Colorado Springs,
Fort Collins, Greeley,
Highlands Ranch,
Lakewood, Longmont,
Pueblo, Westminster,
Cheyenne, Jackson Hole,
Sheridan, Rock Springs,
Boise, Idaho Falls, Nampa,
Pocatello, Denver County,
Adams Country, Arapahoe
County, and Jefferson
County.
