OC Immigration Attorney

My client from Newport Beach was just approved for naturalization after our successful interview this morning at the Santa Ana USCIS office. She has been a lawful permanent resident for three years. Generally, aliens seeking naturalization must have their green cards for five years before they are eligible for naturalization. There are several exceptions to this rule. For example, if an alien has been married to a United States citizen for over three years and has had lawful permanent residence for over three years, s/he can naturalize.

In this case, my client has been married for four years, and she has been a lawful permanent resident for over three years. The interview went smoothly. The USCIS officer asked to see documents proving that her marriage was entered into in good faith. We provided joint tax returns, life insurance documents, joint bank account information and evidence of joint investment in real estate. The officer was quickly convinced of the validity of the marriage and the case was approved after a thirty minute interview.

My client is very excited. She intends to petition for her children to obtain immigrant visas so they can come to the United States from Europe.

If you are considering naturalization, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation. Managing attorney Jay Nunez will personally meet with you in a confidential setting and help you determine if naturalization is the right option for you.

With Arizona’s new immigration law going into effect, there is fear that a little known problem will get worse: Americans getting deported.

According to a Northeastern School of Law researcher, there are many cases in which U.S. citizens have been deported. In addition, with Arizona’s new immigration law it just might get worse.

At the naturalization interview this morning, USCIS approved the N-400 application for naturalization for a client from Coto De Caza in Orange County. He is originally from Switzerland, and he came to the United States 15 years ago. He acquired his permanent resident status 12 years ago through his marriage to his US citizen wife. He decided earlier this year that he wanted to become a US citizen, so that he could vote in elections.

The interview went smoothly and we were well prepared. The client passed the English and civics exam. The officer approved the case on the spot, and we should receive the appointment letter for the oath ceremony within the next few weeks.

The client was very excited about the approval, and is excited to vote in Fall elections.

If you are considering naturalization, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation. Managing attorney Jay Nunez will discuss your situation with you and help determine whether there will be any issues or complications with the naturalization process.

The 14th amendment, which was adopted after the Civil War, defines who is a citizen of the U.S. The law states that any person born or naturalized in the U.S. is a citizen and that no state shall make or enforce any law denying that right.

However, in Oklahoma, a group of lawmakers, led by Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, have stated that they are thinking of filing a bill in the next session that is similar to the controversial Arizona immigration law and goes a step further:  preventing children from becoming citizens at birth if both parents are illegal immigrants.

The state of Arizona, which already has the law that makes it a crime to be in that state illegally and requires law enforcement officers to check documents of people they reasonably suspect to be there illegally, already stated plans to introduce a law denying citizenship to children of illegal immigrants. Actually, a challenge to birthright citizenship has been proposed in Congress as recently as 2009.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association, Immigration Policy Center and legal scholars cite judicial rulings and precedent, executive branch interpretations, congressional law and Supreme Court rulings in arguing to uphold birthright citizenship. They all say altering the amendment or its interpretation would create a subclass of citizens and lead to discrimination.

But the reform activists argue that the amendment was to grant citizenship to former slaves, not illegal immigrants.

According to Carol Helm, the founder of the Tulsa group Immigration Reform for Oklahoma Now, who supports the challenge, added: that since birth certificates are state-issued papers, it should also be controlled by the state; and that the myth of a U.S. born baby can serve as an anchor to allow illegal immigrants to remain in the country is lingering and encouraging people to do so.

If Oklahoma were to pass legislation restricting citizenship, it likely would be challenged in the federal courts.

Immigration law today regarding U.S.-born child does not change the immigration status of a parent, and a child cannot legally petition for a parent until age 21.

Additionally, an illegal immigrant must return to their home country pending a petition, which may trigger a 10-year ban from re-entering the country. The process involves eligibility based on congressional quotas and sponsor relationships.

In late 2008, the newest version of the U.S. naturalization test was introduced. Could you pass it? The questions are usually selected from a list of 100 samples that prospective citizens can look at ahead of the interview. Some are easy, some are not. We have picked some of the more difficult ones. Naturalization applicants must answer six of the ten questions correctly in order to pass the test.

NOTES: Candidates are not given multiple choices during the naturalization test. The following questions have been adapted from the immigration service’s sample questions.

If you are considering naturalization, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation. Managing attorney Jay Nunez will discuss your case with you and help you better understand the process.

An Irvine client notified me that his naturalization application was approved today. He hired me to supervise and advise him during the naturalization process, rather than prepare all the forms and evidence and attend the interview like I generally do for most clients.

When I first met him, I advised him that he could prepare the forms and evidence, and I would review his work to make sure that his evidence was organized correctly and his answers on the N-400 were correct. He wanted the peace of mind that accompanies having an immigration attorney involved in the process, but he did not necessarily need me to attend the interview with him. I gave him a list of evidence that he should provide with the N-400 and how to organize the evidence and forms. Once he put his packet together, I reviewed it and he filed the N-400 with USCIS.

He told me that his interview went very smoothly and he was happy to be taking the oath ceremony in the near future.

If you are considering naturalization, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation. Managing attorney Jay Nunez can help you by either handling the entire process or merely reviewing your work and advising you of what to do.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) wants to start deporting American citizens that are the children of illegal immigrants.

At a tea party rally in Ramona in San Diego County over the weekend, Hunter answered a man in the audience a question about the issue:

“We just can’t afford it anymore,” Hunter said. “That’s it. And we’re not being mean. We’re just saying it takes more than walking across the border to become an American citizen. It’s within our souls.”

Hunter also said he thinks Arizona’s controversial new immigration law “is a fantastic starting point.”

After Hunter’s statements, his spokesperson  Joe Kasper, didn’t really back down from the basics of Hunter’s statement, but did offer some more context: What he does want, Kasper said, is to do away with the citizenship rights for children of illegal immigrants who are born in the United States. In fact, Hunter is one of more than 90 House Republicans who are cosponsoring a bill that would do just that.

Mr. Hunter might want to read the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, because it clearly states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States.” Unless Mr. Hunter wants to redefine the term “person,” he might have a tough time accomplishing his goals. Mr. Hunter might want to retake some law classes as well, because you cannot amend the Constitution by merely passing a Congressional bill. Jus Sanguinis is the law of the land. If you don’t like it, consider moving to France.

A naturalization client in Huntington Beach had her N-400 application for naturalization approved today despite being convicted for a DUI five years ago. Due to the Driving Under the Influence misdemeanor conviction, she was sentenced to three years probation, which ended two years ago. She did not have any other convictions on her record.

Generally, a naturalization applicant must show good moral character over the last five years. However, because my client has been married to a US citizen for the last three years, the good moral character period applies only to the last three years. Because her DUI conviction occurred outside the three year statutory period, I argued that USCIS should not consider the DUI conviction. During the interview, the examiner pointed out that my client was on probation during the three year period in question. I argued that because a DUI is not considered a crime involving moral turpitude under Matter of Lopez-Meza (BIA 1999), the probation that resulted from the DUI cannot logically be considered a mark against my client’s moral character.

Additionally, I pointed out that 8 CFR 316.10(c)(1) states “An applicant who has been on probation, parole, or suspended sentence during all or part of the statutory period is not thereby precluded from establishing good moral character, but such probation, parole, or suspended sentence may be considered by the Service in determining good moral character. An application will not be approved until after the probation, parole, or suspended sentence has been completed.”

I argued that because my client was no longer on probation and the DUI misdemeanor was her only conviction, she should be considered to have good moral character and her naturalization application should be approved.

We provided USCIS with extensive documentation regarding my client’s good moral character including letters from employers, friends and her pastor. Ultimately, the examiner agreed that my client proved good moral character and approved the case. My client was extremely happy with the outcome, and she looks forward to her oath ceremony, which should occur in the next month or so.

If you are considering naturalization, but you are worried about previous convictions and how they might affect your naturalization attempts, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation. Managing attorney Jay Nunez will personally discuss your case with you and explain the risks, options and chances of success so that you can make an informed decision.

An  Irvine client was approved for naturalization yesterday afternoon. The client was originally from Pakistan. He obtained his green card over ten years ago; however, there was a major issue regarding his extended absences from the United States. Since obtaining his green card in 1997, he had been out of the United States for most of the time until 2006. Although he was approved for a re-entry permit twice, there was a concern that the USCIS officer might deem his permanent resident status abandoned due to his lengthy absences from the United States.

We attended the interview and I discussed the issue with the USCIS officer at length. I explained that my client had no intention of abandoning his permanent resident status and he was outside the United States because his parents wanted him to finish his secondary education in Pakistan before studying at a U.S. university. I pointed out case law such as Li v. Chertoff, which states that study abroad does not result in abandonment of residence. I mentioned Khodagholian v. Ashcroft which states that the test is whether the lawful permanent resident intended to be temporarily abroad and not whether the absence was over one year.

I discussed the issue with the USCIS officer at length, and eventually he was satisfied that my client’s absences were not indicative of an intent to abandon his permanent resident status.

If you are considering the naturalization process, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation.

We just received a notice of approval for an immigrant visa for the mother of a Santa Ana client. The daughter is a U.S. Citizen, and the mother is from the Philippines. We filed the I-130 visa petition in 2009. Because the mother of a U.S. Citizen over the age of 21 is considered an immediate relative, the annual limits on immigration do not apply; therefore, there is no waiting period (other than the standard processing time).

Although the I-130 visa petition has been approved, the mother will need to schedule a consular interview before the visa application can be approved, and she can immigrate to the United States permanently.

The U.S. Citizen daughter has also petitioned for her brothers in the Philippines; however, their visas will not be processed for several years, because annual limits apply to siblings of U.S. Citizens, and currently there is a backlog of petitions.

If you are considering filing a petition for a family member living in another country, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation. Managing attorney Jay Nunez will meet with you in person to discuss your options and help you understand your situation more fully.