We just received a DACA approval for one of our clients in Newport Beach. He has been in removal proceedings in the Los Angeles Immigration Court for several years and we were defending him against deportation.

When Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals was enacted, we weren’t sure if we wanted to continue fighting his deportation case or pursue deferred action to terminate the removal process. After much deliberation, he decided to pursue DACA rather than defend against deportation.

Now that we’ve received the DACA approval, the next step is to attend his next immigration court hearing in Los Angeles and request that the immigration judge terminate proceedings.

If you are currently in deportation proceedings in Los Angeles or San Diego, contact Nelson & Nuñez to schedule a consultation. With over 45 years of combined immigration experience, we can help you better understand the options available to you.

Sine 1997, California law has permitted a criminal court judge to offer deferred entry of judgment to qualifying defendants charged with a first, minor drug offense. The DEJ process was meant to help first time offenders avoid the debilitating consequences of a drug conviction. Thousands of immigrants accepted the deferred entry of judgment program only to find that, under immigration law, their cases were still considered convictions, and they were still subject to deportation and other serious consequences.

Under federal immigration law, a successfully completed DEJ remains an extremely damaging drug "conviction." It causes deportability and inadmissibility, and makes it impossible for the spouse or child of a US citizen to obtain lawful resident status.
Immigration law provides that a conviction occurs once there is a guilty plea or finding of guilt, coupled with a punishment including assignment to a drug program. Whether California later classifies it as a non-conviction is irrelevant under immigration law.

To eliminate a conviction for immigration purposes, the plea must be withdrawn for cause, based on some legal error in the proceedings - for example the defendant was improperly represented by counsel or was misinformed about the consequences of pleading guilty.

In Penal Code § 1203.43 the Legislature acknowledges that the DEJ statute misinformed defendants, including all non-citizens, about the consequences of pleading guilty, and for that reason deems the plea legally invalid. Withdrawal of the guilty plea is thus for cause, based on this legal defect.

Under Penal Code § 1203.43, the withdrawn guilty plea should satisfy federal immigration law and allow non-citizens to avoid severe immigration consequences stemming from their DEJ cases.

If you have pled guilty to a deferred entry of judgment case and wish to withdraw the plea, contact Nelson and Nuñez, PC.

We just received an I-140 approval for a nurse of one of our San Diego healthcare facility clients. We started the case earlier this year with a prevailing wage determination filing. Once we received the prevailing wage from the Department of Labor, we filed the job posting at the worksite for ten days.

Although the nurse candidate was educated in the US and had a US nursing license, we were surprised to learn during our preparations that she was required to obtain a visa screen. The visa screen for nurses is generally used to ensure that foreign-trained nurses are qualified to practice nursing in the United States.

We filed the I-140 last month and used the premium processing program to receive an approval within two weeks. She falls into the worldwide EB-3 category (she is not from Mexico, Philippines, India or China), so her wait time is approximately 1-2 months until a visa will be available.

We will start preparing all the adjustment of status documents now for her and her husband.

If you are considering an employment based immigration case, contact Nelson & Nuñez to schedule a consultation. We work with companies of all sizes and industries in devising immigration strategies for their employees. We will help you better understand the viable options, timelines and fees associated with the immigration process.

Governor Brown signed legislation requiring local police and prosecutors to sign the form I-918 supplement B - the form required for U visa certification - for alien victims of serious crimes. This makes California the first state to adopt such a stance.

Until now, different police departments and district attorney offices had different policies on when and under what circumstances they would certify U visa cases. In Kern county, Sheriff Donny Youngblood admitted he had only signed 2% of U visa certifications and only in cases where they needed the witness to testify in court.

The U visa program was created in 2000 to encourage undocumented victims of crime to cooperate with law enforcement in the capture and prosecution of criminals. If an alien is the victim of a serious crime and helps law enforcement investigate the perpetrators, she is eligible for a U visa which can ultimately turn into lawful permanent residency. As part of the process, the alien must have a law enforcement official sign off that the alien was helpful and cooperative. Oftentimes the law enforcement certification is the most difficult part of the U visa process and different law enforcement agencies have different policies on when they would sign off. From my experience District Attorneys and judges are often helpful and willing to cooperate, but if the perpetrators were never apprehended and the case was never initiated by a prosecutor, the police or sheriff's office were the only agencies eligible to sign off. Many police departments were reluctant to sign off under such circumstances.

The new law signed by Governor Brown should standardize the U visa certification process within the law enforcement community.

If you have been the victim of a crime, even if it was many years ago, contact Nelson & Nuñez. You may be eligible to pursue a U visa so you can live and work in the United States legally.

We just received an I-485 Adjustment approval for the husband of a US citizen. The couple lives in Los Angeles and the marriage based adjustment interview was conducted in downtown Los Angeles.

The couple met a couple years ago and began dating shortly thereafter. They moved in together and got married in January 2015. Because the husband entered the US legally on a visitor visa in 2014, he was eligible to adjust his status in the United States rather than returning to his home country of Brazil to consular process.

We filed the I-130 visa petition and the I-485 application concurrently along with the rest of the required forms and evidence establishing the client’s eligibility for a green card.

The interview went smoothly; however, the officer was unable to make a decision at the conclusion of the interview. A couple weeks later we received the approval.

Because the marriage was less than two years old at the time of green card approval, the client will have a two year conditional green card. He will be required to file an I-751 during the 90 day period immediately preceding the expiration date. USCIS will want to see evidence that the couple is still living together and conducting themselves as one would expect of a married couple.

If you are married to a US citizen and are interested in obtaining lawful permanent resident status, contact Nelson & Nuñez to schedule a consultation. Attorneys Jay Nuñez and John Nelson will personally meet with you during a confidential consultation so you can better understand your situation and which options are viable.

We just received an approval for an I-485 for a client in Texas. The client was approved for U status over three years ago. After living in the US in U visa status for three years, she was eligible to apply for permanent residency.

We filed the I-485 application for permanent residency along with evidence that she has lived in the US for the past three years and proof that it is in the public interest to allow her to become a permanent resident. The case was pending for six months before we received the approval.

The client is very excited to become a permanent resident. We have represented this family throughout the U visa process, consular processing and green card applications for the past five years or so. We are still waiting for the parents' green cards to be approved. Their cases were slightly more complex which likely accounts for the further delays.

If you are curious about the U visa and would like to schedule a consultation, contact Nelson & Nu

We recently received an approval for an I-130 visa petition filed by an US citizen wife for her husband. The I-130 was filed in April 2015, and the case was approved without an RFE (request for evidence) from USCIS.

The couple has been married for a year and a half, and they live in Riverside. The wife has two children from a previous marriage, but the couple has no children together. The next step is for us to file the I-601A provisional waiver. This will likely take a couple months to put together, but we hope to file before the holidays.

Although the couple does not have any children together, the US citizen wife has her whole family here and she would experience extreme hardship if her husband were forced to return to Mexico. As part of our preparation of the I-601A waiver, we will explain the couple's story and the difficulties they would face if the I-601A is not granted.

If you are curious about your immigration situation and would like to schedule a consultation, contact Nelson & Nuñez to schedule a confidential meeting. Attorneys John Nelson and Jay Nuñez will personally meet with you to help you better understand your situation and the options available to you.