SRW Border Lawyers Successfully Guides Client Through Removal Proceedings & I-192 Waiver Process

Background: Client, a naturalized Canadian citizen, initially approached SRW after she was placed in removal proceedings. CBP Officials placed Client in removal proceedings because she had attempted to enter the U.S. without a waiver after CBP Officials had previously advised her that she was inadmissible pursuant to INA § 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) and INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i) and required a waiver. Notably, Client had initially been informed of her inadmissibility when she was only a permanent resident of Canada and mistakenly believed that she no longer required a waiver to enter the U.S. since she was now a Canadian citizen.

With the assistance of SRW, Client admitted to the factual allegations of her Notice to Appear and conceded her removability. SRW also prepared a Motion to Withdraw Application for Admission on Client’s behalf, which ultimately was granted by the Immigration Judge.

Following the conclusion of Client’s removal proceedings, Client retained SRW to assist her with obtaining a nonimmigrant waiver to overcome her inadmissibility to the U.S.

Grounds of Inadmissibility: INA § 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) – Two (2) Theft Convictions that occurred over nineteen (19) years ago; and INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i) – Misrepresentation stemming from her failure to disclose her criminal convictions on a B1/B2 visa application over ten (10) years ago.

SRW Waiver Strategy: Evidence of Rehabilitation (no criminal issues since 1997, no immigration issues since being placed in removal proceedings in 2010, demonstrated remorse, productive member of community); Compelling reasons for entry (many family members living in the U.S. including her only living parent, siblings and extended family members).

Application Type: I-192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant

Adjudicating Agency: Admissibility Review Office (Filed @ Peace Bridge Port of Entry in Buffalo, New York)

Purpose of Entry into U.S.: Business and Pleasure Visits [B-1/B-2]

Adjudication Time: 240 Days

Canadian Citizen With Another I-192 Waiver Approval

Application Type: I-192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant

Adjudication Time: 129 Days

Adjudicating Agency: Admissibility Review Office (Filed @ Edmonton International Airport in Edmonton, Alberta)

Grounds of Inadmissibility: INA §212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) – (3) Convictions for Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude (Three (3) Breaking & Entering Offenses from the mid-1980s)

Purpose of Entry into U.S.: Business & Pleasure Visits [B1/B2] – Attend business meetings and trainings in the U.S. and vacation to the U.S.; Employment in H-1B, O-1 or TN

SRW Strategy: Evidence of Rehabilitation (no encounters with the law in over twenty-five (25) years, received a pardon for all criminal offenses in 2013, compliance with terms of previous waiver approvals, record of success in personal and professional lives)

Approval Period: Five (5) Years

Another I-192 Waiver Approved For Max Five Years

Application Type: I-192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant

Adjudication Time: 102 Days

Adjudicating Agency: Admissibility Review Office (Filed @ Peace Bridge Port of Entry in Buffalo, New York)

Grounds of Inadmissibility: INA §212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) – Conviction for Crime Involving Moral Turpitude (2000 Conviction for Theft Over $5,000)

Purpose of Entry into U.S.: Business & Pleasure Visits [B1/B2] – Visit with family and friends in the U.S., vacation to the U.S., attend tradeshows that are held in the U.S., and travel with clients to the U.S.; Employment in H-1B, L-1 or TN

SRW Strategy: Evidence of Rehabilitation (no criminal issues since 2000, on-going compliance with U.S. immigration laws – complied with all terms and conditions of previous waiver approvals and parole authorizations, respected businessperson, active member of community)

Approval Period: Five (5) Years

Are you really inadmissible?

When a Client comes to us after being advised by U.S. Customs & Border Protection or another entity that they require a waiver in order to overcome their inadmissibility, the first step that we always undertake is to ensure that a waiver really is required for the individual to accomplish what they are seeking. If we determine that a waiver is in fact necessary, we then discuss the merits of the waiver application itself with the client.

In matters relating to inadmissibility relating from a criminal incident, once we review the facts, we will want to review the associated criminal documents (police report, charging document, certificate of disposition, etc.), as well as the statute(s) that the individual was convicted under as it existed at the time of the conviction.

Once we have all the information necessary, our firm reviews the following issues to determine whether or not the Client truly does require a waiver:

• Does the Client actually have a "conviction" as defined under immigration law?
• If the Client does have a conviction, does it render them inadmissible? (For example, if they are alleged to be inadmissible for a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude - is the conviction actually for a CIMT?)
• If the Client does have a conviction rendering them inadmissible, do they qualify for any exceptions (Petty Offense Exception or Juvenile Exception) that would waive the inadmissibility?

If at any point during our analysis we find sufficient legal and factual grounds to determine that the Client is not inadmissible and therefore does not require a waiver, we would propose a strategy to the Client to prepare a submission to the appropriate agency demonstrating why they do not require a waiver.

What's the point of this review? Just because a foreign national has been told they require a waiver, they should still seek experienced legal counsel to confirm they do in fact require a waiver.