HAMILTON ENDS THE YEAR WITH TWO IMMIGRATION COURT ASYLUM APPROVALS AND ONE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL BY THE ASYLUM OFFICE

Mr. Hamilton completed trial today of his last Immigration Court matter for the year 2010, with an approval of Asylum for his Kenyan client, by Immigration Judge (IJ) Sholomson of the Los Angeles Immigration Court. Mr. Hamilton has been with this case at the Asylum Office and Trial Court levels for the past four and a half years.

On December 16, 2010, the Los Angeles District Asylum Office granted another of Mr. Hamilton's Kenyan clients a "Recommended" Asylum Approval. Such approval is an indication of the Asylum Office's intent to grant asylum once background and identity checks are completed by the Government. Mr. Hamilton rarely reports on his numerous approvals at the Asylum Office level for any given year.

On December 7, 2010, Judge Riley of the Los Angeles Immigration Court approved another of Mr. Hamilton's Kenyan clients' asylum, claims, finding that the client had overcome the complex one-year filing bar issue in spite of having resided in the United States for many years prior to the filing of the application. In this case, Mr. Hamilton, bypassed the Asylum Office phase of the case and chanelled the case to the Immigration Court, where Hamilton believed it would be more effectively adjudicated. Hamilton has litigated this matter for two years.

So ends the year 2010 with Hamilton winning approvals of all Asylum Claims tried before Immigration Courts within the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Mr. Hamilton suffered one asylum denial this year at the trial court level, of a case which he re-tried before an Immigration Judge in Bloomington Minnesota (within the jurisdiction of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals). Hamilton had taken that case over from another attorney at the very advanced 8th Circuit Court of Appeals phase of the case, winning a remand of the case back to the trial court pursuant to a motion to reopen before the BIA. Mr. Hamilton re-tried the case by tele-video conference, and since its denial has appealed the case back up to the BIA where it remains pending.

By: Maria Rangel