On October 18, 2012, I conducted my third immigration "Removal" trial for the month, before the Los Angeles, California Immigration Court, in the matter of a native of Kenya. In spite of profound complexities in this matter, we concluded proceedings with a grant of Withholding of Removal, by Immigration Judge Tabaddor, which will allow our client to remain in the United States indefinitely, with continuing renewable employment authorization.
By: Duane M. Hamilton
Friday, October 19, 2012
Friday, October 12, 2012
SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER BEAR FRUIT FOR KENYAN AND JAMAICAN CLIENTS
In late September to October 10, 2012, I completed a couple important cases for Kenyans and one Jamaican family.
On September 27, 2012, the Anaheim Asylum Office (AO) granted asylum in what had been a protracted case with that office which necessitated my filing of complaints against an AO supervisor with Asylum Office Headquarters in Washington DC and with the Office of the Inspector General. The case had been filed in mid 2011 and interviewed not long thereafter, yet remained pending for far longer than it should have due to certain internal matters at the AO. Ultimately a second interview was conducted on September 27 and the case was granted that very day. We are grateful to the AO and the officers who participated in resolving this matter.
On October 5, 2012, I conducted a trial in Los Angeles in my first Jamaican Non-LPR Cancellation of Removal claim. The applicants had been residing in the United States, out of status, for a significant amount of time, but were able to demonstrate that they should be granted Lawful Permanent Residence as a result of their long stay in the US and certain hardships which their US born children would suffer were they to return to Jamaica. The case was heard and approved by Judge Tabaddor of the Los Angeles Immigration Court.
On October 10, 2012, I completed a second day of trial in a hotly contested Kenyan asylum claim before Judge Rooyani of the Los Angeles Immigration Court. The Government's attorneys argued that asylum should be denied because the case had not been filed within the requisite one year period required by law in asylum cases. However, I was able to demonstrate, using the very particularized circumstances of the alien and the presentation of certain witnesses, including experts, that a waiver of the one year requirement should be granted. Judge Rooyani found that the applicant had established eligibility for such waiver and had also met the required burden in the asylum claim, immediately granting the alien asylum in the United States.
All of these cases resulted in final decisions in which no appeal or referral was taken. We look forward to our remaining matters scheduled for trial and other hearings this year.
By: Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
On September 27, 2012, the Anaheim Asylum Office (AO) granted asylum in what had been a protracted case with that office which necessitated my filing of complaints against an AO supervisor with Asylum Office Headquarters in Washington DC and with the Office of the Inspector General. The case had been filed in mid 2011 and interviewed not long thereafter, yet remained pending for far longer than it should have due to certain internal matters at the AO. Ultimately a second interview was conducted on September 27 and the case was granted that very day. We are grateful to the AO and the officers who participated in resolving this matter.
On October 5, 2012, I conducted a trial in Los Angeles in my first Jamaican Non-LPR Cancellation of Removal claim. The applicants had been residing in the United States, out of status, for a significant amount of time, but were able to demonstrate that they should be granted Lawful Permanent Residence as a result of their long stay in the US and certain hardships which their US born children would suffer were they to return to Jamaica. The case was heard and approved by Judge Tabaddor of the Los Angeles Immigration Court.
On October 10, 2012, I completed a second day of trial in a hotly contested Kenyan asylum claim before Judge Rooyani of the Los Angeles Immigration Court. The Government's attorneys argued that asylum should be denied because the case had not been filed within the requisite one year period required by law in asylum cases. However, I was able to demonstrate, using the very particularized circumstances of the alien and the presentation of certain witnesses, including experts, that a waiver of the one year requirement should be granted. Judge Rooyani found that the applicant had established eligibility for such waiver and had also met the required burden in the asylum claim, immediately granting the alien asylum in the United States.
All of these cases resulted in final decisions in which no appeal or referral was taken. We look forward to our remaining matters scheduled for trial and other hearings this year.
By: Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)