Fresno Immigration Attorney

Category Archive Immigration News

  • Home   /  
  • Archive by category "Immigration News"
    • ( Page2 ) ( Page2 )
ByPhillip Kim

DHS to Publish Final Rule That Expands I-601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver Eligibility

On July 29, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) will publish in the Federal Register a final rule that will expand eligibility for I-601A provisional unlawful presence waivers.

Prior to the expansion, DHS allows only certain immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are residing in the United States to request an I-601A provisional unlawful presence waiver before departing for consular processing for their immigrant visas. The waiver would be available to applicants where the sole ground of inadmissibility would be unlawful presence under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. In order to get the waiver approved, applicants must show they are statutorily eligible for the unlawful presence waiver and establish extreme hardship to his or her U.S. citizen spouse or parent.

Under the expanded provisional waiver, applicants can now also show extreme hardship to his or her lawful permanent resident (LPR) spouse or parent. The expanded provisional waiver is expected to open the door to more eligible applicants and will be effective starting August 29, 2016.

ByPhillip Kim
, , , , , , ,

Supreme Court Tie Blocks Obama Immigration Plan- DAPA & DACA expanded

Today, June 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court deadlocked in a 4 to 4 split in the long-awaited case, United States v. Texas, effectively upholding the lower court’s injunction halting the expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and the creation of a new program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). The original DACA program remains in place.

The decision was just nine words long: “The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court.”

The case, United States v. Texas, No. 15-674, concerned a 2014 executive action by the president to allow as many as five million unauthorized immigrants who were the parents of citizens or of lawful permanent residents to apply for a program that would spare them from deportation and provide them with work permits. The program was called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA.

The court did not disclose how the justices had voted, but they were almost certainly split along ideological lines. Administration officials had hoped that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. would join the court’s four-member liberal wing to save the program.

The case hinged in part on whether Texas had suffered the sort of direct and concrete injury that gave it standing to sue. Texas said it had standing because it would be costly for the state to give driver’s licenses to immigrants affected by the federal policy.

Chief Justice Roberts is often skeptical of expansive standing arguments. But it seemed plain when the case was argued in April that he was satisfied that Texas had standing, paving the way for a deadlock.

White House officials had repeatedly argued that presidents in both parties had used similar executive authority in applying the nation’s immigration laws. And they said Congress had granted federal law enforcement wide discretion over how those laws should be carried out.

But the court’s ruling may mean that the next president will again need to seek a congressional compromise to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws. And it left immigration activists deeply disappointed.

In their Supreme Court briefs, the states acknowledged that the president had wide authority over immigration matters, telling the justices that “the executive does have enforcement discretion to forbear from removing aliens on an individual basis.” Their quarrel, they said, was with what they called a blanket grant of “lawful presence” to millions of immigrants, entitling them to various benefits.

In response, Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. told the justices that this “lawful presence” was merely what had always followed from the executive branch’s decision not to deport someone for a given period of time.

Speaking at the White House, President Obama described the ruling as a deep disappointment for immigrants who would not be able to emerge from the threat of deportation for at least the balance of his term.

“Today’s decision is frustrating to those who seek to grow our economy and bring a rationality to our immigration system,” he said. “It is heartbreaking for the millions of immigrants who have made their lives here.”
(from nytimes)

ByStaff
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Supreme Court Tie Blocks Obama Immigration Plan- DAPA & DACA expanded

Biden’s Announcement on June 17, 2024

Qs & As for Biden’s Announcement on June 17, 2024

Q1. What does it do?
A1. It provides deportation protections for undocumented spouses and their children.
It allows those undocumented spouses to obtain work permits. These spouses can then apply for permanent residence status without leaving the United States. And it also eases work visa processes for DACA recipients and dreamers.

Q2. Who is eligible?
A2.1 Spouses who are married to US citizens and have lived in the US for at least 10 years.
A2.2 DACA recipients and undocumented noncitizens who have earned a degree from an accredited university and if they have received a high-skilled job offer in a field aligned with their degree.

Q3. What are the specific requirements?
A3.1. For Spouses-
a. Must NOT have been admitted or paroled into the US.
— Must NOT have entered the US on a Visa, Border Crosser Card, Advance Parole, etc.
b. Have lived in the US since June 17, 2014 or before and are currently present in the US.
c. Are legally married to US citizens on June 17, 2024.
— NOT eligible if married to US citizens before but divorced on June 17, 2024
d. Have NEVER been deported.
e. Do NOT pose a threat to national security or public safety.
f. Have NOT committed certain crimes.

A3.2. DACA recipients and undocumented noncitizens who have earned a degree from an accredited university and if they have received a high-skilled job offer in a field aligned with their degree.

Q4. When can I file?
A4. You may file later this summer 2024, when the application period begins- most likely in August 2024. If you file early, your application will be rejected.

Q5. What documents are required?
A5. A marriage certificate, proof of your presence since 2014 (pay stubs, house leases, medical records, school records, bank statements, utility bills, any documents with your name, address and date), etc.

Q6. Is there anything I can do to get my case ready now so that I can file immediately after the application period begins?
A6. Gather all the documents above in Q5.

Q7. After I file in August 2024, if USCIS issues a notice confirming my eligibility, when can I apply for a Permanent Resident Card (Green Card)?
A7. You have three years to apply for a Green Card.

Q8. Will this program actually go through and become a valid relief as announced?
A8. Republicans will certainly file lawsuits to stop this relief. Consequently, it may be halted in the court system for a long time before it becomes a valid relief. So, if you have other options such as Advance Parole from DACA or I-601A waiver, you might want to pursue those options without waiting for this relief.

Q9. What if I have questions that were not answered on this page?
A9. Check back here again every week because this page will be updated when USCIS releases more information.

_______________________________________________________________________________

On June 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court deadlocked in a 4 to 4 split in the long-awaited case, United States v. Texas, effectively upholding the lower court’s injunction halting the expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and the creation of a new program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). The original DACA program remains in place.

The decision was just nine words long: “The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court.”

The case, United States v. Texas, No. 15-674, concerned a 2014 executive action by the president to allow as many as five million unauthorized immigrants who were the parents of citizens or of lawful permanent residents to apply for a program that would spare them from deportation and provide them with work permits. The program was called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA.

The court did not disclose how the justices had voted, but they were almost certainly split along ideological lines. Administration officials had hoped that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. would join the court’s four-member liberal wing to save the program.

The case hinged in part on whether Texas had suffered the sort of direct and concrete injury that gave it standing to sue. Texas said it had standing because it would be costly for the state to give driver’s licenses to immigrants affected by the federal policy.

Chief Justice Roberts is often skeptical of expansive standing arguments. But it seemed plain when the case was argued in April that he was satisfied that Texas had standing, paving the way for a deadlock.

White House officials had repeatedly argued that presidents in both parties had used similar executive authority in applying the nation’s immigration laws. And they said Congress had granted federal law enforcement wide discretion over how those laws should be carried out.

But the court’s ruling may mean that the next president will again need to seek a congressional compromise to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws. And it left immigration activists deeply disappointed.

In their Supreme Court briefs, the states acknowledged that the president had wide authority over immigration matters, telling the justices that “the executive does have enforcement discretion to forbear from removing aliens on an individual basis.” Their quarrel, they said, was with what they called a blanket grant of “lawful presence” to millions of immigrants, entitling them to various benefits.

In response, Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. told the justices that this “lawful presence” was merely what had always followed from the executive branch’s decision not to deport someone for a given period of time.

Speaking at the White House, President Obama described the ruling as a deep disappointment for immigrants who would not be able to emerge from the threat of deportation for at least the balance of his term.

“Today’s decision is frustrating to those who seek to grow our economy and bring a rationality to our immigration system,” he said. “It is heartbreaking for the millions of immigrants who have made their lives here.”
(from nytimes)

— — —
Summary of Executive Action Obama Announced

Today, 11/20/2014, President Barack Obama announced broad executive action to offer temporary relief from deportation to millions of undocumented immigrants.

“If you’ve been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes – you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily, without fear of deportation,”

The most controversial aspect of the president’s executive order allows as many as five million undocumented immigrants to stay in the U.S., including the undocumented parents of children born here. Those parents will be able to request deportation relief and work permits for three years at a time, provided that they register, pass background checks, pay fees, and prove that their legal resident or citizen child was born before the date of the executive order.

The plan also protects more so-called “DREAMers” — young immigrants brought to the United States illegally as children. Previously, individuals were eligible for deferred action if they were born after 1981 and entered the country before 2007. That date is expected to change to January 1, 2010, with no age limit.

Obama noted that the move would not grant undocumented immigrants citizenship or the right to remain in the country permanently. And he said that he will still push for a legislative solution

NBC News
Please LIKE our Facebook Page for Updated News:
https://www.facebook.com/phillipkimlaw

— — —

While relatives of U.S. citizens often find a path to legal status, relatives of green card holders can also apply for a green card. If you are related to a permanent resident or green card holder, you might be eligible to petition for a green card.

A green card holder may apply for his/her spouse and children (unmarried, any age) to come to the U.S. legally. As a relative of a permanent resident, you will be placed in a category known as “family second preference”. Because the number of visas given out to family preference applicants annually is limited, you will be placed on a wait list. When a visa number is available, it will be assigned to you.

If you are in the U.S., the process of applying for a visa will be the same as that of relatives to U.S. citizens. If you are already in the U.S., your relative must file Form I-130. When it is approved, you must wait until the priority date in the family preference category becomes current. The priority date is the date when the I-130 is properly sent. When it becomes current, you can file the I-485 which will allow you to adjust your status. Eventually, the adjustment process will result in your status as a permanent resident.

For the most part, the application process must be completed by the green card holder. First, he/she must file Form I-130 and provide USCIS with proof of his/her status as a legal permanent resident. Documents and evidence of the relationship between the green card holder and immigrant must also be included. Examples of evidence include birth and marriage certificates. If you and your family member do not share the last name, you must show proof of the legal name change. More specific details can be found on the forms that need to be filed.

If you are outside the U.S., you must undergo the process of consular processing. This type of processing occurs when USCIS works with the Department of State to issue a visa on an I-130 that has been approved. When the Department of State issues you the visa, you can travel abroad and will become a permanent resident when you enter the U.S.

Many families are under the impression that an approved I-130 means that an applicant has been granted a benefit or change in status. This is not true. If USCIS accepts and approves the visa petition, it means that you are now in line for a visa number. If you belong to a first preference category, you will be issued a visa right away. If not, there will be a longer wait.

If you have any questions about preference categories, the process of becoming a U.S. citizen, or how to obtain a visa, please contact Immigration Attorney Phillip Kim.

ByPhillip Kim

DACA & DAPA- What Could Happen After Supreme Court’s Recent Certiorari?

In November 2014, President Obama announced Executive Actions: Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) and expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

These Executive Actions would allow over 10 millions of immigrants to apply for protection from deportation and a work permit.

Subsequently, Texas and 25 other states filed a lawsuit challenging the Executive Actions. In February 2015, a federal district court in Texas issued an order putting DAPA and expanded DACA on hold. The Obama administration quickly appealed this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. On November 9, 2015, a divided panel of the Fifth Circuit issued a decision that affirms the Texas federal district court’s order that temporarily blocks DAPA and expanded DACA.

Timeline of Expected Events:

March 4, 2016: Obama’s brief due
March 11, 2016: Amicus briefs supporting DACA/DAPA due
April 27, 2016: Last day of this term’s arguments in Sp. Ct.
June 2016: Decision by Sp. Ct.

ByPhillip Kim

One of every 15 children in USA has an undocumented parent

Something happened while the immigration system in the United States got broken, something that should change the way we talk about fixing it. Years went by, and nature took its course. More than 11 million unauthorized immigrants settled into our communities; many formed families and had children. Now at least one of every 15 children living in the United States has an unauthorized parent, and nearly all of those children are native-born United States citizens.

Think of that statistic, one in 15, the next time you drive by a school or a playground. Think of those children living with the knowledge that the federal government can take their parents away. Common sense tells you that the threat of a parent’s deportation will exact a terrible price.

Now it’s possible to get some measure of how big the cost is. In a recent report, we assessed more than 50 research studies of the children of unauthorized immigrants conducted by scholars in a variety of fields. This growing body of work shows that fear and uncertainty breed difficulties that manifest themselves in delayed cognitive development, lower educational performance and clinical levels of anxiety.

By one estimate, more than six million children are paying the price of having an unauthorized immigrant parent, and more than five million of them were born here. A study that followed 380 New York City newborns for three years found evidence of lower cognitive skills as early as 24 months among the children of the undocumented and concluded that parents’ psychological distress played a major role. A 2004-8 Los Angeles survey of more than 5,000 immigrants found that having an unauthorized immigrant mother means children will end their education with one and a half years less schooling than those growing up under identical circumstances, with a mother who is in the country legally.

The research not only diagnoses the costs of policy failure but also points the way to a solution. The same Los Angeles study found that 43 percent of children with a father legalized in the 1986 immigration reform act received some college education, compared with 14 percent of similar children whose father remained an unauthorized immigrant. Legalization can place these young people on a life trajectory equal to that of their peers.

Once you take this evidence into consideration, the challenges change. The nation has an interest in regulating immigration, yet it also has a stake in its children. Current policies do not succeed in regulating immigration, but they do force these children into life-stifling insecurity.

Though now blocked by a legal challenge, the executive actions issued by President Obama in November offered an immediate if short-term fix. One of the proposed programs would grant permission to parents of American citizens and legal residents to remain in the United States for three years and to work legally, as long as they meet a number of conditions. An amicus brief signed by an array of educational organizations and children’s advocacy groups cited our report as evidence of the harm current policies inflict on children who are United States citizens, and the federal government made the same argument during an appellate court hearing this month.

These young citizens are at risk of being less than full members of society. Removing the threat of deportation from their families gives them a chance to prosper. That serves the public interest more effectively than maintaining an enforcement system widely decried as ineffective and unjust.

In the universe of manufactured disadvantage, we cannot think of many instances in which sitting judges, with the stroke of a pen, can bring immediate and measurable relief to millions of children. Here, they can. The remedy begins by understanding that the adults can no longer be seen simply as people who slipped the border to find work. We must begin to see them as parents, as the people raising our nation’s children. Some will reject that view and fault the adults for being in this country without proper immigration status.

But the American sense of fairness and system of justice have long embraced the notion that the “sins of the father” should not be visited on the children. Reasonable minds can debate whether there is blame to attach to the parents. There is no reasonable case to be made for punishing their children, who are citizens of the United States. Yet they are punished every day.

(Source: The New York Times)

ByPhillip Kim

Certain H-4 Dependent Spouses Are Now Eligible For Employment Authorization

USCIS announced today that starting May 26, 2015 certain eligible H-4 dependents may apply for employment authorization (work permits). USCIS believes this change will reduce the economic burdens and stress that H-1B nonimmigrants and their families will have, especially when an H-4 dependent spouse is unable to work and generate income.

Eligible individuals under this new initiative include certain H-4 dependent spouses of H-1B nonimmigrants who:

1. Are the principal beneficiaries of an approved Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; or
2. Have been granted H-1B status under sections 106(a) and (b) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 as amended by the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act. The Act permits H-1B nonimmigrants seeking lawful permanent residence to work and remain in the United States beyond the six-year limit on their H-1B status.

USCIS Director Leon Rodriguez states “Allowing the spouses of these visa holders to legally work in the United States makes perfect sense. It helps U.S. businesses keep their highly skilled workers by increasing the chances these workers will choose to stay in this country during the transition from temporary workers to permanent residents. It also provides more economic stability and better quality of life for the affected families.”

The number of individuals eligible to apply for employment authorization under this rule could be as high as 179,600 in the first year and 55,000 annually in subsequent years as estimated by USCIS.

ByPhillip Kim

USCIS Will Start Accepting Expanded DACA Applications On February 18, 2015

Eligible applicants may submit their expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) applications to USCIS beginning February 18, 2015.

The expanded DACA will allow an even greater population of people to qualify under the program than under the existing DACA program. In order to qualify, you must meet the following requirements:

(1) Have no lawful immigration status
(2) Entered the United States before the age of 16
(3) Have lived in the United States continuously since at least January 1, 2010
(4) Be of any age
(5) Graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have a GED, or currently enrolled in school, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States
(6) Have not been convicted of certain criminal offenses

Even if you do not qualify for expanded DACA, you may still be eligible under the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA) Program.

Under the DAPA program, you qualify if you:

(1) Have no lawful immigration status
(2) Have a US citizen or lawful permanent resident son or daughter as of November 20, 2014
(3) Lived in the United States continuously since January 1, 2010
(4) Was physically present in the United States on November 20, 2014
(5) Are not an enforcement priority for removal from the United States and have not been convicted of certain criminal offenses

The application period for DAPA is expected to start sometime in mid to late May 2015. If you are granted DACA or DAPA, you will receive a work permit valid for three years subject to renewal.

ByPhillip Kim

How to Get a Green Card under Parole In Place PIP Permanent Resident Cards

Our Client received a Permanent Resident Card under Parole In Place (PIP). It took only a few months from filing to approval. I attended the interview with my clients and it took only 10 minutes.

PIP allows spouses/children/parents of Military Service personnel to apply for a Green Card in the US without leaving the country. No waiver (perdón) is required.

Authority

INA §§ 212(a)(6)(A)(i), 212(d)(5)(A), 235(a), and 245(a), (c); 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(a)(6)(A)(i),1182(d)(5)(A), 1225(a), and 1255(a), (c)

Background
Parole of Spouses, children and parents of Armed Forces personnel

In partnership with the Department of Defense (DoD), USCIS has launched a number of initiatives to assist military members, veterans, and their families to navigate our complex immigration system and apply for naturalization and other immigration services and benefits.
This PM builds on these important initiatives as there is concern within DoD that some active members of the U.S. Armed Services, individuals serving in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve and individuals who have previously served in the U.S. Armed Forces or Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve face stress and anxiety because of the immigration status of their family members in the United States.
Military preparedness can potentially be adversely affected if active members of the U.S. Armed Forces and individuals serving in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve, who can be quickly called into active duty, worry about the immigration status of their spouses, parents and children.
Similarly, our veterans, who have served and sacrificed for our nation, can face stress and anxiety because of the immigration status of their family members in the United States. We as a nation have made a commitment to our veterans, to support and care for them. It is a commitment that begins at enlistment, and continues as they become veterans.
Responding to these and similar concerns by several Members of Congress about soldiers and veterans, the Secretary of Homeland Security on August 30, 2010 emphasized the Department’s commitment to assisting military families. The Secretary identified several of the discretionary tools that the Department utilizes “to help military dependents secure permanent immigration status in the United States as soon as possible.” Among the tools listed was “parole … to minimize periods of family separation, and to facilitate adjustment of status within the United States by immigrants who are the spouses, parents and children of military members.” 1
INA § 212(d)(5)(A) gives the Secretary the discretion, on a case-by-case basis, to “parole” for “urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit” an alien applying for admission to the United States. Although it is most frequently used to permit an alien who is outside the United States to come into U.S. territory, parole may also be granted to aliens who are already physically present in the U.S. without inspection or admission. This latter use of parole is sometimes called “parole in place.”

A. Parole in Place for Spouses, Children and Parents of Active Members of the U.S. Armed Forces, Individuals in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve or Individuals Who Previously Served in the U.S. Armed Forces or the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve

As noted above, the decision whether to grant parole under INA § 212(d)(5)(A) is discretionary. Generally, parole in place is to be granted only sparingly. The fact that the individual is a spouse, child or parent of an Active Duty member of the U.S. Armed Forces, an individual in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve or an individual who previously served in the U.S. Armed Forces or the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve, however, ordinarily weighs heavily in favor of parole in place. Absent a criminal conviction or other serious adverse factors, parole in place would generally be an appropriate exercise of discretion for such an individual. If USCIS5 decides to grant parole in that situation, the parole should be authorized in one-year increments, with re-parole as appropriate.

ByPhillip Kim
,

Mexican Birth Certificates Are Issued by Mexican Consulates

Issuance of certified copies of Mexican birth certificates at Consulates of Mexico.

Starting January 15th, 2015, the consulates of Mexico in the United States will issue copies of birth certificates registered in Mexico.

To obtain their certified copies, Mexican nationals should visit the nearest consulate, present an official proof of identity, fill out an application and provide their Clave Única de Registro de Población (CURP) in case they have one. The cost of each certified copy will be $13.00 dollars.

The issuance of certified copies does not carry any additional costs. Be aware of abuses and scams. Nobody can charge additional fees for this service.

Those interested in obtaining a certified copy of their birth certificate can get more information in the free application for smartphones and mobile devices MiConsulmex or at the toll free number Centro de Información y Asistencia a Mexicanos (CIAM): 1-855-463-6395.
Mexican consulates will continue offering protection and consular assistance to Mexicans regardless of their immigration status.

ByPhillip Kim

Finally, Tonight 5:00 PM, Obama Will Announce Executive Action

At 5:00 PM, Pacific Time (8:00 PM, Eastern Time) tonight, Obama will announce his long overdue Executive Action on Immigration.

Here is the preview of the terms of Executive Action and who will be eligible.

Up to four million undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States for at least five years can apply for a program that protects them from deportation and allows those with no criminal record to work legally in the country.

An additional one million people will get protection from deportation through other parts of the president’s plan to overhaul the nation’s immigration enforcement system, including the expansion of an existing program for “Dreamers,” young immigrants who came to the United States as children. There will no longer be a limit on the age of the people who qualify.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals is a program that allows certain immigrants who were brought into the country as children to stay and work on a temporary basis. Of the nation’s 11.7 million unauthorized immigrants in 2012, about 1.2 million were eligible for the program. The Obama administration is considering expanding eligibility to an estimated 700,000 additional people.

The Obama administration is expected to extend protections to live and work in the United States to as many as 3.3 million parents of children who are American citizens or legal residents, and it could further extend them to parents of DACA-eligible children.

If all of the more extensive expansion scenarios for children and parents listed above were put into place, roughly an additional five million unauthorized immigrants would be extended temporary protections, leaving more than six million unaffected.

Immigration advocates rallied behind Mr. Obama’s actions, describing them as a much-delayed victory for millions of people.

NY Times

Need Help?

Get the Latest News

To receive important Immigration news, enter your email address below:
Email

Testimonials


"My family member recommended Attorney Phillip Kim. My whole experience with Attorney Kim's office was pleasant. Attorney Kim was thorough in preparing my case and assured me answering all of my questions throughout the process. I got my Green Card in a little over 3 months from filing and the entire process took less than one year. I would definitely recommend Attorney Phillip Kim to anyone who wants to fix their immigration status." Gina & Edgar from the Central Valley

"Amazing service. Great communication. My case was approved a little over three months. I have been recommending Mr. Kim to my family and friends." Alexa & Abraham from the Central Valley
"I am a DENTIST busy managing two offices and hired Attorney Kim recently. Alex Denes, DDS, PhD. Mr. Phillip Kim is a very knowledgeable and efficient immigration attorney. I was extremely pleased on how he handled the immigration of my father-in-law. His office staff is courteous and always returned my calls and email inquiries in a timely fashion. His Fresno office is very clean and he has extremely good knowledge of the US immigration law. I felt very safe having him handle our case. I am confident that you will not benefit of the same level of professionalism elsewhere. I am a busy professional, dentist with 2 offices and time and efficiency matters more. All that said, I found his fees to be extremely reasonable relative to the kind of service that he provides. I congratulate him on his knowledge and dedication as well as I congratulate his office staff for their professionalism. Dr. Alex Denes, DDS, PhD."
“I am a REGISTERED NURSE and My father just went through very lengthy difficult deportation proceedings. We hired our first lawyer, who lost our case. That’s when we hired Attorney Kim, who appealed and took our case to San Francisco Immigration Court. He attended our hearings in Court and finally won our case. My father now has a Green Card. If you have a Deportation Case or are about to be deported, please call me. I will tell you how Attorney Kim helped my father with his Deportation case. My Cell # is (559) 802-7124.” – by Nalleli Medina, RN; Tulare, CA.
"I am an ENGINEER. Attorney Kim helped me and my wife realize our American dream of staying together in the US by getting my wife a Green Card. It took less than three months. Please call my cell. (559) 978-9497 or home at (559) 297-4040. I will tell you more about Attorney Kim's practice." - by Leo HISUGAN & Marites HISUGAN; Fresno, CA.
“My green card application was denied. Attorney Kim appealed for me and attended the interview with me. It was approved at the interview. Please call me if you want to ask me about Attorney Kim’s work. (209) 534-7112.” – by Molly Harrington; Los Angeles, CA"
“I am a REGISTERED NURSE. We got our Green Card approved in less than three months. Everything went very well smoothly. Thank You. We highly recommend Attorney Kim. Please call us at (559) 475-0155. We will tell you more about our experience with Attorney Kim’s firm.” – by Raul TABADA, RN and Family; Fresno, CA.

 

Need Help?

Get the Latest News

To receive important Immigration news, enter your email address below:
Email:

Testimonials

"I am a DENTIST busy managing two offices and hired Attorney Kim recently. Alex Denes, DDS, PhD. Mr. Phillip Kim is a very knowledgeable and efficient immigration attorney. I was extremely pleased on how he handled the immigration of my father-in-law. His office staff is courteous and always returned my calls and email inquiries in a timely fashion. His Fresno office is very clean and he has extremely good knowledge of the US immigration law. I felt very safe having him handle our case. I am confident that you will not benefit of the same level of professionalism elsewhere. I am a busy professional, dentist with 2 offices and time and efficiency matters more. All that said, I found his fees to be extremely reasonable relative to the kind of service that he provides. I congratulate him on his knowledge and dedication as well as I congratulate his office staff for their professionalism. Dr. Alex Denes, DDS, PhD."
“I am a REGISTERED NURSE and My father just went through very lengthy difficult deportation proceedings. We hired our first lawyer, who lost our case. That’s when we hired Attorney Kim, who appealed and took our case to San Francisco Immigration Court. He attended our hearings in Court and finally won our case. My father now has a Green Card. If you have a Deportation Case or are about to be deported, please call me. I will tell you how Attorney Kim helped my father with his Deportation case. My Cell # is (559) 802-7124.” – by Nalleli Medina, RN; Tulare, CA.
"Attorney Kim helped me and my wife realize our American dream of staying together in the US by getting my wife a Green Card. It took less than three months. Please call my cell. (559) 978-9497 or home at (559) 297-4040. I will tell you more about Attorney Kim's practice." - by Leo HISUGAN & Marites HISUGAN; Fresno, CA.
“My green card application was denied. Attorney Kim appealed for me and attended the interview with me. It was approved at the interview. Please call me if you want to ask me about Attorney Kim’s work. (209) 534-7112.” – by Molly Harrington; Los Angeles, CA"
“We got our Green Card approved in less than three months. Everything went very well smoothly. Thank You. We highly recommend Attorney Kim. Please call us at (559) 475-0155. We will tell you more about our experience with Attorney Kim’s firm.” – by Raul TABADA and Family; Fresno, CA.
“I hired two other lawyers before Mr. Kim. They could not do it. It was denied. Finally, my third attorney, Mr. Kim helped me to get my green card even after my husband died. Please call me at (559) 283-5636. (ask for Reagan). We will tell you more about how Mr. Kim helped us.” – by Sochinda Nguon & Reagan; Fresno, CA"

 

PhillipKimLaw.com | Theme: Appointment Blue by Webriti