We have won a series of cases where USCIS had earlier held that unpaid employment under OPT was legally unacceptable to maintain status. We have argued that such holding is contrary to all law, policy and precedence. Students are NOT required to engage in PAID employment. All these cases were won after we filed our briefs pursuant to Motions to Reopen (MTR).
F Visa Sample Cases
These are some sample cases from our files. It is impossible for us to present all have done past over 15 years of our practice. But these were some cases that came to mind when we started writing this column 2-3 years ago.
Our client, a former Tri-Valley University of California (TVU) student who was left out of status due to unexpected closure of TVU, applied for reinstatement to student status. He retained us to respond to the Request for Evidence (RFE) he received on his reinstatement application. There were several serious issues raised by USCIS in the RFE. One of them was that the USCIS alleged that the online classes our client took at TVUdisqualified him from full-time F-1 student status. We prepared a comprehensive response and documented our client’s entire case history. We argued that our client complied with F-1 regulations before and after his association with TVU, followed all the instructions of his Designated School Officials (DSO’s), and should not be faulted for relying and acting on the advice of TVU DSO’s.
USCIS accepted our arguments and approved the reinstatement.
Last week we received an approval for a difficult change of status RFE. We were retained to respond to an RFE for a client who had no ties to his home country (India). Six years of his H-1 were over and he was trying to get into F-1 status. He had been working and studying in Europe before coming to USA on H-1. We presented the facts of our client's background with complete honesty and sincerity. No games (which is the way all our cases are presented). I am glad to report that as has always been my belief, truthful presentation works.
We were approached by the parents of an applicant whose application for an F-1 visa had been denied based on Section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (possible immigrant).Normally, we would have not been able to do much. But in this case, the visa applicant had already visited USA three times in the past and left in time.While it was true that her entire family lived in USA, the fact remained that she had never violated any US laws, despite having an opportunity to do so. We filed for reconsideration.