India Man’s Many Green Card Attempts Failed Due to Removal Order; Removal Order Terminated, His Green Card Was Easily Obtained

[Please note: The Client’s name and case key details may have been altered to preserve the identity of the client. This Success Story is not intended to be an offer of service or case plan. Every case is unique. The Success Story is presented for information purposes only.]

In 2016 the Margaret W. Wong team in Atlanta agreed to work with Rudra, a man in his forties from India who came to the United States in the late 1990’s and had been unsuccessful in all attempts to obtain a green card since that time. Of course, this was very frustrating for Rudra especially since his parents immigrated from India two years after he did and were already U.S. citizens.

Sadly, Rudra had never done that well on his own in both his personal and his professional life; in fact, he had to rely on his dad, Ayaan, for a lot including employment. Accordingly, although he was well-educated, his source of income was managing a small motel that Ayaan owned.

Along these lines, on two separate occasions, Ayaan had filed an I-130 (Petition for Alien Relative) on behalf of his son; the first time in 2001 when Ayaan was a legal permanent resident and the second time in 2013 when he was a United States citizen in accordance with advice from other legal representation.

Our team thus did a thorough review of Rudra’s history and learned that an “in absentia” removal order had been issued for Rudra’s failure to appear at a hearing shortly after he arrived in the United States. When we confronted Rudra with this information, he groaned and said that he had changed addresses multiple times back then and never received the order to appear.

Our team thus concentrated our efforts on cancelling the removal order but encountered additional problems when, during a prepping session, Rudra admitted that he had been briefly married in the early 2000’s; a fact that was never disclosed on any of his previously filed documentation which invalidated a lot of it including the first I-130 that Ayaan had filed.

Nevertheless, we really felt sorry for Rudra when he said, with tears in his eyes, that he was deeply ashamed of the entire incident and he didn’t even tell his parents about it because the other party was not of their religious faith.

Having gotten everything finally out in the open, our team decided that we had some pathways to pursue, nevertheless, especially considering that although it had been invalidated, the 2001 I-130 application could be used for grandfathering purposes to secure 245 (i) relief for Rudra under the LIFE Act of 2000.

We were thus able to file an MTR (Motion to Reopen) and get the removal order terminated.

Fortunately, the second I-130 filed by Rudra in 2013 was still valid so it was only a question of waiting until the priority date was current, which it was in December of 2019, before we filed an I-485 (Application for Legal Permanent Residency).

Due to circumstances pertaining to the Covid-19 pandemic, Rudra didn’t get an USCIS interview until October of 2020 but when it took place, Rudra behaved in a very mature fashion and owned up to his past negligence and mistakes. In fact, Ayaan who accompanied us to the interview said he was quite proud of him.

A few months passed but in the middle of March of 2021, we were on the phone with Rudra congratulating him on his newly approved legal permanent residency.

Of course, Rudra was quite thrilled and shared with us that, despite the beating that the hospitality industry had endured during the pandemic, he had managed to keep his dad’s motel in the black, so Ayaan planned to partner with him in other ventures.

Get Started with a

Schedule a consultation and review your immigration case with one of our experienced attorneys.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form. Due to heavy demand, please note that, should you wish to proceed with an attorney consultation, these are by appointment only and cost $400.
Privacy Policy