Without documentary proof of entry into U.S., Guyanese adjusts status after appearing in immigration court

Gehi & Associates was retained for a case that went to an individual hearing in July 2012 and involved the complicated issue of proving proper inspection and admission for purposes of INA section 245(a) adjustment of status, when there was no documentary proof of the inspection and admission and the only possible evidence was the credible testimony of the applicant about the details of the entry.
These types of cases usually cause desperation among many who are married to US citizens and are anxious to adjust their status to lawful permanent resident, but would only be eligible for such adjustment if they could prove proper inspection and admission at the port of entry. Such cases involve people who are not eligible for grandfathering under section 245(i), because they are not grandfathered by a petition filed on their behalf on or before April 30, 2001.

The client is now about 30 years old and has a USC wife, but he was essentially smuggled into the U.S. when he was a minor. He entered with a name-substituted passport (immigration defense attorneys call it name-substituted, ICE calls it fraudulent). He was about 12 years old at the time he entered, and he was escorted into the U.S. by an adult travel companion, a stranger to him, after his grandmother passed away in Guyana and no one was left in Guyana to take care of him.
He entered the U.S. through JFK airport in New York, was inspected and admitted, and was therefore eligible for adjustment of status under 245(a) of the INA through an I-130 petition by his USC wife. However, without the travel documents that he used to enter the U.S., it became difficult to prove that he was actually inspected and admitted. This is an issue that is coming up in numerous cases, and USCIS frequently refuses to give applicants the benefit of the doubt on this issue. So, when the client applied for adjustment of status before he retained Gehi & Associates, the USCIS denied his application and placed him in removal proceedings. At that point, the client left his previous attorney and retained Gehi & Associates just a few months before his individual hearing in Immigration Court.
Gehi & Associates sent the client for a polygraph exam regarding the details of his entry, which he passed. Gehi & Associates submitted a brief to the Immigration Court, noting that even without the benefit of the original entry documents, an applicant can be granted adjustment if he proves to be credible with regard to the details of his entry. The lawyers at Gehi & Associates went through practice trial questions with the client numerous times before the hearing, so that he would know what to expect, especially on cross-exam by ICE, and at the hearing the judge focused on the testimony regarding whether the client actually was inspected and admitted into the U.S. and was therefore, prima facie eligible for adjustment.
The judge was surprised that Gehi & Associates was moving forward with this application and seemed to believe that it would be very difficult to prove proper inspection and admission. The client had no hope of adjustment through grandfathering under the option of 245(i). Gehi & Associates had filed an application for cancellation of removal as a back-up, in case the 245(a) adjustment did not work. Anyway, the law firm completed direct exam on the entry details and the client testified very credibly. ICE did a short cross exam, but the law firm felt that the client’s answers only provided further support for the information elicited.
The immigration judge called a sidebar after the testimony questions and said the client was very credible. The judge stated on the record that the client had completed a proper inspection and admission. The judge and the ICE attorney noted that the polygraph test was an interesting strategy and that it was helpful. It was a good idea by Attorney Naresh Gehi, the principal of Gehi & Associates, to incorporate the polygraph test into the case strategy. The testimony at the hearing was also necessary to demonstrate the details of the entry and the credibility of the witness, and the client did just great. The several visits at the law office by the client for practice definitely paid off. The judge granted his adjustment and the client is now a lawful permanent resident of the United States.
(To know more about this case, call Gehi & Associates at 718.263.5999/718.577.0711 or email info@gehilaw.com)