Phone: 312-714-2800
-
Recent Posts
- Administrative Closure Explained: When Detention Means No Pause June 7, 2025
- Trump’s 2025 travel ban is back—overbroad, underinclusive, and unnecessary, but likely to survive in court as a policy spectacle, just like before. June 6, 2025
- Who Must Register Under the 1940 Alien Registration Law? | 2025 Immigration Compliance Guide May 31, 2025
- When Paperwork Errors Don’t End Cases: The New Rules for Defective NTAs After Lopez-Ticas May 29, 2025
- Court Says No: How the President’s Tariff Powers Were Put in Check May 28, 2025
Archives
Categories
RSS Feed
Links
- CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 25-M-397(SCD) CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 25-M-397(SCD)
- Law Offices of Michael D. Baker
-
Monthly Archives: January 2014
Guidance on Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers
U.S. Department of Homeland Security January 24, 2014 Field Guidance SUBJECT: Guidance Pertaining to Applicants for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Field Operations Directorate Washington, DC 20529 Purpose: This field guidance addresses the adjudication of Form … Continue reading
Posted in Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence WaiverI-601A, I-601A, Provisional Waivers, Stateside Processing of I-601A Waivers, The Provisional Waiver, Unlawful Presence, Unlawfully Present in the United States, Waivers, Waivers of Inadmissibility
Tagged Guidance on Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers, Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers
Leave a comment
CA7 holds that misadvice and failure to advise does not evade the non‐retroactivity of Padilla
Chavarria, born in Mexico, became a legal permanent U.S. resident in 1982. In 2009, Chavarria pleaded guilty to distributing cocaine. One year later, the Supreme Court decided Padilla v. Kentucky, imposing a duty on defense attorneys to inform noncitizen clients … Continue reading
CA7 denies I-751 extreme hardship waiver because an alien has no protected liberty interest in discretionary immigration relief
CA7 Denies Extreme-Hardship Waiver for Petitioner Convicted of Marriage Fraud. The court denied the petition for review, finding that the petitioner’s due process argument failed because he had no legitimate claim of entitlement to an extreme-hardship waiver under INA §216(c)(4). … Continue reading