Search cases
Compare defaults:
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52
vs
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med
Results
Showing 6776–6800 of 7923 (page 272 / 317)
NOV082021_02A6245
Remanded
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The Applicant is a native and citizen of El Salvador who entered the United States without inspection, admission, or parole in 2000 and was subsequently granted temporary protected status based on a
different application. The Director denied the U adjustment application, determining that the Applicant had not demonstrated that his marital relationship with…
NOV082021_02D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
A. Relevant Facts and Procedural History The Petitioner filed his U petition in August 2015 with a Supplement B signed and certified by the Deputy County Attorney from the! I Arizona Attorney's Office inl I Arizona ( certifying official). The certifying official checked boxes indicating that the Petitioner was the victim of criminal activity involving or si…
NOV082021_02H2212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The issue before us on motion is whether the Applicant has submitted new facts or evidence that overcome our reasons for dismissing his appeal and establish proper cause for reopening his waiver application. As noted, the Director denied the waiver application because a U.S. consular officer determined that the Applicant is inadmissible under section 212(a)…
NOV082021_02H5212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The issue on appeal is whether the Applicant has established that denial of the waiver application will result in extreme hardship to her U.S. Citizen parent. An applicant may show extreme hardship in two scenarios: 1) if the qualifying relative remains in the United States separated from the applicant, and 2) if the qualifying relative relocates overseas w…
NOV082021_02H6212
Remanded
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The Applicant is a native and citizen of Mexico born in 1983. He has presented credible evidence and testimony indicating that, up until December 2018, he had reason to believe that he was a U.S. citizen born in Texas. At that time, he encountered questions about his citizenship from the U.S. Department of State when he applied to renew his U.S. passport. W…
NOV082021_03A6245
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The Applicant is a 33-year-old native and citizen of Ecuador. His mother filed a Form 1-918 Supplement A, Petition for Qualifying Member of U-1 Nonimmigrant (U derivative petition), on his behalf: which USCIS approved, according him derivative U-3 nonimmigrant status from April 2014 to April 2018. The Applicant was in Ecuador at the time his U petition was…
NOV082021_03D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The Petitioner filed his U petition in October 2014 with a Form 1-918, Supplement B, U nonimmigrant Status Certification (Supplement B), certifying that he was the victim ofrobbery under section 211 of the California Penal Code (Cal. Penal Code). The narrative portion of the Supplement B states that the perpetrator approached the Petitioner at his food cart…
NOV082021_03H5212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The issue on motion is whether the Applicant submitted a valid signature on her previously submitted Form 1-290B. In our prior decision, which we incorporate here, we found that the Applicant did not provide a valid signature as the signature on the above referenced Form 1-290B did not match the signature on her underlying appeal and application. On motion,…
NOV082021_05H5212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
As a preliminary matter, we note that the review of any motion is narrowly limited to the basis for the prior adverse decision. Here, although the Applicant addresses the Director's denial of the underlying waiver application, the subject of the prior decision was our summary dismissal of her appeal. As such, the issue in this matter is whether the Applican…
NOV082021_06H5212
Remanded
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The Applicant is a native and citizen of Mexico born in 1983. He has presented credible evidence and testimony indicating that, up until December 2018, he had reason to believe that he was a U.S. citizen born in Texas. At that time, he encountered questions about his citizenship from the U.S. Department of State when he applied to renew his U.S. passport. W…
NOV082021_07H5212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The Applicant must demonstrate that denial of the application would result in extreme hardship to a qualifying relative or relatives, in this case his U.S. citizen spouse. An applicant may show extreme hardship in two scenarios: 1) if the qualifying relative remains in the United States separated from the applicant and 2) if the qualifying relative relocate…
NOV082021_08H5212
Remanded
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 08, 2021
—
The Applicant, a citizen of Mexico, does not contest her inadmissibility. She entered the United States on or about January 1, 2019, on a B-2 nonimmigrant visa with the intention to marry a U.S. citizen and remain in the United States, in contravention of her visitor visa. The Applicant married her husband, the qualifying relative in this application, onl I…
NOV052021_01A6245
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
The Applicant, a native and resident of Honduras, was granted U-2 derivative status November 2015, with a validity period of November 2015 through September 2019 . In March 2019 , the Applicant timely filed his U adjustment application. In October 2019 , the Director issued the Applicant a request for evidence (RFE) advising that his U adjustment applicatio…
NOV052021_01B2203
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
The issue before us is whether the Petitioner has established that our decision to dismiss his appeal was based on an incorrect application oflaw or USCIS policy. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). The Petitioner must specify the factual and legal issues raised on appeal that were decided in error or overlooked in our decision. Because the Petitioner did not indicate…
NOV052021_01D12101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
The Applicant, a native and citizen of Mexico, first entered the United States without inspection or parole in October 2009 .1 He contacted I I after seeing an advertisement at a laundromat indicating that the company was looking for drivers and was offered a position as a driver paying $13. 7 5 an hour. The record reflects that the Applicant worked fo~ I I…
NOV052021_01D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
The Petitioner became a legal permanent resident (LPR) in 1998 through marriage. Inl I 2003, her LPR status was revoked after being arrested for and charged with alien smuggling. In April 2015, the Petitioner concurrently filed a U petition and a waiver application. In July 2019 the Director denied her U petition, concluding that the Petitioner was inadmiss…
NOV052021_02A6245
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
The Applicant is a native and citizen of Mexico who entered the United States without inspection, admission, or parole in July 2002. USCIS granted the Applicant U nonimmigrant status from October of 2014 through September 2018 as a victim of armed robbery who was helpful in the investigation of the crime. The Applicant timely filed the U adjustment applicat…
NOV052021_02D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
A. Relevant Facts and Procedural History In April 2016, the Petitioner concurrently filed a U petition and a waiver application. On March 20, 2019 the Director denied his U petition, concluding that the Petitioner was inadmissible based upon the underlying denial of his waiver application. The Director denied the waiver application finding that the Petition…
NOV052021_02H5212
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
An applicant may show extreme hardship in two scenarios: 1) if the qualifying relative remains in the United States separated from the applicant, and 2) if the qualifying relative relocates overseas with the applicant. Demonstrating extreme hardship under both of these scenarios is not required if the applicant's evidence demonstrates that one of these scen…
NOV052021_03D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
A. Relevant Facts and Procedural History The Petitioner filed her U petition in August 2015 based upon a robbery perpetrated against her inO 2013. With her U Jetition she provided a Supplement B signed and ce1iified by both a lieutenant of and the chief of th _ [Police Depaiiment inl lcalifornia (certifying officials). The certifying officials checked boxes…
NOV052021_04D14101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 05, 2021
—
The Applicant, a citizen of Mexico, last entered the United States in January 1996. He filed his T application in October 2018.
A. The Applicant's Trafficking Claim
The Applicant indicated in his two personal statements that he began working for a construction company, A-C-E-, 1 in September 2001. His supervisor at A-C-E- told the Applicant he would be pai…
NOV042021_01A6245
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 04, 2021
—
In our previous decision dismissing the Applicant's appeal, incorporated here by reference, we affirmed the Director's decision, agreeing that the negative factors presented by the Applicant outweighed the positive and mitigating factors. We acknowledged the positive and mitigating factors present in the Applicant's case. Specifically, the Applicant submitt…
NOV042021_01B9204
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 04, 2021
—
In this case, the Petitioner, a citizen of Ghana, indicated on her VA WA petition that she had been married two times. As evidence of her divorce from her first marriage, she submitted a one-page Order for Confirmation of Dissolution ofCustoma] Marriage (confirmation of dissolution document) from the District Magistrate Court. I Ghana, which contained two s…
NOV042021_01C6101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 04, 2021
—
A. Relevant Factual and Procedural History Inl 12019, when the Petitioner was 20 years old, a probate and family court in Massachusetts issued an order entitled Judgment on Petitioner's General Petition for Dependency and Special Findings of Fact and Rulings of Law Pursuant to M G.L. c. 119 §39M (SIJ order). The order states, in pertinent part, that the cou…
NOV042021_01D12101
Dismissed
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt52: Missing
v3_no_parsed_rules_gpt5mini_med: Missing
Nov 04, 2021
—
The Applicant, a citizen of Mexico, last entered the United States without admission, inspection, or parole in January 2006. She filed this T application in February 2019 based on her claim that the individuals who smuggled her into the United States subjected her to trafficking.
A. The Applicant's Trafficking Claim
The Applicant's personal statements set…