Desire for Religious Freedom yield asylum approval

Ms. Yun and her child came to the US in 2015 under B2 visa.  She filed asylum shortly after she arrived and she received asylum approval recently.

Ms. Yun had some trouble attending her church in her home country.  Nothing too serious. In the US, she continued her religious activities and at the interview, the asylum officer spent asked her many detailed questions about her religion.  Ms. Yun was well prepared and she did not give the asylum officer any reason to doubt her credibility.

You do not need to have suffered past persecution in your home country to receive asylum approval.  As long as you have reasonable fear of future persecution, you may still receive asylum approval.

Our New Approved Cases

Client married his US citizen wife about 2 years ago.  His wife is 16 years older than him.  They filed the application themselves and had their first interview in 2016.  6 months after the first interview, the USCIS scheduled them for the second interview(marriage fraud interview).

They were nervous so they hired us.

you know the rest:  we discussed their case extensively and prepared them for the interview.

They were separated in the interview.  Although there were some minor discrepancies and some other small issues, overall they did well and the USCIS approved the husband's green card application 3 weeks after the interview.

In another case, client was ordered deported by the immigration court and her petition for review was dismissed by the 9th Circuit of Appeals.  Client married her husband while her case was pending at the 9th Circuit.

We took over the case 2 years after the 9th Circuit dismissed her petition for review.

you know the rest:  we got her waivers approved and she went back to China and last week she received her immigrant visa in Guangzhou, China.

We are extremely good at difficult cases.  There are many cases that are seemingly impossible in other places that were resolved by us.

If you have any difficult cases(we can handle not so difficult cases, too), please contact us.

Asylum Approved 2 months It Was Transferred to SF

An asylum seeker filed asylum in the summer of 2014 in Los Angeles.  She hired a lawyer.  But her lawyer filed a very simple application, without any supporting evidence and declaration.  Last summer She hired another "lawyer" who claimed he could get her interview fast.  After she paid $3000 that "lawyer" disappeared.

In early February of 2017, she moved to the Bay Area and hired us.  

We requested her case from LA asylum office and 2 weeks later we got interview notice.

Upon reviewing her file, we found many problems.  We had to redraft her declaration, submit missing evidence and prepare her for the interview.

Hard work paid off.  Client's application was approved two weeks after the interview.

If her case were still in LA, she may have to wait for another 3 years for the interview.  And with the condition of her file, she would certainly get a denial of her application.

Recent approved cases at Baughman and Wang

1.  Two I-526(investors' visa petition) were approved yesterday by the USCIS without Request for Evidence.  These two petitions were filed around November of 2015.

2.  Mr. Hui received asylum approval after interview.  Hui came from Guangxi, China.  He filed his asylum application in early 2015 in San Francisco.  Mr. Hui has 3 children, one from his first marriage, one from his current wife's previous marriage and the third one from his current wife. His wife experienced two abortions after she married Mr. Hui and finally gave birth to their first child in 2014. 

3.  We have a waiver case approved last week.  The case is an I-601 waiver for overstaying after deportation.

4.  We also have a permission to apply after deportation approved last week.  Client has outstanding deportation order and she lost her 9th Circuit Appeals review. She changed lawyer after she lost the federal court review. 

5. Ms. Yang is from Shandong.  She filed her asylum on January, 2015.  She participated religious activities before she came to the US as a student and she has continued her religious activities in the US.  She received her asylum approval in February of 2017.


Nun from a local Buddhist temple received immigrant visa petition approval

Our client came from China.  She studied English in college and went on to study Buddhist as a graduate student.  After her master's degree she came to the US as an exchange visitor(J-1).  

A temple in the Bay Area wishes to employ her as a Prior.

Under the immigration law, some religious workers may be eligible for immigrant visa if they meet certain requirements.

We filed the petition last July and today we received the approval notice without RFE.

Immigration Judge granted asylum to our client

Client entered the US in 2013 and applied for asylum in San Francisco.  The asylum office did not approve her application, alleging that our client did not have medical documents and inconsistencies in her application.

At hearing in immigration court, our lawyer presented a well prepared client and the whole hearing lasted about 2.5 hours and the immigration judge granted the asylum application.

Now client can file application for her family to join her in the US.

Even in Trump era, the basic immigration law and regulations are the same and a well prepared client with superb representation by a skillful lawyer will make the difference.

We welcome new clients to contact us for consultation(as always if we are retained within one week of consultation, the $200 consultation fee will be credited back to client).  If you are outside of San Francisco and you wish to do a phone consultation, you can make $200 consultation on our website and then schedule a time to discuss your case.

Contact us: 

Baughman & Wang, Attorneys at Law

111 Pine Street, Suite 1225

San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel. (415)576-9923 
Fax (415)576-9929


Fremont Office

39650 Liberty Street, Suite 240

Fremont, CA 94538

Tel: (510)623-9668 Ext. 101

Fax (510)623-9498

Los Angeles (213)915-6568


EB5 Direct Investment in Nevada approved by the USCIS

USCIS approved one of our direct EB5 investments in Nevada.

Our client invested $1,000,000 in a car wash business owned by his relatives.  We carefully designed the investment structure and corporate structure in order to fit the needs of direct EB5 investment.  Without request for evidence, USCIS approved this petition in 17 months.

While most EB5 investments are made in regional center projects, there are some direct EB5 investments.  We have done direct investments ranging from restaurant, after school, car wash, import/export and other types of businesses.  So far we have had 100% approval record (this also includes our regional center EB5 case).

If you wish to consult with us for your EB5 cases, please contact us at or call 415-576-9923.

Another 2 EB5 (I-526 approved)

As of today we have maintained 100% success rate for our I-526 and I-829 petitions.

USCIS announced today that there are 20,000 I-526 petitions pending with the USCIS.  This number of pending petitions alone will need at least 5 years to digest(if you think 4000 a year investors actually use the visa number, not counting their family members).

USCIS also announced today that it will begin interview for I-829.  randomly selected I-829 applicants may receive interview notices soon.

EB5 RFE: overcome the source of fund issue and I-526 approved

Last week we received an I-526 approval.  This case received request for evidence.  The USCIS asked about the source of fund.  In particular, the $500,000 investment was from a Hong Kong company and the company did not have any business and tax records.  To make things worse, the investment was wired into the company account from the company's CEO one day before the company wired the money to the EB5 petitioner.

After we responded to the RFE, USCIS approved I-526 petition within a week.
As of now, we never have had any I-526 or I-829 (remove condition) denials.

Win in California Labor Commissioner Hearing

We recently represented a doctor in a case where his former employee filed claims for overtime, rest period and meal time violations.  The former employee also claims for waiting time penalty, holiday pay and business reimbursement.  Total claimed amount was more than $50,000.

We had a meeting last year before the labor commissioner but we could not settle the case.

Under California labor law,  if the employer and the employee could not settle the dispute at the meeting, the matter will be referred to a formal hearing where a hearing officer takes the testimonies of both parties, witnesses and review any evidence submitted.

After two hours, the hearing officer concluded the hearing.

We just received the award:  former employee took nothing from the employer.  The decision discredited former employee's testimony and found her claims were not believable. 

It should be noted that if our client is found to owe her anything, the waiting time penalty would substantially increase the award.

We represent both employer and employee in labor(wage) dispute.

Direct EB5 I-526 approved

We recently got an approval for our direct EB5 client.

Client put $1 million and her relative put another $1 million to buy a restaurant in San Jose, California.  The company is also doing other business.  We helped clients working on incorporation, other business registration, business plan, source and path of funds.

USCIS approved the first investor in about 18 months.

Three months ago USCIS approved another of our direct EB5 case.

If you know exactly what business you want to do and you have friends/relatives to assist you in the United States, direct investment is very viable.

Chinese restaurant EB5 investor approved by the CIS

We just received an approval for one of our Chinese restaurant EB5 investors.  It took the CIS about 21 months to adjudicate the application.  But it is approved without request for evidence.

The Investor is a graduate student studying in the US.  He received the investment money from his family.  The restaurant is a new business located in a $1 million investment area(not the TEA).  Investor invested $1 million.

Although most EB5 investors choose to invest in regional centers, there are increasing number of investors invest their own business(direct investment).  If a investor knows well exactly what he or she wants, with the help of trusted partners in the US, direct investment is a good alternative to regional center EB5.

As of today, we have represented many regional center investors and direct EB5 investors with 100% success record!

A case delayed by the USCIS for 5 years

Client married a US citizen in 2009, filed I-130 and I-485 in 2010.  USCIS delayed the adjudication for 5 years without a decision.  Client asked the USCIS many times without any positive response.

We asked client several times to file lawsuit against the USCIS.  Finally in may, 2015 client decided to sue the government.  We filed the lawsuit in May and within 2 weeks we receive interview notice;  within 5 days after the interview we received the approval notices.

Once again mandamus action is the best way to compel the USCIS to act.

Removal order set aside after 90 days of the order

Ms. Xiong received her conditional green card in 2011  She did not file petition to remove the condition until 10 months after the deadline.  At that time she was referred to immigration court for removal hearing.

Ms. Xiong had separated from her husband in early 2013.  Her husband received the first notice from immigration court but he did not tell Ms. Xiong.  He claimed that he did not receive the hearing notice from the court.

Ms. Xiong failed to appear in her master hearing in January, 2015 and she was ordered removed to China by the judge.

Ms. Xiong was told the removal order in late February, 2015 and she immediately retained our service.

The Immigration  judge granted our motion to reopen the proceedings and Ms. Xiong now has a chance to get her green card back.

11 year old deportation order set aside

Ms. Gao was refereed to immigration court in 2003 after her asylum was denied.  She showed up for the first master hearing without lawyer.  She later found a US citizen boyfriend and hired a lawyer who charged her low fee to help her in court.  The attorney told her she does not need to go to court as she was about to marry the US citizen.

Ms. Gao failed to appear in her second master hearing and the judge ordered her removed.

Two months ago Ms. Gao came to our office asking for help.  gao married another man, also US citizen, in 2011.  She later discovered that she had an outstanding deportation order.

Gao does not want to return to her country for visa processing.  The only way to get her green card is to reopen her immigration court case.

This is very difficult case because the order was issued 11 years ago and she did not hire an attorney to do anything until now.  

We filed our motion one month ago and the immigration judge granted our motion to reopen the case last week.

Ms. Gao is saved, at least procedurally.

It is very difficult to reopen old immigration court cases.  We have done it many times because we know how to find the right facts and use the facts to the full benefit of our cases.

Client is rescued from disastrous consequences

Mr. Cao entered the US on a K-1 visa in 2003.  He married the sponsor and filed I-485, adjustment of status.  His application was approved and later his I-751, removal of condition, was also approved.  His wife divorced him in 2006.

During the marriage, Cao's wife gave birth to a child.  Cao is not the father.

After the divorce, cao married another woman in China.  Cao and his second wife has a child together, born while he was still married to his first wife.

In 2012, Cao, still a permanent resident,  filed I-130 visa petition for his wife and child.  The USCIS scheduled an interview in early 2014.  At this time, Cao retained us.

After we reviewed the case, we determined that the USCIS had every reason to suspect that the  first marriage was for immigration purposes.  Not only cao may lose his I-130 visa petition for his wife and child, he may face deportation for marriage fraud.

Preparation for the interview was time consuming.  Unfortunately client did not have much documentation to support the first marriage.

After the interview, we waited for more than 7 months.  Then we contacted the USCIS director for status.  two weeks later we received the second interview notice.

Again we prepared the client for this interview.

The second interview was conducted by an officer and her supervisor.  Lots of questions were asked about the first marriage.  Client was well prepared.

Shortly after the second interview, USCIS approved Cao's I-130 visa petition.

Lesson learned here:  a devoted and competent lawyer makes a huge difference.

BIA grants our Motion to Reopen and Remand 7 years after deportation order was issued.

Board of Immigration Appeals granted our motion to reopen and remand in a case where our client was represented by another counsel who committed terrible error which prejudiced client in her removal proceedings.  The BIA found that although the motion is untimely, we submitted sufficient evidence to toll the deadline based on ineffective assistance of counsel claim against the attorney.

 Within 5 months of the remand, we successfully helped our client to receive permanent resident status based on her marriage to an LPR husband. (Click to see)