Case No. 1
The USCIS asylum office had denied this client's asylum application and the US government was trying to deport her. But we showed the court that this person was a member of a church that was persecuted in her country and that if she were deported, she faced at least a 10% chance of being persecuted.
We appeared in court with three witnesses from the church. We had submitted written testimony from each of them. Because we introduced the witnesses to the court the government attorney agreed that our case was very strong and told the judge that he believed our client. The judge granted asylum in about 90 minutes.
This client will now be able to file petition for her husband who was ordered deported but remained in the US for the past 10 years.
Case No. 2
This is case is based on forced abortion and insertion of IUD. Client had an abortion in 1990 and subsequently had an IUD inserted without her consent. The Asylum office denied her case for inconsistencies and lack of details.
This is a very difficult case because the abortion was 27 years ago and her country has since changed it policy on how many child its citizens may legally have. In addition, client gave inconsistent testimonies not only in asylum interview but also at her immigration court hearing. Finally the court interpreter made several important mistakes at her first day hearing (this case was continued after first day hearing and it concluded this week). We have to listen to the hearing tape to point out the interpreter mistakes; to call a doctor to testify about the effect of an IUD.
In the end, the judge believed our client and concluded that even client's country may have changed it family planning policy, our client suffered past persecution and her IUD continues to cause pain.
Experience, competence and care for client are no substitute in any immigration cases, especially in immigration court.