INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I)

INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) Expedited Removal Successful Case: Overcoming a 5-Year Entry Bar

by

Our client, a successful businessman from the UK, faced a significant hurdle when he was refused entry to the U.S. and barred for five years. The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) believed he had failed to properly disclose a misdemeanor from 25 years ago that had been expunged. Despite having traveled to the U.S. numerous times for business and pleasure without any issues, this incident resulted in a directive from the CBP to apply for a different visa after the five-year period to conduct business in the U.S.

Understanding the urgency and importance of frequent travel to the U.S. for his business, he reached out to us for assistance.

We promptly engaged with CBP in an effort to remove the five-year bar. After persistent efforts and coordination with two different CBP offices, we successfully had the bar lifted. Subsequently, we assisted the client in obtaining an L1 visa, which we determined to be more suitable for his business needs.

If you are facing a similar situation and need our help, please contact us at 305-515-0613 or info@messersmithlaw.com. We are here to assist you.

Immigration Success Stories – INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) + Expedited Removal Under 235(b)

by

When a foreign national tries to enter the U.S., CBP can deny the entry if CBP believes the foreign national  intends to remain in the US permanently but does not have a dual intent nonimmigrant visa nor an immigrant visa. This generally results in an expedited removal order which comes with a five year ban from entering the United States.  Let’s highlight two recent successful cases where we were able to remove these charges from our client’s records.

  1. A client from Brazil sought entry to the United States for a business conference but was denied entry due to INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) and removed. CBP believed the client lacked proper documentation for the intended stay. However, upon review, we discovered errors in the CBP’s assessment. Through meticulous documentation and persuasive arguments, we appealed the decision to the CBP. As a result, the removal order was lifted, and our client was granted a visa, allowing them to attend the conference and pursue their business endeavors in the U.S.
  2. A family from Mexico planned a vacation to the United States but encountered unexpected challenges upon arrival. Despite having valid tourist visas, they were detained by CBP at the border due to suspicions of insufficient documentation under INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) and removed. After thorough investigation and advocacy, we clarified the family’s intentions and provided additional evidence of their ties to their home country. Our efforts resulted in a huge victory and the 5 year ban was erased, allowing the family to reenter as tourist and enjoy their vacation without further hindrance.

Do you have a similar case or a case you thought was hopeless?  Don’t be discouraged.  We have won many complicated cases.  If you have a similar inadmissibility issue, contact us by phone at 305 515 0613 or email us at info@messersmithlaw.com.

Immigration Success Stories – INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) and INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(II)

by

Immigration Success Stories – INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) and INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(II)

When a foreign national tries to enter the U.S., CBP can deny the entry if CBP believes the foreign national intends to remain in the US permanently but does not have a dual intent nonimmigrant visa nor an immigrant visa. CBP can either allow the foreign national to withdraw the application or order expedited removal which carries a five year ban.  CBP can apply additional penalties as they deem applicable.  Let’s highlight two recent successful cases where we were able to remove these charges from our client’s records.

  1. In February 2023, our client from India informed us that he was previously refused entry to the US under INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I), removed pursuant to 235(b)(1), and was also charged with fraud under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i).  He told us that this happened more than 10 years prior and that some other lawyers said that nothing could be done to fix it.  Apparently, back in 2012, he and his wife tried to enter the US as tourists but in different traveling parties and CBP thought they were trying to hide the fact that they were together to increase their chances to enter the US successfully.

    We filed our client’s appeal in April of 2023 and heard back just two months later that we had won the case.  The five year ban from the removal had expired on its own since it had been so long since the incident but we were able to get the fraud charge cleared and since our client had immigrated to Canada several years prior, he was able to enter the US without applying for a visa and the INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) determination was no longer an issue.
  2. Another client came to us in March 2023 and told us that because she previously attended Silicon Valley University, CBP refused to allow her entry to the US as an H1B holder.  CBP cancelled her H1B visa, refused her entry pursuant to INA 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I). CBP used their authority under INA 235(b)(1) to perform an expedited removal and barred her from returning to the US for 5 years.  After spending a significant amount of time to build a strong case, we were able to file her appeal in May of 2023. We heard back in July 2023 that we won her case and she was instructed to apply for a new H1B visa.  We assisted her with her visa interview, got her visa approved, and she was able to reenter the United States to reunite with her family.

Do you have a similar inadmissibility problem?  If so, contact our office and we’ll see if we can correct it for you.