5718 Westheimer Road
Suite 1100
Houston, TX 77057

Tel: 800.878.1807 (U.S. Toll Free)
Fax: 866.608.2766
Email: contact@niwus.com 

LPY Law Group

Success Highlight: I-601 Waiver for Chinese Communist Party Membership and I-485 Approval

On June 6, 2023, LPY Law Group (LPY) received approval for a Form I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility and Form I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status for a Client who was, at one point, a member of the communist party prior to coming to the United States.

Client came to the U.S. with an F-1 visa to earn her Master’s degree. Soon after graduation, she met her husband, a U.S. citizen, and they were married.

The following year, Client’s husband filed a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative concurrently with Form I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status. Client and her husband filed these cases themselves and attended the interview without an attorney. Following the interview, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) finding Client to be inadmissible pursuant to INA § 212(a)(3)(D) and ineligible to adjust status because she had been a member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) within five years of submitting the Form I-485 application. The RFE stated that Client did not qualify for exemption for involuntary membership under INA 212(a)(3)(D)(ii) based on the statement she provided and requested that Client submit Form I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility. Client retained LPY to respond to prepare and submit the Form I-601 waiver application and to respond to the RFE for the I-485 application.

To meet the deadline for the RFE, LPY Law Group needed to prepare and submit the I-601 waiver application within about six weeks after Client retained our firm. With little time to spare, LPY began to prepare the evidence, which required proof of extreme hardship to a U.S. citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident spouse, child, or parent to qualify for the waiver. USCIS has stated that the “common consequences of denying admission” do not warrant a finding of extreme hardship.

At this point Client and her husband had barely been married for three years. Client’s only U.S. citizen relative was her husband, and they had no children or other dependents. Further, Client’s husband had only one close relative in the United States, his mother who lived in another state. Client and her husband were both high earning and successful STEM professionals with flourishing careers at a leading technology company in Silicon Valley.

LPY argued that Client qualified for several exceptions due to the fact that her membership was involuntary and non-meaningful, and that there was sufficient hardship to a qualifying relative, a U.S. citizen spouse, to merit approval of Form I-601 waiver request for humanitarian purposes, to assure family unity. Specifically, LPY requested that USCIS balance the adverse factors evidencing an alien’s undesirability as a permanent resident with the social and humane considerations presented on the alien’s behalf to determine whether the grant of relief in the exercise of discretion appeared to be in the best interests of the country.

LPY argued that Client should qualify for an exception as her CCP membership was necessary “for purposes of obtaining employment…or other essentials of living.” The Client attested to joining the CCP due to social and financial pressures. Furthermore, once she left China, Client allowed her membership to lapse since the financial and social pressures to maintain membership were no longer present. Moreover, Client confirmed that her membership in the CCP was nominal, as she did not actively participate in any CCP activities outside of paying dues.

LPY argued that in addition to being involuntary, Client’s membership was non-meaningful, as it was devoid of any political implications. Client affirmed that her personal beliefs have never aligned with the ideological principles of the CCP and that she did not support their viewpoints. Additionally, as mentioned above, the memberships were merely for job opportunities and involved limited participation, further proving the memberships were non-meaningful.

Finally, LPY argued that Client’s qualifying relative, her U.S. citizen spouse, made her eligible for an exception for the maintenance of family unity. In the interest of preserving family unity, the Attorney General has discretion to grant the waiver for “humanitarian purposes” if it is not otherwise contrary to public interest. LPY presented evidence of Client’s significant economic, social, and family ties to the U.S. which would be severed if she had to relocate to China. Further, LPY argued Client’s spouse would experience extreme hardship if the waiver were denied, as Client has provided essential support, financially and emotionally. Client’s husband detailed the difficulties he would face in China. Further, Client is known for her good moral character, as attested to in letters from friends, family, and co-workers. The letters also explained the challenges the family would face if they were separated, or alternatively, forced to relocate to China. Overall, the United States would benefit from the services of Client in her role in the technology industry, as testified in Client’s personal statement and letters from friends.

Based on the substantive evidence, LPY successfully argued that Client fell under at least one of the exceptions for membership in a CCP under INA § 212(a)(3)(D)(ii), non-meaningful association under 9 FAM 302.5-6(B)(6), and the exception for close family members under INA § 212(a)(3)(D)(iv). As a result, Client will be able to remain in the United States with her husband and continue contributing to her local community and to the United States as a permanent resident.

Success Highlight: EB-2 NIW Approval for Writer fr...
STEM OPT Update: Additional Degree Fields are now ...

Request A Free Evaluation