Most people think their AOS case is simple. The ones that fail usually fail because the client under-prepared. Even clean, first-time green card cases ask hard questions at the interview, demand specific documentation, and turn on details most people do not anticipate. This page walks you through what AOS really takes, whether your case is straightforward or complicated and how Cohen Immigration Law Group, P.C. – New York Immigration Attorney can help you. Before you file, get a strategy review from a retired Immigration Judge who has seen these cases from the bench.
Reviewed by Hon. Raisa Cohen (Ret.). Retired U.S. Immigration Judge. Former U.S. Assistant Chief Counsel. New York Immigration Attorney.
Filing forms is the easy part. Building a winning strategy is where most cases fail. The questions below are the ones that come up in almost every consultation, and the short answers are exactly what I would tell you in the first ten minutes.
If your case is straightforward, you may not need me. If it isn’t, the difference between an approval and a denial is usually one decision made early, and the wrong one is hard to undo.
Short answer: AOS is one of the most fact-specific filings in immigration law. Even cases that look simple on paper turn on details: how the medical exam is sealed, how the I-864 sponsor income is calculated, how prior overstays are characterized, what the interview officer chooses to ask. The cases that fail rarely fail because the law was against the applicant. They fail because the applicant under-prepared and the record did not support the result.
You have any prior immigration filing in your history (yours or filed for you).
You have any prior denial, NOID, or RFE on record.
Your case is marriage-based (immediate-relative or family-preference).
You have any criminal history, including arrests that did not result in convictions.
You have any time out of status, unauthorized work, overstay, or status violation.
You have any inadmissibility issue (fraud, public charge, prior unlawful presence triggering 3- or 10-year bars).
If you checked any of those, you are not in a routine AOS case. You are in a strategy case. The work that decides the result starts now, before USCIS receives anything.
Marriage-based AOS with a U.S. citizen spouse. Looks straightforward. Becomes a separate spousal interview and a NOID when documentation is thin or inconsistencies surface.
Family preference AOS with a current priority date. Looks like a paperwork exercise. Becomes a § 245(c) bar problem when prior status is misunderstood.
Employment-based AOS with concurrent I-140. Looks routine. Becomes a § 245(k) calculation problem when the H-1B history has gaps.
Asylee or refugee AOS one year after the grant. Looks like a checklist. Becomes a discretionary problem when the prior asylum record has weaknesses.
The right preparation does not depend on whether the case is simple or complex. It depends on whether the work was done before USCIS asked the question. We do that work. Our clients show up to interviews ready, with documentation that lines up, and answers that the officer can verify.
The interview. The officer asks a question the applicant did not prepare for, or compares the applicant’s answer to the spouse’s answer and finds an inconsistency.
The evidence stage. The I-485 was filed without the documentary depth USCIS expects, and the RFE that follows has more issues than the case can absorb.
The RFE or NOID response. The applicant answered the question on the page without addressing the question behind the question.
The prior file. An old I-130, an old denial, or an old fraud allegation that was not properly addressed before the new filing. USCIS pulls the prior file. The new case absorbs the old problem.
The legal eligibility decision. The wrong category was filed (immediate relative versus family preference, AOS versus consular processing, with or without § 245(i)), and the case was denied on a procedural ground that could have been avoided.
Short answer: AOS cases rarely fail at the form level. They fail at the interview, the evidence stage, the response to an RFE or NOID, or because of an issue in the prior file that was never addressed. By the time a case is denied, the problem is usually already in the record.
Filing the form is the last step, not the first. The cases that win are those in which every decision before the form was the right one.
STOP. If you recognize your case in any of the failure points above, stop reading general information. This is where strategy matters. Book a Strategy Consultation. (718) 275-1234
Short answer: Adjustment of Status (AOS) is the legal process that lets a non-citizen already inside the United States apply for a green card without leaving the country. It is filed on Form I-485 under INA § 245.
If your application is approved, you become a Lawful Permanent Resident. You can live and work permanently in the United States, travel internationally with the green card, and apply for citizenship after the required residency period.
AOS is the alternative to Consular Processing, which requires you to leave the U.S, and finish the green card process at a U.S. consulate abroad. Both paths get you to the same green card. The risks, the timing, and the strategy are different, and choosing wrong is one of the more expensive mistakes I see.
Short answer: You generally qualify if you (1) are physically inside the United States, (2) were inspected and admitted or paroled when you entered, (3) have an approved or concurrently filed immigrant petition, (4) have a visa number immediately available to you, and (5) are not barred for criminal, security, health, public-charge, or other inadmissibility reasons. The framework is INA § 245(a).
Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens: spouses, parents of a U.S. citizen child age 21+, and unmarried children under 21. Visa numbers are always current. INA § 245(c) bars are forgiven. The cleanest path.
Family preference: F1, F2A, F2B, F3, F4. Subject to the Visa Bulletin and the priority date system.
Asylees and refugees: eligible to adjust one year after the grant.
VAWA self-petitioners, U-visa holders, T-visa holders: different rules apply.
Employment-based: EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, EB-4, EB-5. Some require PERM; some do not.
INA § 245(i) grandfathered applicants (covered below).
Short answer: You generally cannot adjust if you entered without inspection, have certain unauthorized work or status violations (outside the immediate-relative forgiveness rule under § 245(c)(2)), are inadmissible without a waiver, or are in removal proceedings without an approved petition. Workarounds exist: § 245(i), § 245(k), waivers, motions to terminate proceedings, and consular processing with provisional waivers.
Entered without inspection: no I-94, no admission stamp. Generally cannot adjust unless you fall under § 245(i) or were later inspected and paroled.
Status violation, overstay, or unauthorized work: bars apply differently by category. Immediate relatives get the § 245(c)(2) forgiveness rule. Family preference and employment-based applicants do not, with narrow exceptions.
Currently in removal proceedings without an approved petition: your AOS path runs through the Immigration Judge, not USCIS. The strategy is different.
Inadmissibility under INA § 212(a): fraud, certain criminal convictions, security grounds, public charge, prior unlawful presence triggering 3- or 10-year bars. Some are waivable (I-601, I-601A, § 212(h)); some are not.
If your application is approved, you become a Lawful Permanent Resident. You can live and work permanently in the United States, travel internationally with the green card, and apply for citizenship after the required residency period.
AOS is the alternative to Consular Processing, which requires you to leave the U.S, and finish the green card process at a U.S. consulate abroad. Both paths get you to the same green card. The risks, the timing, and the strategy are different, and choosing wrong is one of the more expensive mistakes I see.
Here’s the reality: a denied I-485 may expose you to removal risk, especially if you have no lawful status or other removability issues. We don’t file first and ask questions later. We evaluate the case before anything goes to USCIS.
Most of our AOS work is family-based. Most of that family-based work is marriage cases. Some are clean and easy. Others are complicated. Both are common, and both are the cases we know best.
Short answer: A U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident files Form I-130 to establish the qualifying relationship. The non-citizen spouse files Form I-485 (concurrent with the I-130 if the petitioner is a U.S. citizen, or after a current priority date if the petitioner is an LPR). Both spouses attend a USCIS interview. If approved, the non-citizen spouse receives a green card, conditional or 10-year, depending on how long the couple has been married.
Short answer: USCIS looks for objective evidence that you and your spouse share a life together. Joint financial accounts, joint lease or mortgage, joint tax returns, beneficiary designations on insurance and retirement accounts, photos across time, affidavits from people who know you as a couple, birth certificates of any children, travel together. The more your marriage looks like a typical American marriage on paper, the easier the interview goes.
Joint lease or deed in both names, signed on the same date by both spouses.
Joint bank accounts with regular activity. Not just a deposit the day before filing.
Joint tax returns for every year of the marriage, filed jointly.
Health, life, and auto insurance with your spouse as beneficiary or co-insured.
Photos from holidays, family events, vacations. Not just the wedding.
Birth certificates of any shared children.
Affidavits from at least two people who can describe the marriage and explain how they know you as a couple.
Big age gaps with no shared cultural, religious, or family context.
Different addresses on tax returns, driver’s licenses, or bills.
Marriage shortly after a removal order or denial in another category.
Prior I-130 filed for the same beneficiary by a different petitioner.
A petitioner with a history of filing for multiple foreign-born spouses.
Inconsistent answers between the two spouses at the interview.
Short answer: A Stokes interview is a separate, intensive marriage-fraud interview where spouses are questioned in different rooms about the details of their relationship. Daily routines, finances, sleep arrangements, family details, and the answers are compared. New York USCIS field offices use Stokes interviews more aggressively than most of the country. If you are filing a marriage-based AOS in New York City, you need to prepare for the possibility of Stokes the day you file.
Stokes was developed out of federal court litigation in the Eastern District of New York and has been the NYC standard for marriage-fraud screening for decades. NYC officers ask harder questions and follow up with more sub-questions than officers in other parts of the country. That is not bias. That is volume. They see more marriage cases, and they have more pattern recognition for what fraud looks like.
We run a practice Stokes interview before the real one. Same format, same hard questions, same separate-room comparison.
We identify the inconsistencies before the officer does, and we either resolve them or build the credible explanation the officer will need to hear.
We pull every piece of evidence that backs up the daily-life answers. Calendar entries, text threads, photos with dates, bills with both addresses.
We brief you on what to do if the officer becomes aggressive, what to do if they ask something you do not know, and what to do if they pull you and your spouse into separate rooms.
I sat on the bench in NYC. I saw Stokes interviews break good cases and save bad ones. The single biggest variable was preparation. We do not send clients into a Stokes blind.
Short answer: INA § 204(c) bars USCIS from approving any future I-130 (and most other family-based petitions) for a person who has previously entered into a marriage for the purpose of evading immigration laws. Even if no fraud was prosecuted. The bar is permanent. It travels with the person forever, applied to every future petition any U.S. citizen or LPR ever files for them.
This is the worst-case outcome of a marriage-fraud finding, and it is more common than people realize. Officers can apply § 204(c) based on substantial and probative evidence. They do not need a criminal conviction. A NOID or denial that says ‘evidence of a sham marriage’ is the start of a § 204(c) record.
If you are filing a marriage case and you have any prior marriage in your immigration history. Your spouse’s, yours, or anyone in either family who filed an I-130 that was later flagged. Disclose it in the consultation. We need to evaluate whether § 204(c) is on the table before USCIS sees the file.
It is not always permanent in practice, even though it is permanent on paper. We have re-opened § 204(c) determinations by attacking the evidentiary basis: pulling the FOIA, getting the prior file, identifying what USCIS actually relied on, and showing the standard of proof was not met. It is hard work. It is sometimes successful. It requires the right legal theory and a complete record.
Short answer: If your green card is granted through a marriage that was less than two years old at the date of approval, USCIS issues a two-year conditional green card. You must file Form I-751 (Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence) in the 90-day window before that card expires, with proof the marriage was real and ongoing.
Miss the I-751 window without good cause and the conditional status terminates automatically. You can be placed in removal proceedings. If your marriage ended in divorce, abuse, or your spouse died, there are waiver options under INA § 216(c)(4), though they require specific evidence and timely filing. Don’t sit on this.
Short answer: Often yes. A grant of humanitarian parole under INA § 212(d)(5), including parole at a port of entry, parole-in-place, advance parole travel, and program-specific parole categories generally counts as having been ‘inspected and paroled’ for purposes of INA § 245(a). That means you may be eligible to adjust through a qualifying immigrant petition, even if you originally entered without inspection or otherwise would not have qualified.
Humanitarian parole granted at the border or while abroad.
Advance parole travel. Leaving with an approved I-131 and being paroled back in upon return (the legal effect varies; we evaluate case by case).
Parole-in-place for spouses, parents, and children of active U.S. military members and certain veterans.
Program-specific parole. Cuban Family Reunification, Filipino WWII Veterans, certain country-specific programs.
Parole following deferred inspection at a port of entry.
If anyone (USCIS, CBP, or DHS) ever issued you a parole document, do not assume you know the impact. The technical analysis under § 245(a) is fact-specific, the case law has evolved, and the difference between paroled and admitted-as-entered controls whether you can adjust at all.
Short answer: Yes, in two different ways. (1) You can apply for AOS as relief from removal directly before the Immigration Judge. (2) Where the underlying removal case is procedurally weak or the equities are strong, we can file a motion to dismiss or terminate proceedings. That moves your case out of court and back to a USCIS adjustment posture, where the process is faster, cleaner, and the procedural rules favor you. The right strategy depends on the
case.
If you have an approved or approvable immigrant petition and you are otherwise eligible, you can apply for AOS as a
form of relief from removal. The I-485 is filed with USCIS but adjudicated by the IJ at the merits hearing. The government attorney can oppose. The IJ decides eligibility and discretion.
This is one of the situations where the bench experience matters most. I sat on cases like this for years. I know how the IJ wants the file presented, what the government attorney will argue, and what evidence carries the day. Generalists struggle here. We don’t.
In the right case, the better move is to get the removal proceedings terminated or dismissed and then file the AOS at
USCIS. This usually means a faster decision, a less hostile forum, and a cleaner record going forward. Termination/dismissal is granted in two main ways:
By the Immigration Judge, where the NTA is procedurally defective, the basis for removal is no longer valid, the
respondent is now eligible for relief that USCIS has primary jurisdiction over, or other case-specific reasons.
(See current BIA precedent on termination of removal proceedings, including Matter of S-O-G- & F-D-B– and
successor cases; controlling case law has shifted, so verify before filing.)
Through a motion to dismiss or terminate filed jointly with DHS counsel, when the government attorney agrees the
case is best handled outside court.
If we can terminate, we usually do. The AOS is then filed and adjudicated by USCIS the way any other AOS would be. No
IJ adversarial posture, no government attorney opposing, no merits hearing on a tight schedule. The downside is
termination is not always available, and the standards have evolved with recent BIA decisions. We evaluate it as part
of the consultation.
The rule of thumb: if you are in proceedings and you are eligible to adjust, do not assume the IJ courtroom is your only path. Termination is real, it works in the right cases, and we file these motions regularly.
Short answer: This is a significant part of what we do. RFEs (Requests for Evidence) and NOIDs (Notices of Intent to Deny) have firm deadlines and require complete, well-documented responses. AOS denials can often be challenged with a Form I-290B Motion to Reopen or Motion to Reconsider, generally filed within 30 calendar days of the decision (or 33 days if the decision was mailed, depending on the decision type). Do not wait. The deadlines are unforgiving and a weak response or missed filing closes the case for good.
Short answer: We respond to RFEs by addressing every issue the officer raised, in order, with both legal argument and documentary evidence. We do not just throw documents at USCIS. We brief the response.
We pull the original filing and the RFE side by side and we identify every gap the officer flagged.
We collect supplemental evidence: affidavits, expert reports, certified records, updated financials. Each piece is mapped to a specific gap.
We write a cover brief that explains how the new evidence cures each issue, with citations to the statute and the regulations.
Our system is designed to file before the deadline. Late RFE responses are denied without further review. NOID response: when USCIS is preparing to deny
Short answer: A NOID means USCIS has tentatively decided to deny but is giving you a final chance. The response window is short, typically 30 days. A well-built NOID response can save the case. A weak one is treated as confirmation.
Short answer: Form I-290B lets you challenge a USCIS denial. A Motion to Reopen presents new facts or evidence that were not available before. A Motion to Reconsider argues USCIS made a legal error in applying the law to the facts that were already in front of it. The deadline is 30 days from the denial. It is strictly enforced.
This is one of the legal filings where we have a real edge. I read motions to reopen and reconsider from the bench for years. I know what makes USCIS reverse, what gets summarily denied, and how the legal framing has to be built. Most pro se I-290Bs are denied because they re-argue the same facts. The successful ones identify a specific statutory or regulatory error and brief it.
The completed I-290B itself, with the right box checked (reopen, reconsider, or both).
A legal brief identifying the error or new facts, with statutory and regulatory citations.
New documentary evidence (for a motion to reopen) or the existing record cited and analyzed (for a motion to reconsider).
The filing fee or a fee waiver request where appropriate.
An expedite request where the case is time-sensitive (status running out, scheduled travel, etc.).
I built a Motion to Reconsider that USCIS reversed in our F-1 student / I-130 case (story below). Most lawyers would have advised the family to re-file. We won the case on the existing record by re-framing the misrepresentation analysis. That is what good I-290B work looks like.
Short answer: INA § 245(i) is a grandfathering provision that lets people who would otherwise be barred from AOS adjust anyway, if a qualifying immigrant petition or labor certification was filed for them on or before April 30, 2001 (and the petition was ‘approvable when filed’). They have to pay an additional $1,000 penalty fee with the I-485. The grandfathering can pass to derivatives (spouse and children at the time of filing.
This is one of the most underused provisions in immigration law. Many people who think they cannot adjust actually can. The reason is usually an old I-130 a parent filed in 2000, or a labor certification that never got finalized. If anyone ever filed any immigration paperwork on your behalf before May 2001, mention it in the consultation. We pull the FOIA and check.
Critical: § 245(i) requires the petitioner to have been physically present in the U.S. on December 21, 2000, if the qualifying petition was filed between January 14, 1998, and April 30, 2001. The rules are technical. Don’t try to evaluate this on your own.
Short answer: INA § 245(k) is a limited safety valve for employment-based AOS applicants who fell out of status briefly. It forgives up to 180 days of failure to maintain status, unauthorized employment, or unauthorized presence, but only for EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, and certain other employment categories, and only since the most recent lawful admission.
If you are an H-1B who lost a job and went a few months without filing a change of status, § 245(k) may save the AOS. If you are an L-1 who worked for the wrong entity briefly, it may apply. The 180-day calculation is strict. Get the dates right before you assume you qualify.
Short answer: If you are eligible for both, Adjustment of Status usually wins because you stay in the U.S. with your family during processing, you can get work authorization (EAD) and travel permission (Advance Parole), and a denial does not strand you abroad. Consular Processing is faster in some categories, but a denial at the consulate is hard to challenge, and once you leave, you may have triggered a 3- or 10-year bar that prevents you from coming back.
You are inside the U.S. with valid status (or grandfathered under § 245(i)).
Your family is here and you cannot easily relocate during a multi-month process abroad.
You want appeal/review options if something goes wrong.
You are abroad already, or you have a clean immigration history and consular is faster for your category.
You have unwaivable inadmissibility issues that USCIS would deny on, but the consulate plus an I-601 or I-601A waiver can clear them.
You triggered § 245(c) bars and § 245(i) is not available. Provisional waiver consular processing may be the only path.
Short answer: Five stages. (1) Confirm the underlying petition (I-130, I-140, etc.) is approved or filed concurrently. (2) File the I-485 package with all supporting evidence and the medical exam. (3) Attend biometrics. (4) Respond to any RFE or NOID. (5) Attend the USCIS interview and receive the decision.
AOS rides on top of an immigrant visa petition. Most cases use Form I-130 (family) or Form I-140 (employment). In some categories you can file the I-485 at the same time as the petition (concurrent filing). In others, you have to wait for petition approval and a current priority date on the Visa Bulletin.
Form I-485 plus: the I-797 approval notice (or concurrent petition), Form I-693 sealed medical exam from a USCIS-designated civil surgeon, Form I-864 affidavit of support and the sponsor’s tax returns and W-2s, two passport photos, copy of the I-94, prior visa stamps, certified court records of any arrest, category-specific evidence, and the filing fees. Add Form I-765 for work authorization and Form I-131 for advance parole if you want them.
USCIS schedules fingerprinting, photo, and signature at an Application Support Center. Routine, but missing the appointment delays everything. Don’t move without notifying USCIS on Form AR-11.
Covered above. We treat RFEs as a discrete service. Most denials we see started as a poorly-answered RFE.
Most AOS applicants are interviewed at a USCIS field office. In NYC that includes 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan and other regional offices. Marriage-based cases get the most scrutiny (see Stokes above). Some employment-based cases now receive interview waivers. The decision is approval, RFE, NOID, or referral for further review.
Short answer: Family-based AOS in New York typically takes 10 to 24 months from filing to green card. Employment-based varies dramatically by category and country of birth. Marriage-based with concurrent filing is often on the shorter end. Always check your specific field office processing time at egov.uscis.gov before relying on averages.
Why NYC is sometimes slower: high case volume, marriage-fraud screening, and complex cases concentrated in metro field offices. Why it is sometimes faster: experienced officers and routine cases move efficiently when the file is clean. The biggest controllable factor is the quality of the filing.
Short answer: USCIS applies a ‘public charge’ test under INA § 212(a)(4) at the AOS stage. The agency assesses whether the applicant is likely at any time to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence. Under current USCIS guidance, the focus is on likely future receipt of certain narrowly defined cash assistance programs (such as SSI and TANF or state and local cash assistance for income maintenance) and long-term institutionalization at government expense. Most non-cash benefits, including SNAP, most Medicaid, and most housing assistance, are generally not weighted the same way. Past receipt of public benefits is one factor among several, not an automatic disqualification.
Practical points. The I-864 affidavit of support must show the sponsor’s household income at or above 125% of the federal poverty line for the household size. If the sponsor doesn’t qualify alone, you need a joint sponsor or household member income from Form I-864A. Tax returns must match the affidavit. We don’t submit a sloppy I-864. Confirm the current public charge rule on uscis.gov before filing, as agency guidance has evolved.
Short answer: Yes, in most categories. A spouse and unmarried children under 21 are ‘derivative beneficiaries’ and can file their own I-485s based on your principal application. They get green cards through your case. The exception is immediate-relative cases, where each person needs their own I-130.
Derivatives need their own I-485, I-693 medical, biometrics, and category-specific evidence. They share the principal’s priority date. Their AOS travels with yours. If your case is approved, theirs typically follows; if yours is denied, theirs usually goes too.
Short answer: Maybe, but the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) may protect them. CSPA freezes a child’s age in certain categories using a calculation that adjusts the child’s actual age based on the time the underlying immigrant petition was pending. If the calculated CSPA age is under 21, the child keeps the child status. The rules differ for immediate relatives versus preference categories, and USCIS has revised the age-calculation guidance multiple times in recent years. Verify the current rule before relying on any specific calculation.
Critical timing: a CSPA-protected child must ‘seek to acquire’ lawful permanent residence within one year of visa availability. Usually by filing the I-485 or having the immigrant visa application submitted. Miss that one-year window and CSPA protection is generally lost, absent extraordinary circumstances. If you have a child approaching 21 and a pending family case, this is a question for the consultation. Bring the timeline of every filing. We run the calculation and tell you where the case stands.
Short answer: Yes. File Form I-765 (Application for Employment Authorization) with, or after. Your I-485. USCIS issues an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) several months after filing. The EAD is renewable while AOS is pending and authorizes you to work for any U.S. employer.
If you already have work authorization through your underlying status (H-1B, L-1, O-1), you can keep using it while AOS is pending. We pair the I-765 with the I-485 anyway. It locks in EAD-based permission as a backup.
Short answer: Only with Advance Parole (Form I-131), unless you hold a still-valid H-1B or L-1 and the travel is consistent with that status. Advance Parole lets you re-enter the U.S. without abandoning AOS. Leave without it, and USCIS will generally consider your I-485 abandoned.
Practical advice we give every client before any travel. First: do not travel without a lawyer reviewing your unlawful presence history, prior orders, criminal issues, and admissibility risk. The interaction of advance parole with the 3- and 10-year bars under INA § 212(a)(9)(B) is fact-specific, has evolved with case law and policy, and can produce different outcomes in front of USCIS versus a U.S. consulate abroad. Second: a granted Advance Parole does not guarantee admission at the airport. CBP can still inspect and refuse entry. Don’t make travel plans you cannot afford to lose.
Short answer: It depends on what the conviction is, when it happened, and how it is classified under federal immigration law (which often differs from state law). Some convictions are absolute bars: aggravated felonies, certain controlled-substance offenses, and crimes involving moral turpitude over the petty-offense exception. Many are waivable under INA § 212(h) or curable through post-conviction relief. Bring the certified disposition of every arrest, including dismissed charges, to the consultation.
Pro tip from the bench: applicants almost always under-report. USCIS pulls the FBI background check and finds everything. If you don’t disclose, you’ve added ‘misrepresentation’ on top of the underlying issue. Disclose the record. We build the strategy around it.
Short answer: If you are an immediate relative of a U.S. citizen, INA § 245(c)(2) forgives most overstay and unauthorized work. If you are in a family preference or employment-based category, those violations are bars under INA § 245(c). Except for narrow exceptions including § 245(i) and § 245(k). The answer changes completely depending on category.
Filing the wrong I-485 in the wrong category is one of the more common mistakes I see. The I-485 gets denied, USCIS issues an NTA, and the case ends up in immigration court. When the right call upfront would have been consular processing with a provisional waiver, or waiting for the right priority date, or an entirely different strategy.
Short answer: EB-1 (priority workers. Extraordinary ability, outstanding professors/researchers, multinational managers) does not require PERM. EB-2 (advanced-degree professionals or persons of exceptional ability) requires PERM unless you self-petition under National Interest Waiver. EB-3 (skilled workers, professionals, other workers) requires PERM. Visa availability and processing time vary significantly by category and country of birth. Check the Visa Bulletin every month. Most of our practice is family-based, but we handle employment-based cases where the legal complexity calls for the bench-and-prosecutor perspective.
Short answer: Three things. (1) I’m a Retired U.S. Immigration Judge. I decided AOS cases from the bench, including marriage fraud, denied petitions, and § 245(i) cases. (2) I served as U.S. Assistant Chief Counsel. I know how DHS argues these cases. (3) We prepare every AOS case the way it needs to be prepared, not the way it looks on paper. That means clean cases get treated like the high-stakes filings they actually are, and complex cases get the bench-and-prosecutor strategy work that other firms refer out.
Filing forms is the easy part. Building a winning strategy is where most cases fail. We prepare every case the way it needs to be prepared, whether it looks simple on paper or not.
We represented an adult child of a U.S. citizen who was lawfully in the U.S. on an F-1 student visa. The I-130 priority date became current and we filed the I-485. USCIS denied it, alleging misrepresentation of intent because the client had stopped attending school while waiting for the priority date.
We filed a Form I-290B Motion to Reconsider arguing that the facts did not support a fraud finding. The timeline, the client’s actual intent at the time of each filing, and the statutory framework all pointed away from misrepresentation. USCIS reversed the denial. The family of five received their green cards.
That case would have been a simple denial in most offices. The difference was knowing how the misrepresentation analysis actually works, and presenting it that way in the I-290B.
Short answer: Call a lawyer before you file if any of these apply: any criminal arrest (even dismissed), any prior immigration filing or denial, any unauthorized work or overstay, any prior marriage, any RFE or NOID you don’t know how to respond to, any time outside the U.S. during pending applications, any inadmissibility issue, any fraud allegation, any prior removal order, any pending removal proceedings, or a child approaching age 21. A consultation up
front is much cheaper than fixing a denial later.
Simple, clean immediate-relative AOS cases with no prior history can be filed pro se. Most cases are not actually that simple. They look simple until USCIS asks the question that changes everything.
Short answer: AOS cases run from straightforward to high-stakes, and the strategy work changes by category. The simpler the case looks, the more likely the client under-prepares. The more complex the case, the more decisions matter early. We prepare every category the way it needs to be prepared.
Clean immediate-relative AOS: U.S. citizen spouse, no prior immigration, no criminal record. Looks simple. Becomes a separate spousal interview or a NOID when documentation is thin.
Family preference AOS: priority date current, prior status clean. Looks like a paperwork exercise. Turns on § 245(c) bar analysis.
Employment-based AOS: H-1B, L-1, O-1 history. Routine in theory. Becomes a § 245(k) calculation problem when status had gaps.
AOS with prior overstay or unauthorized work: § 245(c)(2) forgiveness for immediate relatives, narrow exceptions for others.
AOS with criminal record: requires post-conviction analysis and possibly a § 212(h) waiver. Filing without analysis ends in denial.
AOS with marriage timing or fraud signals: a different posture entirely. Requires defensive preparation from day one.
AOS in removal proceedings: filed before the Immigration Judge with a different procedural framework.
If your case is in any of these categories, preparation is what changes the result. The form is the last step, not the first.
“I had a phenomenal experience with Attorney Raisa Cohen. I was facing removal proceedings and didn’t know where to turn. My prior attorney was disbarred, and I went to Attorney Raisa Cohen for help. She took on my case and fought hard for me.” (Rosemary)
“I came for a second opinion on my asylum claim. Raisa told me the potential problems that could be raised by the DHS. Super helpful.” (Anonymous, Avvo)
“I had the pleasure of speaking with Raisa Cohen, and she provided me with clear and valuable legal guidance. She patiently clarified important points, laid out a clear roadmap for me, and summarized everything in a way that was easy to understand.” (Sayed)
Retired U.S. Immigration Judge. Adjudicated thousands of removal and AOS proceedings.
Former U.S. Assistant Chief Counsel (DHS/ICE). Prior government-side prosecutor.
Admitted to practice in New York.
5/5 stars on Google. Verified Avvo reviews.
Hon. Raisa Cohen (ret.) now practices as a private Immigration Attorney. Any reference to her prior judicial service is for informational purposes only and does not imply continued judicial authority, influence, or government endorsement. This page is attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The information on this page is for general educational purposes and is not legal advice. Reading this page does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Adjustment of status attorneys in New York assist with obtaining a green card without leaving the U.S., handling I-485 applications, family-based petitions, and waivers for inadmissibility.
Adjustment of Status can be a complex process, but with the help of experienced immigration lawyers, you can increase your chances of success. At Cohen Immigration Law Group, P.C., we are dedicated to helping individuals achieve their immigration goals. Contact us today to schedule a consultation and learn more about our Adjustment of Status services.
