Fernanda M. Pereira Immigration Law

07/15/2026

USCIS Approved Your VAWA Petition. Can Your Green Card Still Be Denied?

Yes. Prior entries, departures, border encounters, or removal orders can prevent approval of the I-485, even when the abuse happened.

An approved VAWA petition and an approved green card application are two separate legal decisions.

Before you act, make sure an immigration attorney has reviewed your complete immigration history.

VAWA approval is not green card approval

Obtaining permanent residence through VAWA requires passing through two separate legal doors.

Door 1: Form I-360

This petition asks whether you qualify as a VAWA self-petitioner based on the qualifying relationship, the abuse, and the other legal requirements.

Door 2: Form I-485

This application asks whether you are legally eligible and admissible for permanent residence.

USCIS may examine your entries and departures, unlawful presence, border encounters, removal orders, criminal history, and other possible grounds of inadmissibility.

An approved I-360 means USCIS accepted you as a VAWA self-petitioner. It does not necessarily mean USCIS has determined that your complete immigration history can be overcome.

One of the most serious problems in these cases is commonly called the “permanent bar.”

It may apply when a person:

• accumulated more than one year of unlawful presence and later entered or attempted to reenter the United States without being admitted; or

• was ordered removed or deported and later entered or attempted to reenter without being admitted.

VAWA self-petitioners may qualify for a narrow, discretionary waiver when there is a connection between the abuse and the person’s removal, departure, reentry, or attempted reentry.

Some survivors can establish that connection. Others cannot. The waiver is not automatic, and approval of the I-360 alone does not establish that the waiver applies.

Do not change or reshape your history to fit the law, and do not allow anyone else to do that for you. False or altered statements can create problems far more serious than the original immigration issue.

What if the green card application cannot be approved?

A pending I-485 is not harmless simply because USCIS has not yet decided it. Eventually, the application must be approved, denied, withdrawn, or otherwise resolved.

Depending on the case, a denial or withdrawal may affect a work permit based on the pending I-485, increase the risk of receiving a Notice to Appear, and expose the person to removal proceedings.

Withdrawal is not a reset button.

It does not erase the application, declarations, documents, or immigration history already submitted to USCIS. It does not eliminate the permanent bar or correct inaccuracies in the original filing.

At the same time, continuing with an application that cannot legally be approved may also carry serious consequences.

No one can advise you whether to withdraw or continue the application without first reviewing the complete file and immigration history.

What to do now:

Obtain your complete immigration file and read everything submitted in your name.

If the documents contain inaccurate information, events you do not remember reporting, or statements that do not reflect your life, tell an immigration attorney immediately.

Write down every entry and departure.

Include border detentions, fingerprinting, returns, removal orders, and immigration court proceedings. Even old incidents may matter.

Do not make another decision without a complete review.

Some people have real legal options. Others may not have a current path to permanent residence.

The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda M. Pereira offers legal consultations for individuals who need this type of complete case review.

Fernanda M. Pereira is a Certified Specialist in Immigration and Nationality Law, certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.

Hablamos Español. Falamos Português.

Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda M. Pereira
Stockton, California

This post provides general information, not legal advice. Every immigration case depends on its individual facts, and immigration laws and government policies may change.

07/02/2026

Você é residente permanente, tem green card ou já teve um caso criminal na Califórnia?

Uma condenação que parece “pequena” no tribunal criminal pode causar um problema muito maior na imigração.

Uma nova decisão do Tribunal de Apelações do Nono Circuito confirmou que uma condenação por child endangerment, nos termos do artigo 273a(a) do Código Penal da Califórnia, pode fazer com que uma pessoa seja colocada em processo de deportação.

Isso pode acontecer mesmo que:

• a condenação tenha sido por misdemeanor, um crime considerado menos grave;

• a criança não tenha sofrido lesão física;

• o caso criminal já tenha terminado há anos;

• a pessoa seja residente permanente e tenha vivido nos Estados Unidos por muito tempo.

Muitas pessoas pensam que, porque pagaram a multa, cumpriram a pena, terminaram a liberdade condicional ou resolveram o caso criminal, não existirão consequências na imigração.

Infelizmente, isso nem sempre é verdade.

No dia 25 de junho de 2026, o Nono Circuito publicou uma decisão em Leon-Briviesca v. Blanche/Rivera-Mendoza v. Blanche. A decisão confirmou que uma condenação por child endangerment sob o artigo 273a(a) é considerada uma condenação relacionada a abuso, negligência ou abandono de criança para fins de imigração.

Na prática, isso significa que essa condenação pode afetar:

• pedidos de cidadania americana;

• renovação da residência permanente ou do green card;

• legalização;

• pedidos de cancelamento de deportação;

• outros benefícios imigratórios.

Antes de solicitar a cidadania, renovar a residência permanente, aplicar para legalização ou fazer qualquer pedido imigratório, é importante revisar as possíveis consequências migratórias de qualquer antecedente penal com um advogado de imigração.

The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda Pereira auxilia indivíduos, famílias e advogados de defesa criminal em casos de imigração, incluindo processos familiares, defesa contra deportação, naturalização e consequências migratórias de acusações e condenações penais.

Falamos Português.

(209) 942-3300
Stockton & Northern California

Esta publicação é apenas para informação geral e não é aconselhamento jurídico. Cada caso é diferente.

06/30/2026

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed birthright citizenship. This means that children born in the United States are U.S. citizens at birth, even if their parents are undocumented or only temporarily present in the country.

This is an important decision for immigrant families, and a reason to celebrate. Parents should still be careful with immigration applications, travel, and pending cases, but today’s decision confirms a core constitutional protection for U.S.-born children.

Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda Pereira

06/30/2026

A misdemeanor child endangerment plea that looks safe in criminal court can still make a noncitizen deportable. This is the practical impact of a new Ninth Circuit decision involving California Penal Code § 273a(a), child endangerment under circumstances likely to produce great bodily harm or death.

On June 25, 2026, the Ninth Circuit issued a published decision in Leon-Briviesca v. Blanche / Rivera-Mendoza v. Blanche, a consolidated case involving two petitioners, one convicted under California Penal Code § 273a(a), the other under an Oregon child neglect statute. The court held that section 273a(a) categorically qualifies as a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment under federal immigration law.

This is now binding Ninth Circuit law unless and until altered by rehearing, en banc review, or the Supreme Court.

The decision matters because a plea that may appear modest in state criminal court can create a permanent immigration problem for a noncitizen parent or caregiver.

In Leon-Briviesca, the court held that the federal child-abuse ground includes child endangerment where the statute requires a substantial risk of harm and at least criminal negligence.

The key points are:

1. Actual injury is not required. It is enough that the child was placed at risk, even if there was no physical harm.

2. Criminal negligence is enough. Under California law, criminal negligence is not ordinary carelessness. It requires conduct that is aggravated, culpable, gross, or reckless, and that reflects a disregard for human life or safety.

3. The risk must be substantial, not theoretical. A remote or speculative risk is not enough. The conduct must place the child in a situation likely to produce bodily or mental harm, and must involve a gross deviation from accepted standards.

4. The statute is not limited to parents or legal guardians. The court rejected the argument that the federal child abuse ground applies only to people with a legal parental or custodial relationship to the child.

For this type of immigration analysis, courts look at what the statute covers, not what actually happened in the individual case. That means immigration courts do not look at whether the particular facts were "minor" or whether the child was actually injured. The conviction itself creates the immigration problem.

This decision does not decide every possible immigration consequence of PC § 273a(a). It does not decide whether § 273a(a) is a crime of violence or a crime involving moral turpitude. Those remain separate questions.

The practical consequences are serious.

A lawful permanent resident with this conviction can be placed in removal proceedings and may be removed from the United States, even if the conviction was only a misdemeanor.

This also matters for naturalization. A permanent resident with this conviction, including a long-term resident with a years-old conviction who has lived here without incident, should not assume it is safe to apply for citizenship without first getting immigration advice. A naturalization application can bring a deportable conviction to the government's attention.

For an undocumented person seeking non-LPR cancellation of removal, a PC § 273a(a) conviction will bar that relief. That means a person with a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse, parent, or child may be barred from using that remedy, even where the hardship to the family would otherwise be severe.

Bottom line: If you handle criminal cases involving noncitizen clients in California, this decision should change how you evaluate PC § 273a(a) pleas. If you or a family member has a prior conviction under this statute, speak with an immigration attorney before filing for any immigration benefit.
The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda Pereira assists individuals, families, and criminal defense attorneys with immigration matters, including family immigration, removal defense, naturalization, and immigration consequences of criminal charges and convictions.

For criminal defense attorneys, early immigration analysis can help identify risks before a plea, sentencing, or creation of the record of conviction.

For individuals and families, a prior conviction should be reviewed before filing for naturalization, adjustment of status, renewal of lawful permanent residence, cancellation of removal, or any other immigration benefit.

Hablamos Español.
(209) 942-3300 | Stockton & Northern California

This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case is different.

06/26/2026

If Alexandra Lozano or Luz Legal represented you, USCIS says it needs your updated mailing address to continue processing your case. This is urgent.

USCIS recently sent a notice stating that Alexandra Lozano resigned from the Washington State Bar on May 26, 2026, in lieu of discipline and is permanently barred from practicing law in Washington. USCIS also stated that she closed her law firm on June 10, 2026, and that on June 18, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals suspended her from practice before DHS, including USCIS, the Immigration Courts, and the BIA.

If you were represented by that office and have petitions or applications pending before USCIS, you should update your mailing address with USCIS as soon as possible.

This is very important. If USCIS sends a Request for Evidence, interview notice, approval, denial, biometrics notice, or other important document to the wrong address, you may not receive it in time. A missed USCIS notice can create serious problems for your case.

What you should do now:

1. Update your mailing address with USCIS.

2. Use the correct procedure if your case is VAWA, T, U, or an I-751 abuse waiver. Do not assume a regular address change is enough if your case is protected or confidential.

3. Do not withdraw your application or petition without speaking to an immigration attorney first.

USCIS states that withdrawal is an option. But for many people, withdrawing a pending application or petition can have serious consequences that may be difficult or impossible to fix. Depending on the case, withdrawal could affect work authorization, protection from removal, future eligibility, or the immigration record USCIS reviews later.

4. Get a complete case review.

If your application was filed by this firm, you need to know what was filed, whether it was filed correctly, whether USCIS has issued any notices, whether your address is correct, and whether there are errors in the record that could affect your case now or in the future.

At this point, affected clients need clear information, an updated mailing address with USCIS, access to their case records, and a careful review of their options.

Save this post. Share it with anyone who may have been represented by Alexandra Lozano or Luz Legal.

General questions are welcome in the comments, but please do not post private immigration details publicly. For your specific case, send a private message or call to schedule a consultation.

Follow this page for immigration updates explained in plain language in English and Spanish.

The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda Pereira offers confidential consultations to help former clients understand the current status of their case and their options.

We are based in Northern California and are available to meet in person.

Hablamos Español.
(209) 942-3300

This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case is different.

06/26/2026

Si Alexandra Lozano o Luz Legal lo representó, USCIS dice que necesita su dirección postal actualizada para continuar procesando su caso. Esto es urgente.

USCIS envió recientemente una notificación indicando que Alexandra Lozano renunció a la Barra del Estado de Washington el 26 de mayo de 2026, en lugar de enfrentar disciplina profesional, y que está permanentemente impedida de ejercer leyes en Washington. USCIS también indicó que ella cerró su firma el 10 de junio de 2026, y que el 18 de junio de 2026, la Junta de Apelaciones de Inmigración la suspendió de ejercer ante DHS, incluyendo USCIS, los Tribunales de Inmigración, y la BIA.

Si esa oficina lo representó y usted tiene peticiones o solicitudes pendientes ante USCIS, debe actualizar su dirección postal con USCIS lo antes posible.

Esto es muy importante. Si USCIS envía una solicitud de evidencia, una cita para entrevista, una aprobación, una negación, una cita de huellas, o cualquier otra notificación importante a una dirección incorrecta, usted podría no recibirla a tiempo. No recibir una notificación de USCIS puede causar problemas graves en su caso.
Lo que debe hacer ahora:

1. Actualice su dirección postal con USCIS.

2. Use el procedimiento correcto si su caso es VAWA, visa T, visa U, o un perdón I-751 basado en abuso. No asuma que un cambio de dirección regular es suficiente si su caso es protegido o confidencial.

3. No retire su solicitud o petición sin hablar primero con un abogado de inmigración.

USCIS dice que retirar la solicitud es una opción. Pero para muchas personas, retirar una solicitud o petición pendiente puede tener consecuencias graves que pueden ser difíciles o imposibles de corregir. Dependiendo del caso, retirar la solicitud puede afectar el permiso de trabajo, la protección contra deportación, la elegibilidad futura, o el historial migratorio que USCIS revise después.

4. Solicite una revisión completa de su caso.

Si su solicitud fue presentada por esta firma, usted necesita saber qué fue presentado, si fue presentado correctamente, si USCIS ha enviado alguna notificación, si su dirección está correcta, y si existen errores en su expediente que puedan afectarle ahora o en el futuro.

En este momento, los clientes afectados necesitan información clara, una dirección postal actualizada con USCIS, acceso a sus expedientes, y una revisión cuidadosa de sus opciones.

Guarde esta publicación. Compártala con cualquier persona que pudo haber sido representada por Alexandra Lozano o Luz Legal.
Preguntas generales son bienvenidas en los comentarios, pero por favor no publique detalles privados de su caso migratorio. Para hablar de su caso específico, envíe un mensaje privado o llame para programar una consulta.

Siga esta página para recibir actualizaciones de inmigración explicadas en lenguaje claro en español e inglés.

La Oficina Legal de Inmigración de Fernanda Pereira ofrece consultas confidenciales para ayudar a exclientes a entender el estado actual de su caso y sus opciones.

Estamos ubicados en el Norte de California y podemos atenderle en persona. Hablamos Español.

(209) 942-3300
Esta publicación es información general solamente y no es asesoría legal. Cada caso es diferente.

Call now to connect with business.

06/13/2026

If your immigration case has been frozen for months (green card, work permit, asylum, or naturalization), a federal court just ruled that freeze was unlawful. The affected countries are listed in the comments.

On June 5, 2026, Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island issued a 135-page ruling in Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS. The court declared four USCIS policies unlawful and vacated them nationwide.

The policies included:

- The Benefits Hold Policy, which froze many pending green card, work permit, and naturalization applications for nationals of affected countries

-The Global Asylum Hold Policy which froze affirmative asylum decisions for everyone, regardless of nationality

- The Comprehensive Re-Review Policy which ordered USCIS to reopen and re-examine already approved benefits based solely on country of birth and entry related criteria

- The Country Specific Factors Policy which treated being from a travel-ban country as a significant negative factor in certain immigration decisions

The Court found that USCIS had placed the lives of countless individuals on hold, solely by virtue of their countries of birth. It ruled that the rule of law has to apply to everyone equally.

What this means in practice:

-Cases frozen solely because of the applicant’s country of birth must return to normal adjudication

- USCIS may no longer treat country of birth as an automatic negative factor in green card and related decisions

- Previously approved benefits may not be subjected to the mass re-review program

- The global asylum hold is also vacated

What this does NOT cover: This ruling applies to USCIS benefit processing inside the United States. It does not affect the State Department’s separate pause on immigrant visa issuances at U.S. consulates abroad for nationals of 75 countries. It does not eliminate the travel ban itself. Cases in immigration court before the immigration court are not affected by this ruling.

Important update as of today, June 13: The government filed a notice of appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals on June 12, 2026. The government may also seek an emergency stay , which is a request to pause the ruling while the appeal continues.
If a stay is granted, the holds could temporarily resume. If denied, the vacatur remains active and USCIS must continue processing cases. This situation is still developing and should be monitored closely.

If your case was frozen: If you or a family member has a pending adjustment of status, work permit, asylum application, or naturalization case that has been stalled since late 2025, and you are from one of the 39 affected countries, this ruling matters directly to your case. Do not assume your case will move automatically. Speak with an immigration attorney about your specific situation and what steps to take now.

Save this post. Share it with anyone whose USCIS case has been frozen.

General questions are welcome in the comments. Please do not post private immigration details publicly. Send a private message or call to discuss your specific case.

Follow this page for immigration updates explained in plain language in English and Spanish.

The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda M. Pereira assists individuals and families with adjustment of status, asylum, removal defense, family immigration, naturalization, and immigration consequences of criminal charges and convictions.

Hablamos Español.
(209) 942-3300 | Stockton & Northern California
This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case is different.

06/05/2026

You filed your I-485. You are eligible. You have been waiting. Can USCIS still deny your green card? Yes, and here is what that means for your case right now.

On May 21, 2026, USCIS issued Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199. It does not change the law, but it signals how USCIS wants officers to apply discretion in adjustment cases, and that difference matters if you have a pending I-485.

In plain English: being eligible to file Form I-485 does not end the analysis. USCIS may look at the full picture of your case before deciding.

What may work against you in this discretionary review:

• Prior immigration violations or overstays

• Unauthorized employment

• Entry without inspection

• Criminal history, including arrests, charges, or convictions

• Conduct inconsistent with your original visa purpose

• Fraud, misrepresentation, or inconsistent information

What may work in your favor:

• Long residence in the United States

• U.S. citizen or permanent resident family members

• Employment history and tax compliance

• Community ties

• Clean criminal record

• Evidence of good moral character

• Hardship to family members if denied

• Rehabilitation, where relevant

What this means practically:

If your I-485 is pending and your record is clean, that is helpful. But adjustment of status is still discretionary, and no post can predict the result of an individual case.

If your record has any of the negative factors listed above, this memo may increase your risk and should be taken seriously. Do not wait for USCIS to raise the issue.

A stronger filing may include affirmative evidence of family unity, hardship, employment, tax compliance, community ties, rehabilitation where relevant, and good moral character. The point is to show not only that you are eligible, but why your case merits approval as a matter of discretion.

Address the issue proactively with an immigration attorney before the interview, before responding to a Request for Evidence, and before assuming the issue will not matter.

Save this post if you or someone you know has a pending I-485. Share it with someone waiting for a green card interview.

General questions are welcome in the comments, but please do not post private immigration details publicly. For your specific case, send a private message or call to schedule a consultation.

Follow this page for immigration updates explained in plain language in English and Spanish.

The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda M. Pereira assists individuals and families with adjustment of status, family immigration, removal defense, naturalization, and immigration consequences of criminal charges and convictions.

Hablamos Español.
(209) 942-3300 | Stockton & Northern California

This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case is different.

06/04/2026

Yesterday, the Senate held a hearing on denaturalization. Here is what happened, and what it means for every naturalized U.S. citizen.
The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution met to debate the administration's expanding denaturalization campaign. Senators debated whether the administration's efforts are consistent with constitutional limits.
The numbers from the hearing:
▪ Between 1990 and 2017, the government opened an average of 11 denaturalization cases per year.
▪ Since January of this year, the government has already opened 34 cases and revoked citizenship from 11 people.
▪ USCIS is reviewing 100 to 200 potential cases per month.
What the hearing revealed that you should know: A June 2025 DOJ memo expanded the campaign beyond terrorism and war crimes to include fraud, s*x crimes, and - critically - "any other cases the division deems sufficiently important." That last phrase has no defined limit.
This is a serious concern. Naturalized citizens have already been stopped at airports and questioned about their immigration history despite holding U.S. citizenship.
The law still requires a federal court proceeding to denaturalize someone, and a misrepresentation must have been material to obtaining citizenship. the government still bears a high burden of proof, and a court, not an agency, makes the final decision.
However, the volume of cases is increasing and the scope is expanding. If you are a naturalized citizen with any of the following, now is the time - not later - to speak with an immigration attorney:

• A prior criminal conviction of any kind
• A prior immigration violation or misrepresentation
• A name discrepancy in your immigration record
• Any concern about what was disclosed during your naturalization process

The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda M. Pereira assists individuals and families with citizenship, naturalization, removal defense, family immigration, and immigration consequences of criminal charges and convictions.

Hablamos Español. 📞 (209) 942-3300 | Stockton & Northern California
[email protected]

This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case is different.

06/02/2026

If you became a U.S. citizen through naturalization, you may be wondering: can the government take that away? The answer is: it depends, and right now, that question matters more than it ever has.
Recent reporting states that internal USCIS guidance calls for field offices to refer 100 to 200 potential denaturalization cases per month to the Department of Justice for fiscal year 2026. Historically, denaturalization has been rare, averaging about 11 cases per year between 1990 and 2017.
On June 3, 2026, the Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing on this issue.
Here is what the law generally requires:
▪ Denaturalization is not simply an executive decision. In most cases, the government must bring a case in federal court.
▪ The government has a high burden of proof.
▪ A false statement or omission is not automatically enough. The issue is whether the person illegally obtained citizenship or whether a willful misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact affected the naturalization decision.
▪ There is no statute of limitations. The government may examine conduct or records from many years ago.

What does this mean practically?
Most naturalized U.S. citizens should not panic. But naturalized citizens with complicated immigration histories, prior criminal issues, prior immigration violations, possible misrepresentations, name discrepancies, or concerns about what was disclosed in the naturalization application should take this seriously.
A referral is not a court finding. The strength of individual cases will vary significantly. Only a court can decide a denaturalization case. But it is far better to understand your immigration and criminal record before the government raises the issue, not after.
If you are a naturalized U.S. citizen and you are concerned about your naturalization file, prior immigration history, prior criminal record, or prior statements to immigration, speak with an immigration attorney before there is a problem.
The Immigration Law Offices of Fernanda M. Pereira assists individuals and families with immigration matters, including family immigration, removal defense, citizenship, and immigration consequences of criminal charges and convictions.

Hablamos Español. 📞 (209) 942-3300 | Stockton & Northern California

This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every case is different.

Call now to connect with business.