Applications for Asylum Granted

At the Law Office of Alexander R. Vail, we are committed to defending individuals facing deportation and providing expert representation in removal defense cases. One of the most significant forms of relief available to those facing removal is asylum. Asylum offers protection to individuals who are fleeing persecution in their home countries. Several of our recent asylum cases, demonstrate the impact of removal defense strategies and how our team has helped clients secure their futures in the United States.

Each of the cases highlighted below showcases an individual who came to the U.S. seeking safety from political persecution. Whether they were dissidents fighting oppressive regimes, individuals targeted for their beliefs, or those facing violence for standing against their government, we helped them establish their credible fear of future persecution, a crucial element of their asylum applications. From Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Russia, these individuals found relief through the diligent work of our team, which ultimately led to the approval of their asylum requests.

In cases such as Matter of P.D.B. (2024), where political dissidents faced targeted violence by their home country’s regime, or Matter of E.R.E. (2024), where opposition to a brutal government led to physical harm, we meticulously built the case for asylum by ensuring every piece of evidence was in place. We worked with each client to demonstrate their well-founded fear of returning to a country where their lives or freedom would be at risk.

The Law Office of Alexander R. Vail has successfully navigated the complexities of the asylum process, helping clients avoid deportation and gain the protection they deserve under U.S. law. If you are facing similar circumstances, whether fleeing political persecution or fearing for your life due to your beliefs, our office can guide you through the asylum process and help you understand your legal rights and options for relief.

Applications for Asylum Granted

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of P.D.B (2024)

P.D.B. is a native and citizen of Venezuela who entered the United States to seek asylum. She had been pegged as a political dissident by the Maduro regime in her native country, and this led to constant harassment that eventually turned to violence. Functionaries of the Venezuelan government had gone so far as to physically assault her and destroy the business that served as her family’s source livelihood, all in order to make an example of her. Alex helped take her Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) to completion with the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”). The immigration judge presiding over the case ultimately concluded that P.D.B. had established a “well-founded fear” of future political persecution and, accordingly, granted her asylum application.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of E.R.E. (2024)

E.R.E. is a native and citizen of Nicaragua who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from his native country. Because he was opposed to the Ortega regime in Nicaragua, he suffered physical harm at the hands of the police. Fearing that the violence would only escalate, E.R.E. and his wife fled the country in order to pursue asylum in this country. The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) paroled him and his wife into the country so that they could file an Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) before the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”).

Alex explained to E.R.E. all of the elements that would need to be established to obtain asylum and explained that so long as E.R.E. could credibly establish past persecution, he would be able to avail himself of the presumption of a well-founded fear of future political persecution. To that end, Alex helped E.R.E. identify the types of evidence that would help him carry his burden of proof. At the time of the hearing in the immigration court, the presiding judge found that E.R.E. met his burden of proof and granted his asylum application.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of V.A. (2024)

V.A. is a native and citizen of Russia who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from his native country. Being opposed to the conflict in Ukraine, he suffered violence at the hands of the Russian authorities who tried to silence him. Fearing not just for himself but for his family, he sought asylum in the United States. After presenting himself at the border, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) paroled him and his family into the country so that they could file an Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) before the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”).

Alex explained to V.A. all of the elements that would need to be established to obtain asylum and explained that so long as V.A. could credibly establish past persecution, he would be able to avail himself of the presumption of a well-founded fear of future political persecution. To that end, Alex helped V.A. identify the types of evidence that would help him carry his burden of proof. At the time of the hearing in the immigration court, the presiding judge found that V.A. met his burden of proof and granted his asylum application.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of L.O. (2024)

L.O. is a native and citizen of Cuba who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from her native country. Being opposed to the communist regime in Cuba, she had lost her position at the hospital where she had worked. Unable to find gainful employment elsewhere and fearing additional persecution, she fled the country in order to seek asylum in the United States. Not having been granted parole, she had no choice but to litigate her Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) before the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”).

L.O. feared that she would be unable to convince the immigration judge that she was eligible for asylum because she did not suffer physical harm and did not have much in the way of documentary evidence. Alex explained that the loss of her job ultimately resulted in substantial economic deprivation and that such economic harm that posed a threat to her life or freedom qualified as “persecution” as that term is understood in the asylum context. See Zehatye v. Gonzalez, 453 F.3d 1182, 1186 (9th Cir. 2006). Moroever, Alex explained that L.O.’s credible testimony alone was sufficient to meet her burden of proof.

Alex made sure L.O. was well prepared for the hearing on her Form I-589, and because L.O. was able to credibly establish past persecution, she was able to avail herself of the presumption of a well-founded fear of future political persecution. Current country conditions in Cuba made it such that the government could not overcome this presumption. Therefore, at the time of the hearing in the immigration court, the presiding judge found that L.O. met her burden of proof and granted her asylum application.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of R.L. (2023)

R.L. is a native and citizen of Cuba who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from his native country. He had suffered past persecution at the hands of the Cuban authorities and feared future harm if he returned to the country. R.L. and his family trusted Alex to help litigate R.L.'s Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) before the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”).

Knowing how difficult it can be to obtain asylum in the United States, R.L. was concerned whether he could meet his evidentiary burden without having suffered physical harm. Alex explained that under the governing law, substantial economic deprivation that poses a threat to life or freedom can rise to the level of “persecution” as that term is understood in the asylum context. See Zehatye v. Gonzalez, 453 F.3d 1182, 1186 (9th Cir. 2006). And this is exactly what R.L. had experienced in Cuba: in an attempt to suppress his political opinions, the Cuban government had essentially made it impossible for R.L. to earn a livelihood. Alex helped R.L. ensure he secured the evidence needed to credibly establish just how severe the economic harm was and how it was on account of his political opinion. Because R.L. was able to credibly establish past persecution, he was able to avail himself of the presumption of a well-founded fear of future political persecution. Current country conditions in Cuba made it such that the government could not overcome this presumption. Therefore, at the time of the merits hearing in the immigration court, the presiding judge found that R.L. met his burden of proof and granted his asylum application.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of K.M.M (2022)

K.M.M. is a native and citizen of Venezuela who fled her country because of the political unrest and entered the United States with her children. Because of her participation in a political protest, C.I.C.P.C. took an interest in her and issued multiple summonses to her demanding that she appear before the agency to answer to the trumped-up charges lodged against her. Having already fled the country, she had no intention of complying, knowing well what the Venezuelan government does to political dissidents. The issuances of these summonses also made it very clear to K.M.M. that returning to Venezuela might never be possible in the future. She therefore contracted Alex to help with the preparation and filing of the Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) with the Executive Office for Immigration Review. The case was predicated on a well-founded fear of political persecution, and this meant that K.M.M. had the burden of establishing (1) that her fear of political persecution was subjectively genuine and objectively reasonable, (2) that she could not avail herself of the protection of her home country’s government, and (3) that it would not be possible to avoid her persecutors by relocating to another area in her home country. At the time of the hearing, the immigration judge found that K.M.M. met her burden of proof and therefore granted her asylum application.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of G.M. (2022)

G.M. is a native and citizen of Venezuela who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from her native country. She had suffered past persecution at the hands of the Venezuelan authorities and feared future harm if she returned to the country. She contracted Alex to help with the preparation and filing of the Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) with the Executive Office for Immigration Review. The case was predicated on past political persecution, which meant that, so long as G.M. could credibly establish that she suffered past persecution on account of her political opinion, there would be a presumption that she had a well-founded fear of the same unless the government could prove by a preponderance of the evidence that current country conditions were such that G.M.’s fear is no longer objectively reasonable. At the time of the hearing, the immigration judge found that G.M. met her burden of proof and therefore granted her asylum application.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of T.T. (2021)

T.T. is a native and citizen of Sri Lanka who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from her native country. She had hired another attorney to file on her behalf an Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration and Services (“USCIS”). The agency, however, referred her case to the Las Vegas Immigration Court, alleging that it found material inconsistencies between the evidence she had filed in support of her Form I-589 and the responses she provided at the asylum interview. Dissatisfied with the services of her previous attorney, T.T. sought the assistance of Alex to represent her in removal proceedings. Alex prepared T.T. for the individual hearing, working through all the alleged inconsistencies and making sure T.T. would be prepared for the rigorous cross-examination that she would be subjected to by counsel for the government. The presiding immigration judge ultimately found that T.T. was a credible witness and was satisfied with the evidence presented in support of her asylum application. Accordingly, T.T. was granted asylum in the United States.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of A.R.C. (2021)

A.R.C. is a native and citizen of Venezuela who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from his native country. On his own, he filed an Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”) with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration and Services (“USCIS”). The agency, however, referred his case to the Las Vegas Immigration Court, alleging that it found material inconsistencies between the evidence he had filed in support of his Form I-589 and the responses he provided at the asylum interview. Shortly thereafter, A.R.C. sought the assistance of Alex to represent him in his removal proceedings. Alex prepared A.R.C. for the individual hearing, working through all the alleged inconsistencies and making sure A.R.C. would be prepared for the rigorous cross-examination that he would be subjected to by counsel for the government. The presiding immigration judge ultimately found that A.R.C. was a credible witness and was satisfied with the evidence presented in support of his asylum application. Accordingly, A.R.C. was granted asylum in the United States.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of M.V.S. (2020)

M.V.S. is a native and citizen of Colombia who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from her native country. She had suffered past persecution at the hands of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (“FARC”). Her case had been administratively closed back in 2015 but after it had been recently recalendared, she contracted Alex’s services. M.V.S. expressed her concerns that because eight years had passed since she filed her Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”), she didn’t stand a chance at obtaining asylum. Alex explained to her that so long as she could credibly establish that she was the victim of past political persecution and that she was unable to avail herself of the protection of her native country, a rebuttable presumption would arise that she has a well-founded fear of future political persecution. Alex prepared the case accordingly, and, at the hearing on the asylum application, the presiding immigration judge found that M.V.S. had credibly established that she had suffered past political persecution and that the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) failed to rebut the presumption of a well-founded fear of future political persecution. M.V.S. was therefore granted asylum here in the United States.

APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM GRANTED Matter of W.D.V. (2019)

W.D.V. is a native and citizen of Venezuela who entered the United States, fleeing political persecution from his native country. He initially contracted the service of an “immigration consultant” to assist with the preparation an Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal (“Form I-589”). That consultant, however, failed to update U.S. Citizenship and Immigration and Services (“USCIS”) with W.D.V.’s new address despite assuring the latter that he would. Consequently, W.D.V. was placed in removal proceedings after failing to attend his asylum interview. While removal proceedings were pending, W.D.V.’s family, who had remained in Venezuela, eventually had to flee Venezuela because the situation had become untenable even for them. They sought asylum at the Mexican border, were paroled in, and also placed in removal proceedings. At this point, W.D.V. sought the assistance of Alex to assist with the complicated situation that he and his family found themselves in. Alex succeeded in consolidating the two cases and in litigating W.D.V.’s asylum application. Satisfied with the evidence presented in support of W.D.V’s application for relief, the presiding immigration judge granted W.D.V.’s asylum application (which applied to W.D.V’s family as well since they qualified as derivatives of W.D.V’s application).

At the Law Office of Alexander R. Vail, we are committed to providing unwavering support to individuals facing removal proceedings and seeking asylum. The success of our clients in these cases underscores our expertise in handling complex asylum applications. If you or a loved one is facing a similar situation, don’t navigate the process alone. Call us today at (725) 221-5998, we are here to help you explore your options.