Success Stories

Zambrano Law successfully represented a client who was wrongly accused by the government of being subject to the Permanent Bar—one of the harshest and most devastating penalties in U.S. immigration law.

The government alleged that our client had previously been deported and unlawfully re-entered the United States, which, if true, would have permanently barred her from obtaining lawful immigration status. This allegation was false and the result of a mistaken identity.

The Challenge

USCIS relied on incorrect records that confused our client with another individual who had a completely different immigration history. As a result, the agency treated our client as if she had been removed from the United States and returned unlawfully—something that never occurred.

Despite our client having no prior deportation and no unlawful re-entry, USCIS issued a denial based on this incorrect assumption.

Our Strategy

We first appealed the USCIS decision, submitting extensive documentary evidence proving that the alleged deportation did not belong to our client. The evidence clearly demonstrated that the government had misidentified her and attributed another person’s immigration history to her record.

Even after reviewing this evidence, USCIS still denied the case. At that point, we escalated the matter and filed a Declaratory Judgment Action in federal court, challenging the agency’s decision and the factual inaccuracies underlying it.

The Result

Through federal litigation, we were able to prove the mistaken identity, dismantle the government’s Permanent Bar allegation, and demonstrate that USCIS’s decision was legally and factually incorrect.

This victory corrected the government record and protected our client from a wrongful, life-altering immigration consequence.

Why This Case Matters

This case underscores a critical reality in immigration law:

Government records are not infallible — and USCIS mistakes can be challenged.

When denials are based on incorrect facts, misidentification, or flawed assumptions, federal court may be the only path to justice.

Our Commitment

At Zambrano Law, we do not accept denials rooted in error. When necessary, we take cases beyond USCIS and into federal court to protect our clients’ rights and futures.

If you have been denied due to an alleged prior deportation, unlawful re-entry, or Permanent Bar, you may still have legal options.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is the Permanent Bar in immigration law?

The Permanent Bar is a severe penalty that can permanently prevent a person from obtaining lawful immigration status, usually based on allegations of unlawful re-entry after removal or false claims of U.S. citizenship.

Can USCIS be wrong about prior deportations?

Yes. USCIS relies on government databases that can contain errors, outdated information, or mistaken identities. These mistakes can lead to wrongful denials.

What is mistaken identity in immigration cases?

Mistaken identity occurs when the government confuses one individual with another person who has a similar name, date of birth, or biographic information, and incorrectly assigns that person’s immigration history to the wrong individual.

What if USCIS denies my appeal?

If USCIS continues to deny a case despite clear evidence, federal court litigation—such as a Declaratory Judgment Action—may be necessary to correct the record.

Do I need a federal court lawyer for this?

Yes. Federal litigation requires an attorney experienced in immigration federal court cases. Not all immigration lawyers handle this level of litigation.

📍 Atlanta & Georgia Localization

Zambrano Law proudly represents clients in Atlanta, Cobb County, Gwinnett County, DeKalb County, and throughout Georgia in complex immigration cases, including federal court litigation against USCIS.

If you are located in Atlanta or anywhere in Georgia and have been denied due to a Permanent Bar allegation, prior removal claim, or unlawful re-entry accusation, our firm has the experience to fight back.

Zambrano Law recently secured lawful permanent residence for a client in Immigration Court despite serious criminal allegations and a highly unfavorable police report.

The case required the Court to carefully evaluate the totality of the circumstances, including the client’s family ties, work history, community contributions, and evidence of good moral character. Through witness testimony and extensive supporting documentation, we demonstrated that our client merited a favorable exercise of discretion.

After considering all the evidence, the Immigration Judge granted adjustment of status and approved the client’s green card.

This case highlights the importance of experienced legal representation and serves as a reminder that difficult cases are not necessarily unwinnable.

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Every case is unique and depends on its specific facts and circumstances.

Attorney Shirley Zambrano secured a remand from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals for one of her Guatemalan clients who had been a victim of sexual abuse and domestic violence at the hands of her stepfather. Asylum for domestic violence cases represents a complex and ever-evolving area of immigration law in the United States. Traditionally, survivors of domestic violence who sought asylum faced significant challenges in obtaining protection, especially when their claims were based solely on their experiences of abuse within a private relationship.

Attorney Shirley Zambrano successfully obtained a remand by arguing that the Immigration Judge’s decision had been influenced by the now-outdated Attorney General Decisions, specifically, Matter of A-B-, 27 I&N Dec. at 316, and Matter of L-E-A-, 27 I&N Dec. at 581. As both Matter of A-B- and Matter of L-E-A- are no longer considered applicable law, Attorney Shirley Zambrano requested the court to revert to the previous existing law, which recognized that victims of domestic violence and/or nuclear family members can constitute a particular social group protected under the statute.

This compelling story underscores the profound impact of legal advocacy in immigration matters. If you have any further questions or require additional assistance, please feel free to contact our office to schedule a consultation with Attorney Shirley Zambrano.

Attorneys at Zambrano Law achieved a remarkable victory by overturning an ‘Intent to Deny’ our client’s naturalization application, which was based on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s erroneous allegations of marriage fraud. Marriage fraud, also known as marriage-based immigration fraud or immigration marriage fraud, occurs when individuals enter into a marriage primarily to evade immigration laws and gain immigration benefits, such as a green card (lawful permanent residence) in the United States. Marriage fraud is illegal and considered a serious immigration violation. In our client’s case, he had failed to disclose the existence of two children with another woman during his green card application process and his marriage to his U.S. citizen spouse. Attorney Shirley Zambrano successfully convinced immigration officials that, although our client had misrepresented a fact during his green card application, the evidence supported the notion that our client’s marriage to his U.S. citizen spouse was genuine and in good faith. As a result, our client has now become a United States Citizen. This compelling story highlights the profound impact of legal advocacy in immigration matters. If you have further questions or require additional assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office to schedule a consultation with attorney Shirley Zambrano.

At Zambrano Law, we are reminded every day that immigration cases are not just about statutes and courtrooms — they are about families, stability, and the future of U.S. citizen children.

Recently, our firm successfully won a Cancellation of Removal case, allowing a father to remain in the United States and keep his family together. While every case is different, this win highlights the importance of understanding one of the most powerful — and most difficult — forms of immigration relief: Cancellation of Removal for Non-Permanent Residents, commonly known as “42B.”

What Is Cancellation of Removal (42B)?

Cancellation of Removal under INA § 240A(b) is a form of relief available only in immigration court. It allows certain individuals who do not have lawful permanent residence to stop deportation and obtain a green card, despite being in removal proceedings.

However, 42B is not easy to win. Congress intentionally created a very high standard, and Immigration Judges grant this relief only in limited circumstances.

What Does Someone Have to Prove?

To qualify for 42B, a person must prove all four of the following:

• At least 10 years of continuous physical presence in the United States
• Good moral character during that time
• No disqualifying criminal convictions
• That removal would cause “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse, parent, or child

If even one requirement is not proven, the case must be denied.

What Does “Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship” Really Mean?

This is the hardest part of a 42B case.

It is not enough to show that deportation would be painful, financially difficult, or emotionally upsetting. Immigration Judges must find hardship that goes far beyond what most families experience when a loved one is removed.

Judges look at the totality of the circumstances, including factors such as:

• Medical or mental-health needs of U.S. citizen children
• Educational challenges or special academic programs
• Trauma, safety concerns, or instability
• Financial dependence on the person in removal proceedings
• Whether there is another parent or caregiver who can realistically step in

Hardship is evaluated cumulatively, meaning all factors together — not in isolation.

Why Winning a 42B Case Matters

When Cancellation of Removal is granted, the impact is immediate and life-changing:

• Families remain together
• Children keep a parent in their lives
• Medical and mental-health care can continue
• Financial stability is preserved
• A person who has built a life in the United States is given lawful status

In this recent case, the Court recognized that separation would have caused harm far beyond the ordinary consequences of removal — and that is exactly what the law requires.

These Cases Require Strategy, Preparation, and Experience

42B cases are not won by accident. They require:

• Careful legal analysis
• Detailed and consistent testimony
• Strong documentation
• Thoughtful presentation of hardship
• Credible witnesses and preparation

Every detail matters, because the burden of proof is high and the consequences are permanent.

A Message to Families in Immigration Court

If you or someone you love is facing removal proceedings, do not assume that deportation is inevitable. Relief may exist, but it must be identified early and prepared correctly.

Cancellation of Removal is one of the hardest forms of immigration relief to win — but when it applies, it can change lives.

At Zambrano Law, we fight relentlessly for families because the stakes are too high not to.

Ganamos porque no paramos.
We win because we don’t stop.

Our legal team achieved a significant victory by convincing the immigration judge to reopen our client’s case. Remarkably, this success came after four previous unsuccessful attempts by various attorneys. A ‘Motion to Reopen’ is a formal request made by an individual to immigration authorities or a court, seeking to have a previously decided immigration case reconsidered. Such motions are typically used when new evidence emerges or when errors in the initial decision need correction. In our client’s case, he had resided in the United States for over 30 years, was married to a U.S. citizen, and had two children who were U.S. citizens. The immigration judge had previously declined to reopen the case, citing our client’s failure to leave the United States after being granted voluntary departure. Fortunately, our dedicated attorney, Shirley Zambrano, successfully argued that a sua sponte reopening was warranted based on our client’s compelling circumstances—something previous attorneys had overlooked. As a result, our client’s case was reopened and terminated, setting him on the path to obtaining lawful permanent residence. This success story underscores the profound impact of skilled legal advocacy in immigration matters. If you have further questions or require assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office to arrange a consultation with Attorney Shirley Zambrano.

Our client faced removal proceedings after being involved in an accident while driving under the influence. During the incident, the other driver was injured, and out of fear of deportation, our client left the scene. Attorney Shirley Zambrano successfully convinced the immigration court that, despite our client’s mistake, there were positive factors in their record that outweighed the error. As a result, our client has achieved lawful permanent resident status in the United States.

This case highlights the importance of skilled legal representation in immigration matters and demonstrates that even in challenging situations, individuals can achieve positive outcomes. If you have further questions or require assistance, please feel free to contact our office to schedule a consultation with Attorney Shirley Zambrano.

Attorney Shirley Zambrano won an appeal at the Board of Immigration Appeal, effectively overturning the immigration judge’s initial finding of lack of credibility. In immigration cases, ‘lack of credibility’ pertains to a situation where an applicant’s statements, documents, or testimony are not considered trustworthy or believable by immigration authorities. Credibility plays a crucial role in immigration cases, as it is essential for applicants to establish the truthfulness of their claims, whether they are seeking asylum, a visa, a green card, or any other immigration benefit. In our client’s case, there were inconsistencies in his testimony, and he lacked physical evidence to support his identity and his claims of fear of persecution. Despite these challenges, Attorney Shirley Zambrano skillfully argued that, when considering the totality of the circumstances, our client’s claims were indeed credible. This case demonstrates the paramount importance of expert legal representation in immigration matters. If you have questions or require assistance, we invite you to schedule a consultation with Attorney Shirley Zambrano for further guidance and support.

In our client’s case, Attorney Shirley Zambrano successfully argued that our client’s alleged claim of being a United States citizen was not made for the purpose of obtaining an immigration benefit under federal or state law. Making a false claim to U.S. citizenship is a serious immigration violation and a federal crime in the United States. It refers to falsely representing oneself as a U.S. citizen for any purpose, whether it’s to obtain employment, receive government benefits, or for any other reason. A false claim to citizenship can render an individual inadmissible to the United States, impacting their ability to obtain visas or legal status in the future. In our client’s case, USCIS notified our client that they intended to deny her green card application, alleging that she had claimed to be a citizen of the United States during an arrest by law enforcement. Attorney Shirley Zambrano argued that her statements were not made with the ‘purpose or benefit’ under the INA or any other federal or state law. She also argued that our client was not seeking any public benefit from the police department, as there is no benefit created by law and administered by the police department. Furthermore, Attorney Shirley Zambrano argued that there was no evidence that the police department could confer a benefit to our client and that our client would have been arrested regardless of whether or not she was a citizen of the United States. This case highlights the importance of skilled legal representation in immigration matters and the ability of an attorney to advocate on behalf of their client to avoid adverse immigration consequences. If you have any further questions or need additional assistance, feel free to call our office to set up a consultation with attorney Shirley Zambrano.

Zambrano Law represented a client whose naturalization application was denied by the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) due to misrepresentation and marriage fraud. Our client failed to disclose the existence of a child fathered by someone else during the marriage to her United States citizen spouse. The attorneys at Zambrano Law submitted a lawsuit before the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, and they argued that having a child outside the marriage did not prove that the marriage was not valid and that the misrepresentation was not material under the immigration laws. Our client is now a United States citizen thanks to the amazing advocacy of our attorneys.

One of our clients applied for permanent residency with the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS). During the process, our client failed to disclose that she had been arrested (but not convicted) in the past for drug related crimes. USCIS claimed that she committed misrepresentation by omitting her arrest to immigration officials, and denied her application. The attorneys at Zambrano Law submitted a complaint against USCIS before the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. Our attorneys successfully argued that a failure to disclose an arrest was not a misrepresentation and that there was insufficient evidence indicating our client to be a drug trafficker. Now our client is now a lawful permanent resident of the United States.

Our client petitioned for her spouse’s permanent residency several years ago, but despite our client’s constant follow up and communications with the U.S. Embassy in Jordan over the last few years, they refused to approve it. Our client came to our office desperate to be reunited with her spouse after several attorneys declined to take her case. Our attorneys submitted a Complaint for Writ of Mandamus before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. Embassy in Jordan. This complaint stated that they have willfully and unreasonably delayed our client’s husband’s permanent residency, causing extreme harm to our client. Our client’s spouse is now here in the United States and expecting their first baby.

Our client is married to a United States citizen who petitioned for him several years ago. But because our client did not have a legal entry, our client was required to go to the U.S. Embassy in his native country to obtain permanent residency. During his interview at the U.S. Embassy, the consular officer determined that our client was a suspected drug trafficker and denied his permanent residency. Because he wanted to be with his family, our client immediately reentered the US through the border and was apprehended by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Our client applied for Cancellation of Removal. During our client’s hearing, our amazing attorneys were able to convince the immigration judge that our client was not a drug trafficker. Our client is now a lawful permanent resident of the United States.