Based on a new mandate from the CDC beginning October 01, 2021, any individual who submits a medical exam in connection to an application for an immigrant visa, or refugee status, must receive a COVID-19 vaccine. While some medical, religious, and age exceptions apply, any person who has a COVID-19 vaccine, from a U.S. approved manufacturer, available to them in the country that their medical exam is conducted must receive full vaccination.
As of June 15, 2021, the Law Office of Camille K. Cook is open to the public. To reduce the amount of people we have in our office at one time we are currently only seeing individuals who make appointments before coming in. If someone attempts to enter our office without an appointment they will be turned away and asked to come back once an appointment has been made. Furthermore, we are requiring all office visitors to wear masks when in our office space, and we are pre-screening everyone who enters our office.
On April 29, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Niz-Chavez v. Garland that could impact a large number of people in immigration court proceedings. To qualify for Cancellation of Removal, an individual must, among other things, have been physically present in the United States for 10 years. The “stop-time” rule cuts off the amount of time that an individual has accrued for cancellation of removal purposes. Federal law states the “stop-time” rule is triggered when an immigrant is served with a Notice to Appear. In Niz-Chavez, the Supreme Court stated that a Form I-862 that does not list the date and time of the initial hearing is insufficient to trigger the “time-stop” rule for purposes of cancellation of removal. The decision states that the federal law requires that the time and date of the initial hearing, among other things, has to be included in the Notice to Appear. By failing to include this information in Notices to Appear, the documents that the government has issued are not Notices to Appear as defined by federal law. Thus, the document in Niz-Chavez, and thousands of similar forms issued by the government, failed to trigger the “stop-time” rule. The ruling further states that the federal government cannot cure a defective NTA by issuing a subsequent Notice of Hearing providing the date and time of the initial hearing. The decision in Niz-Chavez has the potential of having a much wider impact on individuals who have been issued defective NTA’s than just triggering the “stop-time” rule. If you believe the Niz-Chavez decision could impact your case, give our office a call at (559) 558-5118 to discuss your immigration options with one of our three immigration lawyers