• You file asylum affirmatively with USCIS (full asylum application) – this generates credible fear interview appointment date
  • At the credible fear interview an Immigration officer will go through the I-589 application with client to make sure correct and then will ask why they fear returning to their home country and why are they seeking asylum. You are advised to attend this interview with an Immigration attorney. The Law offices of Caro Kinsella will give you a full mock interview
  • If the officer denies your petition, then you will go before an Immigration Judge. The officer will give in writing why application was denied, and whether they want IJ to review
  • If officer says yes has a credible fear, then refers the case to Immigration Court for a hearing on asylum
  • To qualify for asylum, applicants must first establish that they qualify as “refugees” under the definition set forth in Section 101(a)(42) of the INA. Once an applicant has satisfied this requirement, the Attorney General (or her designate) may then grant asylum in the exercise of discretion. This discretion is not limitless, however. Hernandez Ortiz v. INS, 777 F.2d 509 (9th Cir. 1985). Only “the most egregious of adverse factors” should preclude a grant of asylum to an otherwise qualified refugee. Matter of Pula, Int. Dec. 3033 (BIA 1987)
  • Requirements for Demonstrating Eligibility as a Refugee: Applicants can establish that they are refugees by demonstrating that they have been persecuted in the past or by establishing that they have a well founded fear of persecution in the future
  • Qualifying through past “persecution”: The BIA has defined persecution, in pertinent part, as “the infliction of suffering or harm upon those who differ in a way regarded as offensive.” Matter of Sanchez & Escobar, 19 I&N Dec. 276 (BIA 1985). Persecution undoubtedly includes more than just restrictions on life and liberty. INS v. Stevic, 467 U.S. 407 (1984). In INS v. Cardoza Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421 (1987), the Supreme Court declined to define the particular acts that might rise to the level of persecution and instead suggested that the well founded fear could “only be given concrete meaning through a process of case by case adjudication.” Finally rape and other severe sexual harm have also been found to constitute persecution
  • An applicant for withholding of removal must establish that his/her “life or freedom would be threatened . . . on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion.” INA § 241(b)(3) (emphasis added). This standard has been interpreted to require that aliens demonstrate a clear probability that they would face persecution. INS v. Stevic, 467 U.S. 407 (1984) (“more likely than not” standard).
  • Those with further questions are welcome to consult with an attorney at the law offices of Caro Kinsella to obtain advice on this important document