Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Cella & Associates LLC - Immigration Lawyers

Post has attachment
Trump Administrati on Announces an
End to TPS for Salvadorians

Joseph G. Cella, Esq. - January 8, 2018
On Monday, January 8, 2018, the Trump Administration announced that it will end Temporary Protected Status ,”TPS”, on September 9, 2019 for Salvadorians, after seventeen years of being allowed to live and work in the United States temporarily, in renewable increments.
Apparently, after undertaking “an extensive outreach campaign”, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen concluded the problems that led to the country’s original designation for the program — which followed a series of earthquakes in 2001 — no longer exist.
This change throws an interesting element into the negotiations on Capitol Hill over a possible solution for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children, 'Dreamers”. Part of those negotiations include a possible trade-off between cutting the Diversity Program, ”Visa Lottery”, and extending TPS protections, as a bipartisan group of senators works on a possible legislative solution for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, “DACA” beneficiaries.
Although this administration has announced the end of other TPS designations, like Haiti, the decision concerning Salvadorans affects by far the largest group with 263,000, or 60% of all current TPS beneficiaries.
Presently many Salvadorian TPS beneficiaries may be eligible for other forms of relief such as Withholding of Removal, and Cancellation of Removal, and are strongly encouraged to consult with immigration attorneys to work toward securing lawful permanent resident status in the United States
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

October 21, 2016 – Newark, New Jersey

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague Convention) is the primary civil law mechanism for parents seeking the return of their children from other treaty partner countries. As of March 2016, ninety-four (94) countries states are party to the convention. Countries that are party to the Convention have agreed that a child who was habitually resident in one Convention country, and who has been removed to or retained in another Convention country in violation of the left-behind parent’s custodial rights, shall be returned. Once the child has been returned, any custody dispute can then be resolved in the courts of that jurisdiction. The Convention does not address who should have custody of the child; it addresses where the custody case should be heard.

For example, in a recent case in which CELLA & ASSOCAITES, LLC represented the Petitioner-father from Colombia, the father had agreed in writing to the mother's request to allow her to travel to the United States with their seven-year-old son for three months, ending on June 30, 2015. Once in the United States however, the mother immediately moved with her boyfriend and filed an action for sole custody in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Bergen County. Although the father was never served with the Summons and Complaint, an Order granting sole custody of the child to the mother was entered. The mother then immediately forwarded a copy of that Order to the father and demanded that the father pay child support.

Stranded in Colombia without his son, the father was referred to Joseph G. Cella, Esq. Upon taking on his case CELLA & ASSOCIATES, LLC, immediately drafted and filed Petition and Emergency Motion for the Return of the child in the Federal District Court, District of New Jersey, and secured an immediate stay of the New Jersey Superior Court Custody Order. As wrongful child removal/retention cases are handled in an expedited manner, discovery was concluded in a matter of several, and the matter was scheduled for trial.

After two full days of testimony, the Federal Judge issued a twenty-four page decision in which he found that the mother had wrongfully retained the child in the United States in violation of the father's parental rights under Colombian law; that the child's country of habitual residence at the time of the wrongful retention was Colombia; the father had not acquiesced or consented to the wrongful retention; the mother had failed to meet hr burden of proof with regard to each of the affirmative defenses she had raised; and ordered the mother to pay the father's counsel fees and costs.

Presently, the child will meet with a reunification therapist, and be reunited with his father and paternal family in Bogota, Colombia this week, where the custody, visitation and support issues will be properly decided. The mother has decided to also move back to Colombia.

The circumstances of every wrongful child abduction or retention case are different and each requires a tailored response. Please call and discuss your child’s case with an attorney at CELLA & ASSOCIATES, LLC as soon as possible to determine what if any options may be available to you in seeking the return of your child.

Joseph G. Cella, Esq.
Attorneys At Law
Miami, FL – Clifton and Fort Lee, NJ
National Toll Free: 877.583.7080
Add a comment...

12 апреля 2016
Автор: Джозеф Г. Челла, адвокат.
11-го апреля 2016 года, администрация Обамы подала ответ в США против Техаса, Республиканского вызовы против DAPA и расширенной DACA, который будет устно аргeментирован перед Верховным Cудом 18 апреля. Ответ администрации бросает вызов юридическим аргументам, предложенным Республиканцами, утверждая, что представленный Техасом иск не связный; не точно изображает Программу DACA; и что интерпретация содержания DAPA и расширенной DACA просто неправильно. Он также "предупреждает" Верховный суд о судебном хаосе, который, скорее всего, последует, если Техасу предоставятся права по этому делу.
В основе аргумента администрации, лежит то, что утверждение истца о том, что DAPA и DACA дают право оставаться на законных основаниях в США просто неправильно. В нем говорится, что Техас утверждает, что программа по отложеному действию накладывает "законное присутствие" на нелегальных иммигрантов является "ошибочным утверждением", которое появилось из юридически необоснованного мнения судьи Hanen блокирующего програмы DAPA и DACA, и основывается на "ошибочной предпосылке". В частности , в его иске, администрация оспаривает следующее:
Респонденты в корне неправы утверждая, что руководство возлагает на иностранцев чье присутствие Конгресс счел незаконным право оставаться на законных основаниях в Соединенных Штатах. Иностранцы, подпадающие под данное руководство, как и все инностранцы имеющие право на отложенное действие, нарушают закон, оставаясь в Соединенных Штатах и подлежат удалению из страны по усмотрению государства, и не имеют никакой защиты от  депортации ... .Программа DAPA и DACA сама по себе ничего не отражает кроме как, суждение о том, что пребывание инностранцев будет допускаться в течение определенного периода времени, на основе приоритетов правоприменеия и гуманитарным соображениям и разрешение на работу позволит им обеспечивать себя на период пребывания в стране.
И, наконец, в случае если Верховный суд постановит в пользу администрации Обамы, то программы DAPA и расширенная DACA будут осуществлены немедленно и, вероятно, окажут значительное влияние на выбоы в ноябре.
US Immigration Attorneys
Clifton & Fort Lee NJ, and N. Miami, FL
National Toll Free: 877.583.7080
Add a comment...


April 12, 2016
By: Joseph G. Cella, Esq.
On April 11, 2016, the Obama Administration filed it's reply brief in United States v. Texas, the Republican challenge to DAPA and expanded DACA, which will be orally argued before the Supreme Court on April 18th. The Administration's brief challenges the legal arguments offered by the Republican Plaintiffs, claiming that the brief submitted by Texas is not coherent; does not accurately portray the deferred action guidance under review;  and that it's substantive interpretation of DAPA and expaded DACA is simply wrong. It also “warns” the Supreme Court of the judicial chaos that will likely ensue if Texas is granted standing for this suit.
At the core of the administration's argument is that the Plaintiff's assertion that DAPA and DACA confer the right to remain lawfully in the U.S.   is simply wrong. It submits that the Texas’ claim that deferred action bestows “lawful presence” on an undocumented immigrants is a “misguided assertion” which grew out of Judge Hanen’s legally unsound opinion blocking DAPA and DACA, and  is based upon a “mistaken premise.” Specifically, in it's brief, the Administration argues:
Respondents are fundamentally wrong to claim
that the Guidance confers on aliens whose presence
Congress has deemed unlawful the right to remain
lawfully in the United States. Aliens covered by the
Guidance, like all aliens afforded deferred action,
are violating the law by remaining in the United
States, are subject to removal proceedings at the
government’s discretion, and gain no defense to
removal….Deferred action itself reflects nothing
more than a judgment that the aliens’ ongoing
presence will be tolerated for a period of time,
based on enforcement priorities and humanitarian
concerns, and work authorization enables them
to support themselves while they remain.

Finally, should the Supreme Court rule in favor of the Obama Administration, DAPA and Expanded DACA will be implemented immediately and will likely have a significant influence on the November elections.

US Immigration Attorneys
Clifton & Fort Lee NJ, and N. Miami, FL
National Toll Free: 877.583.7080
Add a comment...

Cella & Associates, LLC se complace en anunciar la apertura de nuestra nueva oficina ubicada en 2125 Center Avenue, Suite 402, Fort Lee, Nueva Jersey! Situado a sólo un minuto a pie del puente George Washington y a sólo cinco minutos de la zona alta de Manhattan, nuestra nueva oficina es fácilmente accesible desde Manhattan, Brooklyn y el condado de Bergen Nueva Jersey. Nuestra Oficina en Fort Lee será abierta con todo el personal y operativa el 15 de noviembre de 2015, y nos puede contactar llamando a nuestro número gratuito: 877.583.7080 or 201.720.7004.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
With offices in Fort Lee and Clifton NJ, and Aventura FL, Cella & Associates, LLC has been providing ethical, aggressive and results-oriented legal representation to our corporate and individual clients since 1993.  Our attorneys and staff are dedicated to providing the finest Federal representation in the areas of Immigration Law and Removal/ Proceedings, US Citizenship, and Consular Matters.  Our Attorneys also provide legal services in state matters that relate to immigration, such as  criminal defense, personal injury, workers’ compensation, real estate transactions and modifications, business law and asset protection. Our site, offers our clients secure online case status updates 24/7 and, in addition to English, our staff speaks Spanish, French and Russian!
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

By Joseph G. Cella, Esq.
      November 11, 2015

On Monday, the  Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction against implementation of DAPA and Expanded DACA, ruling that the Obama administration had overstepped its legal authority with the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA) program, which would have let about 4 million undocumented immigrants stay in the country with employment authorization. Announced last November, the program would have deferred the deportation for parents of permanent residents and U.S. citizens. However, although the Justice Department said Tuesday that it would appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, the case will likely not be heard until near the end of the Obama presidency. 

In 2012 President Obama launched Deferred Action for Childhood Approvals, (DACA), affording 1.2 million undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children, the opportunity to study and work legally in the United States. Then, in December 2014, President Obama followed DACA with another  executive order known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans, (DAPA), which would have also covered those young immigrants’ parents, and expanded DACA to include more undocumented immigrants.

In response DAPA, Texas and 25 other states sued to halt the programs, and in February, 2014, U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen, from Brownsville, Texas, issued a preliminary injunction preventing the administration from starting the programs. The Obama Administration appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals, which today denied the appeal, leaving the injunction in place. 

Presently, although this decision does not effect DACA and it's beneficiaries, DAPA and expanded DACA  remain stayed until such time as the U.S. Supreme Court rules otherwise. 

Joseph G. Cella, Esq. Has been an 
immigration attorney since 1993.,  
Fort Lee and Clifton, NJ and Aventura, FL
National Toll Free: 877.583.7080

Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded