TOLL FREE 844.4REJALICALL US TODAY OR CLICK HERE FOR YOUR CONSULTATION
mycase Change Language

Fast and secure 24/7 access to all of your files with our state of the art online platform

Personalized attention

Price Match Guarantee

Personalized payment plans available to meet any budget & Ability to make secure online payment

San Diego Immigration Lawyer

Our firms values are embedded in honesty, integrity, passion, diligence and the ability to act quickly to preserve and pursue our clients’ interests. Mr. Rejali’s passion lies in representing the repressed and he will do anything to get his clients the justice they deserve.


Case Results

View All Case Results

San Diego Criminal Defense Lawyer

Date: July 2015

Criminal Felony Domestic Violence

Description: Client on visa was not only facing a felony domestic violence, but also deportation from the country.

Result: Dismissed

San Diego Business Litigation Lawyer

Date: October 2014

Bahrami v. GIA et al.

Description: Client submitted stone for Grading to GIA. GIA withheld clients diamond by relying on a clause in their contract called "competing claims of ownership" and was alleging the diamond submitted for grading is the same or substantially similar one as a diamond reported stolen by a reporting party in New York.

Result:

Confidential Settlement.

San Diego Immigration Lawyer

Date: October 2015

Immigration-Removal Proceedings

Description: Client failed to file for removal of green card conditions. Despite the governments denial of agreeing to administratively close the proceedings, the court granted our motion for administrative closure.

Result: Administrative Closure Granted.

San diego immigration lawyer

Date: June 2016

U.S. Citizenship

Description:

Client was having difficulty traveling in and out of the country with his green card. On one occasion, our clients green card was taken away from him while he tried to enter the U.S.,  and the government was giving him the go around until we were able to finally get it back for him. After getting clients green card back we counseled client that he should apply for his U.S. citizenship so he could be protected from further government harassment and to protect himself from deportation should any charges be brought against him in the future. 

 Client was afraid that his prior criminal history might prevent him from obtaining U.S. citizenship. We attended the hearing with the client and explained to the officer why it should not have a bearing on our clients otherwise pristine moral character.   

Result:

U.S. citizenship granted. 

San Diego Immigration Lawyer

Date: April 2016

Change of Status H1-B to F

Description:

Clients husband and wife were in a critical situation and came to us for a change of status. In less than a week we were able to gather all the necessary documents and provide them to USCIS, just in time to prevent them from violating their H1-B visa. 

Result:

Approved. Length of time: 5 months. 

San Diego Immigration Lawyer

Date: August of 2016

Advance Parole

Description:

Client had initially gone to a notario-an individual who is a notary public and holds himself out to assist people on immigration matters. After receiving a RFE (Request for Evidence) client came to our office extremely worried about her advance parole document because she had been unable to see her family for over 15 years. 

Result:

Advance parole granted-Length of time less than 6 weeks. 


Client Testimonials

See all

Leave us a review!



Insurance (Bad Faith)

Barickman v. Mercury Casualty Company (2016) _ Cal.App.4th _ , 2016 WL 3975279: The Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment for plaintiffs for $3 million plus interest following a bench trial by reference in a bad faith case. Plaintiffs were seriously injured by an intoxicated insured of defendant who had minimum policy limits. Plaintiffs offered to settle with defendant carrier for the $15,000 policy limits, but defendant refused to settle because it would not agree to language plaintiffs’ counsel added to the release saying the release “does not include court-ordered restitution.” The referee properly ruled that defendant acted in bad faith in not accepting the policy limits demand, and it was therefore liable for the stipulated judgment of $3 million that its insured agreed to in a civil lawsuit (the insured assigned her rights against the carrier in exchange for the plaintiffs’ agreement not to attempt to collect the judgment against the insured). (C.A. 2nd, August 15, 2016.)


How Can We Help?

CONTACT



ADDRESS


  • 8880 Rio San Diego Dr, Suite 800, San Diego, CA, 92108