Our website is currently being remodeled. Thank you for visiting us while we continue to improve!
I-130 Difficulties Proving Kinship Relationship

I-130 Difficulties Proving Kinship Relationship

Tsang & Associates has undertaken a series of Motion to Reopen cases. These cases are all requests to the Immigration Bureau/Immigration Court/Immigration Appeal Board to reopen the case after being rejected, requiring the applicant to make a decision. Favorable ruling, very difficult. Two of them are proof of relationship for relative immigration. Generally speaking, the application for relatives is relatively simple, but the client’s application was rejected. After the rejection, he entrusted Tsang & Associates to apply for retrial. The case is organized here for readers as follows:

Application Type: I-130 Petition for Alien Relative

Case number one:

Kinship: Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens

Beneficiary Nationality: India

basic situation:

The applicant is an American citizen of Indian origin. In June 2012, he submitted the I-130 alien relative immigrant application for his younger brother in India. In August 2015, the Immigration Bureau required additional documents to prove the brotherhood. The guest spent 2 months to make up the documents by himself, but was rejected by the immigration office in January 2016.

After being rejected, the applicant approached Tsang & Associates to consult the lawyer whether there is any remedy? If I ask a lawyer to reapply, can it be approved? After studying the special situation of the applicant and the beneficiary, lawyer Joseph suggested a Motion to Reopen.

Difficulties in this case:

1. Parents have not received a marriage certificate in the local area, and the father has passed away;
2. Both parents have changed their names, the mother changed her name once, and the father changed her name twice, and the parents’ names on the birth certificates of the applicant and the beneficiary are inconsistent;
3. There are very few materials to prove the brotherhood;

Keys to success:

In the end, Zang’s lawyer team successfully got the case retrial and approved by submitting the following evidence:

Approval of the applicant’s application for mother immigrant (I-130): The USCIS has recently approved the I-130 immigrant petition submitted by the applicant for the mother. Indicates that the Immigration Service has recognized the relationship between the applicant and the mother.
Evidence of name change of parents: Evidence of the process of changing the names of their common parents, explaining that although the names on the birth certificate are different, they are essentially the same person.
Parents Marriage Affidavit: We drafted an affidavit for the mother stating her marriage to the child’s father (deceased) and why she cannot provide a marriage certificate. The mother’s affidavit also certifies that the beneficiary is born out of marriage.
Parents’ Joint Tax Return Certificate: Proof of the legal and economic joint relationship between the parents.
• Genetic (DNA) testing: Arranged for the two brothers to undergo DNA testing in the United States and India respectively, the test results showed that the applicant and the beneficiary were born to a common mother.


After submitting a retrial application through our firm, the case was successfully reopened and approved by I-130.

Case two:

Kinship: Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens

Beneficiary Nationality: China

basic situation:

Ms. Li is a Chinese-American citizen. In February 2011, she submitted the I-130 alien relative immigrant application for her half-brother. At the end of 2014, the Immigration Bureau required a supplementary document to explain the relationship between the siblings. The customer submitted the document on January 2015 month rejected. Afterwards, Ms. Li approached Tsang & Associates, hoping to remedy the situation. Lawyer Joseph also suggested Motion to Reopen after analysis.

Difficulties in this case:

Ms. Li submitted a notarization of kinship before. However, the Immigration Bureau believes that the notarial certificate of kinship is not enough to prove the relationship between siblings and requires the birth certificate of the place of birth of the two. However, the party involved in this case was born in a town in the inland region, and was not born in a regular hospital, so he could not provide a birth certificate.

Keys to success:

• Lawyer Zang’s team gave a detailed explanation of the functions of the notary office in China, and let the immigration bureau understand the difference between Chinese notarization and American notarization. The Chinese notary office is not limited to formal review, but should prove the authenticity and legality of documents according to law. In addition, it also explained the fact that it was difficult to obtain the original birth certificate of the party concerned, so the party concerned could not submit the documents within the time limit stipulated in the supplementary documents.

• During the retrial, we guided the applicant and the beneficiary to apply for birth notarization through the notary office, so they could submit the birth certificates of the applicant and the beneficiary, and the affidavits of relatives and friends to fully prove the sibling relationship.


After submitting a retrial application through our firm, the case was successfully reopened and the I-130 approval was quickly passed.

Lawyer Zang commented:

Motion to Reopen requires new facts and new evidence. In family immigration cases, the parties often underestimate the strength of proof required by the Immigration Bureau, the preparation of the application is too simple, and they cannot grasp the key supplementary documents (RFE), which leads to rejection. After being sorted out by our lawyers, we can generally find favorable points. Combined with the reasonable and well-founded explanations in the lawyer’s letter, the chances of successful retrial are high.

These two cases are US citizens applying for brothers and sisters, which belong to the F-4 category. The beneficiaries born in mainland China and India are facing a long waiting period. Currently, they need to wait for 13 years and 13 and a half years respectively. If you reapply, in terms of time alone, the 3.5 and 4 years of waiting in this case are wasted, and the risk of the child being over-age is extremely high. Therefore, whether such a long waiting time can be recovered, the success of the retrial is very critical.

If your application is unfortunately rejected, please do not immerse yourself in sadness. It is recommended to find a professional lawyer to review the file as soon as possible to see if it is possible to recover through retrial, reconsideration or appeal. For remedies after rejection, please see the article “After the application is rejected, immigration appeals, retrials, and reconsiderations all know”

Original Content

This is our original content and is based on our real client(s) and their unique story. Please be aware that many of our articles and success stories have been copied by others. If you are seeking a professional for legal services we highly recommend you directly ask the lawyer details about how to win this case and the key strategies involved. We would love to share with you how we did it for others and how we can create a new success story with you.