Skip to main content


This is a 5-year US Entry Waiver that we successfully secured for one of our clients on their very first attempt. 



- Five years is the maximum time you can get for a US Entry Waiver; this is a big win for our client.

- What's the secret behind this successful outcome?

- In this blog I'm going to cover our law firm's strategy - so insider tips – that will significantly enhance your chances of getting your waiver approved and hopefully get the longest time period possible. 



Understanding the US Entry Waiver Process

To understand our law firm strategy to maximise your chances of success it's important to understand what aspects of the US Entry Waiver process that are in your control and those that are not.



- A key factor that you can't control is the criteria used by ARO, which is the Admissibility Review Office, when assessing your waiver application.

- Understanding this criteria and how the ARO interprets them is critical to crafting a waiver application that maximises your likelihood of success.



The ARO's Decision-Making Criteria

The ARO's decision-making is influenced by a legal case known as Matter of Hranka, established in 1978.  Using this case, the ARO will evaluate your application on three factors.



- 1/ Seriousness of the Inadmissibility Cause.  This means how severe was the criminality that led to your inadmissibility?



- 2/ Risk to Society.  In other words, what potential risk might you pose if they let you visit the United States?



- 3/ Purpose for Entering the United States: This simply means why do you want to enter the U.S.?  Is it for work and or for leisure purposes.



Now, the ARO will also consider other factors when evaluating your application.  These factors include the nature of your offence, the circumstances that led to it, how recently it occurred, whether it was an isolated incident or part of a pattern of misconduct, and critically, what is the evidence of your reformation or rehabilitation. 

The Secret to Success: Presenting Your Story

The secret to success is this: it's how you present your story.



- While you can't change the facts of your past offenses, you can control how they're framed and presented.



- By tailoring your application to address the ARO's criteria and resonate with their concerns, you'll greatly improve your chances of getting your waiver approved."



Three Key Components of a Strong Waiver Application

Here are 3 things you can do.  

1/ Write a strong Personal Statement:



- You need to write a letter addressing the ARO criteria, highlighting your personal growth, responsibility, and reasons for entering the United States.

- It's important to showcase your understanding, remorse, and rehabilitation, turning past mistakes into a compelling case for approval.



2/ Get Compelling Reference Letters:



- Get reference letters from credible people who can talk about your good character. Each reference should reinforce your narrative of transformation and responsible behaviour.



3/ And third, provide strong Supporting Materials:



- For example, include documents like rehabilitation certificates, community service records, and recognition awards that demonstrate your positive contributions and rehabilitation efforts.



If you focus carefully on preparing these components of your waiver application, you will significantly improve your chances of getting your waiver approved.



https://youtu.be/lab7LoZzK1c https://www.nextlaw.ca/2024/05/21/us-waiver-lawyer-waiver-approval/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Office Location is Irrelevant When Choosing Ontario's Best Stunt Driving Lawyer When facing stunt driving charges under Section 172(1) of Ontario's Highway Traffic Act, many defendants make a critical error that could compromise their defence: choosing legal representation based solely on proximity to their courthouse. Jon Cohen, legal representative at Nextlaw—Ontario's leading stunt driving lawyer—explains why this geography-based approach is not only outdated but potentially harmful to your case outcome. The Virtual Court Revolution Changed Everything Since 2021, Ontario's court system has undergone a fundamental transformation that most defendants don't realize. Court appearances for legal representatives are now conducted one hundred percent online across all fifty-two Provincial Offences Courts in Ontario. This shift to virtual proceedings means that whether Nextlaw operates from its Toronto office at 250 University Avenue or any other location in On...
Challenging a distracted driving charge in Ontario is not a lost cause. With the right strategies, you can successfully defend yourself. Here are the most effective defences that have brought relief to many facing these charges. 1. Insufficient Evidence Officer's Observations The prosecution must prove that you were using a prohibited device while driving. The officer's testimony must be clear and consistent about what they observed. If there are gaps or inconsistencies in their observations, this can create reasonable doubt about your guilt. 2. Emergency Situation Defence Legitimate Emergencies Ontario law recognizes exceptions for emergencies. If you can demonstrate that you were using your device to: - Call 911 - Contact emergency medical services - Respond to a genuine emergency This defence can be valid, though you must provide concrete evidence to support your claim. 3. Technical Device Defence Device Status and Mounting This defence focuses on...
Distracted driving has become one of the most significant road safety issues in Ontario and across Canada in recent years. To address this growing problem, the Ontario government introduced Section 78(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, which prohibits using hand-held devices while driving. This article provides a detailed overview of Section 78(1), its implications for drivers, and its impact on road safety in Ontario. Background and Context With the proliferation of smartphones and other mobile devices, distracted driving emerged as a significant concern. Studies have shown that using a phone while driving significantly increases the risk of accidents. In response, Ontario first banned hand-held devices while driving in 2009. Section 78(1) was later introduced to strengthen and clarify these laws. Key Provisions of Section 78(1) - Section 78(1) of the Highway Traffic Act states: "No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a highway while holding or using a hand-held wireless co...