Urgent matters

Deportation defense & asylum

In removal defense, timing and preparation are inseparable. Every date matters.

Removal proceedings, Notices to Appear, asylum, bond, cancellation, and court strategy.

What it covers

Notice to Appear review and immigration court calendar checks
Master calendar hearing preparation
Asylum, withholding, and Convention Against Torture planning
Bond and custody-related strategy where available
Cancellation of removal and other relief screening
Motions, evidence packets, and hearing preparation

Process for this practice

Urgency triage

When a client contacts the firm about a removal threat — whether they have received a Notice to Appear (NTA), are detained, or have missed a prior hearing — the first step is immediate triage to assess detention status, scheduled hearing dates, and the risk of an in absentia removal order. A detained client may have days rather than weeks to act: a bond hearing before the immigration judge requires a separate motion and may involve coordination with ICE, and missing a master calendar hearing without counsel can result in an order of removal entered in absentia under INA § 240(b)(5). David Cho Immigration Law accepts deportation defense matters on a nationwide basis and works with clients by phone and video to move quickly on time-sensitive filings, including requests for additional time to retain counsel at the first master calendar appearance.

Charge review

The attorney reviews the NTA and any other charging documents to confirm the accuracy of the factual allegations and to identify whether the charge of removability can be contested — for example, if the government has alleged a criminal conviction that was vacated, alleged inadmissibility based on an erroneous ground, or served an NTA that is defective on its face. Under 8 CFR 1003.15, the NTA must specify the nature of the proceedings, the legal authority under which they are conducted, the acts or conduct alleged, and the charges; defects in the NTA — including the Supreme Court's Pereira v. Sessions holding on incomplete NTAs — may affect jurisdiction in some cases. Even if removability is conceded, the charge review determines which forms of relief are available: cancellation of removal, asylum, withholding, Convention Against Torture protection, adjustment of status, or voluntary departure.

Relief strategy

With removability assessed, counsel develops a relief strategy by identifying all available defensive and affirmative remedies. For long-term residents, cancellation of removal — either for lawful permanent residents (EOIR-42A) or non-LPRs (EOIR-42B) — may allow the client to obtain or retain permanent residence; the non-LPR form requires 10 years of continuous physical presence, good moral character, and proof of exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a U.S. citizen or LPR qualifying relative. For clients with a well-founded fear of persecution, defensive asylum via Form I-589 may be available even after the one-year filing deadline if an exception applies. The strategy must also address whether a pending family-based or employment-based petition could support an adjustment of status application before the immigration judge under INA § 245.

Court preparation

Immigration court proceedings require meticulous preparation of the record: prior to the individual (merits) hearing, the attorney files an exhibit list, brief, and supporting documents with the immigration court according to the judge's individual docket requirements and the applicable EOIR Immigration Court Practice Manual. Witness preparation — particularly for asylum applicants who must credibly establish their past persecution or well-founded fear — is critical, as credibility findings by the immigration judge are given substantial deference on appeal. Evidence submitted must be translated into English with certified translations, and country condition reports from the State Department, UNHCR, and credible human rights organizations are typically filed as exhibits in asylum and withholding cases. The attorney also evaluates whether any EOIR-recognized form of discretionary relief (prosecutorial discretion, administrative closure) might resolve the case outside of formal adjudication. (Source: EOIR Practice Manual)

Common case types

Notice to Appear response	A Notice to Appear (NTA) is the charging document DHS issues to initiate removal proceedings in immigration court under INA § 239; it contains allegations of fact and a charge of removability, and must be served on the respondent. Upon receiving an NTA, the respondent must update their address with the immigration court by filing Form EOIR-33/IC within 5 days of any address change, or risk being ordered removed in absentia if notices are sent to an old address. At the first master calendar hearing, the respondent (ideally with counsel) will be asked to admit or deny the factual allegations and to plead to the charge(s) of removability — this plea has significant legal consequences and should not be made without an attorney's guidance. Counsel may also request additional time at the master calendar hearing to prepare, and immigration judges are required to provide at least 10 days notice before a scheduled hearing under INA § 239(b)(1). (Source: American Immigration Council NTA Practice Advisory)
Asylum application	A defensive asylum application — filed as Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal — is available in immigration court to respondents who fear persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The one-year filing deadline from the date of last arrival in the United States is statutory (INA § 208(a)(2)(B)) and may only be excused by 'changed circumstances' or 'extraordinary circumstances' that materially affect eligibility or prevented timely filing — the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the exception. In addition to the asylum standard, the I-589 simultaneously requests withholding of removal (a higher standard but available regardless of the one-year bar) and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), which does not require a nexus to a protected ground. The credibility of the applicant's declaration, corroborating country condition evidence, and witness testimony are central to the outcome. (Source: USCIS Asylum)
Master calendar hearing	The master calendar hearing (MCH) is the initial scheduling hearing in immigration court — similar to an arraignment — where the respondent appears before the immigration judge to address pleadings, schedule future proceedings, and identify forms of relief that will be pursued. At the MCH, the attorney files an entry of appearance (Form EOIR-28 for attorneys), and the judge will typically set a briefing schedule, designate deadlines for filing applications for relief, and schedule the individual merits hearing at a date weeks or months in the future. The MCH is also the appropriate time to request a continuance if the respondent needs more time to retain counsel — judges are required to inform unrepresented respondents of available legal services and may grant reasonable additional time to secure representation. In detained cases, MCHs move faster and judges may deny multiple continuance requests, making prompt engagement of counsel especially critical. (Source: EOIR Practice Manual)
Individual merits hearing	The individual (or 'merits') hearing is the full evidentiary proceeding before the immigration judge where the respondent presents testimony, documentary evidence, and legal arguments in support of their application for relief from removal. The hearing can last from one to multiple days depending on complexity; the immigration judge hears direct and cross-examination of witnesses (including the respondent), admits and reviews exhibits, and applies the relevant legal standards — such as the nexus and well-founded fear standard for asylum, or the exceptional-and-extremely-unusual hardship standard for non-LPR cancellation of removal. The government (DHS/ICE) is represented by a Department of Homeland Security attorney who may cross-examine witnesses and challenge the credibility of evidence. Adverse credibility findings — where the judge does not believe the respondent's testimony — are one of the most common bases for denial and are difficult to overcome on appeal, making thorough witness preparation essential. (Source: INA § 240(b))
Bond request	A detained respondent may request a bond hearing before the immigration judge to seek release from DHS custody while the removal case is pending. The respondent bears the burden of demonstrating that they are not a danger to the community and not a flight risk, typically through evidence of family ties, community roots, employment history, length of residence, and any prior immigration history. The current minimum mandatory bond amount under INA § 236(a) is $1,500, though judges have discretion to set higher amounts or deny bond altogether for certain categories — individuals subject to mandatory detention (generally those with certain criminal convictions, prior orders of removal, or certain national security grounds) may not be eligible for a bond hearing before the immigration judge. An ICE-set bond may also be challenged through a bond redetermination hearing before the immigration judge if new evidence of family ties or community support exists that was not presented to ICE.
Motion to reopen	A motion to reopen asks the immigration court or the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to reconsider and reopen a previously decided case based on new facts, new evidence, or changed circumstances. Under 8 CFR 1003.23, a motion to reopen in immigration court must generally be filed within 90 days of the final order of removal; the time and number limits may be waived in cases involving asylum based on changed country conditions, cases where the respondent was deported before the deadline, or cases involving in absentia orders where the respondent demonstrates they did not receive notice of the hearing or had exceptional circumstances preventing attendance. Motions to reopen in absentia removal orders filed within 180 days based on 'exceptional circumstances' may also be considered; beyond 180 days, only changed country conditions or lack of notice can toll the deadline. These motions require careful legal analysis and a strong evidentiary showing; the BIA's standards for reopening are strict, and many motions are denied. (Source: 8 CFR 1003.23)

Questions clients ask

What is a Notice to Appear?

A Notice to Appear (NTA) is the formal charging document issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) — through ICE, CBP, or USCIS — that initiates removal (deportation) proceedings against a noncitizen in immigration court under INA § 239. The NTA contains factual allegations about how and when the individual entered the U.S. or violated their immigration status, the legal charge(s) of removability (inadmissibility or deportability), and — in most cases — a date, time, and location for the first hearing before an immigration judge. Unlike a criminal charging document, an NTA is a civil immigration document, but the consequences of removal proceedings can be severe and long-lasting, including a bar to reentry for years or permanently. The NTA is not a final order of removal; the recipient has the right to appear before an immigration judge, contest the charges, and apply for any forms of relief for which they are eligible. (Source: American Immigration Council NTA Practice Advisory)

What if my NTA has no date?

It is common — particularly for NTAs issued during high-volume enforcement operations — for the NTA to be served with the date, time, and location of the hearing listed as 'to be determined' (TBD) or left blank. In such cases, the immigration court will mail a separate hearing notice to the address on file, which is why it is critical to immediately update the immigration court with your current address by filing Form EOIR-33/IC. The Supreme Court in Pereira v. Sessions (2018) and Niz-Chavez v. Garland (2021) held that an incomplete NTA lacking time and place information does not trigger the 'stop-time rule' for cancellation of removal purposes, which is a significant benefit for some respondents. However, a TBD NTA still places the individual in active removal proceedings, and missing the hearing date when eventually scheduled — even due to non-receipt of the notice — can result in an in absentia removal order. (Source: DOJ EOIR NTA Information)

How do I check my hearing date?

Immigration court hearing dates and case status can be checked online through the EOIR Automated Case Information System using the respondent's alien registration number (A-number), by calling the EOIR hotline at 1-800-898-7180 (available 24/7 in English and Spanish), or by checking with the immigration court directly. For detained individuals, ICE also maintains case information through the ICE Detainee Locator, which can identify which facility and court has jurisdiction over the case. It is critical to check for scheduled hearings frequently — especially for TBD NTAs where a notice has not yet arrived — because in absentia removal orders can be entered if the respondent fails to appear even without actual notice when the court sent the notice to the last address of record. An immigration attorney can set up monitoring on a client's case and will typically receive the same electronic notices sent to the court file.

Can I ask for more time to find a lawyer?

Yes — at the first master calendar hearing, a respondent who does not yet have an attorney may ask the immigration judge for a continuance to obtain legal representation. Immigration judges are required by INA § 239(b)(1) to advise unrepresented respondents of their right to be represented by counsel (at no expense to the government), and judges will typically grant at least one reasonable continuance for this purpose, particularly in non-detained cases. In detained cases, however, the immigration court may be more limited in granting continuances, and it is important to contact an immigration attorney as soon as possible after receiving an NTA. The respondent should not admit or deny the factual allegations in the NTA or plead to the charge of removability without attorney guidance; asking the judge for more time before addressing these issues is entirely appropriate at the first appearance. (Source: INA § 240(b)(4))

What is cancellation of removal?

Cancellation of removal is a form of relief from deportation available in immigration court that, if granted, results in the respondent's removal proceedings being cancelled and — for non-LPR applicants — their status being adjusted to lawful permanent resident. For lawful permanent residents, cancellation requires: LPR status for at least 5 years; continuous residence in the U.S. for at least 7 years; and no conviction for an aggravated felony — the applicable form is EOIR-42A. For non-LPRs, cancellation requires: 10 years of continuous physical presence; good moral character during that period; no disqualifying criminal convictions; and proof that removal would cause 'exceptional and extremely unusual hardship' to a U.S. citizen or LPR spouse, parent, or child — the form is EOIR-42B. The hardship standard for non-LPRs is demanding — courts have held that normal hardships of family separation do not meet the exceptional and extremely unusual threshold. Only 4,000 non-LPR cancellation grants are available per year under the cap, and the stop-time rule (triggered by an NTA that includes time and place) can cut off the 10-year clock. (Sources: DOJ EOIR Non-LPR Cancellation; [INA § 240A])

What is the one-year asylum deadline?

Under INA § 208(a)(2)(B), an asylum application — whether affirmative (Form I-589 filed with USCIS) or defensive (filed in immigration court) — must be filed within one year of the applicant's most recent arrival in the United States. There are only two exceptions: 'changed circumstances' (such as a material change in country conditions, a change in personal circumstances like marriage to a qualifying individual, or a change in applicable law that materially affects asylum eligibility) or 'extraordinary circumstances' (such as serious illness, mental or physical disability, legal disability, and ineffective assistance of prior counsel that prevented timely filing). Both exceptions must be raised through documented evidence and legal argument; courts and immigration judges apply these exceptions narrowly. Importantly, missing the one-year deadline does not necessarily bar all relief — withholding of removal under INA § 241(b)(3) and protection under the Convention Against Torture are not subject to the one-year bar, though they carry a higher standard and more limited benefits than asylum. (Source: USCIS Asylum – One Year Filing Requirement)

Case-example narratives

NTA with missing hearing date

Hypothetical example for educational purposes only. A client who had entered the United States without inspection several years earlier was apprehended during a workplace enforcement action and served with an NTA listing the hearing date as 'to be determined.' The client retained the firm within days of receiving the NTA and the attorney immediately filed Form EOIR-33/IC to update the address with the immigration court, filed an EOIR-28 entry of appearance, and began monitoring the case through the EOIR automated case information system. When the initial master calendar hearing notice arrived, the attorney requested a 60-day continuance to assess all available relief options; USCIS records confirmed that the client had been continuously present for over 12 years, had two U.S. citizen children under age 10, and had never been convicted of any criminal offense. The attorney filed Form EOIR-42B for non-LPR cancellation of removal, assembled a comprehensive hardship declaration package documenting the U.S. citizen children's medical, educational, and emotional dependency on the parent, and obtained supporting expert letters from the children's school and pediatrician. The immigration judge granted cancellation of removal at the individual merits hearing, and the client received a green card. Hypothetical example for educational purposes only.

Asylum case with credibility issues

Hypothetical example for educational purposes only. A client from a Central American country had filed a pro se asylum application within the one-year deadline but had given incomplete and occasionally inconsistent information about the threats they had received — partly because the prior form-preparer (a non-attorney notario) had not adequately translated the client's full account. The immigration judge flagged the inconsistencies between the I-589 narrative and testimony at the master calendar hearing. The attorney was retained before the individual merits hearing and spent multiple preparation sessions carefully reviewing the prior filing, identifying where the original narrative was incomplete rather than fabricated, and submitting an amended I-589 with a detailed supplemental declaration reconciling the inconsistencies and providing additional corroborating documentation. At the individual hearing, the client testified consistently with the amended narrative; the attorney submitted country condition evidence from the State Department and human rights organizations confirming the specific type of persecution alleged. The immigration judge found the client credible and granted asylum. Hypothetical example for educational purposes only.

Cancellation of removal for LPR

Hypothetical example for educational purposes only. A lawful permanent resident who had lived in the United States for 22 years was placed in removal proceedings after a conviction for a state-law drug possession offense that the government alleged was an aggravated felony. The attorney conducted a careful analysis of the conviction under the categorical approach — comparing the elements of the state offense with the federal aggravated felony definition in INA § 101(a)(43) — and determined that the state statute was broader than the federal definition, meaning the conviction did not categorically match an aggravated felony and did not bar LPR cancellation under EOIR-42A. The attorney filed Form EOIR-42A, documenting more than 19 years of LPR status, 22 years of continuous U.S. residence, no other criminal history, U.S. citizen spouse and children, stable employment, and strong community ties. The immigration judge granted LPR cancellation of removal, preserving the client's green card and avoiding deportation after more than two decades in the United States. Hypothetical example for educational purposes only.

Next step

Bring the facts. We will build the map.

A consultation gives you a legal path, a document plan, and a clearer sense of timing.