Adjustment of Status Is Not “Just Filing Forms”: Where Most Cases Quietly Break Dow

Many people view the adjustment of status as a paperwork exercise. If you qualify, you file the forms, submit supporting documents, attend an interview, and receive a green card.

In practice, adjustment of status is far more complex.

While some cases are approved smoothly, many others encounter delays, requests for evidence (RFEs), interviews, or denials, even though the applicant appears “technically eligible.” These breakdowns rarely stem from a single missing form. More often, they result from strategic weaknesses that develop quietly long before the U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services (USCIS) makes a decision.

Understanding where adjustment-of-status cases tend to fail can help applicants avoid costly mistakes.

Eligibility Alone Does Not Guarantee Approval

Meeting basic eligibility requirements is only the starting point.

USCIS does not simply check boxes. Officers evaluate whether the totality of the record supports approval. This includes reviewing immigration history, consistency across filings, credibility, and discretionary factors.

Two applicants may both qualify on paper, yet receive very different outcomes depending on:

• How their case is presented.

• What their prior immigration history shows.

• Whether inconsistencies exist.

• How clearly eligibility is documented.

Adjustment of status is an adjudicative process, not a mechanical one.

Prior Immigration History Is Often the Weakest Link

One of the most common sources of trouble is prior immigration history.

Applicants may assume old visa applications, prior entries, or previous petitions no longer matter. USCIS does not view them that way.

Officers routinely compare current filings with:

• Prior visa applications.

• Past petitions.

• Entry records.

• Border inspection notes.

• Previous interviews.

Discrepancies that seem minor to an applicant can raise questions about credibility or misrepresentation.

Examples include:

• Different job titles listed over time.

• Inconsistent marital histories.

• Variations in addresses or timelines.

• Prior overstays or unauthorized employment.

If these issues are not addressed proactively, they often surface later in RFEs or interviews.

Incomplete Legal Analysis of Status Violations

Many adjustment applicants have a history of status issues.

That may include, but is not limited to:

• Overstaying a visa.

• Working without authorization.

• Falling out of status.

• Entering on a visa with immigrant intent.

Some violations can be forgiven under certain categories. Others cannot.

A frequent breakdown occurs when applicants assume a violation is automatically excused without analyzing:

• The specific statutory basis for forgiveness.

• The timing of the violation.

• The visa category used.

• Whether exceptions apply.

Submitting a filing without clearly explaining why a violation is forgiven places the burden on USCIS to determine whether it is forgiven. That often leads to delays or denials.

Weak Evidence Packages

USCIS evaluates evidence quality, not just quantity. Submitting large volumes of documents does not compensate for poor organization or missing core proof.

Common evidence problems include:

• Missing primary documents.

• Unclear translations.

• Disorganized submissions.

• Lack of explanations for unusual facts.

• Failure to connect evidence to legal requirements.

For family-based cases, weak proof of a bona fide relationship is a major risk. For employment-based cases, vague job descriptions or thin employer documentation often trigger RFEs.

Strong cases tell a coherent story supported by well-organized evidence.

Failure to Anticipate Officer Concerns

Many applicants approach the adjustment of status reactively. They respond only when USCIS asks questions. A more effective approach is anticipatory.

Our experienced attorneys identify likely concerns before filing and address them upfront through:

• Legal explanations.

• Supporting documentation.

• Clarifying statements.

For example:

• If there was a period of unemployment, explain it.

• If there were multiple entries and exits, document intent.

• If there was a prior denial, analyze and distinguish it.

When concerns are ignored, USCIS may interpret silence as concealment.

Overreliance on Templates and DIY Tools

Online templates and form software can generate completed applications, but they do not evaluate risk.

They do not assess:

• Whether adjustment is strategically advisable.

• Whether consular processing may be safer.

• Whether inadmissibility issues exist.

• Whether waivers may be required.

These tools treat adjustment of status as uniform. In reality, every case has its own risk profile. Applicants often discover problems only after USCIS issues an RFE or schedules an interview.

At that point, damage control is harder.

Interview Preparation Is Treated as an Afterthought

Adjustment interviews are not casual conversations. They are credibility assessments.

Breakdowns occur when applicants:

• Are unfamiliar with their own filings.

• Provide answers inconsistent with written submissions.

• Guess rather than clarify.

• Volunteer unnecessary information.

Even truthful applicants can harm their case through poor communication. Preparation is essential.

Applicants should understand:

• What USCIS is likely to focus on.

• How to answer clearly and accurately.

• How to handle difficult questions.

Lack of preparation can turn an otherwise approvable case into a problematic one.

Discretion Plays a Larger Role Than Many Realize

Adjustment of status is discretionary. That means USCIS can deny even when eligibility exists.

Officers consider factors such as:

• Immigration history.

• Compliance patterns.

• Credibility.

• Overall equities.

Strategic presentation matters. Applications that demonstrate good faith, transparency, and consistency tend to fare better than those that recite facts.

Why Legal Strategy Matters

Successful adjustment of status cases are built, not assembled.

They involve:

• Careful review of history.

• Identification of risks.

• Legal analysis of violations and exceptions.

• Thoughtful evidence selection.

• Clear narrative framing.

The difference between approval and denial is often found in these strategic layers.

Talk With Sharma Law Associates About Your Adjustment of Status Case

If you are considering an adjustment of status or have already filed and are facing delays, RFEs, or interview concerns, our New York immigration attorneys can help evaluate your case and identify potential vulnerabilities.

Call 646-921-6630, contact Sharma Law Associates online, or schedule a consultation to discuss your situation and learn how strategic legal guidance can help strengthen your path toward permanent residence.

Related Blogs

• Adjustment of Status vs. Consular Processing: Which Path is Safer for Your Case?

• The Most Overlooked Evidence That Strengthens a Marriage-Based Adjustment of Status Case

• Consular Processing vs. Adjustment of Status: Which Path Works Best for Families?

• How to Prepare for the Adjustment of Status Interview: Practical Tips for New York Applicants

• Adjustment of Status vs. Consular Processing: Which is the Right Choice for You?