An experienced Immigration Lawyer can help you navigate a complex legal system.

OUR PHILOSOPHY

At Paskoff & Tamber, LLP, we see our role differently than many lawyers. We are not only interested in the results we produce for our clients but also in the impact we have on the person, their family and their community. You can count on exceptional legal counsel to produce the results you desire. In addition, our hope is that, when your case is complete and we part ways, you feel that your life has been elevated, encouraged and changed for the better by the experience of working with our law firm. We have built our law practice on word of mouth recommendations.

OUR RESULTS

Simply put, our clients' cases are approved by USCIS, our clients' visas are issued at U.S. consulates around the world, and we win our clients' cases in U.S. EOIR Immigration Courts. We have a proven track record of excellent results that we attribute to:

• Our law was established in 2002 with roots going back to the early 1970's

• Our attorneys possess exceptional problem-solving skills

• Our experience has taught us to think outside the box which leads to creative and individualized solutions for our clients

• We believe that there is always a way to solve even the most complex immigration problems

• We are committed to exhausting every possible ethical and legal means to achieve our clients' goals

OUR VALUE

We charge reasonable flat legal fees for our immigration matters which accurately reflect the amount the work we must perform. We do not charge you for work that is not necessary and we do not look for ways to increase our fees over the life of your case. With a flat fee structure, you know up front how much your case will cost you so you can budget accordingly and not worry about unexpected legal later.

It is important when comparing fees with other lawyers to be make sure precisely what is included in the fee that you are quoted. We find that it is often the case that the fees of other law firms do not include the same level of services that we provide.

For a consultation with an attorney at Paskoff & Tamber, LLP, complete our online form or call our NJ office at (201) 643-6733 or our NY office at (212) 643-5454 or by sending us an email, or contact us through this website.

MEET OUR MANAGING ATTORNEY

Licensed in New York and New Jersey

Adam Paskoff, Esq. has more than 33 years of experience as a lawyer. He is the former Editor-in-Chief of the NYLS Journal of Human Rights and has a Master of Laws (LL.M.) from NYU School of Law. He has extensive experience in business and family based immigration, litigating cases before the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR Immigration Courts), the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), Federal District Courts, Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, New York state courts, and New Jersey state courts. Mr. Paskoff has successfully represented clients ranging from individuals to multi-national managers, executives, athletes and entertainers transferring to the United States for nationally recognized events, world renowned scientists and other individuals seeking permanent residence on the basis of extraordinary ability, and special immigrant visas including SIJS, VAWA, U and T Visas. Our success is built upon our experience, knowledge, and trusting relationships with our clients, as well our relationships with immigration personnel at the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS), Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs & Border Patrol (CBP) and other federal government agencies.

Adam Paskoff, Esq. is at the forefront of the burgeoning Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) payments for international university student-athletes who are presently prohibited from receiving NIL compensation under a F-1 Student Visa. Mr. Paskoff regularly works with investors and entrepreneurs to establish businesses in the United States and to obtain status as E-1 treaty traders, E-2 treaty investors, or E-3 specialty workers from Australia. He also assists U.S. based businesses with applying for personnel needs through temporary work visas including H-1B, H-2B, L-1 and O-1 visas and their long-term personnel needs through PERM labor certification cases for EB-1, EB-2 and EB-3 immigrant visa petitions. He has helped many individuals legally change their status in the U.S. and has obtained waivers for immigrants that required showing exceptional hardship to a qualifying relative.

Adam Paskoff, Esq. has helped families reunite and bring their loved ones to join them in the U.S.. He works regularly with USCIS and the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to obtain visas for spouses, parents, children of all ages, and siblings. He has also successfully represented fiancés and fiancées of U.S. citizens at U.S. consulates all around the world.

Adam Paskoff, Esq. has experience with handling challenging cases involving bars to admission due to previous immigration violations and criminal convictions. He also works closely with criminal defense counsel to determine the immigration consequences of alleged criminal activity. He has helped many clients go from no status to becoming proud U.S. citizens. He has successfully argued cases involving asylum, withholding of removal, Convention Against Torture (CAT), cancellation of removal, INA §212(c) relief, INA §212(a)(1)(H) waivers, adjustment of status and special relief programs such as NACARA, Life Legalization and Registry, Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

Adam Paskoff, Esq.

Authorized to practice immigration law in all 50 states

Tel: (201) 643-6733
Fax:(877) 323-9766
APaskoff@Visa311.com

OUR LAW FIRM HISTORY

Paskoff & Tamber, LLP was founded by Stephen Ira Tamber, Esq. and Adam Paskoff, Esq. in 2002. Mr. Tamber began his long and distinguished career in 1968 as an associate lawyer for an established immigration law firm in New York City. Mr. Tamber went on to co-found the law firm Black & Tamber that serviced clients in the field of immigration law, commercial and civil litigation, divorce and matrimonial matters, real estate closings, and trusts, wills and estates for many years.

Mr. Paskoff is the former Editor-in-Chief of the NYLS Journal of Human Rights and has a Master of Laws (LL.M.) from NYU School of Law. He vecame a licensed attorney in 1991. He began working as an associate attorney in a boutique litigation law firm in Fort Lee, new Jersey, becoming the co-chair of its New York litigation department. Mr. Paskoff then became a senior associate at a litigation law firm in New York City. Mr. Paskoff started his own law firm in 1996.

Messrs. Tamber and Paskoff joined forces forming Paskoff & Tamber, LLP in 2002. The law firm continues providing legal representation in the fields of immigration law, commercial and civil litigation, divorce and matrimonial matters, real estate closings, and trusts, wills, and estates. Mr. Tamber retired from the practice of law in 2012. The law firm of Paskoff & Tamber, LLP continues its rich tradition of providing dedicated legal representation under the leadership of Adam Paskoff, Esq. No case is more important than yours!

Why Put Your Trust In Us?

We have extensive experience and a proven track record of success

Focused on results with getting clients the best possible outcome

Affordable and flexible fees, including payment plans

Experienced

Approachable

Affordable

LANDMARK CASES BY PASKOFF & TAMBER, LLP

Monitor Holding Corp. v. I.B. Distributing Corp. et al., 139 N.Y.S.3d 337 (Spp. Div. 2d Dept. 2020) (Paskoff & Tamber, LLP represented the defendant: "Here, the plaintiff failed to establish, prima facie, its entitlement to summary judgment on its causes of action pursuant to the above-cited sections of the applicable version of the Debtor and Creditor Law and the Business Corporation Law. The plaintiff failed to establish that the funds deposited in the underfunded Plan were corporate assets in the first instance, that such funds were deposited without fair consideration, that the individual defendants made such deposits with the actual intent to defraud the plaintiff, or that the individual defendants made such deposits unlawfully. The plaintiff further failed to establish its entitlement to satisfaction of the 2015 judgment from such funds, as the corresponding action which resulted in the 2015 judgment was commenced after such funds were deposited into the Plan.).

Margaret Orosz v. Regeneron Pharmeceuticals, Inc., No. 15 CV 8504(NSR)(PED) (S.D.N.Y 2016) ("The Court agrees with Judge Smith that the facts as alleged by Plaintiff, accepted as true, are sufficient to assert a plausible claim for Title VII pregnancy discrimination for failure to hire. The Court finds no error on the face of the R&R, and thus adopts Judge Smith's R&R in its entirety.).

Lanferman v. Board of Immigration Appeals, et al., 576 F.3d 84 (2d Cir. 2009) ("[W]e remand to the BIA to allow it to consider in the first instance the question of the divisibility of Section 120.14 in light of the legal framework established by our cases. For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is GRANTED, the order of removal is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED to the BIA for proceedings consistent with this decision.").

In the Matter of the Application of Victor M. I. I., to unseal adoption records, 2009 NY Slip Op 50557(U) (Sup. Ct. Nassau County 2009) ("Under these unique circumstances, the court finds that petitioner has demonstrated good cause, and that the due notice requirement of Domestic Relations Law §114(2) may be dispensed with, on the grounds that petitioner's application is supported by his only known biological parent, and petitioner's adoptive parents are deceased.).

Gill v. Immigration and Naturalization Services, 420 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 2005) ("[A] person cannot "attempt" (as this term is used in New York criminal law) to commit a crime of recklessness, particularly not one defined, as in § 120.05(4), by an unintended result such as bodily injury. The question that follows is what significance, if any, this legal impossibility should have in the immigration context.... [T]his is a question of first impression in this circuit as well as in most other circuits.... [W]e find that, in the immigration context, no mental state can be clearly discerned from such a conviction, let alone the sort of aggravated recklessness that has been found to demonstrate moral turpitude.... .For the foregoing reasons, because Gill's crime of conviction was not a crime involving moral turpitude, we reverse the BIA's removal order and remand with instructions to close Gill's removal proceedings.").