VAWA Self-Petition and Your Colorado Family-Law Case
You can petition for immigration status on your own — without your abuser's signature, cooperation, or knowledge. Here is how that petition and your Colorado protection order, divorce, or custody case fit together.
Before you read further.
If you are in immediate danger, call 911.
If someone may be able to see what you do on this device, consider reading this page on a public library computer, a borrowed phone, or a friend's computer instead. Browsing history can be checked, and it cannot always be erased completely. You can leave this page at any time by closing the tab or navigating away.
The National Domestic Violence Hotline is available at 1.800.799.SAFE (7233), or by texting START to 88788 (message and data rates may apply; text STOP to opt out). The hotline offers service in Spanish at espanol.thehotline.org.
You do not need your husband's signature. You do not need his cooperation. You do not need him to know.
Under the Violence Against Women Act, a person who has been abused by a U.S.-citizen or lawful-permanent-resident spouse, parent, or adult child may be able to petition for immigration status on their own — a VAWA self-petition, filed on USCIS Form I-360. The abuser does not sign it. USCIS does not notify him that it was filed. He cannot withdraw it out from under you the way he could withdraw a petition he filed himself. That is the entire point of the law: Congress built it so that a survivor's immigration future would stop being something an abuser could hold over her.
This page is about the part almost nobody writes about — what happens when that petition and a Colorado family-court case are running at the same time. A protection order in Denver County. A dissolution filed in Arapahoe. A parenting-time dispute in Jefferson. Those are Colorado state matters, decided by Colorado judges under Colorado law. The self-petition is a federal immigration filing, decided by USCIS. Two systems, two sets of rules — and decisions made in one of them can land hard in the other. Survivors get told contradictory things about this constantly, often by people who genuinely know one half of the picture and none of the other.
Novo Legal Group is a Spanish-first practice — every attorney and staff member is bilingual, so you are never waiting on an interpreter to say something difficult. VAWA self-petitions are immigration matters and are handled here by a Novo immigration attorney. If you want the general survivor's overview of VAWA before the Colorado-specific part, start with our VAWA self-petition survivor guide. If you want to know how this sits inside the rest of your case, this page and our Colorado family law practice are where that lives.
What a VAWA Self-Petition Is — the Short Version
VAWA is not a visa. It is a petition you file for yourself, asking USCIS to recognize you as eligible for immigrant status based on abuse by a qualifying family member — without that family member's involvement.
The law generally reaches three groups: abused spouses of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, abused children of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, and abused parents of U.S.-citizen adult sons or daughters. Each category has its own statutory conditions — residence with the abuser, good moral character, a good-faith marriage where a marriage is involved, and a showing of battery or extreme cruelty. The governing provisions are INA § 204(a)(1) / 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1).
"Abuse" here is broader than most people expect. The statute reaches a person who has been battered or has been the subject of extreme cruelty — and Congress wrote those as two different things. Cases where nobody was ever hit are not automatically outside the law. Whether a particular pattern meets the standard is a fact-specific question an attorney reviews with you — it is not something a webpage can tell you.
What a self-petition does and does not do is worth being precise about. An approved self-petition is a step, not the finish line. It establishes the qualifying relationship and abuse for immigration purposes. Whether and when a person can obtain work authorization or lawful permanent residence depends on the category, on visa availability, and on other requirements that are analyzed case by case. Nobody should promise you a timeline, and we will not. USCIS publishes its own overview for VAWA self-petitioners.
We keep this section short on purpose. If you want the full walk-through — who may qualify, what counts as abuse, what evidence USCIS considers, how children can be included — that is exactly what our VAWA self-petition survivor guide covers at length. The rest of this page is the Colorado family-court half that guide does not cover.
You Can File Without Him Knowing — and Here Is Exactly Where That Ends
A federal confidentiality statute restricts what immigration officials can disclose about a VAWA filing. It does not reach the Colorado courthouse where your divorce is on file. Understanding that line is the difference between real safety planning and false comfort.
The petition is yours alone
Nothing about the self-petition requires the abuser to participate. He does not sign the form. He is not asked to confirm anything. USCIS does not send him a notice saying you filed. This is the structural feature that makes VAWA different from a family-based petition, where the citizen or resident relative controls the filing and can abandon or withdraw it whenever he wants leverage.
What 8 U.S.C. § 1367 actually does
Congress wrote a specific confidentiality statute for filings like this. 8 U.S.C. § 1367 does two things. First, it bars covered officials from making an adverse determination about admissibility or deportability using information furnished solely by the abuser or certain people connected to the abuser. Second, it bars those officials from permitting the use or disclosure of information relating to a person who is the beneficiary of a VAWA, T, or U application, outside of legitimate departmental purposes. Violations carry a civil penalty of up to $5,000 per violation, plus discipline.
Who it binds matters enormously, and this is where honest advice separates from marketing. The prohibition runs against the Attorney General and officials and employees of the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of State. It also carries enumerated exceptions — including disclosure for a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, disclosure in judicial review conducted in a manner that protects confidentiality, disclosures to agencies determining benefits eligibility, congressional oversight, national-security disclosure, and disclosures made with the consent of the adult victims involved.
So the accurate statement is this: a specific federal statute restricts federal immigration, justice, and state-department personnel from disclosing your filing and from using your abuser's word alone against you, and it carries penalties. It is not a blanket promise that no one anywhere will ever learn anything. Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling you something.
Where he can still learn something: the Colorado family-court file
Section 1367 binds federal officials. It does not bind a Colorado district court, a county clerk, a local police department, a school, a landlord, or an employer.
This is the point this page exists to make, and it is the one survivors are most often not told. A Colorado family-court case is a public court proceeding, and the person you file against is served and becomes a party to it. If you petition for a protection order, he is served. If you file for dissolution, he is served. If you open an allocation-of-parental-responsibilities case, he is served. He will see the pleadings in the case he is a party to, he can attend the hearings, and family-court records are not covered by a federal immigration-confidentiality statute.
That said, "public" does not mean you have no say in what goes into the file. What a petition alleges, how much detail an affidavit carries, which address appears on which document, and what a court is asked to do with a particular filing are all decisions, and they are decisions made better with counsel than alone. What is unavoidable is that he becomes a party and sees the case; what is manageable is how much of your life the file ends up holding. That is a conversation to have before the first document is filed, not after.
That does not mean the immigration filing becomes visible — it does not. It means the two filings live in two different systems with two different privacy rules, and the safety planning has to account for both. Which case you file, when you file it, and what you put in the pleadings are decisions with consequences on both sides. They should be made together, by people who can see both files, before anything gets filed.
Mail, addresses, and staying reachable
USCIS has to be able to reach you, which means an address you actually control and can safely receive mail at. Colorado maintains an Address Confidentiality Program under C.R.S. § 24-30-2101 et seq., administered by the Colorado Department of Personnel & Administration, which provides participants a substitute address and mail forwarding. The program's enumerated categories include survivors of domestic violence, sexual offenses, human trafficking, and stalking. Whether that program fits your circumstances — and what it can and cannot be used for — is worth asking about directly, as part of a broader conversation about which address goes on which filing.
Talk to us before anything gets filed — in English or Spanish.
Call (888) 746-5245 or contact Novo Legal.
Your Protection Order and Your Petition Are Two Different Fights
Seeking safety in a Colorado courtroom is not turning yourself in to immigration. A protection order and a VAWA self-petition are different filings, in different systems, decided by different people, under different standards of proof.
Different courts, different proof, different decision-makers
A Colorado civil protection order is a family-court remedy under C.R.S. Title 13, Article 14. A Colorado judge decides it. To make a temporary order permanent, the court must find by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent committed acts constituting grounds for a civil protection order and that the respondent will, unless restrained, continue to commit such acts or acts designed to intimidate or retaliate against the protected person (C.R.S. § 13-14-106(1)(a)).
A VAWA self-petition is a federal immigration filing. USCIS decides it, under the federal statutory standards described above, considering any credible evidence the self-petitioner submits — while retaining discretion over what is credible and how much weight it carries.
Neither decision-maker controls the other. A Colorado judge does not decide your immigration case. USCIS does not decide whether you get a protection order. If we explain nothing else on this page, we want that one to land.
For how Colorado protection orders actually work — temporary versus permanent, the hearing, the timeline — see our full page on Colorado civil protection orders.
Asking a court to protect you is not calling enforcement on yourself
Filing for a protection order is a survivor-side civil action. You are the person the order protects. You are not the accused, and it is not a criminal case against you. Congress created VAWA self-petitions and U visas precisely so that immigrant survivors would not have to choose between safety and status.
We will not tell you more than we can stand behind. We are not going to make claims on this page about how or where federal enforcement operates on any given day, because that is exactly the kind of reassurance that has been wrong before and has hurt people. What we will do is talk through your specific circumstances, in Spanish or English, before you walk into any courthouse — so the plan accounts for your real situation rather than a generic promise.
What a protection-order record can and cannot do for a petition
A protection-order record can be useful evidence in a self-petition. A verified petition describing what happened, a court's findings, and a granted order are contemporaneous, court-generated documents about the abuse. USCIS considers any credible evidence, and documents like these often help.
They do not, by themselves, establish a VAWA case. A self-petition requires a qualifying relationship, residence with the abuser, good moral character, good faith where a marriage is at issue, and a showing of battery or extreme cruelty. A protection order speaks to some of that. It does not speak to all of it.
The reverse matters just as much: a protection order is not a prerequisite. Many self-petitions are filed by people who never sought one. And a protection order that was denied, dismissed, or withdrawn does not end a VAWA case — those proceedings are decided on a different standard, in a different forum, often on a much thinner record assembled under emergency pressure. It is a fact for an attorney to address, not a verdict on your immigration case.
There is one asymmetry worth knowing before you file: what you say in a protection-order petition becomes part of a court record that your abuser sees. That record can help your immigration case and it can be used against you in a contested family-court proceeding, and it is written under time pressure. That is a conversation worth having before it is filed rather than after.
Divorce and VAWA — the Question Everyone Gets Wrong
This is the section that matters most on this page. If you take one thing from it: get immigration advice before the dissolution is filed or finalized, not after.
The rule is not "you have two years"
Here is the honest version of a rule that is constantly repeated badly.
Under 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)(iii)(II)(aa)(CC)(ccc), a former spouse of a U.S. citizen may self-petition only if both conditions are met: the person was a bona fide spouse within the past 2 years and the person demonstrates a connection between the legal termination of the marriage within the past 2 years and the battering or extreme cruelty by the citizen spouse. The parallel provision for a former spouse of a lawful permanent resident is 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(B)(ii)(II)(aa)(CC)(bbb), which requires the same connection showing.
Read that again, because the second half is the half that gets dropped. A date on a divorce decree is not the test. The two-year window is a threshold; the connection between the end of the marriage and the abuse is the substance, and it is an evidentiary showing — the thing that actually decides real cases. Anyone who tells you "you have two years after the divorce" has told you half of the rule, and it is the less important half.
There is one further asymmetry to know: the statute's provision for a spouse who died appears in the U.S.-citizen provision. The lawful-permanent-resident provision does not contain that prong. Do not assume the rules are identical simply because the situations sound similar; they are drafted differently.
None of this is something to self-apply. Whether a particular marriage, a particular termination, and a particular history line up under these provisions is exactly the analysis an attorney does with the actual facts.
Why the sequencing decision is real, and why Colorado gives you room to make it
Colorado law creates a defined window in which sequencing decisions can still be made. A dissolution requires that at least one party have been domiciled in Colorado for 91 days before the petition (C.R.S. § 14-10-106(1)(a)(I)), and the court cannot enter a decree until 91 days or more have elapsed since it acquired jurisdiction over the respondent — that is, since service or the respondent's appearance (C.R.S. § 14-10-106(1)(a)(III)).
That 91-day floor is not a technicality. It means there is a real period between filing and decree. Decisions made inside it — what the petition says, what the parties stipulate to, what the decree recites, when the decree enters — are decisions that can still be coordinated with an immigration analysis. Once the decree enters, that flexibility is gone.
Our page on Colorado divorce and dissolution walks through the Colorado process itself.
The bad advice, named plainly
"Just get divorced first and deal with immigration later" is the single most damaging thing a survivor gets told about this. It is usually said by someone who means well and does not handle immigration. It treats the divorce as a clean prerequisite to be cleared out of the way. It is not. The timing of the termination, the record built in family court, and the sequence of filings are all inputs into a federal analysis that the person giving that advice is not looking at.
The opposite instruction is not right either. We are not telling you to rush a filing, and we are not telling you to delay leaving a marriage. A statutory window is not a deadline to act on by yourself — it is a reason to get both halves of the analysis in the same room before anything is filed.
What that looks like in practice: an immigration attorney and the family-law side reviewing the same file, agreeing on what gets filed and in what order, and making sure the family-court record and the immigration record are telling a consistent story. That is coordination, and it is what one firm handling both sides is actually for. It is not a promise about how either case turns out.
Your Children, Your Case
Colorado decides parenting time under Colorado's best-interests statute. Your immigration status is not one of the listed factors. His threats about your status, on the other hand, now have a name in Colorado law.
What the Colorado statute actually weighs
In Colorado, what most people call custody is the allocation of parental responsibilities — decision-making and parenting time — and it is decided under the best-interests standard at C.R.S. § 14-10-124. The statute at § 14-10-124(1.5)(a) enumerates the factors a court considers: the parents' wishes, the child's wishes if sufficiently mature, the child's relationships with parents and siblings, any report related to domestic violence submitted by a child and family investigator, the child's adjustment to home and school and community, the mental and physical health of those involved, each parent's ability to encourage the child's love and contact with the other parent, the past pattern of involvement, physical proximity, and the ability to put the child's needs ahead of one's own.
Immigration status is not among the factors the statute enumerates. And Colorado went further in 2024: under C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.5)(a.5), in determining best interests for purposes of parenting time, a court "shall strive not to consider as a relevant factor information or recommendations that are biased," and the statute names national origin among the biases it has in mind. That is a directive a Colorado court is operating under — not a guarantee about how any particular judge will rule, and not the same thing as a rule that immigration status can never come up. But it is a real thing to be able to point to.
Colorado law also directs that where a court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that a party has committed child abuse or neglect, domestic violence, or sexual assault resulting in the conception of the child, the court, in formulating or approving a parenting plan, must consider conditions on parenting time that ensure the safety of the child and the abused party — giving paramount consideration to the safety and to the physical, mental, and emotional conditions and needs of the child and the abused party (C.R.S. § 14-10-124(4)(e)).
Our page on allocation of parental responsibilities (custody) in Colorado covers the Colorado standard in depth.
When he says he will have you deported and take the kids
He has said it. It is one of the most common things we hear in mixed-status households.
Colorado has named exactly this behavior in statute. HB24-1350, signed June 3, 2024 and effective August 7, 2024, added a definition of coercive control to Colorado's best-interests statute at C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.3)(a) — a pattern of threatening, humiliating, or intimidating actions used to harm, punish, or frighten a person, including a pattern that strips away the person's liberty, isolates them from support, or regulates their everyday behavior. The definition is expressly non-exhaustive, and the legislature enumerated examples.
One of those enumerated examples is immigration-status abuse. Under § 14-10-124(1.3)(a)(X), coercive control includes threatening a person, or their child or relative, "with deportation or contacting authorities based on perceived or actual immigration status, withholding essential documents required for immigration, or threatening to withdraw or interfere with an active immigration application or process."
That is not an interpretation. It is the text of the statute. When he says he will have you deported, when he holds your passport or your birth certificate, when he threatens to pull the petition — the Colorado General Assembly wrote those three things down by name. The same law also requires a court that orders unsupervised parenting time, where there is any information or a child's accusation of domestic violence, child abuse, child sexual abuse, child emotional abuse, or coercive control, to state on the record why it found that unsupervised time to be in the child's best interests (§ 14-10-124(9)).
What a family court can do is decide parenting time and decision-making, and consider the pattern of conduct the statute directs it to consider. What a family court cannot do is decide your immigration case, grant you status, or stop a federal proceeding. Keeping those lanes straight is part of the work — and part of why the two sides of your case should be handled by people who talk to each other.
Your children and the petition
A VAWA self-petition can, in appropriate cases, include the self-petitioner's children as derivatives. Which children can be included, and under what conditions, depends on the category and the facts, and our VAWA survivor guide walks through the general framework. Whether it applies to your children is a question for an attorney with your actual file.
U.S.-citizen children in a mixed-status household
The questions parents actually ask us are practical, and they deserve practical framing rather than reassurance. Does a child's U.S. citizenship change the parenting-time analysis? The best-interests factors are the best-interests factors — a child's citizenship is not one of them. Does having U.S.-citizen children help an immigration case? Sometimes, in some forms of relief, and not automatically in any of them; it is one fact among many. Can parenting-time orders and travel provisions create problems when the parents' statuses differ? Yes, and that is precisely the kind of thing worth catching in the drafting rather than after entry.
Ask how your family case and your VAWA case fit together.
Schedule a consultation · (888) 746-5245
VAWA Is Not the Only Path — a Quick Map
Several forms of immigration relief exist for survivors and crime victims. They have different requirements, and more than one can be open to the same person. Sorting that out is an attorney's job, not a webpage's.
The VAWA self-petition is keyed to a family relationship with the abuser — a U.S.-citizen or lawful-permanent-resident spouse, parent, or adult child — and to battery or extreme cruelty by that person. You file it yourself. No law-enforcement involvement is required.
The U visa is keyed to being the victim of a qualifying crime, and it requires a certification of the victim's helpfulness to law enforcement or other certifying agency. The relationship to the perpetrator is not the trigger; the crime and the cooperation are. Our U visa for crime victims page covers it properly.
Because the two are keyed to different things, the same set of facts can point to both, one, or neither. Nothing on this page determines which applies to you. An attorney reviews your facts and tells you which paths are actually open — and, just as important, which are not, before you spend a year on the wrong one. Our broader victim protections practice is the parent page for this work.
If your case is in Washington, see our Washington VAWA page. This page addresses Colorado family-court matters.
Not sure which path fits? Talk to an attorney.
How This Actually Works With Novo
An attorney handles this — not a paraprofessional
A VAWA self-petition is immigration work, and at Novo it is handled by a Novo immigration attorney. It is not within Licensed Legal Paraprofessional scope.
This matters because several of our family-law pages describe an LLP-plus-attorney model, and that model does not extend here. Under C.R.C.P. 207.1(2)(f)(xii), family-law matters with immigration consequences fall outside LLP scope — VAWA self-petition strategy inside a divorce and mixed-status custody questions are attorney work, even when the family-law piece standing alone might not be. Our page on when you need an attorney rather than an LLP sets out that line. If you arrived here from one of our LLP-scope family-law pages, this is the difference: the immigration thread makes it attorney work.
One firm, both sides of the file
The whole argument of this page is that the family-court decisions and the immigration decisions are the same decisions viewed from two angles. That only helps you if the same firm is looking at both.
At Novo, the immigration attorney and the family-law side work the same file. The sequencing questions in the divorce section above actually get decided — by people who have both records in front of them — instead of falling into the gap between a family lawyer and an immigration lawyer who have never spoken. That is a description of how we work. It is not a promise about how either case comes out.
Spanish-first, not "Spanish available"
Novo Legal Group is a Spanish-first practice. Every attorney and every staff member is bilingual in English and Spanish. There is no interpreter to schedule, no delay, and no relative or family friend sitting in the room translating the hardest sentences of your life. You talk to your attorney directly, in the language you actually think in.
What a first conversation looks like
You do not need documents in order to call. Bring whatever you have and nothing you do not.
If they exist and are safe to gather: identity and marriage documents, anything showing you lived with the abuser, any immigration paperwork ever filed for you or by you, and anything from a Colorado court — a protection-order petition or order, dissolution paperwork, parenting-time orders. If any of that is in a house you cannot safely enter, say so; that is a common situation and it is workable.
We will ask what has already been filed, what is about to be filed, and what deadlines you are already inside of. We will not tell you that you qualify for something on a phone call. What we will do is tell you honestly what the analysis requires and what the sequencing questions are in your specific case.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I file a VAWA self-petition without my husband or wife knowing?
Yes — a self-petition is filed by you, without the abuser's signature or cooperation, and USCIS does not notify the abuser that it was filed. A federal statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1367, restricts Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, and Department of State personnel from disclosing information about the filing and from basing an adverse determination solely on information the abuser supplied. That statute has enumerated exceptions and does not bind Colorado courts, county clerks, local police, schools, or employers — so if you also have a Colorado family-court case, that case is a separate, public proceeding your abuser is a party to.
Do I have to be married to a U.S. citizen to file VAWA?
No. The law generally reaches abused spouses of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, abused children of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, and abused parents of U.S.-citizen adult sons or daughters. Each category has its own statutory conditions. Whether a specific relationship qualifies is a fact-specific question for an attorney.
Does getting divorced end my VAWA self-petition?
Not necessarily, and the answer differs depending on whether the petition was already filed. The statute provides that divorce after the petition is filed does not adversely affect its approval (8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)(vi)). Where the marriage ended before filing, the statute still allows a former spouse to self-petition — but two conditions both have to be met: the person was a bona fide spouse within the past 2 years, and the person demonstrates a connection between the legal termination of the marriage within the past 2 years and the battering or extreme cruelty. Both conditions, not either one. This is a case-specific analysis, not a date calculation. Remarriage is a separate question with its own timing rule — see below.
Can I remarry while my VAWA self-petition is pending?
Timing matters here, and the difference is significant. After a self-petition has been approved, federal law provides that remarriage is not a basis for revoking that approval (8 U.S.C. § 1154(h)). While a self-petition is still pending, remarriage is treated very differently and can jeopardize the case. If remarriage is anywhere on the horizon, that is a conversation to have with an immigration attorney before anything is filed or finalized — not after. This is one of the situations where an ordinary, unremarkable life decision can have consequences nobody warned about.
Should I file for divorce before or after my VAWA petition?
That is exactly the question to bring to an attorney before anything is filed, and it does not have a universal answer. What is filed first, what the pleadings say, and when a decree enters can all matter to the immigration analysis. Colorado's 91-day statutory period before a decree can enter (C.R.S. § 14-10-106(1)(a)(III)) means there is real room to coordinate — if the coordination happens early.
Do I need a protection order to file a VAWA self-petition?
No. A protection order is not a requirement. It can be useful evidence, because it produces contemporaneous court records about the abuse, but many self-petitions are filed by people who never sought one. A protection order that was denied, dismissed, or withdrawn also does not end a VAWA case — different forum, different standard, different record.
Does filing VAWA affect my custody or parenting-time case in Colorado?
Colorado decides allocation of parental responsibilities under the best-interests standard at C.R.S. § 14-10-124, and immigration status is not among the factors the statute enumerates. Colorado law also directs courts, in formulating or approving a parenting plan where domestic violence is found, to give paramount consideration to the safety and to the physical, mental, and emotional conditions and needs of the child and the abused party, and HB24-1350 added a statutory definition of coercive control that names immigration-status threats by example. The two cases are decided separately, but the records they generate can affect each other, which is why they are best handled together.
Can men file a VAWA self-petition?
Yes. Despite the name, VAWA self-petitions are gender-neutral. Men can file. Survivors in same-sex marriages can file. The statute is written in terms of the qualifying relationship and the abuse, not the survivor's gender.
Can I work while my VAWA self-petition is pending?
Work authorization for VAWA self-petitioners exists, but whether and when a particular person can obtain it depends on the posture of the case and other requirements. We do not publish timelines for this, because published estimates go stale and a survivor should not plan their life around a number from a webpage. An attorney can tell you what applies to your case as it stands.
What's the difference between VAWA and a U visa?
A VAWA self-petition is based on a family relationship with an abusive U.S.-citizen or lawful-permanent-resident spouse, parent, or adult child, and it does not require any law-enforcement involvement. A U visa is based on being the victim of a qualifying crime and requires a certification of helpfulness to law enforcement or another certifying agency. Different triggers, different requirements — and the same facts can sometimes support more than one path.
Does Novo handle VAWA cases in Spanish?
Yes. Novo Legal Group is a Spanish-first practice — every attorney and staff member is bilingual in English and Spanish. You speak directly with your attorney in Spanish, with no interpreter and no delay, and without relying on a relative to translate.
Related Reading
- VAWA self-petition survivor guide — the general overview of who may qualify, what counts as abuse, and what evidence USCIS considers
- Colorado civil protection orders — temporary and permanent orders, the hearing, and the timeline
- Colorado divorce and dissolution — the Colorado process step by step
- Allocation of parental responsibilities (custody) in Colorado — the best-interests standard and how Colorado decides parenting time
- The U visa for crime victims — the other principal survivor pathway
- Victim protections — our humanitarian immigration practice
- When your family-law matter needs an attorney rather than an LLP — scope, and why immigration threads are attorney work
- Colorado family law practice — the full family-law practice
- About Aaron Elinoff, Managing Partner
Reviewed by Aaron Elinoff, Managing Partner, Novo Legal Group — Colorado Bar #46468.
Aaron Elinoff, Managing Partner, Novo Legal Group — Colorado Bar #46468.