Robert C. Milla

​Robert C. Milla has been an immigration attorney since 2006, dedicating his career to helping clients fulfill their family and employment goals in the United States. Mr. Milla’s approach has always been to invest the head and heart to provide 100% effort.

Mr. Milla’s personal background has given him great appreciation for the immigrant experience and perspective. His mother immigrated to the United States from the Philippines as a graduate student, and his father was born into impoverished circumstances in Brooklyn, New York to Spanish and Italian immigrant parents, to eventually serve in the United States Marine Corps and New York City Police Department. With such a foundation, Mr. Milla was raised to admire the immigrant experience and dream. While his background is unique to him, Mr. Milla has always found great similarities to his clients. Mr. Milla has created his own immigrant stories as he spent extensive time abroad, receiving his Master's degree in Auckland, New Zealand; working in Niigata, Japan; and completing a legal internship in Beijing, China. Mr. Milla’s wife, also an attorney, is a first-generation Indian-American, and together they have two children.

Mr. Milla’s focus on immigration law has included family and employment cases, as well as removal defense, through which he has earned approvals for asylum, cancellation of removal, and adjustment of status. His work on I-601 hardship waiver applications has earned approvals for clients worldwide, including for countries in Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia. He has successfully represented clients in federal court actions, including mandamus delay cases and challenges to improperly denied immigration applications.

As an adjunct professor at the Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago-Kent College of Law, Mr. Milla teaches a legal writing course that he designed to focus on unique issues of immigration law. He is an active member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), and speaker on immigration litigation and reform.

​​

​

​

Read Robert C. Milla’s 5-star client testimonials at AVVO and/or Yelp.

Admissions

• Illinois, 2006
• United States Supreme Court, 2011
• United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 2008
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 2006

Education

• Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago-Kent College of Law, Juris Doctor, 2006
• University of Auckland (New Zealand), Master of Arts in English with Honors, 2002
• University of Michigan (Ann Arbor), Bachelor of Arts in English, 1998

Honors & Awards

• Illinois Super Lawyers: Super Lawyer in Immigration Law, 2024
• Super Lawyers: Super Lawyer in Immigration Law, 2024
• Finalist for Adjunct Professor of the Year, Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2018-2019
• Illinois Super Lawyers: Rising Star in Immigration Law, 2016
• Illinois Super Lawyers: Rising Star in Immigration Law, 2015
• Illinois Super Lawyers: Rising Star in Immigration Law, 2014
• CALI Excellence for the Future Award, Legal Writing, 2005
• CALI Excellence for the Future Award, Trial Advocacy, 2005

Speaking Engagements

• Chicago-Kent College of Law, Solo and Small Practice Incubator Training Boot Camp, Invited Speaker, "How to Obtain and Retain Clients," February 22, 2019
• Chicago-Kent College of Law, Immigration Law Society Career Panel, Invited Speaker, November 13, 2018
• Chicago-Kent College of Law, Solo and Small Practice Incubator Training Boot Camp, Invited Speaker, "How to Obtain and Retain Clients," February 23, 2018
• Chicago-Kent College of Law, Panel on Immigration Executive Orders: "Policy in Transition," February 8, 2017
• AILA Chicago, Fall Litigation Workshop: Waivers in Immigration Court, November 14, 2013
• Marshall Square Resource Network, Immigration Law and Reform News, September 4, 2013
• Latinos Progresando, Immigration Court & Defense: Cancellation of Removal, August 16, 2013
• WBEZ 91.5 Afternoon Shift, Immigration Reform and Deportation, June 12, 2013.
• Organizing for Action Mid-Northside Chicago Chapter, Immigration Reform Panel, April 2013
• AILA Chicago, Litigation Committee Roundtable Discussion, 2013
• AILA Chicago, Litigation Seminar, 2012
• American Bar Association, Essentials of Immigration Court Representation, 2012
• AILA Chicago, Introduction to Federal Litigation, 2011

Notable Court Cases

• Matter of F-, Immigration Court, July 2024. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of T-, Immigration Court, July 2024. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of N-, Immigration Court, July 2024. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of B-, Immigration Court, June 2024. The immigration judge granted Respondent’s application for waiver under INA § 237(a)(1)(H), allowing her to keep her permanent resident status despite committing an alleged misrepresentation at the time of adjusting status. A citizen of Jamaica, our client can now continue to live in this country supporting and providing for her U.S. citizen family, along with contributing to her community through her volunteer work, without the fear of deportation.
• Matter of A- and Matter of A-, Immigration Court, May 2024. Respondents’ motions to reopen and terminate their removal cases with the Board of Immigration Appeals were granted based on eligibility to adjust status. Our clients, citizens of a western African country, had their prior appeal and motion to reopen filed by a previous attorney denied by the BIA, but we were able to help them to not only reopen their cases but to also terminate them so they could apply for permanent residence with USCIS.
• Matter of A-, Immigration Court, May 2024. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of T-, Immigration Court, April 2024. The immigration judge granted Respondent’s application for waiver under INA § 237(a)(1)(H), allowing him to retain permanent resident status despite an alleged misrepresentation at the time of adjusting status. A citizen of Bulgaria, our client continues to support and provide for his U.S. citizen family, no longer under the threat of deportation.
• Matter of S-, Immigration Court, March 2024. Respondent’s Form EOIR-42B, application for VAWA cancellation of removal and adjustment of status was granted following the abuse he suffered as a child. Our client, a citizen of Mexico, was able to win his immigration court case, turn a painful page in his life, and continue working toward his personal and professional goals in the United States.
• Matter of A-, Immigration Court, February 2024. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of A-, Immigration Court, January 2024. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of M- and Matter of A-, Immigration Court, January 2024. Respondents’ application for asylum from a central Asian nation was granted based on being a member of a particular social group.
• Matter of W-, Immigration Court, January 2024. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of B-, Immigration Court, November 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of L-, Immigration Court, October 2023. Respondent’s motions to recalendar and terminate his removal case were granted based on eligibility to apply for adjustment of status to permanent resident. Our client, a citizen of Venezuela, was granted permanent resident status by U.S. CItizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in summer 2024.
• Matter of A-, Immigration Court, August 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion
• Matter of N-, Immigration Court, August 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of T-, Immigration Court, April August 2023. The immigration judge granted Respondent’s application for waiver under INA § 237(a)(1)(H), allowing her to retain permanent resident status despite an alleged misrepresentation at the time of adjusting status. A citizen of Poland, our client can continue providing for her U.S. citizen family with the emotional and financial support they need, as well as significantly contributing to her community through her profession and volunteer work without worrying about deportation.
• Matter of S-, Immigration Court, August 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion
• Matter of R-, Immigration Court, July 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from an eastern European nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of T-, Immigration Court, July 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion
• Matter of S-, Immigration Court, June 2023. The immigration judge granted Respondent’s request for dismissal, which was joined by the government (DHS), despite being removable. With our help, our client, a citizen of Thailand, was able to show that she deserved the chance to remain in the U.S., despite a certain conviction history, based on her family ties to the U.S., exemplary work history, and documented hardship suffered in her past. Our client can now continue living in the U.S. near her loved ones, and work toward her personal and professional goals.
• Matter of N-, Immigration Court, April 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on being a member of a particular social group.
• Matter of S-, Immigration Court, March 2023. Respondent’s Form EOIR-42B, Application for Cancellation of Removal and Adjustment of Status for Certain Nonpermanent Residents was granted despite an alleged prior misrepresentation in his immigration history. With his victory in court, our client, a citizen of Poland, could remain in the U.S. and continue building the life he established with his U.S. citizen family.
• Matter of M-, Immigration Court, January 2023. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of N-, Immigration Court, November 2022. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of Z-, Immigration Court, June 2022. Respondent’s application for asylum from an eastern Asian nation was granted based on religion.
• Matter of V-, Immigration Court, March 2022. The immigration judge approved Respondent’s I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence filed jointly with his U.S. citizen wife. The government, through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), put our client, a citizen of Serbia, into immigration court (removal proceedings) alleging that their marriage was a sham. The couple was relieved when our firm helped them to prove their good-faith marriage and win in court, allowing them to move forward in their life together.
• Matter of B-, Immigration Court, February 2022. The immigration judge granted Respondent’s application for permanent resident status based on marriage to her U.S. citizen spouse. A citizen of Moldova, our client won her case and received her green card in court so she and her husband could continue to build their life together in this country.
• Matter of M-, Immigration Court, January 2022. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on being a member of a particular social group.
• Matter of V-L-, Immigration Court, June 2020. The immigration judge granted Respondent’s application for protection under the UN Convention Against Torture, despite a certain conviction history. While our client, a citizen of a Latin American country, was statutorily ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal, we were able to help him receive protection under CAT.
• Matter of A-, Immigration Court, October 2019. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of S-, Immigration Court, July 2019. Respondent’s Form EOIR-42B, Application for Cancellation of Removal and Adjustment of Status for Certain Nonpermanent Residents was granted. With his victory in court, our client, a citizen of Mexico, could stay in the country and continue providing for his U.S. citizen family and the life they are building in the United States.
• Matter of A-, Immigration Court (Detained), July 2019. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of B-, Immigration Court, May 2019. Respondent’s application for asylum from a western African nation was granted based on being a member of a particular social group.
• Matter of A-, Immigration Court (Detained) 2019. Respondent's application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• Matter of C-, Immigration Court 2019. Respondent, a U.S. lawful permanent resident and native of Thailand, approved for Form EOIR-42A, Application for Cancellation of Removal for Certain Permanent Residents, despite a particular arrest and conviction history.
• Matter of M-, Immigration Court (Detained) 2019. Respondent's application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of Y-, Immigration Court 2019. Respondent, a U.S. lawful permanent resident and native of a country in the Middle East, was allowed to keep lawful permanent resident status, despite a certain conviction history and alleged misrepresentation.
• Matter of P-, Immigration Court 2018. Respondent, a U.S. lawful permanent resident and native of the Philippines, approved for Form EOIR-42A, Application for Cancellation of Removal for Certain Permanent Residents, despite a particular arrest and conviction history.
• Matter of F-, Immigration Court 2018. Respondent's application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of E-, Immigration Court (Detained) 2018. Respondent, a U.S. lawful permanent resident and native of Mexico, approved for Form EOIR-42A, Application for Cancellation of Removal for Certain Permanent Residents, despite a particular arrest and conviction history.
• Matter of M-, Immigration Court 2018. Respondent's application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of N-, Immigration Court 2018. Respondent's application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of M-, Immigration Court 2018. Respondent’s application for asylum from a Balkan nation was granted based on membership in a particular social group.
• Matter of G-, Immigration Court 2018. Respondent's Motion for Administrative Closure was granted over the government's objection to file for provisional waiver of inadmissibility with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
• Matter of Z-, Immigration Court 2018. Respondent's Motion to Terminate removal proceedings was granted over the government's objection to file for adjustment of status with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
• Matter of M-, Immigration Court 2017. Respondent's application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of N-, Immigration Court 2014. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on imputed political opinion.
• H- and D- v. Napolitano, et al., U.S. District Circuit 2013. Within three months of filing the complaint in federal court, USCIS approved the Plaintiffs’ I-130 Petition and I-485 Application.
• Matter of I-, Immigration Court 2012. Respondent’s application for asylum from a central African nation was granted based on political opinion.
• S- v. Napolitano, et al., U.S. District Court 2010. In a challenge to an improperly denied adjustment of status (“green card”) application, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was granted, and he was granted permanent resident status.
• Matter of D-, Immigration Court 2009. Respondent’s application for asylum from a Balkan nation was granted based on political opinion.
• Matter of M-, Immigration Court 2008. Respondent’s application for asylum from an eastern European country was granted based on social group for sexual orientation.
• K- v. Dorochoff, et al., U.S. District Court 2007. In a mandamus delay action, USCIS’s Motion to Dismiss was denied, and Petitioner was granted permanent resident status.