My Big News: I Am Joining Murray Osorio PLLC

I started my own immigration law practice at the end of 2003. Since then, I have been either a solo attorney or I’ve been working with one or a few colleagues. Now, that’s about to change. I am happy to announce that starting on January 1, my coworkers and I will be joining Murray Osorio PLLC, a full-service immigration firm with offices in Virginia, Maryland, and New Jersey, and which handles cases nation-wide.

Here’s the official announcement:

We are pleased to announce that as of January 1, 2025, the attorneys and legal staff at Dzubow & Pilcher PLLC will be joining the firm of Murray Osorio PLLC. Jason Dzubow and Todd Pilcher will serve as partners at Murray Osorio PLLC, and the team will remain based in the Washington, DC metropolitan area. Murray Osorio PLLC is one of the nation’s leading full-service immigration law firms and is well-positioned to address the many challenges ongoing and ahead for intending immigrants and asylum seekers throughout the United States. This transition will benefit our clients tremendously as they will have improved access to a larger and readily available team of experienced attorneys and support staff to assist them with their legal needs.

We are in the process of notifying our clients, but the change will not affect our existing clients–we will continue to represent them as before, though we will soon be working under the new firm. 

The Murray Osorio holiday party with me (back row, 26th from the left).

Here, I want to explain a bit about why we made this move, which I think relates to the practice of immigration law more generally.

When I started my practice, my business plan (such as it was) was to keep costs down and keep fees low. To make a living, we needed to do cases efficiently, and we needed to do a lot of them. My attorney friends who practiced primarily asylum law followed this same basic model. It all worked pretty well–I was able to serve my clients and make a living–at least for a while. 

But things began to change in 2014 or 2015. Instead of filing an asylum case, attending an interview, and getting a decision, the “backlog” began to grow. Cases that were previously resolved in a year or two were now taking much longer. This meant that our caseload began to get larger and larger.

It also meant we had more work to do. When you have a client for 10 years instead of two, there is significant extra work associated with the case: Work permits, travel documents, other types of immigration petitions, random questions. Also, when an “old” case gets scheduled for an interview, significant additional work is required, since the form, affidavit, and evidence all need to be updated. 

For these reasons, over time, it has become more difficult to provide the services our clients need. Having so many cases and not enough support is also stressful for the lawyer. I am not alone in these problems, and many small firm asylum lawyers face the same challenges.

For me, something needed to change, and for the past several years, I had been thinking about what to do. 

Enter Murray Osorio. It’s a much larger firm than mine, and it is very well organized. The firm uses technology to better manage its caseload and prepare its cases. It has a wide range of immigration lawyers and can provide many services that I cannot. Most important, it has committed attorneys who I know and admire. I felt it was a good match, and I know that our partnership will allow me to better serve my clients and reduce my own level of stress.

As for The Asylumist blog, I intend to keep on keepin’ on. But look out for some improvements and new features in the months ahead.

As we enter 2025, we will face many challenges. Whatever is to come, I feel more confident and better able to represent my clients knowing that I will be working with an experienced team of immigration law professionals who I can turn to for advice and support. I hope to see you in the new year, and until then, I wish you Happy Holidays! 

Related Post

140 comments

  1. Hi Jason, many congratulations!

    I have a quick question about the Laken Riley Act that recently passed in the House. On paper, it seems like a great solution, but in practice, the bill states that people charged (not convicted) with minor crimes will be detained and deported, including asylum seekers. Doesn’t this seem unconstitutional? For example, I knew of a case where a landlord threatened to file false battery charges against a tenant because the tenant refused to vacate the apartment before the lease ended. The tenant was afraid to go to the police because it could affect their immigration process, and ended up leaving apartment. If this bill becomes law, how would it impact asylum seekers in situations like this? Can they deport asylum seekers without court hearing first?

    Reply
    • I do not know all the details of the law, but I have heard about this piece, and I think it is a terrible idea, largely for the reasons you mention. In practical terms, I doubt many non-citizens will be charged with a crime, but I do think it will intimidate them and make them very vulnerable to exploitation. The idea of “innocent until proven guilty” is a bedrock principle of our criminal law (though not our civil law – immigration law is civil), and I think that if this passes, it will be a big step backward for individual rights. Not just for non-citizens, but for everyone. I wrote more about the Laken Riley murder and the reaction to it on March 14, 2024 if you are interested. Take care, Jason

      Reply

Write a comment