Nine former clients have taken a well-known Seattle-area immigration attorney to federal court, accusing her of filing fraudulent abuse-based petitions in their names and, in some instances, signing immigration paperwork without their knowledge. The lawsuit claims a pattern of misrepresentation and promises of quick legal fixes for vulnerable families, and it seeks money damages along with court orders to halt the practices the plaintiffs describe.
Court records show the case, Sanchez et al v. Kennedy et al, No. 2:26-cv-01587, was filed May 11 in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and names nine plaintiffs, attorney Alexandra Lozano Kennedy and several affiliated entities as defendants, according to Justia. The docket lists an initial complaint that includes a jury demand, along with multiple summonses issued to each defendant. It also notes that plaintiffs are represented by a three-firm legal team that has posted case materials online and is seeking potential additional claimants.
Materials posted by plaintiffs' lawyers say the defendant marketed herself to Spanish-speaking clients as the "abogada de los milagros" - the "lawyer of miracles" - and routinely filed VAWA self-petitions, T-visa applications and other immigration forms that the suit characterizes as baseless or fraudulent, at times placing signatures on filings without client consent. The online case page lists claims that include alleged Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act violations, legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, Washington Consumer Protection Act violations, breach of contract and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The plaintiffs' materials also emphasize that these assertions are allegations only and that no court has made findings on the merits, according to Lozano Civil Action.
Clients Say ‘Miracle’ Marketing Turned Into Deportation Fears
Several former clients told reporters they did not fully understand the "abuse-based" petitions filed in their names and that some now face deportation proceedings, according to reporting by KING 5. Those plaintiffs say they were promised paths to legal status that never appeared and that the fees they paid to the firm did not produce the immigration relief they had been led to expect. Their attorneys argue that the financial losses and potential immigration consequences justify the broad civil relief laid out in the federal complaint.
How VAWA Self-Petitions And T Visas Are Supposed To Work
Under federal law, VAWA self-petitions allow certain survivors of domestic abuse to seek lawful status without needing their abuser to sponsor or cooperate. T-nonimmigrant status, commonly called the T visa, can provide protection for victims of human trafficking who assist law enforcement. Both forms of relief require specific documentation and strict statutory showings, and the suit notes that improper or fraudulent filings can use up limited legal options and complicate future immigration claims. For background on these programs, federal guidance is available from USCIS on VAWA self-petitions and from USCIS on T-visa status.
RICO Counts Raise The Stakes
The lawsuit's civil RICO counts could significantly increase potential exposure if they succeed. Civil RICO provides a private cause of action that can allow plaintiffs to seek treble damages and attorney fees if they prove an enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, although such claims carry a high pleading and proof burden, according to Cornell Law School. Alongside those racketeering allegations, the complaint also brings more familiar theories of legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty and violations of consumer-protection law that could support restitution or sanctions if proven. The defendants are presumed to deny the accusations, and as of the initial filing the federal docket lists only the complaint and related summonses.
What Happens Next For Clients And The Court
For now, the case is at the very beginning. Defendants must be formally served, and the parties are expected to trade motions, disclosures and discovery as the matter moves through federal court. Plaintiffs' counsel have posted case documents and a registration form for potentially affected individuals on their site, and the complaint notes that additional claimants may be added as litigation continues. People who believe they were harmed by similar conduct can review guidance on filing grievances with the Washington State Bar Association and are advised to seek qualified immigration counsel if they are in active removal proceedings.
The lawsuit adds to growing scrutiny of immigration-service providers in the region and could prompt closer oversight if the court allows the case to move forward. For now, the allegations remain unproven claims in a newly filed federal complaint, and the court will determine whether and how the case proceeds. Hoodline will continue to follow the docket and local reporting as developments emerge.
