Lawyers behind the federal lawsuit say they are reviewing more than 800 immigration entry forms, fearing their cases may have been mishandled
SEATTLE — A federal lawsuit alleging that a prominent Seattle-area immigration attorney steered some immigrants to file abusive immigration petitions when they allegedly were ineligible is quickly expanding, and the attorney behind the case now says hundreds more people are coming forward with concerns about their immigration applications.
Several plaintiffs gathered at the office of South Seattle immigration attorney Omar Barraza last week to publicly discuss the allegations outlined in a lawsuit filed against Tukwila attorney Alexandra Lozano and her law firm.
One of them, Gabriel Martinez Garcia, said he was one step away from receiving legal status before the case was solved.
Garcia said Lozano encouraged him to apply for VAWA (Violence Against Women Act), a federal immigration pathway available to some victims of domestic violence.
“She didn’t explain to me what VAWA was,” Garcia said. “She didn’t explain the documents to me. I had to figure out how to Google them myself.”
Garcia said he is now working to correct his immigration case while trying to avoid deportation proceedings.
Omar Barraza and Aric Bomsztyk, the attorneys who filed the federal lawsuit, said the response since the lawsuit and KING 5 investigation has been overwhelming.
The attorneys created a website, lozanocivilaction.com, for former clients to contact them.
Bomsztyk said at least 300 more people have come forward since the lawsuit was filed, bringing the total number of admission forms submitted to more than 800.
The lawsuit alleges that Lozano and her firm steered some clients toward abusive immigration claims, allegedly ineligible, mishandling documents and submitting applications that clients did not fully understand. Lozano has denied wrongdoing.
KING 5 previously received complaints filed years ago with the Washington Attorney General’s Office describing similar allegations involving misuse of immigration applications, unauthorized signatures and refund disputes.
The Washington State Bar Association told KING 5 attorney grievance records are confidential unless it would result in public disciplinary action.
After the lawsuit was filed, KING 5 contacted the WSBA again but made the same confidentiality statement.
Several immigration lawyers, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also expressed concerns about oversight involving state bar associations.
They noted that Henry Cruz, the WSBA’s senior disciplinary counsel, is Lozano’s former spouse. Public records reviewed by KING 5 show the two were married from 2009 to 2011.
In a written statement to KING 5, the lawyer said:
“Alessandra Lozano should be treated the same as any other attorney accused of participating in a long-term scheme to harm immigrant communities and discredit genuine survivors of violence. There should be no special treatment and no favoritism. She should be held to the same standards as other attorneys. What happened was wrong and accountability is important.”
“Over the past decade, Ms. Lozano’s unethical conduct has been openly discussed not only among area immigration attorneys, but within the immigrant community as well. The law firm’s investigation should have been initiated years ago, based on the many social media clues you can find by just Googling her name. Ms. Lozano’s inappropriate behavior caused immeasurable harm and even resulted in unnecessary deportations.
Shockingly, in 2026, her WSBA file still showed no disciplinary record. I’m 100% sure she got a grievance from the bar, and probably a lot of them. I don’t think the WSBA is aware of the fraud. It’s quite outrageous to know that her ex-husband is the state bar’s senior disciplinary attorney and, to my knowledge, has not commented on the lawsuit or recused himself from potential investigations. “
“While we assume that WSBA Will remain transparent and will not assign her ex-husband to her case, but people will ask why they are taking no action on this case when clearly a lot of harm has been done and a lot of people have been affected. According to her own statistics, she represents thousands of people. If the lawsuit is indeed what many of her new former clients have confirmed to other immigration attorneys, then why don’t they issue a temporary stay or other remedy as they have in the past with smaller cases and lower volumes? They are there to protect consumers.”
“The Lozano Law Firm’s fraudulent filings and practices have been known to the immigration bar community for some time. I am pleased that some private attorneys are proactively raising the alarm and taking action to stop her fraudulent behavior, and I hope this opens the door for an investigation by the WSBA, as she does not deserve to be licensed or practice law in this community. She was and will be motivated by money and greed. Clearly, I hope that an impartial WSBA will investigate members.”
In its latest statement Thursday afternoon, the WSBA said:
“Under rules established by the Washington Supreme Court, the WSBA is bound by strict confidentiality rules with respect to grievances (complaints) against attorneys. Individuals who file these complaints and attorneys against whom complaints are filed are similarly prohibited from speaking publicly about these matters. We understand that it can be frustrating when information about disciplinary matters that is discussed publicly by the Bar remains confidential. Disciplinary matters undergo careful and thorough investigation by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel and, generally, through additional procedural steps outside the control of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel before reaching a stage where confidentiality is no longer confidential.
As for your other questions: The Disciplinary Counsel’s Office has systems in place to guard against conflicts of interest. If any employee of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel has a current or previous family or other close personal relationship with the attorney against whom the complaint has been filed, they will be recused from the matter and will not be involved in any case. “
The lawsuit remains civil, not criminal. Lawyers representing the plaintiffs said they are considering adding more plaintiffs to the current case.
