Exposing Attorney Fraud, Embezzlement, and Deception – The Case Against Otis Carl Landerholm

This campaign, led by immigrant clients and community advocates, exposes a disturbing pattern of alleged fraud, embezzlement, and professional misconduct committed by Attorney Otis Landerholm, founder of Landerholm Immigration, A.P.C., based in Oakland, California.

The initiative seeks accountability and justice for the many immigrant clients who trusted this firm with their legal defense and life savings—only to be defrauded, ignored, and left unrepresented in critical immigration proceedings.

---

Allegations Against the Firm

Evidence from multiple clients reveals that Landerholm Immigration routinely collects large flat fees upfront, then abandons cases, fabricates progress, and refuses to refund unearned funds. In many instances, the firm allegedly demands additional payments for services already covered under the signed agreements, and in others, it withholds client files and trust fund balances—acts that amount to embezzlement and contractual fraud.

This pattern, if confirmed, constitutes serious violations of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, including:

• Rule 1.3 – Diligence: Failure to act competently and promptly in client matters.
• Rule 1.4 – Communication: Failure to keep clients informed and respond to inquiries.
• Rule 1.5 – Fees: Charging unreasonable or duplicative fees, or misrepresenting billing terms.
• Rule 1.15 – Safekeeping Funds: Misuse or failure to return client funds and property.
• Rule 1.16(e): Failure to return files and refund unearned fees upon termination.
• California Business & Professions Code §6106: Acts involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption, including embezzlement.
• California Business & Professions Code §6068(m): Failure to respond promptly to reasonable client requests and deliver client property.

These are not isolated errors—they reflect a pattern of fraudulent practice, exploiting the vulnerability and limited legal literacy of immigrant clients.

---

Case Example: Nelson Jimenez

Mr. Jimenez paid $22,500 under a flat-fee agreement for representation in his U visa case and removal defense. The agreement expressly prohibited additional charges beyond the fixed fee, yet the firm later demanded up to $35,000 more (as an estimate, which means it could be a lot more), violating the written contract and Rule 1.5.

Mr. Jimenez was assigned 3 different lawyers from 2021 to 2025 because all the new lawyers would leave the firm but when his assigned attorney Amanda left the firm, Mr. Landerholm failed to assign a new attorney or file Form EOIR-28 (Notice of Appearance). As a result, when the Department of Homeland Security filed a motion to recalendar Mr. Jimenez’s removal proceedings, no opposition was filed, and the immigration judge granted the motion, placing him back in active deportation status. No attorney to represent him.

After this failure, both Mr. Otis Landerholm and Managing Attorney David Benham-Suk apologized and admitted fault—communications that Mr. Jimenez has documented in audio recordings and text messages. Instead of remedying the harm, the firm threatened to “expedite deportation” if Mr. Jimenez did not pay additional fees and rehire them – an estimated $35,000 even though his contract was firm on a flat-fee deal.

Upon terminating their services, Mr. Jimenez requested a refund, accounting records, and his complete case file. To date, the firm has refused to comply, a clear violation of Rule 1.16(e) and §6068(m).

This conduct amounts to both breach of contract and embezzlement, as funds were collected under false pretenses and not lawfully applied to the services promised. A covert act of fraud.

---

Case Example: Mauricio Vélez Tobón

Mr. Mauricio Vélez Tobón paid over $8,000 to Landerholm Immigration in 2022. He was assured by attorney Flavio that his case was simple and would be handled efficiently. Over a year later, after repeated excuses and no progress, another attorney, Mitchell, admitted that the firm had overlooked critical legal elements and could not file his case.

Despite acknowledging their mistake, the firm refunded only $4,000—half of what was paid—and handed him a folder containing nothing more than photocopies of his own documents.
Mr. Vélez lost not only $4,000 but also an entire year of opportunity to file with USCIS before his eligibility window closed.

He states:

“They are punctual when taking your money, but vanish when you need them. I lost $4,000 and a year of my life because of their incompetence.”

---

Widespread Pattern of Fraud and Embezzlement

The pattern of misconduct extends beyond individual cases. Dozens of reports share similar stories of money taken, calls ignored, and cases abandoned. Common complaints include:

“I paid for the service, we talked, but they never answered again.”

“This attorney is defrauding his clients. He is currently under investigation for wire fraud and other violations. There will very likely be criminal charges and civil action against his law firm. If you have any information that you would like to report please reach out to Mr. Sanabria at sanabria1244@gmail.com”

Clients consistently describe systematic embezzlement of funds, lack of transparency, and deceptive reassurances designed to extract more payments. Many cases display clear indicators of criminal intent—including taking money under false pretenses, fabricating progress reports, and refusing to return unearned fees.

---

Digital Deception and Reputation Manipulation

Evidence shows that Mr. Landerholm has engaged in deliberate online deception to conceal these abuses.
Investigators have documented that he comments on his own YouTube videos using alternate accounts, replying with messages such as “Thank you for helping me with my case!” to simulate positive client feedback.

A sentiment and metadata analysis of his firm’s reviews reveals:

• Identical phrasing across multiple positive reviews,
• Suspiciously high posting frequency from low-credibility accounts,
• Inconsistencies between verified client experiences and online reputation scores.

These findings suggest that a portion of the firm’s reviews, followers, and testimonials are fake, representing another layer of fraud and public deception intended to attract new clients under false pretenses.

---

Emerging Evidence and Documentary Investigation

A documentary investigation is underway consolidating:

• Audio and text evidence confirming attorney admissions,
• Client testimonies detailing embezzlement and fraud,
• Digital forensics uncovering fake reviews and online self-promotion, and
• Financial documentation tracing client funds and contractual violations.

Preliminary findings indicate potential violations of state and federal law, including wire fraud, embezzlement, and unethical conduct under Business & Professions Code §6106.

---

Call to Action

This campaign calls for:

• An independent investigation by the California State Bar and appropriate federal authorities into Otis Landerholm and Landerholm Immigration, A.P.C.,
• Full restitution and refund to all affected clients,
• Public exposure and accountability for fraudulent practices in the immigration legal industry, and
• Protection of immigrant communities from predatory attorneys who exploit their vulnerability for profit.

Immigrants deserve honesty, transparency, and ethical advocacy—not fraud, embezzlement, and deception disguised as help.