June 30, 2009

H-1B and LCA Certifications and iCERT

H-1B employers need to be aware that June 30, 2009 will be the last day that the Department of Labor’s LCA Online system will be operational. As of July 1, 2009, all LCAs for H-1B and E-3 cases will need to be submitted through the iCERT portal and that means the end of instant LCA certifications.

This has very important implications for the timing of H-1B and E-3 applications as they relate to new hires and extensions. Employers will need to allow for delays in LCA certifications of at least 7 days rather than the instant certifications that were previously issued.

June 28, 2009

Superman is Dead Warped Tour '09 P Visa

As I reported in an earlier blog posting, I represent Superman is Dead and I was successful in obtaining their P visas for Warped Tour ’09.

The Whittier Daily News reports here on their opening show on June 26.

June 27, 2009

H-1B Count - Here is the Latest

As of June 26, 2009, approximately 44,800 H-1B cap-subject petitions and approximately 20,000 petitions qualifying for the advanced degree cap exemption had been filed.

June 22, 2009

I-140 Premium Processing is Back for Many I-140 Applications

The USCIS announced on June 22, 2009 that effective June 29, 2009, it is going to resume Premium Processing Service for most Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker.

The USCIS will accept Premium Processing requests for Form I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker involving EB-1 Aliens with Extraordinary Ability, EB-1 Outstanding Professors and Researchers, EB-2 Members of Professions with Advanced Degrees or Exceptional Ability not seeking a National Interest Waiver, EB-3 Professionals, EB-3 Skilled Workers, and EB-3 Workers other than Skilled Workers and Professionals.

It will still NOT accept premium processing requests for Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, that involve EB-1 Multinational Executives and Managers and EB-2 Members of Professions with Advanced Degrees or Exceptional Ability seeking a National Interest Waiver.

This is very welcome news.

With premium processing service, the USCIS guarantees that for the $1,000 processing fee (in addition to the usual application fees), it will decide an application within 15 calendar days. If it doesn’t meet that deadline, the USCIS refunds the $1,000 fee but still continues to process the request as part of the Premium Processing Service.

I have never had a premium processed application not decided within the 15 days so the program definitely works.

June 16, 2009

Superman is Dead Warped Tour '09 - P Visas Approved for the Band

I am happy to report that the USCIS has approved the P-1B visa application that I filed on behalf of Superman is Dead, an Indonesian band, that will be appearing on Warped Tour ’09.

I will post again with more details about the approval in the next day or two.

June 16, 2009

Writ of Mandamus and Naturalization Delay – Another Success Story

I am happy to report another successful Writ of Mandamus action that I filed on behalf of a client whose N-400 Naturalization application was delayed by the USCIS for almost 3 years.

My client filed his N-400 Naturalization application on March 1, 2006 and he had his naturalization interview on June 20, 2006. Then nothing for almost three years.

After my client tried on his own to contact the USCIS to get action on his N-400 and was told only that his N-400 was still pending, he contacted me.

I promptly filed a Writ of Mandamus on his behalf in the United States District Court for New Jersey on April 7, 2009, naming among others, Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States and Robert Mueller, the Director of the FBI (responsible for background checks).

Almost immediately after I served the government with the Writ of Mandamus, I was contacted by a U.S. Attorney who told me that the USCIS was going to approve the N-400.

My client’s naturalization ceremony was held on June 10th!

Writs of Mandamus work.
.

May 19, 2009

H-1b Cap Update from the USCIS as of May 18, 2009

The USCIS, on May 18, 2009, once again provided an update on the number of filings for H-1B petitions for the fiscal year 2010 program.

It announced that it has received approximately 45,500 H-1B petitions counting toward the Congressionally-mandated 65,000 cap. It continues to accept petitions subject to the general cap.

I can report personally that the most recent H-1B regular cap I-129 petition that I filed was filed on May 11 and it was approved on May 15 – premium processed.

Also, the USCIS announced that is has received approximately 20,000 petitions for aliens with advanced degrees, consistent with its prior update and it reconfirmed that it is still accepting advanced degree petitions because it assumes that not all the petitions it received are approvable.

It’s beginning to look like the cap isn’t going to be reached any time soon and, who knows, maybe not at all this fiscal year.

April 27, 2009

H-1B Update from USCIS for FY2010

The USCIS announced today, April 27, 2009, that it has received approxiamtely 45,000 H-1B petitions counting toward this fiscal year's general cap of 65,000. Therefore it will continue to accept H-1B petitions that are subject to the general cap.

Then USCIS also announced that it has received approximately 20,000 H-1B petitions for aliens with U.S. advanced degrees subject to the 20,000 advanced degree cap. However, the USCIS says it will continue to accept additional advanced degree petitions because it knows from past experience that some number of the advance degree petitions are not approvable for any number of possible reasons.

I will update this blog on the H-1B account as soon as the USCIS makes further announcements.

April 20, 2009

H-1B Approvals for FY 2010 Cap Cases

As of today, April 20, 2009, I have received approval notices for all premium processed H-1B applications that I filed for FY 2010. The applications were both U.S. Masters cap cases and regular cap cases and they were filed all filed with either the Vermont Service Center and the California Service Center.

April 9, 2009

H1-B Cap Count to Date for FY2010

As of today, H1-B applications are still being accepted for fiscal year 2010. On April 8, 2009, the USCIS announced that during the initial filing window for H-1Bs, it has received approximately 42,000 applications against the 65,000 cap.

The numerical limitation on H-1B petitions for FY 2010 is 65,000 and the first 20,000 H-1B petitions filed on behalf of aliens who have earned a U.S. master’s degree or higher are exempt from the fiscal year cap.

However, the USCIS also announced that it has received close to the number needed to fill the 20,000 exemption for those who have earned a U.S. master’s degree or higher. This will be the first time that the U.S. master’s degree exemption has filled up before the H-1B cap has.

The USCIS will continue to accept H-1B petitions and will continue to monitor the number of H-1B petitions received for both the regular cap and the master’s cap. When it receives the necessary number of petitions to meet the respective caps, it will issue an update and announce the “final receipt date”.

March 3, 2009

Visa Waiver Program – A Court Rejects “Entry-Ergo-Waiver Logic” of the Department of Homeland Security

On March 2, 2009, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issue a good decision in a Visa Waiver Program case involving the removal of an individual who was never shown by the government to having knowingly waived his right to a hearing before an Immigration Judge in removal proceedings despite having entered the U.S. on the Visa Waiver Program. Unfortunately, the individual in question was, in fact, removed by the government during the pendency of the litigation. Still, the case provides further evidence that federal courts will not stand by while the government tries to prevent the courts from protecting the due process rights of Visa Waiver entrants.

The case is Mokarram v. U.S. Attorney General (not precedential) and the facts, briefly, are as follows: Mokarram entered the U.S. under the Visa Waiver Program in 1988 (then called the Visa Waiver Pilot Program) when he was only 12 years old. He was issued an I-94, marked “WT”, the old designation “waiver/tourist”. He was picked up by the police years later on a state traffic violation and issued a “Notice of Intent to Deport” for having overstayed his entry on the Visa Waiver program. The government claimed that Mokarram waived his right to a hearing before an Immigration Judge, except to apply for asylum, and sought to immediately deport him.

Mokarram filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus which was then transferred to the Court of Appeals and treated as a Petition for Review.

The Court of Appeals held that there was absolutely no evidence that Mokarram ever knowingly waived his due process rights to a hearing before an Immigration Judge or to contest the removal action, despite his Visa Waiver status. The Court rejected the government’s “entry-ergo-waiver logic”—the idea that every single Visa Waiver entrant must be presumed to having knowingly waived his or her due process rights. On the contrary, the Court presumed that Mokarram did not waiver his rights, absent some showing by the government that he had. In this case, the government had no such evidence. The Court remanded the case back to the Department of Homeland Security on the issue of whether Mokarran was prejudiced by the DHS’ violation of his due process rights.

The case illustrates the importance of a Visa Waiver entrant who has been detained for removal purposes in getting to federal court fast and filing an emergency motion for a stay of removal there. As I noted above, Mokarram was, in fact, removed during the case and so to some extent the decision is a hollow victory for him. The case is very helpful, however, for other Visa Waiver entrants who may find themselves being served with a Notice of Intent to Remove.


December 6, 2008

B-1 B-2 Visitor Visa Extension – What If It Takes Too Long for the USCIS to Decide?

Frequently, holders of B-1 and B-2 visitor visas ask my assistance in requesting extensions of their visas, usually for an extra six months. Often, however, it takes the USCIS at least that long to make a decision on the application (the I-539), leaving the applicant wondering whether he or she must depart the U.S. so as not to incur any period of unlawful presence.

The Vermont Service Center has now issued some guidance on this very issue. It has stated that it will adjudicate an approvable extension application to the date of approval, plus one day, where the adjudication takes place after the requested extension date has been reached – but only if the requested date was for a period of no more than 6 months.

Unfortunately, even this assurance still exposes an applicant to being unlawfully present.

To be absolutely safe, a B-1 B-2 extension applicant should depart the United States prior to adjudication on the extension application. Alternatively, the applicant should file a second I-539 and include a copy of the receipt notice of the first, still-pending extension application. If the applicant files for this 2nd extension, he or she should also provide a good explanation as to why they will not be able to depart within the original time requested and they should provide written documentation to support their claim.

November 20, 2008

USCIS Service Center Processing Times

Here are the most recent USCIS Service Center processing times as announced on November 18, 2008:

Vermont Service Center processing times.

Nebraska Service Center processing times.

California Service Center processing times.

Texas Service Center processing times.

October 15, 2008

TN Visas Can Now be Obtained and Renewed for Three Years

On October 14, 2008, the USCIS announced that TN visas can now be initially granted and then renewed for up to a maximum of 3 years rather than just 1 year as per the prior rule.

TN visas are granted to certain professional workers from Canada and Mexico who have at least a bachelor’s degree or appropriate professional credentials and who work in certain qualified fields pursuant to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

The extension form 1 to 3 years will really make it easier on both the employees and the employers who utilize TN visas. Now, they will not have to incur the costs and hassle of having to renew annually. The change is also effective for spouses and unmarried minor children of a TN nonimmigrant.

Here is the FAQs that was released by the USCIS yesterday. However, the FAQs is confusing in that it still refers to extensions as being available for only one year rather than three years--see, "How many times can a person apply for TN visas?" The USCIS announcement clearly states that the 3 year period applies not only to intial applications for the TN visa but also to renewal applications.

September 25, 2008

Ireland and the U.S. Announce a New J-1 Exchange Visitor Program

On September 24, 2008, the United States and Ireland signed a Memorandum of Understanding on a new Intern Work and Travel Pilot Program. The program is set to start either later this year or in early 2009 and it will allow for a Twelve-Month Intern Work and Travel Pilot Program for post-secondary students or for young people within twelve months of graduation. Young people from Ireland will be able to enter the United States for a period of twelve months on a J-1 exchange visitor visa and there will be reciprocal opportunities for young people from the United States to travel to Ireland.

The program will be coordinated by the private sector under the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs and it will fall under the Intern Category of the Exchange Visitor Program.

As more details are announced about the actual mechanics of applying for the visa, I will post them here.

September 24, 2008

I-9 and False Claim to Citizenship -- a Good Decision From the Board of Immigration Appeals

On September 23, 2008, the Board of Immigration Appeals issued an important and just decision on the issue of false claims to citizenship and whether making such a false claim precludes someone from an immigration benefit—in this case, whether making the false claim precluded the person from establishing good moral character in a cancellation of removal application. I have previously posted on issues surrounding false claims to citizenship on I-9 forms here but this is a new issue that is worth taking a look at. The case is the Matter of Viviana Alejandra Guadarrama de Contreras.

In the case, the applicant falsely claimed to be a U.S. citizen on an I-9 employment eligibility verification form. Although the written decision does not state a lot of the background facts, she was later placed in removal proceeds and applied for cancellation of removal. The Immigration Judge, who appears to have been generally sympathetic to her case, nonetheless ordered her removed because, he ruled, her false claim to citizenship on the I-9 made it impossible for her to establish the required “good moral character” that is necessary for cancellation of removal. The IJ held that although the law does not specifically include false claims to citizenship in the class of offenses that make it impossible to establish good moral character (such as committing an aggravated felony) the law has a “catch-all” provision that “the fact that any person is not within any of the foregoing classes shall not preclude a finding that for other reasons such person is or was not of good moral character”. The law is found at 8 U.S.C. Section 1101(f). The IJ believed that this catch-all provision required him to find that the applicant could not establish good moral character.

The Board of Immigration, fortunately, reversed. It held that the catch-all provision did not require the IJ to hold that the applicant could not show good moral character. While a false claim to citizenship could preclude an applicant from being able to show good moral character, the BIA held, the law does not require an IJ to make such a finding. Each case must be decided on its own facts and its own merits. In this case, the BIA did not even remand the case back to the Immigration Judge so that he could make findings on the issue of good moral character because the IJ had basically made those findings already. The IJ had stated in his opinion that but for his view that the catch-all provision precluded the applicant from showing good moral character; he would otherwise have found that the applicant did have good moral character. Therefore, there was no reason for the BIA to remand the case for such findings.

This is a well reasoned and just decision by the BIA.


September 23, 2008

Non-Minister Special Immigrant Religious Worker Program Expiring October 1, 2008 Unless the Senate Acts

The USCIS issued a reminder that unless the U.S. Senate acts soon, then authorization for the non-minister special immigrant religious worker program will expire on Oct. 1, 2008. Anyone wishing to apply to serve in the two non-minister categories of the program must either adjust status to permanent residence or apply for, and be admitted with, an immigrant visa before Oct. 1, 2008. The expiration date also applies to the accompanying spouses and children of these workers

The two expiring categories are special immigrant religious workers in professional or non-professional capacities within a religious vocation or occupation. The expiration date does not apply to special immigrant religious workers entering the United States solely to carry on the vocation of a minister of a religious denomination.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation on April 14, 2008, extending the expiration date and the Senate is currently considering similar legislation but has not yet passed it. The USCIS announced that if Congress does not extend the expiration date, it will, beginning October 1, 2008, hold any pending Form I-360 and Form I-485 affected by the expiration date in abeyance until further notice. However, unless Congress extends the expiration date, USCIS will begin rejecting Form I-360 petitions and Form I-485 applications filed on or after Oct. 1, 2008, which are based on the expired provisions.


August 13, 2008

Global Entry Pilot Program is Expanded to 4 More Airports

On August 13, 2008, Customs and Border Patrol announced that the Global Entry pilot program has now been expanded, effective August 1, 2008, to the following airports: Los Angeles International Airport, Los Angeles, California (LAX); Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Atlanta, Georgia (ATL); Chicago O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, Illinois (ORD); and Miami International Airport, Miami, Florida (MIA).

Also, CBP announced that although the Global Entry pilot is currently operating at Terminal 4 of John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York (JFK), it will now become operational at the remaining terminals of that airport as well.

Here is an explanation from one of my earlier postings about the Global Entry pilot program.

July 2, 2008

Global Entry Program to be Extended to Low-Risk U.K. Citizens and Low-Risk U.S. Citizens Will Get Reciprocal Benefits in the U.K.

I posted an earlier blog entry about the Global Entry program that allows for certain “low-risk” U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents a means to enter the U.S. in an expedited and automated way—without the usual airport delays. The program began on June 6 at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York, George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, and Washington Dulles International Airport. Here is the earlier posting.

On June 24, it was announced that U.S. Customs and Border Protection has signed a joint agreement with the government of the United Kingdom to develop a bilateral program that will eventually make low-risk frequent travelers from the UK to the U.S. also eligible to apply for the program as soon as later this year. And vice versa—low risk U.S. citizens and permanent residents of the U.S. traveling to the U.K. will have reciprocal benefits. The reciprocal agreement is the “International Expedited Traveler Initiative” and it will integrate CBP’s Global Entry program with the U.K. registered traveler program.

The reciprocal program will be similar to other “trusted traveler” programs such as NEXUS (which allows expedited processing into the U.S. and Canada at the land border and at Canadian pre-clearance airports) and SENTRI (which provides for dedicated processing at the U.S.-Mexico land border).

The agreement with the U.K. is also similar to an agreement that CBP signed with the government of the Netherlands on May 19 to integrate CBP’s Global Entry program with the Dutch “Privium” program.


July 1, 2008

FOIA Requests Can Now Be Checked Online

The USCIS announced on June 30, that the status of FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests can now be checked online at FOIA Request Status Check.

To check on the status of a FOIA request, you enter your assigned control number and receive an immediate response on the status of your request. You’ll be told whether the request is “pending” or “processed” and if its pending, you’ll be told where your requests stands in line with all other requests.

June 17, 2008

Supreme Court: Dada v. Mukasey and Voluntary Departure

On June 16, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important immigration law in Dada v. Mukasey.

The case involved the issue of voluntary departure and the poor choice certain individuals must make between abiding by a voluntary departure order or filing a motion to reopen their removal case if they believe new facts justify a re-opening.

A person in removal proceedings who has asked for voluntary departure as an alternative form of relief from removal and who has been given the standard 30-60 days (under some circumstances, it can be up to 120 days) to voluntarily depart absolutely must depart the U.S. before the deadline or suffer serious consequences. If one fails to abide by their order of voluntary departure, the immigration court order automatically becomes an order of removal and there are civil and criminal penalties too.

On the other hand, one who has been granted voluntary departure might have a legitimate reason to ask that their case be re-opened if new facts develop or other evidence that could not be submitted earlier is now available. If they file the motion to re-open but leave the U.S. as required under their order of voluntary departure, the motion to re-open is abandoned. So, it’s a poor choice to have to make.

The Supreme Court recognized the tension between the motion to re-open provisions and the voluntary departure provisions and ruled that a person must be permitted to withdraw their request for voluntary departure as long as they do it before the deadline by which they were ordered to depart. In this way, the person can freely pursue their motion to re-open with suffering the consequences of failing to voluntarily depart.

However, it’s not a clear win for aliens because the Supreme Court specifically did NOT hold that the voluntary departure period was stayed while a motion to re-open is pending. So the dilemma really is still there—if one wants to file a motion to re-open without suffering the consequences of failing to voluntarily depart, one must give up voluntary departure and its benefits. If the motion to re-open is denied, the individual has lost out on voluntary departure and is subject to a removal order and its 10 year bar on re-entry.

The decision may actually have limited affect because the USCIS has proposed a regulation by which the filing of a motion to re-open would automatically terminate an order of voluntary departure, something the Court said “warrants respectful consideration.”


June 17, 2008

Khat Use and Immigrant Visas

It’s not news that will affect a great many people but it’s interesting nonetheless. AILA has reported that Terrence West, the U.S. Consul in Sana'a, Yemen, has provided some guidance on dealing with the issue of khat use-immigrant visa ineligibility.

Khat is a controlled substance in the U.S. (and many other countries) and if it is used more than a single time, then the visa applicant is going to be considered a drug addict or drug abuser and consequently he or she will be determined to be ineligible for an immigrant visa under INA Section 212(a)(1)(A)(iv).

The statement issued by Mr. West is as follows:

The determination of ineligibility under INA Section 212(a)(1)(A)(iv) is made based upon the results of the panel physician's exam. Due to the prevalence of khat use in Yemen, and after consultation with the CDC and State Department Visa Office, we have instructed our panel physicians to inquire about khat use during the immigrant visa medical exam. If the applicant admits to more than a single use of khat, they are classed as a drug addict or abuser. Under current CDC guidelines, more than a single use of khat or any other controlled substance must result in a finding of drug addiction or abuse. A single use of a controlled substance is considered experimentation and is not an ineligibility.

The procedure for showing non-use of khat is the same as for any other drug. The applicant must submit to periodic examinations by a panel physician over three years. If during the three year period there is no indication of khat use, the applicant's medical condition will be downgraded to a finding of remission, a Class B condition. Once a finding of remission is made, we can proceed with visa issuance once all other documentary qualifications have been met, such as a new medical exam or police certificate.

What makes the clarification interesting is that khat chewing in Yemen is, according to some experts, a way of life and a crucial part of Yemeni celebrations such as marriages. In fact, according to one observer, not using khat in Yemen results in social isolation. Its use is apparently common among men, women and even minors.

This isn’t a criticism of the consul’s policy which makes sense given the long term effects of khat use (especially when it’s use starts at an early age); it’s just an observation. Given its widespread us in Yemen, it must be very difficult to get an immigrant visa out of Yemen.

June 11, 2008

I-140 Premium Processing Applications Will Soon Be Accepted for Certain H-1B Workers

On June 11, 2008, the USCIS announced that starting June 16, 2008, it will accept I-907 Premium Processing requests for I-140 applications (Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker) that are filed on behalf of alien workers who are near the end of their sixth year in H-1B nonimmigrant status.

Requests for premium processing will be accepted for I-140 petitions that are filed on behalf of those who are 1) currently in an H-1B nonimmigrant status; 2) whose sixth year in H-1B status will end within 60 days; 3) who are only eligible for a further extension of H-1B nonimmigrant status under section 104(c) of AC21* and 4) who are ineligible to extend their H-1B status under section 106(a) of AC21**.

*Section 104(c) of AC21 permits someone in H-1B status to extend their stay in increments of up to three years if they are the beneficiary of an approved Form I-140 and if an immigrant visa is not immediately available.

**Section 106(a) of AC21 permits someone in H-1B status to extend their stay in increments of up to one year, provided the Form I-140 petition or underlying labor certification has been pending for at least 365 days.

This change will really help those who otherwise would not be able to maintain status while waiting for normal processing times for their I-140 and where because an immigrant visa is not immediately available, they would not be able to file their I-485 application to adjust to permanent residency status when their I-140 is filed.

With premium processing, the USCIS will make a decision on the I-140 within 15 calendar-days from the time of filing the I-907 request for such premium processing.


June 10, 2008

EAD Validity Period for Those with Pending Adjustment of Status Applications to Double from One Year to Two Years

On June 9, 2008, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff announced that EAD authorization periods for those with pending adjustment of status applications will soon be granted for two year periods rather than the current one year period. He announced the change in a “State of Immigration” address he gave with Commerce Secretary Gutierrez in Washington.

The change is a very welcome one. By doubling the validity period for work authorization, it will mean less expense (the filing fee for the I-765 alone is $340.00) and hassle for those with pending adjustment applications. The change is supposed to start later this month.

Here is the quote from Secretary Chertoff’s remarks:

“. . . I'm also pleased to announce that we will be extending the validity period of the employment authorization documents that we issue to individuals who are waiting adjustment of status to lawful permit residency or in colloquial phrase, the green card.

Currently, adjustment applications are granted employment authorization documents with only a one year maximum validity. Beginning later this month, we'll start issuing these documents with a two-year validity period for aliens who are waiting adjustment of status if their application is expected to be pending for more than a year.

This, again, is eliminating a persistent source of frustration for workers who are here, who have a pending adjustment application but have to go and renew their employment documents every single year. It's going to cut the paperwork there. . .”

May 13, 2008

Global Entry Pilot Program to Start at 3 Airports

On April 12, U.S. Customs and Border Protection began processing applications for the Global Entry pilot program. The program is intended to expedite processing for low-risk, frequent international travelers entering the United States.

The actual start of the program will be June 10 at JFK International in New York, George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston and Washington Dulles International Airport.

The Global Entry program will be available for U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who travel internationally on a frequent basis and who have no criminal record or customs or immigration offense.

Applications for enrollment in the Global Entry program are available through the Global On-Line Enrollment System (GOES) here Global Entry Program – Applications Are Available Now!

Basically, the process has three steps:

• An applicant must complete and submit an on-line application through GOES and pay a $100 fee. Pay.gov

• CBP officers will review the applicant’s information and conduct a background investigation.

• Finally, the applicant will undergo an interview with CBP officers at an Enrollment Center at JFK, Houston or Dulles Airports.

When the Global Entry passenger returns to the U.S. after international travel, he or she will be able to bypass the regular passport control line and go directly to the Global Entry kiosk. They will then insert their passport or U.S. permanent resident card into the document reader and be directed to electronically provide their fingerprints which will then be compared with biometric data already on file. Their digital photograph will also be taken.

The traveler will be prompted to answer several CBP declaration questions and then, once the process is successfully completed, he or she will get a transaction receipt which they will present to the CBP officer as they leave.

April 9, 2008

I-765 Work Authorization and New OPT Categories – You Must Use the New Form (Revision Date April 8, 2008) after March 30, 2008

Just a reminder that the USCIS has revised the I-765 Work Authorization form (the revision date is April 8, 2008) and the new form, which is filed by foreign nationals to obtain an EAD (Employment Authorization Document) must be used as of March 31, 2008. The new, revised I-765 include a change that is relevant to F-1 students seeking OPT-based employment authorization and the change is a result of the recently announced Rule that provides for a 17 month extension for certain OPT students.

Here are the new USCIS instructions for the revised I-765.

The prior eligibility code (c)(3)(i) will no longer be used on the I-765. It has been replaced with the following three codes: (c)(3)(A) for pre-completion OPT; (c)(3)(B) for post-completion OPT; and (c)(3)(C) for a 17-month extension for an F-1 student who has received a degree in Science, Technology, Engineering, or Mathematics (STEM), that appears on the STEM designated Degree Program List published on the SEVP website.

If you are filing as a STEM student requesting the 17-month extension of your currently authorized optional practical training under (c)(3)(C), you must state on the new I-765 your degree, you must now include the employers name and E-Verify id number and you must submit a copy of your degree that must indicate your major field of study.

The new Form I-765 also eliminates the option of filing due to replacement of an EAD that was never received, and for re-issuance of an EAD that was issued with incorrect information due to a USCIS error. If you require a new EADs for either of these two specific reasons, you must contact the specific office that processed the initial EAD or call the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.


March 13, 2008

Visa Waiver to be Extended to Estonia and Latvia by the End of This Year

Citizens of Estonia and Latvia are on their way to being able to travel visa-free to the United States. On March 12, 2008, each country signed a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. on visas and increased air security which will eventually lead to visa-free travel for their citizens to the U.S. under the Visa Waiver Program.

The bilateral visa waiver deals are controversial with European Union officials based in Brussels who want to be the sole negotiators in convincing the U.S. to extend the Visa Waiver Program to all 27 EU member nations. They are not happy with bilateral deals like these. But Estonia and Latvia are only doing what the Czech Republic did earlier this year and what Hungary is expected to do later this year. They are among the 12 countries that have joined the EU since 2004 (all former communist nations in eastern Europe) that are frustrated with Brussels’ slow progress on the issue of visa waivers.

The bottom line is that by the end of this year citizens of Estonia and Latvia should no longer need visas to travel to the United States.

The Visa Waiver Program, which was established in 1986, allows nationals of certain countries to travel to the United States for tourism or business for stays of 90 days or less without obtaining a visa. The whole point is to eliminate unnecessary barriers/red tape to travel and encourage tourism. Countries qualify for the program if they do things such as provide reciprocal visa-free travel for U.S. citizens, issue secure machine-readable passports and have a very low rate of nationals who are denied admission to the U.S. or who otherwise violate the terms of their admission to the U.S.

March 11, 2008

Indonesians in Philadelphia Should be Aware of 2007 Human Rights Practices Reports Released by U.S. State Department

On March 11, 2008, the Department of State released its Country Reports for 2007 on Human Rights Practices for 196 different nations.

The 196 reports consist of summaries of human rights practices in countries organized by region: Africa, East Asia and the Pacific, Europe and Eurasia, the Near East and North Africa, South and Central Asia, and the Western Hemisphere.

For the many Indonesians in the Philadelphia Pennsylvania region who are seeking political asylum, here is the specific Human Rights Report on Indonesia. It's amazing to me how difficult it still is for Indonesians to be granted asylum when the 2007 Report begins:

"The government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, weak legal institutions, limited resources, and insufficient political will prevented accountability for serious abuses that occurred in the past. Problems during the year included: killings by security forces; vigilantism; harsh prison conditions; impunity for prison authorities; arbitrary detentions; corruption in the judicial system; some limitations on free speech and on peaceful assembly; interference with freedom of religion, sometimes with the complicity of local officials; intimidation of human rights groups by security forces; serious instances of violence and sexual abuse against women and children; trafficking in persons; forced labor; and failure to enforce labor standards and worker rights."

Here is the text of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's statement on all the Reports.

March 4, 2008

Unauthorized Employment – Executives and Managers are Being Indicted and Convicted. ICE is Not Fooling Around

In the space of about one week, word comes from ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) that big sentences were handed down in Federal Court in Florida in the Rosenbaum-Cunningham International (RCI) immigration scam and that big indictments were returned against five current managers in a New York case involving Pallet Management Division of IFCO Systems North America.

Work place raids, in which unauthorized unskilled workers are arrested, detained and then placed in removal proceedings often make headlines. However, the RCI and IFCO matters should be reminders to business executives and managers that if they break immigration laws, they are going to get hammered.

In the RCI matter, the company’s former president, a former vice-president and the former controller (who all previously entered guilty pleas on harboring illegal aliens and conspiracy to defraud the U.S. charges) were sentenced on March 3 to 120 months, 51 months and 30 months respectively. All three were also held to be jointly and severally liable for evaded federal taxes and were each ordered to pay well over $15 million. They had all previously been ordered to turn over bank accounts, life insurance policies, etc.

Is there any advantage that an executive thinks his company might be getting by hiring unauthorized workers that is worth risking incarceration and penalties like that?

In the IFCO matter, the managers have been charged with Conspiracy to Harbor Illegal Aliens, to Encourage and Induce Illegal Aliens, and to Transport Illegal Aliens. The job titles of the defendants are Vice President for New Market Development, New Market Development Manager, Operations Manager for New Market Development and Human Resources Manager. The investigation began in February 2005, when an employee at an IFCO plant called ICE to report that Hispanic workers were ripping up W-2 forms; the employee asked a manager about it and he was told that they were doing it because they were illegal aliens, had fake social security cards and didn’t intend to file their taxes.

Arrests soon followed and nearly 1,200 workers at IFCO’s 40 nationwide plants were detained. Seven IFCO managers later pled guilty to felony and misdemeanor charges and they are awaiting sentencing.

The newly announced charges carry a ten-year maximum term of imprisonment (although the maximum on the aiding and abetting charge is five years) and all the counts have a maximum potential fine of $250,000.

Executive and managers are clearly on notice that ICE is serious about enforcing immigration laws and not just against the individual unauthorized workers. Companies need to comply with I-9 regulations and if there is any thought that maybe a company has been a little lax with the I-9 forms, the company should get a good immigration attorney to come in and do a private I-9 audit and to train your HR people on I-9 requirements.

ICE is not fooling around.

February 19, 2008

The United States Recognizes Kosovo

In follow up to my posting of Sunday regarding Kosovo, President Bush recognized Kosovo’s declaration of independence from Serbia and announced that the United States will establish full diplomatic relations with the new nation.

The announcement follows recognition of Kosovo by France, Britain, Italy, Germany and certain Muslim states, such as Afghanistan.

February 1, 2008

Federal Express and Immigration Filing Deadlines - Track It!

On January 31, 2008, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals granted an asylum applicant’s Petition for Review in an interesting case involving the use of Federal Express to send a Notice of Appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Notice of Appeal was sent on time but it wasn’t received by the Board of Immigration Appeals on time. The case is Vasquez Salazar v. Mukasey.

An Order of Removal was entered against an asylum applicant by an Immigration Judge on July 18, 2006. The applicant’s attorney sent a Notice of Appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals on August 15, 2006 by Federal Express for guaranteed next day delivery (the 30 day filing deadline was August 17, 2006). Had the Fed Ex envelope in fact arrived on August 16, 2006, the appeal of course would have been timely filed. The problem was that the Fed Ex envelope inexplicably sat at the Fed Ex facility in Tennessee for 5 days and didn’t arrive at the BIA until August 23, 2006. The BIA then dismissed the appeal as being filed late.

The applicant filed a Motion for Reconsideration and he submitted the Federal Express airbill as evidence of timely mailing. But the BIA denied the Motion saying it didn’t observe the “mailbox rule” and that it had no authority to extend the appeal deadline beyond the 30 days as called for in the rules. The applicant then appealed to Federal Court.

In a common sense and proper decision, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the BIA had abused its discretion in simply denying the applicant’s motion without considering whether the Fed Ex problem may excuse the late filing . The Court sent the case back to the BIA, instructing it to consider whether the applicant’s circumstances were “extraordinary and unique” and would therefore justify extending the deadline.

The Court cited another of its recent decisions, Siby v. Gonzales, in which a Notice of Appeal was sent to the BIA via Federal Express but not actually received until 21 months later. In that case, too much time went by between mailing and delivery and importantly, during that entire 21 month period, neither the applicant nor the applicant’s attorney made any effort to contact either Federal Express or the BIA to find out about the status of his appeal. The Court held in Siby that the delay was not extraordinary or unique and that appeal was denied.

But in this case, the Court said, there was no such lengthy delay—really only a few days. So now the BIA has the case back so that it can consider whether the case presents the “extraordinary and unique” circumstances that justify the late filing.

The case highlights the need to track Federal Express mailings. I make it my practice to track a Fed Ex mailing not only later in the same day of mailing (so that I know that it was picked up) but also on the next day so that I know that it was delivered and signed for. Fed Ex tracking couldn’t be easier—just go to the Federal Express website, type in the number of the receipt and you get an immediate update on where the package is. In the unlikely event there is a problem (and I can only recall one instance in which I have ever had a Fed Ex delivery problem), you’ll know it right away and can take whatever action is necessary with both Fed Ex and with the Court.