SEVP releases 2015 international student data, launches interactive mapping tool.

“SEVIS by the Numbers,” a quarterly report on international students studying in the United States, was released Wednesday by the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP), part of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). The report highlights February 2015 data from the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), a Web-based system that includes information about international students, exchange visitors and their dependents while they are in the United States. New this edition, users can also visit the Study in the States website to review international student data from “SEVIS by the Numbers” via an interactive mapping tool.

Based on data extracted from SEVIS Feb. 6, 2015, 1.13 million international students, using an F (academic) or M (vocational) visa, were enrolled at nearly 8,979 U.S. schools. This marked a 14.18 percent increase in international students when compared to January 2014 data. The number of certified schools remained relatively static, increasing just more than one percent, during the same time period.  

Seventy-six percent of all international students were from Asia. The top 10 countries of citizenship for international students included: China, India, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, Mexico and Brazil.

In February 2015, only 30 SEVP-certified schools had more than 5,000 international students enrolled. The University of Southern California, Purdue University, Columbia University, the University of Illinois and New York University ranked one through five among U.S. schools with the most international students. More than 10,000 international students were enrolled at each of these schools.

Thirty-seven percent of international students studying in the United States, equating to more than 400,000 individuals, were enrolled in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) coursework in February. Eighty-six percent of international students pursuing STEM studies were from Asia.

The February 2015 report includes a special section about women pursuing STEM studies. In the past five years, the total number of female international students studying STEM fields increased more than 68 percent, from 76,638 in February 2010 to 128,807 in February 2015. Sixty-two percent of these female international students were from China and India. Also since 2010, the number of female international students pursuing STEM-focused master’s degrees increased 114 percent. Thirty-four percent of all female students pursuing STEM studies were enrolled at schools in California, New York and Texas.

Other key points from the report include: 76 percent of SEVP-certified schools had between zero and 50 international students; 73 percent of international students were enrolled in bachelor’s, master’s or doctoral programs; and California, New York and Florida had the most SEVP-certified schools. A school must be SEVP-certified before it can enroll international students who are in the United States on a student visa.
The full report can be viewed here. Report data was extracted from SEVIS Feb. 6, 2015. It provides a point in time snapshot of data related to international students studying in the United States. Data for the previous “SEVIS by the Numbers” was extracted from SEVIS Oct. 7, 2014.

In addition to the report, on Wednesday, SEVP launched an interactive mapping tool where users can explore and drill down international student data from “SEVIS by the Numbers.” This information is viewable at the continent, region and country level and includes information on gender and education levels for international students from geographical areas across the globe.

SEVP monitors approximately one million international students pursuing academic or vocational studies (F and M visa holders) in the United States and their dependents. It also certifies schools and programs that enroll these students. The U.S. Department of State monitors exchange visitors (J visa holders) and their dependents, and oversees exchange visitor programs.

Learn more about SEVP at www.ICE.gov/SEVP. 
You can read the complete report here.

This case proves once again that O visas (visas for individuals with Extraordinary Ability or Achievement) could be tricky and sometimes unpredictable. This O-1B (extraordinary ability visa in arts) was approved and extended two times prior to subsequent denial of another extension.

A popular thoroughbred racehorse trainer has accused the USCIS in a D.C. federal court of engaging in “capricious” and “arbitrary” behavior by denying an assistant trainer an extension of his nonimmigrant worker status after previously granting it without incident.

Mott Thoroughbred Stables Inc. said in its Friday complaint that by surprisingly and abruptly denying an O-1B petition extension to an “indispensable employee” on which the famed stables has relied since he began working there in 2010, the USCIS has caused irreparable harm to Mott Stables’ multimillion-dollar horse-training business.

The complaint asks the court to compel the USCIS to set aside the petition denial and promptly re-adjudicate the petition with deference to the prior approvals. It also asks the court to order the agency to postpone the effective date of its denial of the petition for assistant horse trainer Rodolphe Brisset and grant a temporary visa status pending the outcome of the instant suit.

“The USCIS failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the denial, failed to cite relevant authority for its decision and failed to clearly articulate the reasons for its abrupt departure from past and ongoing practice of approving O-1B petitions for horse trainers,” the complaint says.

The lawsuit says the unsuccessful petition is virtually the same as the ones USCIS previously approved, and that the agency only now has decided that its past approvals were a “material error” on the part of the agency, “in contravention of internal agency guidance on deference to prior approvals.”

Petitioner also asked the court to open up limited discovery to ascertain the agency’s grounds for denying the company’s petition in light of the two previous approvals of the same petition.

Mott Stables is challenging an October 2014 decision by the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office to uphold the denial of an O-1B extension to the trainer.

After two successful approvals, in 2013 the USCIS sent Mott Stables a request for evidence ( RFE )regarding the international acclaim and recognition Brisset has received a horse trainer, according to the complaint.

Among the types of evidence Mott Stables could hand over was “comparable evidence” of Brisset’s distinction as a prominent horse trainer, and in February 2014 the company sent to the USCIS a letter signed by six expert member of the equine community attesting to Brisset’s skills, according to the complaint. Mott Stables also explained the “unique nature” of the thoroughbred racing industry and why the trainer plays “an essential and critical role” in successful training operations, the complaint says.

In March 2014, the USCIS denied the petition, saying Mott Stables hadn’t demonstrated that Brisset had extraordinary ability in the field of endeavor nor that he had sustained national or international acclaim, according to the complaint.

On appeal, Mott Stables argued that a Department of Homeland Security memo says that deference must be given to a prior determination that an individual is eligible for a particular nonimmigrant classification, where extension of that nonimmigrant petition’s validity “involves the same parties and the same underlying facts,” the complaint says.

Mott Stables argued that the USCIS had not explicitly said why it refused the petition and that changed circumstances and new material information — possibly dispositive developments — did not form the basis of the agency’s decision.

When the USCIS’ appellate body AAO upheld the denial, it ruled that the memo's deference order didn’t apply when there was a "material error," which in this case was that since 2010 the agency had incorrectly found that Brisset’s occupation fell within the O-1B classification, according to the complaint.

Mott Stables said in its Friday complaint that this was the first time the USCIS had ever ruled that Brisset’s horse-trainer position did not qualify as a creative activity or endeavor, such that he could have been classified as an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts.

- Law360, Mar. 10, 2015.

USCIS published a new L-1B Adjudications Policy, effective date August 31, 2015.  

This Memo is open for public comments. See here. 

The L-1B adjudications memorandum, which clarifies for USCIS officers how L-1B petitioners may demonstrate that an employee has specialized knowledge, is posted online for a 45-day public feedback period.  The memorandum will go into effect on August 31, 2015.

This policy memorandum provides guidance on the adjudication of the L-1B classification, which permits multinational companies to transfer employees who possess “specialized knowledge” from their foreign operations to their operations in the United States.  It provides consolidated and authoritative guidance on the L-1B program, superseding and rescinding certain prior L-1B memoranda.  

Upon final publication, the memorandum will update chapter 32.6(e) of the Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM)." USCIS, Mar. 24, 2015.

A lawsuit was filed on behalf of 11 Filipino workers at L’Amande French Bakery, Los Angeles, CA, who were fraudulently lured by their employer to the United States on E-2 visas and then subjected to exploitative working conditions including forced labor, severe wage theft, immigration-related retaliation, and national origin discrimination.  
(L’Amande is a popular bakery in the Los Angeles-area with stores in Beverly Hills and Torrance.  The owners of L’Amande are Ana Moitinho de Almeida, the daughter of a wealthy and powerful government official in the Philippines, and her husband Goncalo).

The E-2 visa provides temporary work authorization for immigrants with specialized or supervisory skills who are employed by a foreign national who has invested a substantial amount of capital in a U.S.-based business. Like other temporary (or guest) worker visas, E-2 visa holders are dependent on their employers for legal status, with few – and in this case no – protections against employer exploitation and retaliation for asserting workplace rights. In the lawsuit, the workers were recruited under false pretenses for their specialized pastry chef skills, but were forced to do menial labor once they arrived in the United States.

The employer used threats of debt, deportation, and financial ruin in the Philippines to maintain their economic exploitation of the workers while paying legally mandated wages to local workers. After the workers arrived in the United States, the Almeidas threatened them with a significant debt of $11,000 each unless they agreed to work under these illegal conditions for at least three years.  After an investigation by the California Labor Commissioner's Office revealed egregious wage and hour abuses, including 14-hour work days for more than three consecutive months and wages of less than $3 per hour, the Almeidas retaliated against the workers when they refused to lie about their working conditions. As the lawsuit details, half of the workers were fired after they cooperated in the labor investigation. Since the E-2 visa is bound to the employer, the termination has left the workers without a livelihood. Yet, they fear returning to the Philippines because of what the politically powerful Almeida family will do to them there.

“When Ana promised me $2,000 a month to work at her bakery in the United States, I jumped at the chance to provide a better future for my sons than I had. I had no idea that I would be forced to work for 12 hours a day for five weeks straight or that I would be forced to act as a general servant for the Almeidas. When I stood up for my rights and refused to lie to the labor investigator about the conditions I was working in, Ana threatened to sue me and ruin my life and that of my family in the Philippines. Now that she has terminated me, I worry she will make good on her threats, and I worry for my own safety and that of my family if I return to the Philippines. But I feel I have to fight back, because my family is counting on me.”

The lawsuit alleges claims for labor exploitation, discrimination, unfair immigration-related practices, trafficking, and racketeering based on visa fraud, retaliation, and seeks to enjoin ongoing unfair practices. Some of the wage and hour claims alone for the 11 workers amount to more than $700,000, and we will pursue additional damages and penalties based on the many legal claims.

“What is particularly egregious about what the Almeidas did here is that they engaged in a scheme to defraud the U.S. government and the workers, lying about the workers’ wages and conditions,” said Philip Wang, one of the attorneys for the workers at Latham & Watkins LLP. “It wasn’t until the workers arrived in the U.S. that they were threatened with substantial debt unless they kept working. No one should be allowed to profit in this way, especially when it is on the backs of workers who are alone and new to the U.S., and have poor English skills and limited legal recourse.”

Advancing Justice – LA is also seeking immigration relief for the workers, U visas, as victims of labor trafficking, coercive labor practices, and potential persecution if they return to the Philippines. 

The filed complaint can be found here." - Advancing Justice - LA, Mar. 19, 2015.

Beverly Hills bakery workers say they were paid as little as $2 an hour - L.A. Times, Mar. 19, 2015.

China EB-5 Visa Category To Retrogress by June 2015, and a Two-Year Backlog Expected.

The U.S. Department of State's Visa Bulletin for April 2015 explains that continued demand for EB-5 green cards by immigrant investors from China will require a retrogression for the China EB-5 visa category by June 2015 to hold number use within the annual numerical limit. 

It's also expected that the retrogression will be about two years (a two-year backlog).

The bulletin is available at US Dept of State website here. 

DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP CHARTS: 

How children born abroad to a US citizen mother or father acquire or derive US citizenship through their parents, their mother or father. How children used to derive US citizenship under the old laws (which is still relevant because it applies to those children who were born during those timeframes). 


Please see charts on acquisition/derivation of citizenship here: http://www.ilrc.org/resources/naturalization-quick-reference-charts

This is important news for attorneys or those who represent clients in front of DHS/USCIS/ICE.

USCIS has published a revised Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Accredited Representative. 

Attorneys and legal representatives accredited by the Board of Immigration Appeals use Form G-28 to notify USCIS of their legal representation in a given case. Form G-28 must be signed by the legal representative and by the applicant/petitioner/requestor. When a valid Form G-28 is on file, USCIS communicates with the legal representative. If you sign and submit an expired form G-28, USCIS will not enter you as an attorney of record.

**New Form G-28 Changes**

The revised Form G-28, with the 03/04/2015 edition date, includes two new boxes that allow the applicant/petitioner/requestor to tell USCIS whether they want to receive their notices and secure documents directly, or whether they want USCIS to send them to their legal representative. 

The revised Form G-28 also collects more biographic data, email addresses and cell phone numbers.

Beginning April 13, 2015, USCIS will not accept earlier versions of Form G-28. If an applicant, petitioner, or requestor submits an application or benefit request with a previous/expired version of Form G-28, USCIS will accept only the application or request as long as it meets the acceptance criteria. In this situation, they will not accept the Form G-28 and will send all notices and secure documents only to the applicant/petitioner/requestor. Please remember to start using new edition of form G-28. It's available at USCIS website. See the link below.

For More Information Visit the Filing Your Form G-28 Web page to learn more about the revised form.

http://www.uscis.gov/forms/filing-your-form-g-28

UPDATE 03/06/2015:

Nebraska's ban on same-sex marriage will remain in place while the state appeals a federal judge's decision to strike it down. 
The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday issued a stay of U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon's decision this week to end the ban.
It means that no same-sex marriages will be allowed starting March 9th, as was expected under the federal judge ruling.
************
A federal judge has struck down Nebraska's ban on same-sex marriage. Effective March 9, 2015, same-sex couples in Nebraska can marry.

As a practical matter, a US citizen petitioner in the same-sex marriage in Nebraska can now petition for his/her spouse's permanent residency (aka green card) in the United States.

According to an injunction filed in federal court Monday, Senior U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon said "all relevant state officials are ordered to treat same-sex couples the same as different sex couples in the context of processing a marriage license or determining the rights, protections, obligations or benefits of marriage."

The order is effective March 9 2015 at 8 a.m.

Within moments of Judge Bataillon's injunction, the State of Nebraska filed an appeal.

The U.S. Supreme Court announced January 17, 2015 that it would decide whether same-sex couples have a right to marry everywhere in America under the Constitution. A decision is expected by late June.

Nebraska is the 38th state in the USA to allow same-sex marriage.

Read more at: 

http://www.ketv.com/politics/judge-rules-on-nebraskas-samesex-marriage-ban/31519918?utm_source=Social&utm_medium=FBPAGE&utm_campaign=ketv7&Content%20&linkId=12636249