On August 17 2015, USCIS published L-1B adjudications policy memorandum. New memo 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. New memo provides consolidated guidance on the L-1B program, superseding and rescinding all prior L-1B memoranda. This memo applies only to L-1B visas/employees with specialized knowledge (not L-1A visas). "Preponderance of the Evidence" Standard of Proof: a petitioner seeking approval of the L-1B visa, must establish that they meets each eligibility requirement of the L-1B classification by preponderance of evidence. This standard of proof is lower than that of "clear and convincing evidence" or "beyond a reasonable doubt" standards. Elements of the L-1B Classification: In order to establish eligibility for approval, the L-1B petitioner must show: (1) that the beneficiary possesses “specialized knowledge”; (2) that the position offered involves the “specialized knowledge” held by the beneficiary; and (3) that the beneficiary has at least one continuous year of employment abroad in a managerial, executive, or specialized knowledge capacity with the petitioning employer and/or any qualifying organization (collectively referred to as the “petitioning organization”) within the preceding 3 years. If the beneficiary will be located primarily at the workplace of an unaffiliated company, the petitioner also must establish that the beneficiary is eligible for L-1B classification under the requirements of the L-1 Visa Reform Act, discussed below in section VI. The new memo provides definition of "specialized knowledge". A petitioner can demonstrate “specialized knowledge” by establishing either one of two statutory criteria. Under the statute, a beneficiary is deemed to have specialized knowledge if he or she has: (1) a “special” knowledge of the company product and its application in international markets; or (2) an “advanced” level of knowledge of the processes and procedures of the company. INA 214(c)(2)(B). The corresponding regulation similarly defines specialized knowledge in terms of “special” or “advanced” knowledge: [S]pecial knowledge possessed by an individual of the petitioning organization’s product, service, research, equipment, techniques, management, or other interests and its application in international markets, or an advanced level of knowledge or expertise in the organization’s processes and procedures. 8 CFR 214.2(l)(1)(ii)(D). Other important things to keep in mind: >>Specialized knowledge generally cannot be commonly held, lacking in complexity, or easily imparted to other individuals. >>Specialized knowledge need not be proprietary or unique to the petitioning organization. >>The L-1B classification does not involve a test of the U.S. labor market. >>Specialized knowledge workers need not occupy managerial or similar positions or command higher compensation than their peers. The memo notes the following "non-exhaustive" list of factors USCIS may consider when determining whether a beneficiary’s knowledge is specialized:
Other evidence that a petitioner may submit to demonstrate that an individual’s knowledge is special or advanced, includes, but is not limited to: • Documentation of training, work experience, or education establishing the number of years the individual has been using or developing the claimed specialized knowledge as an employee of the petitioning organization or in the industry; • Evidence of the impact, if any, the transfer of the individual would have on the petitioning organization’s U.S. operations; • Evidence that the alien is qualified to contribute significantly to the U.S. operation’s knowledge of foreign operating conditions as a result of knowledge not generally found in the petitioning organization’s U.S. operations; • Contracts, statements of work, or other documentation that shows that the beneficiary possesses knowledge that is particularly beneficial to the petitioning organization’s competitiveness in the marketplace; • Evidence, such as correspondence or reports, establishing that the beneficiary has been employed abroad in a capacity involving assignments that have significantly enhanced the petitioning organization’s productivity, competitiveness, image, or financial position; • Personnel or in-house training records that establish that the beneficiary’s claimed specialized knowledge normally can be gained only through prior experience or training with the petitioning organization; • Curricula and training manuals for internal training courses, financial documents, or other evidence that may demonstrate that the beneficiary possesses knowledge of a product or process that cannot be transferred or taught to another individual without significant economic cost or inconvenience; *Evidence of patents, trademarks, licenses, or contracts awarded to the petitioning organization based on the beneficiary’s work, or similar evidence that the beneficiary has knowledge of a process or a product that either is sophisticated or complex, or of a highly technical nature, although not necessarily proprietary or unique to the petitioning organization; and • Payroll documents, federal or state wage statements, documentation of other forms of compensation, resumes, organizational charts, or similar evidence documenting the positions held and the compensation provided to the beneficiary and parallel employees in the petitioning organization. A petitioner may submit any other evidence it chooses. In all cases, USCIS will review the entire record to determine whether the petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that the beneficiary has specialized knowledge under the totality of the circumstances. Merely stating that a beneficiary’s knowledge is somehow different from others or greatly developed does not, in and of itself, establish that he or she possesses specialized knowledge. Ultimately, it is the weight and type of evidence that establishes whether the beneficiary possesses specialized knowledge. USCIS can issue a RFE (Request for Evidence) for various reasons to I-129 Petitioner. Denial rate is high, RFE rate is even higher for L-1B petition. The new memo is intended to help to solve many difficulties with obtaining a L-1B visa for qualifying applicants. See August 17, 2015 memo at http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2015/L-1B_Memorandum_8_14_15_draft_for_FINAL_4pmAPPROVED.pdf In Russian: Российская газета "Новые Известия" опубликовала дельную статью про опасность "бесплатных юридических консультаций". Журналисты проинтервьюировали некоторых моих московских партнеров и коллег. Как известно, бесплатный сыр бывает только в мышеловке. Ты получаешь то, за что заплатил. Хороший компетентный и этический адвокат НЕ будет предоставлять консультацию (давать юридический совет) бесплатно. В оказании юридических услуг самое главное - это получить правильный совет и знать что делать и как поступить. Среди "юридических фирм" и "иммиграционных консультантов" попадается немало мошенников или недобросовестных и малограмотных "специалистов". Особенно много вебсайтов на интернете, которые в поисковике выходят в самом начале как реклама (так как вебсайт платит за такое выгодное размещение) и нелицензированных "иммиграционных консультантов" или "нотариусов", которые предлагают "первую" консультацию бесплатно и готовы перезвонить потенциальному клиенту в течение 5 минут. Что следует дальше, об этом люди не задумываются. А им навязывается контракт на завышенную сумму, с ненужными сервисами или предлагаются ненужные или вредные для дела действия (которые дорого стоят). После предоставления бесплатной консультации, такому специалисту ведь нужно как-то заработать на клиенте (на которого было потрачено время) -- если уж не брать оплату за консультацию, то ее используют как ловушку для доверчивых граждан, готовых повестись на обман. Следует иметь в виду, что хороший опытный адвокат не будет и не имеет права давать "гарантии" успеха или гарантии выигрыша вашего дела. Опытный адвокат ценит свое и ваше время, и для того, чтобы проконсультировать клиента ей/ему нужно изучить ваши обстоятельства и проанализировать возможные варианты и осложнения перед тем как давать платный (ни в коем случае не бесплатный совет). Хорошая статья обо всем этом в Новых Известиях, с консультациями моих Московских партнеров и коллег. On November 20, 2014, the President announced a series of executive actions. However, not all of these initiatives have been implemented, and USCIS is not accepting any DAPA or expanded DACA applications at this time. Beware of anyone who offers to help you submit an application or a request for any of these actions before they are available. You could become a victim of an immigration scam. If you need legal advice on immigration matters, make sure that the person you rely on is an attorney who is authorized to give you legal advice. Only an attorney or an accredited representative working for a Board of Immigration Appeals-recognized organization can give you legal advice. An immigration attorney can be licensed in any state because immigration law is federal law. It's important to consult an experienced and knowledgeable attorney before submitting any immigration applications. The Internet, newspapers, radio, community bulletin boards and local businesses storefronts are filled with advertisements offering immigration help. Not all of this information is from attorneys and accredited representatives. There is a lot of information that comes from organizations and individuals who are not authorized to give you legal advice, such as “notarios” and other unauthorized representatives. The wrong help can hurt. Here is some important information that can help you avoid common immigration scams. Here are some examples of common immigration scams: **Telephone Scams**. Do not fall victim to telephone scammers posing as USCIS personnel or other government officials. In most instances, scammers will:
If you have been a victim of this telephone scam, please report it to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Learn more about telephone scams and telephone scammers’ techniques by visiting Federal Trade Commission-Telemarketing-Scams. **"Notario Publico"**. In many Latin American countries, the term “notario publico” (for “notary public”) stands for something very different than what it means in the United States. In many Spanish-speaking nations, “notarios” are powerful attorneys with special legal credentials. In the U.S., however, notary publics are people appointed by state governments to witness the signing of important documents and administer oaths. "Notarios publico,” are not authorized to provide you with any legal services related to immigration. Please see the National Notary Association website "What is a Notary Public" for more information. **Local Businesses who are not law firms and not attorneys or lawyers**. Some businesses in your community “guarantee” they can get you benefits such as a:
**Dot-com websites - operated by non-attorneys or people not authorized to give legal advice**. Some websites offering step-by-step guidance on completing a USCIS application or petition will claim to be affiliated with USCIS. Many of these websites are scammers or fraudsters, often taking money for blank forms or minimal assistance without attorney supervision. USCIS has its own official website: www.uscis.gov with:
Do not pay to a non-attorney (not a lawyer) for help with immigration paperwork, applications, affidavit. Oftentimes, they give you wrong advice and can potentially damage your chances of ever becoming a permanent resident (getting a green card). **Green Card Lottery or DV Lottery scams**. Once a year in fall, the Department of State (DOS) makes 50,000 diversity visas (DVs) available via random selection to persons meeting strict eligibility requirements and who come from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States. During this time or often around the year, it is common for immigration scammers to advertise in emails or websites that reference either the:
The only way to apply for the DV lottery is through an official government application process (Department of State website, and only when it's open, during an application period which is usually in October-November only). DOS does not send emails to applicants. On or after May 1st, you can visit the Department of State website to verify if you are actually a winner in the DV lottery. If need help, consult a licensed attorney (not one of the "green card lottery" websites). **INS doesn't exist. It's been replaced by DHS and USCIS**. To this day, some local businesses, websites, "notarios" and individuals make reference to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). This agency no longer exists! If someone refers to USCIS as "INS", it's a sign that they are not an attorney, but rather someone unqualified with little knowledge in immigration matters. INS was dismantled on March 1, 2003, and most of its functions were transferred from the Department of Justice to three new components within the newly formed Department of Homeland Security. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is the component that grants immigration benefits. The other two components are U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. All official correspondence regarding your immigration case will come from USCIS. USCIS will communicate with you and your attorney by mail, by mailing you notices, approved work permit and green card through USPS (postal service). If you need a legal assistance, we will be glad to help. Our contact information is here. Read here. Applicants from all over the world who registered for the DV-2016 program were selected at random from 11,391,134 qualified entries (17,573,350 with derivatives) received during the application period that ran from noon, Eastern Daylight Time on Wednesday, October 1, 2014 until noon, Eastern Daylight Time on Monday, November 3, 2014. The visas have been apportioned among six geographic regions with a maximum of seven percent available to persons born in any single country. The Kentucky Consular Center registered and notified the winners of the DV-2016 diversity lottery. Approximately 91,563 applicants have been registered and notified and may now make an application for an immigrant visa (so called"selectees" or "winners"). Some of the first *50,000 persons registered will not pursue their cases to visa issuance, this larger number (91,563 selectees) should insure that all DV-2016 numbers will be used during fiscal year 2016 (October 1, 2015 until September 30, 2016). During the visa interview, principal applicants must provide proof of a high school education or its equivalent, or show two years of work experience in an occupation that requires at least two years of training or experience within the past five years. Those selected will need to act on their immigrant visa applications quickly. Applicants should follow the instructions in their notification letter and must fully complete the information requested. Registrants living legally in the United States who wish to apply for adjustment of status instead of consular processing of their visas, must apply through USCIS Department of Homeland Security (** Please note that you have to be eligible for adjustment of status. Therefore, if you were selected as a winner in the Green Card lottery and you live in the United States, it's advisable to consult an experienced attorney before applying for your green card). Once the total *50,000 visa numbers have been used, the program for fiscal year 2016 will end. Selected applicants (aka "selectees" or "winners") who do not receive visas by September 30, 2016 will derive no further benefit from their DV-2016 registration. Similarly, spouses and children accompanying or following to join DV-2016 principal applicants are only entitled to derivative diversity visa status until September 30, 2016. Section 203(c) of the INA provides up to 55,000 immigrant visas each fiscal year to permit additional immigration opportunities for persons from countries with low admissions during the previous five years. The NACARA stipulates that beginning with DV-99, and for as long as necessary, up to 5,000 of the 55,000 annually-allocated diversity visas will be made available for use under the NACARA program. This resulted in reduction of the DV-2015 annual limit to 50,000. DV visas are divided among six geographic regions. No one country can receive more than seven percent of the available diversity visas in any one year. P.S. Our office would be happy to assist you with your DV visa application or adjustment of status should you be selected as a winner. Please email us to schedule a phone or Skype consultation. Please remember that a visa must be issued prior to September 30th of the current fiscal year (09-30-2016 for DV-2016 winners). No visas will be issued after this date. If selected as a winner you should act fast and submit your applications and required documents in a timely matter. Assistance of a qualified and experienced immigration attorney would be of great help to many. The following is the statistical breakdown by foreign-state chargeability of those registered for the DV-2016 program: AFRICA ALGERIA 1,952 ETHIOPIA 4,000 NIGER 102 ANGOLA 108 GABON 32 RWANDA 412 BENIN 914 GAMBIA, THE 67 SAO TOME AND PRINCIPE 2 BOTSWANA 4 GHANA 3,179 SENEGAL 427 BURKINA FASO 199 GUINEA 1,818 SEYCHELLES 0 BURUNDI 208 GUINEA-BISSAU 4 SIERRA LEONE 2,141 CABO VERDE 6 KENYA 2,729 SOMALIA 272 CAMEROON 3,047 LESOTHO 5 SOUTH AFRICA 535 CENTRAL AFRICAN REP. 23 LIBERIA 4,430 SOUTH SUDAN 17 CHAD 40 LIBYA 240 SUDAN 3,216 COMOROS 3 MADAGASCAR 75 SWAZILAND 7 CONGO 124 MALAWI 17 TANZANIA 93 CONGO, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE 4,475 MALI 114 TOGO 1,241 COTE D’IVOIRE 1,129 MAURITANIA 15 TUNISIA 227 DJIBOUTI 92 MAURITIUS 41 UGANDA 453 EGYPT 4,024 MOROCCO 1,993 ZAMBIA 57 EQUATORIAL GUINEA 0 MOZAMBIQUE 11 ZIMBABWE 152 ERITREA 544 NAMIBIA 18 ASIA AFGHANISTAN 406 JAPAN 302 QATAR 42 BAHRAIN 13 JORDAN 349 SAUDI ARABIA 267 BHUTAN 22 NORTH KOREA 0 SINGAPORE 39 BRUNEI 1 KUWAIT 143 SRI LANKA 704 BURMA 236 LAOS 1 SYRIA 460 CAMBODIA 1,229 LEBANON 225 TAIWAN 297 HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMIN. REGION 151 MALAYSIA 95 THAILAND 73 INDONESIA 126 MALDIVES 3 TIMOR-LESTE 0 IRAN 4,501 MONGOLIA 185 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 103 IRAQ 330 NEPAL 3,801 YEMEN 724 ISRAEL 162 OMAN 12 EUROPE ALBANIA 1,931 GREECE 93 NORWAY 35 ANDORRA 0 HUNGARY 186 POLAND 629 ARMENIA 1,277 ICELAND 3 PORTUGAL 58 AUSTRIA 50 IRELAND 89 Macau 23 AZERBAIJAN 380 ITALY 410 ROMANIA 626 BELARUS 811 KAZAKHSTAN 376 RUSSIA 2,200 BELGIUM 47 KOSOVO 244 SAN MARINO 0 BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA 92 KYRGYZSTAN 209 SERBIA 283 BULGARIA 865 LATVIA 73 SLOVAKIA 70 CROATIA 67 LIECHTENSTEIN 0 SLOVENIA 33 CYPRUS 28 LITHUANIA 153 SPAIN 193 CZECH REPUBLIC 74 LUXEMBOURG 0 SWEDEN 108 DENMARK 35 MACEDONIA 258 SWITZERLAND 122 ESTONIA 40 MALTA 0 TAJIKISTAN 337 FINLAND 57 MOLDOVA 1,854 TURKEY 1,795 FRANCE 510 MONACO 0 TURKMENISTAN 124 French Polynesia 1 MONTENEGRO 8 UKRAINE 4,507 Saint Martin 1 NETHERLANDS 81 UZBEKISTAN 4,300 Wallis and Futuna 1 Aruba 4 VATICAN CITY 0 GEORGIA 571 Curacao 2 GERMANY 678 NORTHERN IRELAND 9 NORTH AMERICA BAHAMAS, THE 16 OCEANIA AUSTRALIA 832 NAURU 12 SAMOA 5 Cocos Islands 1 NEW ZEALAND 208 SOLOMON ISLANDS 0 FIJI 393 Cook Islands 4 TONGA 26 KIRIBATI 4 PALAU 4 TUVALU 0 MARSHALL ISLANDS 0 PAPUA NEW GUINEA 3 VANUATU 5 MICRONESIA, FEDERATED STATES OF 3 SOUTH AMERICA, CENTRAL AMERICA, AND THE CARIBBEAN ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA 0 DOMINICA 6 SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS 2 ARGENTINA 68 GRENADA 7 SAINT LUCIA 5 BARBADOS 0 GUATEMALA 31 SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES 7 BELIZE 0 GUYANA 14 SURINAME 3 BOLIVIA 49 HONDURAS 73 TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 51 CHILE 17 NICARAGUA 58 URUGUAY 21 COSTA RICA 50 PANAMA 5 VENEZUELA 1,038 CUBA 1,488 PARAGUAY 7 P.S. Natives of the following countries were not eligible to participate in DV-2016: Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, China (mainland-born, excluding Hong Kong S.A.R., Macau S.A.R., and Taiwan), Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, the Philippines, South Korea, United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland) and its dependent territories, and Vietnam. Our office would be happy to assist you with your DV visa application or adjustment of status should you be selected as a winner. Please email us to schedule a phone or Skype consultation. Please remember that a visa must be issued prior to September 30th of the current fiscal year (09-30-2016 for DV-2016 winners). No visas will be issued after this date. If selected as a winner you should act fast and submit your applications and required documents in a timely matter. Assistance of a qualified and experienced immigration attorney would be of great help to many. Big news for Cuba: on May 29, 2015, U.S. Department of State rescinded Cuba's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism. Cuba’s removal from the list of countries – now confined only to Iran, Sudan and Syria – is an important step in Obama's administration effort to move past the Cold War era hostility. In December 2014, the President instructed the Secretary of State to immediately launch a review of Cuba’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, and provide a report to him within six months regarding Cuba’s support for international terrorism. On April 8, 2015, the Secretary of State completed that review and recommended to the President that Cuba no longer be designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism. Accordingly, on April 14, 2015, the President submitted to Congress the statutorily required report indicating the Administration’s intent to rescind Cuba’s State Sponsor of Terrorism designation, including the certification that Cuba has not provided any support for international terrorism during the previous six-months; and that Cuba has provided assurances that it will not support acts of international terrorism in the future. The 45-day Congressional pre-notification period has expired, and the Secretary of State has made the final decision to rescind Cuba’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, effective today, May 29, 2015. The rescission of Cuba’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism reflects our assessment that Cuba meets the statutory criteria for rescission. While the United States has significant concerns and disagreements with a wide range of Cuba’s policies and actions, these fall outside the criteria relevant to the rescission of a State Sponsor of Terrorism designation. Read at: http://m.state.gov/md242986.htm USCIS has published information to help eligible H-4 dependent spouses to apply for employment authorization (work permit) under the Employment Authorization for Certain H-4 Dependent Spouses final rule. Note: you can file application for a work permit only on or after May 26, 2015, and you must be eligible to apply. Application form is USCIS form I-765, and the filing fee is US$380. Note: it is applicant's burden of proof to provide evidence of your status, your H1B spouse's status and prove that you meet other eligibility requirements. Your application can be delayed or denied if it's incomplete. Eligibility requirements: you are eligible to apply for a work permit if you are the H-4 dependent spouse of an H-1B nonimmigrant IF your H-1B nonimmigrant spouse:
Read here. Starting May 26, 2015, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will temporarily suspend premium processing for all H-1B Extension of Stay petitions until July 27, 2015. During this time frame, petitioners will not be able to file Form I-907, Request for Premium Processing Service, for a Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, requesting an extension of the stay for an H-1B nonimmigrant. USCIS will continue to premium process H-1B Extension of Stay petitions filed with Form I-907 premium requests prior to May 26, 2015. This temporary suspension will allow USCIS to implement the Employment Authorization for Certain H-4 Spouses final rule in a timely manner and adjudicate applications for employment authorization filed by H-4 nonimmigrants under the new regulations. Read more at http://www.uscis.gov/news/uscis-temporarily-suspends-premium-processing-extension-stay-h-1b-petitions As reported by Bloomberg Business News, birth tourism from China to the US is booming. Although it’s not illegal to travel to the U.S. to give birth, it’s illegal to lie about the purpose of a visit when interviewed by American Consul or by immigration or customs officers at the US airport—or coach someone to do so. If a woman says she’s traveling to the U.S. to give birth, the consular and customs officers may request proof that she can pay for her hospital stay. (The same would be asked of anybody seeking medical treatment in the U.S.) Department of Homeland Security and the IRS have been investigating the growing business of “birth tourism,” which operates in a legal gray area, since last June. The industry is totally unregulated and mostly hidden. No one knows the exact number of Chinese birth tourists or services catering to them. Online ads and accounts in the Chinese-language press suggest there could be hundreds, maybe thousands, of operators. A California association of these services called All American Mother Service Management Center claims 20,000 women from China gave birth in the U.S. in 2012 and about the same number in 2013. These figures are often cited by Chinese state media, but the center didn’t reply to a request for comment. The Center for Immigration Studies, an American organization that advocates limiting the scope of the 14th Amendment, estimates there could have been as many as 36,000 birth tourists from around the world in 2012. Estimated fees paid by Chinese birth tourists to the agencies catering to them are around USD30,000 to USD60,000. Department of Homeland Security declined to discuss the investigation because it is ongoing, but the agent in charge said: “Visa fraud is a huge vulnerability for the country. These women allegedly lied to come have a baby. Other people could come to do something bad. We have to maintain the integrity of the system.” Read the story here. Did you apply for the 2016 DV lottery? It's time to find your DV-2016 confirmation number! Starting May 5, 2015, y ou can check your DV-2016 Green Card Lottery entry status at dvlottery.state.gov . Please keep in mind that Entrant Status Check online is the ONLY means by which you will be notified of your selection for further processing in the Diversity Visa lottery. You will never be notified or requested to pay fees by mail, email, phone -- ONLY through online status check. If you have misplaced your DV lottery confirmation number, you can use the retrieval tool in Entrant Status Check to recover it at https://www.dvlottery.state.gov/ If you have been selected as a WINNER and need help with the visa application process (if you are outside of the United States and will apply at the US embassy or consulate in your country) or with adjustment of status (if you are residing in the United States and eligible for adjustment of status), you are welcome to contact our office for advice or legal assistance. We would be glad to help! USCIS provided statistics on approval rate, denial rate, and RFE rate for Forms I-601 and Forms I-601A, for FY2010 through FY2015. Information was provided in response to a FOIA request. Since FY2010 thru January of FY2015, the average approval rate for I-601s is 79.6% and the average denial rate is 20.4%. The average RFE rate is 18.8%. Since March of FY2013 thru January of FY2015, the average approval rate for I-601As is 70.2% and the average denial rate is 29.8%. The average RFE rate is 26.2%. The total number of I-601 decisions issued since FY2010 (over the course of 5 years and 4 months) = 64,826. The total number of I-601As issued since the program started in FY2013 (over the course of 1 year and 11 months) = 62,973. The highest approval rate for I-601s was 82.4% in FY2013 (the year the provisional waiver program started). At the same time, I-601A approvals were at their lowest in FY2013 at 63.9% -- This was pre-"reason to believe" guidance so this makes sense. Total receipts for I-601As since March of FY2013 = 74,439. Read more stats at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_6gbFPjVDoxRExvLW92eXhHUEU/edit USCIS launched a new interactive webportal myUSCIS. See at: https://my.uscis.gov/ USCIS recently introduced another useful webportal, where customers can submit e-request to ask questions about a pending case, report non-delivery of a document (work permit, green card, etc) or official letter (Receipt or Approval Notice, Form I-797), request certain accommodations. I found it to be a very useful tool. See at: https://egov.uscis.gov/e-Request/Intro.do?locale=en_US Almost daily, I hear from some of our callers: "I don't need legal consultation, I don't want to hire an attorney. I have only one or two very simple (or quick, or easy) questions, and I want an attorney to answer my questions right now and free of charge because my questions are so simple, quick, and easy!" I will try to explain why this request doesn't make any sense and how to get proper legal advice. U.S. immigration law is very complex and constantly changing. There have been no major immigration reforms or amnesties in the past few years (which requires a law to be approved by Congress and signed by the President). However, there have been significant changes introduced by our current and former administrations and the executive branch of the government: executive actions; executive orders of the President; USCIS and DHS memorandums and policy guidance; official and unofficial practice advisories; and changes through our judicial branch (federal and immigration courts), such as, the decisions by the BIA, AAO, Courts of Appeals, US Supreme Court, and even by federal district court judges (for example, an injunction by a federal judge can place on hold an executive order of the President of the United States). U.S. immigration law is federal in nature and is the same in all states. However, it may apply differently to your situation depending on your background, your place of residence or domicile, US embassy in the country where you apply for a visa, etc. An experienced immigration attorney may be able to guide you and advise you about specifics, loopholes, various options, and can spot possible problems before they happen, even if it seems to you that your case is pretty straightforward and you have only "one quick question". A seemingly simple or quick question not always can be answered with a simple "yes" or "no" answer. You may not realize it, but a situation may have a lot of hidden issues or variables depending on your venue, court jurisdiction, your factual circumstances, your arrest and criminal record, your family situation and status, prior legal assistance, prior legal actions and applications filed, or even timing, etc. You can find a lot of useful immigration-related INFORMATION on our Blog. We compiled useful information and links: USCIS forms and fees, case status inquiry, processing times, AR-11 Change of Address, Department of State and NVC, and much more here. Hope you find this information helpful! To ask basic questions about USCIS immigration forms, filing fees or to inquire about status of your pending case, you can contact USCIS, Department of Homeland Security, by calling their 800 Customer Service Hotline (number is on their website), or send an e-request via a webportal at USCIS website. Case status can be checked online, as well. Immigration courts, U.S. embassies and consulates and National Visa Center each have their own hotlines, call centers or other ways to contact them. To receive a case-specific legal advice you should talk to a lawyer. Before a lawyer can advise you, we usually email you our confidential immigration questionnaire, and ask you to complete and return it to us. In some cases, we can ask you to email us copies of your immigration forms, paperwork, personal documents. When an attorney reviews your answers to our questionnaire and your documents, it helps her to get to know you, your situation, and decide what legal and/or visa options you shall consider, what are your best chances of obtaining certain visas and immigration benefits, how and when can you bring your family to USA, are you eligible for permanent residency or a green card in the United States, are you eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship, how can your children become U.S. citizens, etc. It's important that you provide truthful, accurate and complete answers to our questions because an attorney's advice to you is based on information you provide to an attorney. It could be dangerous to give misleading, incomplete or incorrect answers to an attorney. An attorney or a lawyer is often called "a counselor in law". It means that an attorney counsels and advises you, helps you to understand your situation better, anticipates any possible future issues or complications, offers guidance, and a long-term strategy and planning for yourself and your family. Legal advice is never a simple "yes" or "no" answer, it's never "use this form" or "this is the link where you can find all information and all answers you need". Legal advice or consultation is like going to see a doctor. A doctor will ask you questions, take your vitals and administer necessary tests, then she will be able to diagnose you and offer you an appropriate treatment plan. The same is true about work of a good and ethical attorney. An attorney will have to ask you a number of questions, review your documents and paperwork, and only then she will be able to advise you, and offer you guidance and counsel. In order to avoid mistakes and future complications, it's smart to consult an attorney before starting any legal, immigrant or visa process. Consultation with knowledgeable and ethical attorney should serve as a preventative measure and a way to establish a roadmap and plan your future. In over twelve years of practice as an immigration attorney in the United States, I have come across of many unfortunate individuals who got themselves into trouble after reading and following wrong advice on internet forums, listening to their friends, co-workers, relatives and neighbors advice, or paying to complete their "paperwork" to an unlicensed "immigration consultant", or "notario", or "tax preparer", or somebody else who speaks their native language in their immigrant community but has no proper training and is not a licensed attorney. In some of these cases, individual's chances of living in USA legally can be permanently destroyed. Some people can become permanently banned from the United States, no matter how many close family members (wife, kids, parents) and other ties they have in USA. Immigration law is very complex and unforgiving, and non-compliance, fraud or misrepresentation could bring consequences more severe than penalties in an average criminal case. Where a convicted criminal can usually expect to be released from prison after a number of months or years and be reunited with his family, a person who was deported and permanently banned from USA may never be able to reunite with his family and loved ones in the United States. Lack of knowledge or bad advice is not an excuse in immigration law. "Simple mistakes" in immigration law context could be costly and often irreversible. Do yourself a favor and consult a knowledgeable immigration attorney before filing any applications or petitions with the USCIS Department of Homeland Security, or before submitting any visa applications online. You can also schedule a consultation to seek a second opinion, if not sure that your current or former attorney's advice is correct as applies to you. When you have questions or need legal advice you can email us to schedule a consultation. We will be glad to help you. In May 2015 Visa Bulletin, the US Department of State had implemented a cutoff date for EB-5, immigrant investor visa category for China. In May 2015 Bulletin, it retrogresses to May 1, 2013 (two years). How will it affect dependent children of a primary investor? How to protect dependents from ageing-out and becoming ineligible for a visa? On April 13, 2015, Visa Office attended IIUSA 2015 EB-5 Regional Economic Advocacy Conference and provided some guidance on application of CSPA to those derivative children: May 2015 visa bulletin can be found here. 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. 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 |
Legal consultation or services To people seeking legal advice, guidance and help, we offer remote consultations over the phone, Zoom, or video call.
AuthorLuba Smal is an attorney exclusively practicing USA federal immigration law since 2004. She speaks English and Russian. Archives
January 2025
Click to set custom HTML
|