Articles Posted in Uncategorized

Something for the weekend.

Saks Fifth Avenue and Oscar de la Renta are among the fashion industry players who are joining Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s coalition for immigration reform and calling for an easier visa process for international workers.

Bloomberg made the announcement Friday, the day after the close of the fall previews at New York Fashion Week. Brooks Brothers, Perry Ellis, Diane von Furstenberg and Malia Mills are also joining the group, which already claims as members chief executives of major corporations including Hewlett-Packard, Disney and News Corp.

President Barack Obama delivered a 61-minute State of the Union address Tuesday, but only a a passing reference to immigration issues.

The president said: “Now, I strongly believe that we should take on, once and for all, the issue of illegal immigration. I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows.”

A passing reference to immigration. I’m glad it was in there, but this is a complicated issue not suited to sound bites — or one paragraph in a 6,000-word speech. Obama has to convince his own party to stop thwarting reform to please organized labor.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will host public sessions to discuss the E-2 Investor Visa and Grant of Status at the National Park Service’s American Memorial Park indoor auditorium in Garapan.

The two-hour sessions will begin at 5pm on Jan. 25 and 26, Tuesday and Wednesday. Seating is available for 110 people on a first-come, first-served basis. Note that these public sessions are exclusively designed to discuss the CNMI-only E-2 Nonimmigrant Investor, for which the final rule was published in December 2010, and Grant of Status.

There will be no opportunity to discuss the Transitional Worker rule during these forums. Public meetings will be set up in the future when the final rule for the CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker is finalized.

Tech companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have bemoaned the shortage of American students earning advanced degrees in math, engineering and science; half of all graduate students in those subjects at U.S. universities are foreign-born.

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) introduced a bill Wednesday that would pave the way for up to 55,000 foreign graduate students at American universities to obtain a green card.

Issa’s bill would make it easier for those graduate students to stay in the country after earning their degree by allowing up to 55,000 graduates holding advanced degrees from U.S. universities to earn green cards, provided they have found employment “in the sciences or medicine.”

A few months ago we posted the most recent update about Visa Waiver overstay adjudications in San Diego District office and other offices, see here

In San Diego the situation is still on hold and there is no clear guidance yet. Nationwide we have some clarity. This is the update by Stephen Manning, AILA Amicus Chair & Laura Lunn, 2010 ILG Summer Immigration Litigation Fellow:

In Bradley v. Holder, the government filed a Brief in Opposition to the cert request. While it seems doubtful that the Supreme Court will grant certiorari to hear the argument given the government’s position and the general state of the law among the circuits, the government’s brief presents the position of the United States. Indeed, the brief can be cited in litigation as the considered interpretation of the statutes and policy of the United States as it comes from the Solicitor General.

Gov. David A. Paterson announced that he had issued pardons to 24 immigrants with prior criminal convictions, to prevent their deportation.

In a statement, Mr. Paterson said his administration had reviewed more than 1,100 pardon applications and found that federal immigration laws were often “excessively harsh and in need of modernization.” Tell me about it.

Mr. Paterson said the 24 people he pardoned had committed offenses in the past but had paid their debt to society and were now making positive contributions to their communities.

Love it or hate it – it works! The people have spoken! President of AILA, David Leopold said it well:

I worry that Rep. Lamar Smith, the expected chair of the House Judiciary Committee, will use his gavel not to fashion an historic overhaul of the broken immigration system, but to thwart any meaningful effort to fix it; that he will take us back to the mean spiritedness that resulted in the passage of the infamous H.R. 4437 which would have criminalized the undocumented. I fear that Rep. Steve King, the likely chair of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, will use his newfound subpoena power not to design a safe, orderly, and fair immigration policy for America, but to embarrass the Administration by dragging President Obama’s aunt up to Capitol Hill to interrogate her about her asylum status.

I hope I am wrong. I hope the new House majority will seize the opportunity to do the right thing and reach across the aisle for the good of the country.

When times get tough, Immigration fraud is on the rise. Pretty disturbing news. A Brazilian husband and wife were sentenced Thursday for their involvement in a $55 million visa fraud scheme, following an investigation led by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Office of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).

Wilson, 63, and Valeria Barbugli, 57, were sentenced to 18 and 24 months in federal prison, respectively, by U.S. District Judge Mary S. Scriven, Middle District of Florida. The couple was convicted of conspiracy, visa fraud and alien smuggling as part of an elaborate scheme which allowed illegal aliens to work at jobs that normally would have been filled by U.S. citizens.

As part of their sentence, the court also imposed a money judgment in the amount of $55 million, which represents the illegal proceeds generated during the course of the conspiracy.

Great Analysis from AILA to share with our readers. PL 111-230 requires the submission of an additional fee of $2,000 for certain H-1B petitions and $2,250 for certain L-1A and L-1B petitions postmarked on or after August 14, 2010. Petitioners subject to this new fee include employers with more than 50 employees in the U.S., for which 50% of their workforce is on H and L visas. The fee will remain in effect through September 30, 2014.

USCIS indicated that Vermont Service Center and California Service Center were instructed to hold any H or L petitions sent after that date, pending guidance on how to determine whether the petitioner is subject to the new fee. USCIS will be modifying the I-129 or H-1B Data Collection Form to include information on whether this fee applies.

In the interim, USCIS suggested that petitioners could proactively include a “certification” regarding the fee, including a notation of whether the fee is required in bold capital letters at the top of the cover letter. The sample certification that the petitioner is not obligated to pay the fee would be:

Many clients have been calling my office in the past week or so, they have been reporting denials of adjustment of status applications at the San Diego District Office for applicants, that entered under the Visa Waiver program and later overstayed. The overstay took place before marriage to a US Citizen and filing the adjustment of status case.

Is this is a new trend and change in procedures, yes it is! An internal email released July 9, 2010, (I saw it today at one of my interviews but was not allowed to take a copy out) released by the San Diego District Director to all Officers processing adjustments states the following:” To all Adjudicators effective immediately, any immigrants that have entered to the US under the Visa Waiver program and failed to file for adjustment of Status before the expiration of the 90 days authorized stay, MUST BE denied at the time of the interview.” The email was not very long but that was the general idea.

But why and why now? Under the Visa Waiver Program, citizens of certain countries can enter the U.S. for 90 days without a visa with the condition that the visitor waive his or her right to contest removal (other than on the basis of asylum). The “no-contest” provision of the Visa Waiver Program is fundamental; if someone could enter under the VWP and then contest removability, it would defeat the whole purpose of the Program which is to make it easy for certain nationals to come to the U.S.