Immigration Blog Luba Smal Attorney at Law - Smal Immigration Law Office

US Department of State new policy guidance: how to issue a replacement Immigrant Visa (IV) to a visa applicant unable to use an IV during its validity period. 9 FAM 42.74 N1.

4/7/2015

US Dept of State issued a new policy guidance for immigrant visa applicants who were unable to use an Immigrant Visa (IV) during its validity period.

9 FAM 42.74 N1 ISSUING REPLACEMENT VISA DURING VALIDITY OF ORIGINAL VISA (CT:VISA-2270; 03-31-2015)

a. If you are satisfied that an applicant will be or was unable to use an immigrant visa (IV) during its validity period because of reasons beyond the applicant’s control and for which the applicant is not responsible then you may issue a replacement visa with the originally allocated visa number within the same fiscal year even though the visa has not yet expired.

b. You should recall and cancel the originally-issued visa and collect once again the appropriate IV application processing fee (including the Diversity Visa Lottery Fee for a DV applicant), unless the applicant was unable to use the visa as a result of action by the U.S. Government over which the alien had no control and for which the alien was not responsible.

c. An applicant who will be or was unable to use an IV during its validity period because of reasons within the applicant's control can submit a new visa application if the petition has not been revoked and if the basis for immigration still exists (i.e., familial relationship).
This also applies for new IV applications outside of the original IV's fiscal year of issuance.

9 FAM 42.74 N1:
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87915.pdf

AAO approved EB-1 application for a green card for a researcher, applying Kazarian two-step test.

4/7/2015

Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) non-precedent decision approving EB-1 green card for a researcher applying Kazarian two-step test.

The Director of the USCIS Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa petition in EB-1 category. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be sustained.

The petitioner is a professor and researcher who primarily studies avian brood parasites, i.e., birds that lay their eggs in the nests of other bird species. The petitioner seeks classification as an alien of extraordinary ability (EB-1) pursuant to section 203(b)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(1)(A). ...

While this appeal was pending, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a decision concluding that USCIS should reserve any evaluation of the record evidence that otherwise meets the plain language requirements of the regulatory criteria for a separate and subsequent "final merits determination." Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, 1121-22 (9th Cir. 2010).

The two-step review articulated in Kazarian provides a reasonable interpretation and application of the existing regulatory standard. To promote consistency, USCIS has adopted this two-step review process for cases arising both within and outside the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit. Thus, the proper procedure for evaluating an extraordinary ability visa petition is twofold. First, we will analyze the record and count the number of evidentiary criteria met, without imposing novel substantive or evidentiary requirements beyond those set forth by regulation. Second, if the petitioner submits evidence that meets at least three of the criteria, we will then review the record in its totality in a final merits determination to determine if the alien is one of that small percentage of individuals who have risen to the very top of their field, has sustained national or international acclaim, and that his or her achievements have been recognized by others in the field of expertise.

At the second step, we consider not only the quantum of evidence, but also its quality (including relevance, probative value, and credibility). See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376 (citing Matter of E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 80 (Comm'r 1989)). If the record establishes that it is more likely than not that the individual has sustained national or international acclaim and recognition in the field of expertise, and is one of that small percentage who has risen to the very top of their field ofendeavor, the petitioner has met his or her burden of proof. ...

[T]he petitioner has established eligibility for the benefit sought under section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act. ...

The decision of the director is withdrawn. The petition is approved." Read the full text of the AAO non-precedent decision here.

2015 International Student Data Report Released by SEVP. As of February 2015, more than 1 million students enrolled into SEVIS approved schools in USA.

3/27/2015

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.

O-1B denial case: stable owners sued USCIS for denial of O-1B extension to their racehorse trainer. AAO upheld denial for "material error" in the previous approvals.

3/25/2015

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.

L-1B Adjudications Policy by USCIS (L-1B visas for persons with specialized knowledge): new memorandum published, open for public comments. Expected effective date August 31, 2015.

3/25/2015

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.

E-2 treaty investor visa: lawsuit filed alleging visa fraud, forced labor, exploitation of E-2 workers with specialized knowledge or supervisory skills.

3/25/2015

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.

EB-5 Immigrant Investor Green Card visa category for China will retrogress by June 2015, and a two-year backlog is expected.

3/17/2015

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 acquire or derive US citizenship through their US citizen parent.

3/12/2015

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

New revised form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney, replaces a previous edition. Effective April 13, 2015, only a new edition of G-28 will be acceptable by USCIS.

3/8/2015

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

Effective March 09 2015, same-sex couples in Nebraska can marry. Judge struck down Nebraska gay marriage ban.

3/2/2015

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

Effective May 26, 2015, some H-4 spouses can apply for a work permit or EAD.

2/24/2015

Big news for H-4 spouses:

On February 24, 2015, USCIS announced that, effective May 26, 2015, the DHS is extending eligibility for employment authorization to certain H-4 dependent spouses of H-1B nonimmigrants who are seeking employment-based lawful permanent resident (LPR) status. DHS amended the regulations to allow these H-4 dependent spouses to accept employment in the United States.

Eligible individuals include certain H-4 dependent spouses of H-1B nonimmigrants who:

Are the principal beneficiaries of an approved Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; or
Have been granted H-1B status under sections 106(a) and (b) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 as amended by the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act. The Act permits H-1B nonimmigrants seeking lawful permanent residence to work and remain in the United States beyond the six-year limit on their H-1B status.

Under the new rule, eligible H-4 dependent spouses must file Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, with supporting evidence and the required $380 fee in order to obtain employment authorization and receive a Form I-766, Employment Authorization Document (EAD). USCIS will begin accepting applications on May 26, 2015. Once USCIS approves the Form I-765 and the H-4 dependent spouse receives an EAD, he or she may begin working in the United States.

Read more at DHS Extends Eligibility for Employment Authorization to Certain H-4 Dependent Spouses of H-1B Nonimmigrants Seeking Employment-Based Lawful Permanent Residence | USCIS

In February 2015 Nebraska joins federal RIDE program: E-Verify records and information from DMVs.

2/18/2015

Nebraska Joins E-Verify RIDE Program:

On February 1, 2015, Nebraska became the latest state to join E-Verify's Records and Information from DMVs (RIDE) program. The other participating states are Mississippi, Florida, Idaho, and Iowa. RIDE links E-Verify with state departments of motor vehicles and state public safety offices. The program allows E-Verify to validate the authenticity of driver's licenses and state identification cards that employees present as identity documents for Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services states that driver's licenses and ID cards account for nearly 80 percent of the documents used as proof of identity by employees for E-Verify.

Read more about Driver's License Verification at: http://www.uscis.gov/e-verify/employers/drivers-license-verification

States participating in RIDE program, as of 02/18/2015:

Mississippi - June 2011

Driver's Licenses
ID Cards

https://www.ms.gov/hp/drivers/license/Main.do

Florida - December 2012

Driver's Licenses
ID Cards

http://www.flhsmv.gov/html/dlnew.html

Idaho - July 2013

Driver's Licenses
ID Cards

http://itd.idaho.gov/dmv/

Iowa - September 2013

Driver's Licenses
ID Cards

http://www.iowadot.gov/mvd/index.htm

Nebraska - February 2015

Driver's Licenses
ID Cards

http://www.dmv.nebraska.gov/

Judge places temporary injunction on DACA & DAPA executive action programs: expanded DACA and DAPA are placed on hold. Until further notice, only original DACA program stays in effect.

2/17/2015

(As a practical matter, preliminary injunction means that effective February 18th 2015, there will be no filings under new expanded DACA program, and DAPA is placed on hold. Please be careful as to what applications and forms you file with USCIS. Consult a licensed experienced attorney and verify your eligibility before you apply.)

A Texas Judge has placed a preliminary hold on the two initiatives announced by President Obama last November that would expand the two-year-old Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of U.S. Citizens and Legal Permanent Residents (DAPA). These two programs would provide temporary relief from deportation to approximately 5 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. The order issued overnight, and two days before the government was set to begin the DACA expansion, bars federal immigration officials from implementing “any and all aspects” of these programs.

The coalition of 26 states, led by Texas and made up of mostly conservative states in the South and Midwest, argues that Obama has violated the "Take Care Clause" of the U.S. Constitution, which they say limits the scope of presidential power, and that his executive actions would be difficult to undo once immigrants started to apply for deferred action. They also say Obama's order would force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education.

Among those supporting Obama's executive order is a group of 12 states, including Washington and California, as well as the District of Columbia. They filed a motion with the judge in support of Obama, arguing the directives will substantially benefit states and will further the public interest.

A group of law enforcement officials, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association and more than 20 police chiefs and sheriffs from across the country, also filed a motion in support, arguing the executive action will improve public safety by encouraging cooperation between police and individuals with concerns about their immigration status.

Read more at: http://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-stalls-obamas-executive-action-immigration-052549363.html

*****

On February 17, 2015, USCIS had released their official statement in response to injunction granted by a federal judge in Texas, which effectively put a stop to DACA expansion (which was planned for February 18th 2015) and suspended DAPA (originally planned to start on May 19, 2015).

Since November 2014, USCIS had hired and trained additional 1,000 full-time employees in anticipation of a high volume of DACA and DAPA applications in 2015.

--------------------------
(via email): Statement by Secretary Jeh C. Johnson Concerning the District Court’s Ruling Concerning DAPA and DACA

"I strongly disagree with Judge Hanen’s decision to temporarily enjoin implementation of Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) and expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The Department of Justice will appeal that temporary injunction; in the meantime, we recognize we must comply with it.

Accordingly, the Department of Homeland Security will not begin accepting requests for the expansion of DACA tomorrow, February 18, as originally planned. Until further notice, we will also suspend the plan to accept requests for DAPA.

The Department of Justice, legal scholars, immigration experts and even other courts have said that our actions are well within our legal authority. Our actions will also benefit the economy and promote law enforcement. We fully expect to ultimately prevail in the courts, and we will be prepared to implement DAPA and expanded DACA once we do.

It is important to emphasize what the District Court’s order does not affect.

The Court’s order does not affect the existing DACA. Individuals may continue to come forward and request initial grant of DACA or renewal of DACA pursuant to the guidelines established in 2012.

Nor does the Court’s order affect this Department’s ability to set and implement enforcement priorities. The priorities established in my November 20, 2014 memorandum entitled “Policies for the Apprehension, Detention and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants” remain in full force and effect."

-------------------------

BIA defined "legitimated child" for the purposes of obtaining of U.S. citizenship to include "illegitimate" or "born out of wedlock" children from some jurisdictions. Sec 101(c)(1). Matter of Cross, 26 I&N Dec 485 (BIA 2015).

2/16/2015

** A person born out of wedlock may qualify as a "legitimated child” of his or her biological parents under section 101(c)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(c)(1) (2012), for purposes of citizenship if he or she was born in a country or State that has eliminated all legal distinctions between children based on the marital status of their parents or had a residence or domicile in such a country or State (including a State within the United States), if otherwise eligible. Matter of Hines, 24 I&N Dec. 544 (BIA 2008), and Matter of Rowe, 23 I&N Dec. 962 (BIA 2006), overruled in part. Matter of Clahar, 18 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1981), and Matter of Goorahoo, 20 I&N Dec. 782 (BIA 1994), reaffirmed.

"We now hold that a person born abroad to unmarried parents can qualify as a legitimated “child” under section 101(c)(1) of the Act if he or she was born in a country or State that has eliminated all legal distinctions between children based on the marital status of their parents or has a residence or domicile in such a country or State (including a State within the United States), irrespective of whether the country or State has prescribed other legal means of legitimation. In so holding, we recede from Matter of Hines, 24 I&N Dec. 544 (BIA 2008), and Matter of Rowe, 23 I&N Dec. 962 (BIA 2006), to the extent these decisions hold that the concept of “legitimation” must be interpreted uniformly throughout the Act, including for purposes of visa preference classification. Consequently, our holdings in Matter of Clahar, 18 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1981), and Matter of Goorahoo, 20 I&N Dec. 782 (BIA 1994), are hereby reinstated and reaffirmed."

** Matter of Cross, Int. Dec. No. 3826, Feb. 12, 2015.

Read BIA ruling at http://www.justice.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/vol26/3826.pdf

A record number of 3,415 Americans renounced US citizenship in 2014. Up 14 percent from 2013.

2/12/2015

A record 3,415 Americans renounce US citizenship in 2014.

The number of Americans choosing to give up their passports hit a record 3,415 last year, up 14% from 2013, and 15 times more than in 2008, when only 231 people renounced their citizenship.

Experts say the recent surge is coming from expats who no longer want to deal with complicated tax paperwork, a burden that has only gotten worse in recent years.

Unlike most countries, the U.S. taxes all citizens on income, no matter where it is earned or where they live. The mountain of paperwork can be so complicated that expats are often forced to fork over high fees to hire an accountant -- some say they pay as much as $1,000.

As new procedures are put in place, "the pace of U.S. citizenship relinquishments is likely to slow. People are becoming aware of the various compliant ways they can mitigate the negative effects of FATCA, without having to take the drastic and often emotional step of giving up their American citizenship." But it's going to be a few years before renunciations start to taper off.

Read more at: http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/12/pf/americans-expat-citizenship-passports/index.html

A Russian mother married to a US citizen, living in California with a conditional two-year Green Card, who forgot to file a Petition to Remove Conditions, USCIS Form I-751, faces deportation.

2/12/2015

There are a few things that went wrong in this sad story and several important tips and rules for every immigrant in USA to remember:

1) almost every immigrant living in the United States, especially, a conditional resident, is required by law to notify USCIS of their new address within 10 days, which can be done online by submitting an electronic version of the form AR-11. Here is the link: https://egov.uscis.gov/coa/displayCOAForm.do

2) any conditional resident MUST file a petition to remove conditions from residence within the 90-day period before expiration of their green card (USCIS form I-751). There are some exceptions. Forgetting to do so, can result in a removal order (deportation). Here is the link to the form and instructions: http://www.uscis.gov/i-751

3) if your green card had expired (there is always an expiration date printed on your card), you should not travel internationally,... and Mexico is a foreign country.

4) you should never hire an "immigration consultant" or "Notario" -- but only hire an "immigration attorney" or "immigration lawyer", who is a licensed professional authorized to offer legal advice. Consultants, tax preparers, notarios are not authorized to give advice regarding your immigration situation and can't help with immigration paperwork, they are breaking the law.

5) also, keep in mind that even an attorney doesn't have an obligation to remind you about the deadlines for any *future* immigration petitions you might have to file (petition to remove conditions, application to renew a green card, application for citizenship). It's up to you to calendar these important dates and keep a track of important future applications with USCIS. I usually remind my former clients about these deadlines, but I am not required to do so because an attorney's representation ends at the conclusion of each case.

6) if her conditional green card was indeed "extended", then she should have had an official Receipt Notice, USCIS Form I-797, with the date granting her one-year extension.

If you need legal help, you are welcome to email our office. Don't wait until it's too late!

Story follows below...

Tuesday, February 10, 2015
WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. (KABC) --

Sergey Nikitin lives with his wife and five children in West Hollywood. The Los Angeles realtor, however, is being kept apart from his family from what he says is a clerical error that's turned into an immigration nightmare.

Nikitin's wife, Anya Bondareva, is currently behind bars. She was detained by federal authorities while trying to cross the border near San Diego.

"She was crying and she was in shock. She couldn't believe what was even happening," Nikitin said.

He became a U.S. citizen 15 years ago and married his wife, a Russian native, in 2008. Following their marriage, Nikitin hired an immigration consultant in L.A. to handle her paperwork.

Bondareva received a conditional green card, but Nikitin says the consultant failed to secure a permanent green card.

"I should have checked it myself. It was just one of those things that I relied that they would tell me when it comes up and it needs to be done," Nikitin said.

Bondareva was granted an extension on her conditional green card that had expired. Earlier this year, the couple flew to Mexico and crossed back into the U.S. without any problems. Nikitin says they even met with immigration officials assuming their paperwork was being processed.

"When they called the immigration service he was under the impression that it was still pending," said Stephanie Alcala, Nikitin's attorney.

But last week when the couple tried to cross back into the U.S. from Mexico, Bondareva was detained.

"That was the worst feeling ever," Nikitin said.

It turns out, after Bondareva's green card expired, a deportation order was issued. Nikitin says that because of a change of address in L.A., they were not notified of a hearing, leading to her being taken in.

Nikitin spoke to his wife over the telephone and says that she broke down in tears when she learned that she could be behind bars for weeks, perhaps months.

"She was crying for some time. She couldn't even speak," Nikitin said. "It's horrible. The children keep asking for her, and I can't even imagine what she is going through. This seems like extreme punishment for a paperwork issue."

Bondareva is being held in a federal detention facility near San Diego. Nikitin's five children are currently staying with relatives in Russia. He is staying in a San Diego hotel to be near his wife.

Alcala says Bondareva will likely be deported. Once that happens, she will have to request an in-person hearing to reapply for the permanent green card.

Read at http://abc7.com/news/west-hollywood-family-split-apart-due-to-immigration-paperwork-foul-up/512688/

Temporary glitch with scheduling Biometrics appointments at Vermont Service Center, USCIS VSC.

2/9/2015

The Vermont Service Center USCIS is currently experiencing problems with its biometric scheduling system, which has resulted in a temporary halt in sending biometrics notices in all cases at VSC with the exception of TPS-related applications.

The glitch affects cases that were filed with VSC USCIS in December 2014 and January 2015. VSC is working on the problems and expects to begin sending notifications on or around February 12, 2015 to individuals whose applications were filed in December and January.

DHS USCIS is preparing for millions of new DAPA and DACA applications in year 2015. USCIS is hiring 1,000 new employees.

2/4/2015

USCIS could struggle to process millions of undocumented immigrants who may apply for legal protection under President Barack Obama's recent announcements on immigration, a Senate committee was told on Wednesday.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which handles immigrant visa and naturalization petitions, could be overwhelmed by the surge in workload later this year even if it hires an additional 1,000 workers as planned.

USCIS is expected to receive 4.5 million new DACA and DAPA deferred action applications in the coming months.

Congressional Republicans say Obama has overstepped his constitutional bounds and are trying to pass legislation to block funding for his immigration policies but Democrats in the Senate on Tuesday derailed the Republican effort. As the legislative battle continues, funding for the entire Department of Homeland Security, of which USCIS is a part, runs out at the end of February.

"The administration has informed this committee that it plans to hire 1,000 new workers" to process the applications, Bellocchi said, but "questions immediately surface whether this number will be sufficient without creating extreme backlogs."

He said new workers would have to process and adjudicate 4,500 applications each during the six-month target period. "Including weekends, that would mean 25 to 27 applications per day for 1,000 adjudicators," Bellocchi, who is now an immigration attorney in the private sector, told the committee.

USCIS has roughly 13,000 full-time officers and 5,000 contractors and they handle most applications on paper. Read at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/04/us-usa-congress-immigration-idUSKBN0L81Q320150204

***Our office is ready to provide legal assistance to DACA and DAPA applicants.
DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents) is a new deferred action program. It was expected that DAPA application period will open around May 20, 2015. It means that USCIS is not accepting DAPA applications just yet (applications from parents of US citizen children and lawful permanent resident children). You can start work on preparing your supporting documents for USCIS, however, you have to wait to file until USCIS is ready. New application forms and official guidelines are expected to be released in May 2015. As of February 16, 2015, both expanded DACA and DAPA have been placed on hold until further notice. Avoid notario scam and don't pay anyone to submit your DAPA applications until it's been announced by the USCIS that they start accepting applications. It might be later than May 2015, if a federal case is still pending. If you need help please email an attorney at [email protected] .***

Treaty Trader and Treaty Investor E-1 and E-2 visas: effective May 1, 2015, electronic visa application process at the US Consulate in Vienna, Austria.

1/30/2015

Treaty Traders and Treaty Investors Visa E-1 and E-2 visas: new application procedures when applying at the US consulate in Vienna, Austria. Effective May 01, 2015, only electronic submissions will be accepted.The Immigration and Nationality Act provides non-immigrant visa status for a national of a country with which the United States maintains a treaty of commerce and navigation who is coming to the United States to carry on substantial trade, including trade in services or technology, principally between the U.S. and the treaty country, or to develop and direct the operations of an enterprise in which the national has invested, or is in the process of investing a substantial amount of capital which is at risk in a commercial sense.

TREATY TRADER (E-1) REQUIREMENTS:

The applicant must be a national of a treaty country;
The trading firm for which the applicant is coming to the U.S. must have the nationality of the treaty country. Please note that the nationality of an enterprise is determined by the nationality of the enterprise's owner(s);
The international trade must be "substantial." There must be a sizeable and continuing volume of trade (trade means the international exchange of goods, services, and technology). Title of the trade items must pass from one party to the other;
The trade of the U.S. enterprise must be principally between the U.S. and the treaty country. More than 50 percent of the international trade involved must be between the U.S. and the country of the applicant's nationality;
The applicant must be employed in a supervisory or executive capacity, or possess highly specialized skill essential to the efficient operation of the firm. Ordinary skilled or unskilled workers do not qualify. Please note that a detailed explanation of why the applicant's skills are essential for the enterprise in the U.S. is required.

TREATY INVESTOR (E-2) REQUIREMENTS:

The investor, either a real or corporate person, must be a national of the treaty country;
The investment must be substantial and placed "at risk" and the funds have to be "irrevocably" committed. The investment must be sufficient to ensure the successful operation of the enterprise. If the funds are not subject to partial or total loss if business fortunes reverse, then the investment is not an investment in the sense intended by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 101(a)(15)(E) and in 9 Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) 41.51.;
The investment must be in a real operating enterprise.Speculative or idle investment does not qualify. Uncommitted funds in a bank account or mere ownership of undeveloped land are not considered an investment. Payments in the form of leases or rents for property or equipment may be calculated towards the investment in an amount limited to the funds devoted to that item in any one month;
The investment may not be marginal. Based on 9 FAM 41.51, the enterprise must either show a financial return that significantly exceeds what is necessary to support a living for the investor or else the enterprise must have the capacity, present or future, to make a significant economic contribution;
The investor must have control of the funds. Loans secured with the assets of the investment enterprise are not allowed. Loans secured with personal assets are acceptable;
The investor must be coming to the United States to develop and direct the enterprise. If the applicant is not the principal investor, he or she must be employed in a supervisory, executive, or highly specialized skill capacity. Based on 9 FAM 41.51 Note 14.3 a detailed explanation of why the applicant's skills are "essential" for the enterprise in the United States is required or based on 9 FAM 41.51 Note 14.2 a detailed explanation of why the applicant possesses qualifying "executive or supervisory" experience.

E VISA APPLICATION PROCESSING:

As of May 1, 2015 electronic submission is the only acceptable method for E visa submission! Cases must be submitted to: [email protected].
Please use the e-mail subject line: “Surname, Given Name, Business Name, E Visa Application”. Use this email address for specific E visa questions as well as regarding E visa cases already submitted.
E visa package, submitted electronically, should not exceed 7MB (about 100 pages, pdf only). You may use multiple attachments. Do NOT send “linked” files, as we cannot access or open these. Please scan documents with a maximum of 300 DPI to keep file size small.
Between now and May 1, 2015 E visa applications may either be submitted electronically or as a printed paper version.Please limit paper versions to 100 pages and note that the review for paper versions might take longer. The mailing address for paper applications is: U.S. Embassy, Boltzmanngasse 16, A-1090 Wien, Att: Consular Section/E Visa Unit.

To begin the process to obtain your E visa, follow the instructions (step 1 and step 2) provided on our homepage at:http://austria.usembassy.gov/niv_applic.html. You may submit your E visa package only once you have completed the visa application form DS-160 and paid the application fee.

Case review begins upon receipt of a complete application. Incomplete applications will delay processing. Should your case require additional documentation, this office will contact you or your attorney via e-mail.

Interview scheduling: Please note that all applicants for Treaty Trader/Investor visa will only be able to schedule their appointment for the visa interview only after submitting the request and receiving the approval for appointment from the Embassy. The request can only be approved once the review has been completed.

Formal adjudication of the case begins with the in-person interview. If, after the interview, the case should require additional documentation, you will receive clear guidance from the Consular Officer on what to submit, and by what method.

There are three different categories of E visa submission:

If this is your first E visa, and you are either applying to work as an employee for a new E visa enterprise or you yourself are the investor, you must submit following documentation: Forms DS-160 and DS-156E; the statement about your intent to return upon termination of your E status; and the full E visa documentation package. Full instructions to build an appropriate E visa package are available here:Instructions for Applying for Nonimmigrant E1/E2 Visas.
If you are renewing your E visa, provide the following documentation: Forms DS-160 and DS-156E; the statement about your intent to return upon termination of your E status; a letter from your employer/the U.S. enterprise containing a detailed description of the enterprise’s past and planned activities; proof that the enterprise is still operating, such as copies of the last available U.S. corporate tax returns/updated profit and loss statement/balance sheet/W-2 forms for employees and/or payroll documentation and. Only if there has been a change in the enterprise’s ownership the new ownership documentation needs to be submitted as well.
If this is your first E visa, but you are applying to work as an employee for a previously- qualified E visa enterprise, provide the following documentation: Forms DS-160 and DS-156E; the statement about your intent to return upon termination of your E status; a detailed resume or CV and documentation of your professional qualification (such as copies of education degrees, job training certificates and/or letters from previous employers); a letter of support from your prospective U.S. employer containing a detailed position description; proof that the enterprise is still operating, such as copies of the last available US tax return/updated profit and loss statement/balance sheet/W-2 forms for employees and/or payroll documentation and. Only if there has been a change in the enterprise’s ownership the new ownership documentation needs to be submitted as well.

See more at: Non-Immigrant Visa Section | Embassy of the United States Vienna, Austria

FAM Update: exceptional circumstances for filing I-130 at the US Consulate abroad. 9 FAM 42.41 Notes.

1/29/2015

A FAM update provides two new examples of the types of exceptional circumstances where consular officers should request authorization from USCIS to accept I-130 petitions.

The new examples involve adoption of a child, and short notice of position relocation.

See at 9 FAM 42.41 Notes
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87842.pdf

9 FAM 42.41 N4.2-7 Adjudicating Exceptional Circumstance I- 130 Cases (CT:VISA-2247; 01-28-2015)

a. Consular officers assigned to posts with USCIS public counter presence cannot accept filing or adjudicate the Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, and must refer petitioners instead to USCIS.

b. If a consular section without a USCIS public counter presence encounters an exceptional circumstance case, then the Consular Chief, or another designated officer, must receive authorization from the regional USCIS Field Office Director (or his/her designee) prior to accepting and adjudicating the filing. Post should contact the appropriate USCIS field office by phone or e-mail, providing the specifics of the reason for the exception request. USCIS will have discretion to determine which cases can be processed using the exceptional circumstances procedures and which petitioners should be directed to file by mail with the USCIS lockbox in the United States. USCIS may authorize post to accept the case over the telephone in particularly emergent circumstances but will always communicate his or her decision via email to the post within 1-3 business days of receipt of the request for record-keeping purposes.

c. The following are examples of the types of exceptional circumstances where consular officers should request exceptional authorization from USCIS to accept I-130 petitions:

(1) U.S. Military deployment or transfer: A U.S. service member overseas becomes aware of a new deployment or transfer with very little notice. This should be an exception to the regular relocation process for most service members.
(2) Medical emergencies: A petitioner or beneficiary is facing an urgent medical emergency that requires immediate travel. This includes if the petitioner or beneficiary is pregnant and delaying travel may create a medical risk or extreme hardship for the mother or child.
(3) Threats to personal safety: A petitioner or beneficiary is facing an imminent threat to personal safety.
(4) Cases close to aging out: A beneficiary is within a few months of aging out of eligibility.
(5) Cases where the petitioner has recently naturalized: The petitioner and family have traveled for the immigrant visa interview but the petitioner has naturalized and the family member(s) require a new, stand-alone petition.
(6) Adoption of a child: A petitioner who has adopted a child locally and has an imminent need to depart the country. This exception should only be considered if the child has been in the petitioner’s legal and physical custody for at least two years and the petitioner has a full and final adoption decree on behalf of the child.
(7) Short notice of position relocation: A U.S. Citizen petitioner, living and working abroad, who receives a job relocation within the same company or subsidiary to the United States, or an offer of a new job in the United States with very little notice.
(8) Other emergency situations, as determined by the Consular Section.

d. Large-scale disrupting event: An event such as a natural disaster or widespread civil unrest that affects large numbers of people and creates a humanitarian emergency for U.S. citizens or residents living abroad that would call for a blanket authorization for posts to accept and process I-130 petitions. In these circumstances, only the Chief or Deputy Chief of the USCIS International Operations Division may give blanket authorization to accept filing and adjudicate Form I-130 petitions for a specified period of time.

New filing address for some USCIS I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions (aka permanent green card). Effective date January 14, 2015.

1/29/2015

Update from USCIS: If you live in one of the states listed below, USCIS has changed the filing location for Form I-751, Petition to Remove the Conditions of Residence, as of January 14, 2015, from the Vermont Service Center (VSC) to the California Service Center (CSC):

-- Louisiana -- New Mexico -- Oklahoma -- South Carolina -- Tennessee -- Texas.

How New Petitions Will Be Affected:

If you are filing a new petition, please refer to the Form I-751 Landing Page on our website, www.uscis.gov,for the current filing locations.

Vermont Service Center will continue to accept and work all petitions received at their facility until February 16, 2015 for the states listed above.

Vermont Service Center will forward petitions received between February 17, 2015 through March 16, 2015 to the California Service Center for processing.

Vermont Service Center will begin rejecting petitions for incorrect jurisdiction received on or after March 17, 2015.

How Pending Cases Will Be Affected:

The Vermont Service Center will continue to process pending cases that have been received before the filing location changes went into effect for your state of residence. The filing location change will apply only to newly filed petitions.

How to Track the Status of Your Case:

You can check the status of your case by entering your receipt number in Case Status Online. You can also sign up to receive automatic case status updates by email.

You can ask us about the status of your new or pending case if you do not receive a decision within the published processing time for the California Service Center to process your Form I-751.

You may submit an inquiry using e-Request or call the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283. For TDD (hearing-impaired) assistance, please call 1-800-767-1833.

If you received a RFE Request for evidence or other notice:

If you have filed Form I-751 and we send you any notice, such as a request for evidence, please read the notice carefully. Make sure you respond to the service center that sent you the notice.

If You Move:

If you move while your case is pending, let us know your new address as soon as possible after you move. You can change your address online or call the National Customer Center. It is important that you tell us about any change of address so we can notify you of any action on your case.

See more at http://www.uscis.gov

Western Union CEO: It's tougher to be an immigrant in Europe than in the United States.

1/24/2015

Hikmet Ersek had a lot going for him as a youngster growing up in Vienna, Austria. Except for one thing: his foreign name. In 1975, when he was 19, the CEO of Western Union moved to the Austrian capital from Turkey to study for a masters in economics. He spoke three languages fluently and played basketball professionally.

He wasn't prepared for the prejudices he would face. His father was Turkish, his mother Austrian, but people kept asking him where he was from. "Your name is Hikmet, you must be Muslim, you not from here, how come you are successful?" he recalled.
Ersek went on to work for MasterCard (MA) and GE(GE) before joining Western Union in 1999.

Hostility towards immigrants is one of the biggest problems facing Europe. And it doesn't just affect foreigners who come from outside Europe's borders. "It is East versus West ... Romanians and Bulgarians feel the same when they come to the U.K.," said Mr. Ersek.

Ersek later moved to the U.S., where he felt more welcomed.
"The U.S. is a country built on migrants' entrepreneurship -- they don't ask where you're from, they ask what can you do," he said.

Ersek said Europe needs the adopt the same mindset in order to remain a strong player in the world economy.

Read at: http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/22/news/economy/immigration-europe-western-union-ceo-world-economic-forum/index.html?iid=HP_LN

A group of 28 mayors to file an amicus brief in support of Obama's executive action on immigration or immigration reform, November 2014.

1/24/2015

A group of mayors of led by New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and Los Angeles' Eric Garcetti are coming to the defense of President Barack Obama on immigration.

Twenty-eight (28) mayors have signed on to file an amicus brief this coming Monday in support of Obama's November 2014 executive actions on immigration, which are currently the target of a lawsuit from 25 states, led by Texas. The suit aims to block the president'sdeportation relief policies that will apply to some undocumented young people as well as undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents -- specifically, allowing them to stay in the country and work legally. Republicans in Congress are likewise seeking to block the programs.

Obama is backed by a dozen states and the District of Columbia, all of which filed an amicus brief earlier this month in support of the executive actions on immigration. The states in that brief were California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, along with the District of Columbia. Their amicus brief argues that new immigration policies announced by President Obama in November 2014 are legal and will have a positive impact.

The mayors' defense will be similar, arguing that Obama's executive actions serve the public interest. They will ask that the policies be allowed to move forward despite the lawsuit against them. Along with de Blasio and Garcetti, mayors from Washington, D.C., Chicago, Atlanta, Philadelphia, San Francisco and St. Louis were among those who signed on.

The amicus brief comes after a summit de Blasio hosted last month to discuss implementation of Obama's executive actions.

Here's the full list of mayors, according to a press release:

The following Mayors have signed on to the amicus brief:
Mayor Bill de Blasio, New York, New York
Mayor Eric Garcetti, Los Angeles, California
Mayor Kasim Reed, Atlanta, Georgia
Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, Baltimore, Maryland
Mayor Byron Browm, Buffalo, New York
Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Chicago, Illinois
Mayor Steve Benjamin, Columbia, South Carolina
Mayor Nan Whaley, Dayton, Ohio
Mayor Michael Hancock, Denver, Colorado
Mayor Muriel Bowser, Washington, D.C.
Mayor Pedro Segarra, Hartford, Connecticut
Mayor Annise Parker, Houston, Texas
Mayor Steven Fulop, Jersey City, New Jersey
Mayor Paul Soglin, Madison, Wisconsin
Mayor Ras Baraka, Newark, New Jersey
Mayor Michael Nutter, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Mayor Bill Peduto, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Mayor Charles Hales, Portland, Oregon
Mayor John Dickert, Racine, Wisconsin
Mayor Tom Butt, Richmond, California
Mayor Lovely Warren, Rochester, New York
Mayor Ralph Becker, Salt Lake City, Utah
Mayor Ed Lee, San Francisco, California
Mayor Gary McCarthy, Schenectady, New York
Mayor Ed Murray, Seattle, Washington
Mayor Francis Slay, St. Louis, Missouri
Mayor Marilyn Strickland, Tacoma, Washington
Mayor Mike Spano, Yonkers, New York

The following mayors have expressed their support and will sign on to the brief, pending final local approvals:

Mayor Karen Majewski, Hamtramck, Michigan
Mayor Virg Bernero, Lansing, Michigan
Mayor Tom Barrett, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Mayor Betsy Hodges, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Mayor Greg Stanton, Phoenix, Arizona

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/23/mayors-amicus-brief-immigration_n_6532926.html

NIV waiver: a visa must be issued within 90 days after a waiver was approved. INA 212(d)(3)(A) waiver.

1/23/2015

A few changes to DOS / US Department of State NIV 212(d)(3)(A) waiver procedure:

Beginning March 16, 2015, a visa must be issued within 90 days of receipt of an approved 212(d)(3)(A) waiver. INA 212(d)(3)(A) waivers are valid for the duration indicated by the ARO officer in the ARIS response. The waiver validity starts on the visa issuance date.(Source 9 FAM 40.301 N8)

See more at DOS website: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87150.pdf

DREAMERS or DACA grantees are permitted to get a driver's license or state photo ID in Arizona, a federal judge ruled.

1/23/2015

A U.S. federal judge has decided to make permanent an injunction overturning Arizona’s ban on issuing driver’s licenses to young immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children and granted Deferred Action status under new DACA program started by President Obama in 2012.

Judge issued the permanent injunction on Thursday, citing the “irreparable harm” caused to the young immigrants by not being able to have a license under an executive order issued by former Gov. Jan Brewer.

In the ruling, Judge Campbell cited examples of penalized immigrants, including one man unable to pursue a career as a firefighter because the local department required a license, and a graphic designer whose days were consumed by commuting by public transportation to meet clients.

These young immigrants, who were brought to the United States as children and grew up here, known as DREAMERS (or DACA grantees), were able to get driver’s licenses for the first time last month, after the United States Supreme Court let stand a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to stay the ban.

Read more at: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/23/us/politics/us-judge-says-dreamers-can-keep-drivers-licenses.html