WASHINGTON – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that it has received a sufficient number of H-1B petitions to reach the statutory cap of 65,000 for fiscal year (FY) 2012. USCIS is notifying the public that yesterday, Nov. 22, 2011, was the final receipt date for new H-1B specialty occupation petitions requesting an employment start date in FY 2012.

Properly filed cases will be considered received on the date that USCIS physically receives the petition; not the date that the petition was postmarked. USCIS will reject cap-subject petitions for new H-1B specialty occupation workers seeking an employment start date in FY 2012 that arrive after Nov. 22, 2011.

Read more.

Posted on November 23, 2011 | Category: Immigration News

Posted on November 23, 2011 | Category: Videos

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reminds eligible nationals of Haiti (and persons without nationality who last habitually resided in Haiti) who have not filed their Temporary Protected Status (TPS) applications, to follow guidance about late filing.

Please go to the ‘Filing Late’ section of the TPS Web page for guidance on how to file for TPS and to determine if you may still apply.

Read more.

Posted on November 18, 2011 | Category: Immigration News

As the political stalemate in immigration reform continues in Washington, D.C., more states address the problems of foreign national presence in the United States without lawful status by enacting their own legislation. The first state to enact such legislation was Arizona. With its enactment of SB 1070 on April 23, 2010, Arizona became the first state to try to deter the entry of foreign nationals without legal status and to detect those that were unlawfully present in the state. SB 1070 contains several harsh provisions. Those provisions include that Arizona law enforcement officials inquire the immigration status of foreign national when they are in “lawful contact”. It imposes criminal and civil liabilities for foreign nationals that fail to present immigration documents and for those that work in the state unlawfully as employees or independent contractors. Most, if not all of the SB 1070 provisions, have already existed in the federal law. Soon after SB 1070 is enacted, the U.S. Department of Justice, the ACLU and other private organizations mounted a legal challenge in the federal courts to challenge the constitutionality of the Arizona law under the preemption doctrine. The federal court did enjoin the harshest provisions of SB 1070, and the state has appealed this matter to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal. Several states have since then enacted similar legislation by copying Arizona’s law. Those states include Georgia, Alabama, Utah, and South Carolina. A similar legislation was introduced in Texas, but the legislation failed to gain support of businesses and was successfully blocked by Democrats in the Texas Senate.

Alabama has taken SB 1070 into a further step with its enactment of HB 56. HB 56 mandates that school official to inquire into the children’s and their parents’ immigration status and to report them to the state. In addition, HB 56 enjoins the Alabama state courts from enforcing any contract when the foreign nationals are unlawfully in the U.S. Much like Arizona, the U.S. Department of Justice and other groups have filed lawsuits in federal court to enjoin HB 56. On October 14, 2011, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta ordered an injunction blocking two key provisions of HB 56 from remaining in effect while the appeal of the district court’s ruling continues. The two provisions enjoined are (1) Section 10, making it a state crime to be undocumented in the state of Alabama; and (2) Section 28, requiring public school students to prove their immigration status or be presumed undocumented. The court also allowed two provisions to remain in effect while the legal challenge continues, and they are (1) Section 30, making it a felony for undocumented individuals to enter into business transactions with the state or any subdivision thereof; and (2) Section 12, allowing local law enforcement to stop, detain, or arrest anyone they suspect of being undocumented.

The political stalemate in immigration reform will persist and the likelihood of comprehensive immigration reform is bleak. There will be additional states that will enact their own legislation. Eventually, the U.S. Supreme Court will have to make a critical decision on the boundary of the state’s when its tries to address the problem of undocumented foreign nationals.

Read more.

Posted on November 16, 2011 | Category: Newsletters

I am still taken back and trying to come to grasp with the recent Fifth Circuit’s decision, Khalid v. Holder, Cause No. 10-60373 (Decided on September 8, 2011). It is ironic that the most conservative appellate court in the U.S. has ruled in favor of the applicant, while the 9th Circuit and 2nd Circuit Courts of Appeal have ruled the opposite. Normally, favorable immigration decisions are expected to be within the 9th and 2nd Circuit Courts of Appeal. For the past few weeks, I have reviewed most, and if not, all of the clients’ files that may benefit from this decision. For our clients that are eligible, I have called or personally consulted with you about the positive outcome of this decision and have advised on the necessary steps that we need to undertake. If for some reason that you feel that you are within the benefit of Khalid and that I have not contacted you, please do not hesitate to give me a call or send me an email. I am here to assist you in any possible way. Here are a few thoughts that I want to share with you after going through the process of reviewing all the files for Khalid.

The Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) looks simple but the interpretation of this Act is more complex than initially thought. For this reason, I think this is why the Department of Homeland has not come out with the regulations for this Act even though the Act was passed 9 years ago. For an attorney, I have to rely on the recent memorandums from USCIS and court decisions, whether from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) or federal court, for guidance. I can assure you that due to the complexity of CSPA, there will be many more decisions coming from the Courts regarding CSPA. For example, just days ago, the BIA just issued a precedent decision in Matter of Zamora-Molina, 25 I. & N. Dec. 606 (Oct. 6, 2011). See below for additional information.

There is no frame that will “fit all” when it comes to the application of CSPA. There are countless occasions in which I personally saw the inappropriate comparison of CSPA to other family’s child, or the miscalculation, or total misunderstanding of CSPA. The consequence is tremendous for the child that remains behind. For example, on at least 5 occasions, I have seen the U.S. Consulate in Saigon miscalculate or did not adequately consider the additional 45 days under the Patriot Act in the calculation of CSPA for the child’s age. There are occasions in which I’ve seen prospective clients in which their preparer did not “lock” or “freeze” the child’s CSPA age. Therefore, what could have been a simple process has prejudiced the eligibility and future of the child.

I want to remind our clients that when you change your address please inform the office. The office will update your address with the appropriate agency. I understand that as a newly arrived immigrant, your life may not be permanently settled. Sometimes, it is difficult for the office to contact you when it is necessary. In addition, you are required by law to notify your change of address to the Department of Homeland Security. Below is the chart that should help you when you have a change of address.

Read more.

Posted on November 14, 2011 | Category: Newsletters