March 10, 2010

The Natural State – Immigrants, Latinos and Asians are a Growing Economic and Political Force in Arkansas

As the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) National Day of Action is swiftly approaching on March 25, 2010, we thought that it would be an appropriate time to provide some statistics on the Immigrant population in the United States as provided by research conducted through the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) of the American Immigration Counsel (AIC). The AILA National Day of Action is an opportunity to educate Members of Congress and their staff about the problems plaguing our immigration system so that they can be more effective in crafting, promoting and supporting legislative solutions.

The IPC has complied research on the Immigrant, Latino and Asian community for most of the states within our Nation. Every Wednesday, we will provide in our blog post, the highlights from the research conducted by the IPC.

Arkansas – The Natural State

The IPC has complied research which shows that Immigrants, Latinos and Asians are an essential part of Arkansas’s economy, labor force and tax base. Immigrants and their children are a growing economic and political force as consumers, taxpayers and entrepreneurs. With the nation working towards economic recovery, immigrants and their children will continue to play a key role in shaping the economic and political future of the Natural State.

Below, please find the highlights from Arkansas:
 Immigrants made up 4.2% (or 118,405 people) of Arkansas’s population in 2007.
 28.1% of immigrants (or 33,316 people) in Arkansas were naturalized U.S. Citizens in 2007 who are eligible to vote.
 Latinos accounted for 5.2% (or 147,409 people) and Asians 1.2% (or 34,018 people) of Arkansans in 2007.
 The purchasing power of Latinos totaled $2.7 billion and Asian buying power totaled $972 million in Arkansas in 2008.
 If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arkansas, the state could lose $798 million in expenditures, $ 354 million in economic output, and approximately 6,660 jobs.

There is no denying the contributions Immigrants, Latinos and Asians make in Arkansas and the important role they will play in the state’s political and economic future. For more data on their contributions to the Natural State, view the IPC fact sheet in its entirety.

Immigration Reform will not come until we as a Nation are fully aware of the problems plaguing the current system.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.

Bookmark and Share

March 10, 2010

The Grand Canyon State – Immigrants, Latinos and Asians are a Growing Economic and Political Force in Arizona

As the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) National Day of Action is swiftly approaching on March 25, 2010, we thought that it would be an appropriate time to provide some statistics on the Immigrant population in the United States as provided by research conducted through the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) of the American Immigration Counsel (AIC). The AILA National Day of Action is an opportunity to educate Members of Congress and their staff about the problems plaguing our immigration system so that they can be more effective in crafting, promoting and supporting legislative solutions.

The IPC has complied research on the Immigrant, Latino and Asian community for most of the states within our Nation. Every Wednesday, we will provide in our blog post, the highlights from the research conducted by the IPC.

Arizona – The Grand Canyon State

The IPC has complied research which shows that Immigrants, Latinos and Asians are an essential part of Arizona’s economy, labor force and tax base. Immigrants and their children are a growing economic and political force as consumers, taxpayers and entrepreneurs. With the nation working towards economic recovery, immigrants and their children will continue to play a key role in shaping the economic and political future of the Grand Canyon State.

Below, please find the highlights from Arizona:
 Immigrants made up 15.6% (or 991,584 people) of Arizona’s population in 2007.
 29.7% of immigrants (or 294,541 people) in Arizona were naturalized U.S. Citizens in 2007 who are eligible to vote.
 Latinos accounted for 29.7% (or 1,882,610 people) and Asians 2.4% (or 152,130 people) of Arizonans in 2007.
 The purchasing power of Latinos totaled $31.3 billion and Asian buying power totaled $5.8 billion in Arizona in 2008.
 If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state could lose $26.4 billion in expenditures, $ 11.7 billion in economic output, and approximately 140,324 jobs.

There is no denying the contributions Immigrants, Latinos and Asians make in Arizona and the important role they will play in the state’s political and economic future. For more data on their contributions to the Grand Canyon State, view the IPC fact sheet in its entirety.

Immigration Reform will not come until we as a Nation are fully aware of the problems plaguing the current system.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.

Bookmark and Share

March 9, 2010

BALCA upholds denial of Labor Certification – Employer Failed to Submit Proper Documentation to satisfy the Business Necessity Requirement

The Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) recently affirmed the final determination of a Certifying Officer (CO) denying labor certification (LC) for an alien worker for the position of “Truck Driver."

The employer filed a LC which was accepted for processing on June 1, 2007. ETA Form 9089 indicated that knowledge of a foreign language was required to perform the job duties. The CO issued an Audit Notification letter requesting further documentation justifying the business necessity for this job requirement. The Employer responded by stating that the “job opportunity requires the capability to speak a foreign language because the products that the company hauls are shipped to Cuauhtemoc, Chihuahua, Mexico.” The Employer added that the community speaks either Spanish or German, and a truck driver who did not speak either of those languages would be at a disadvantage. Further, the employer asserted that the truck drivers it currently employs are fluent in English, Spanish and German. Thereafter the CO issued a denial letter; the Employer responded by requesting reconsideration and asked the CO what type of evidence it needed to submit to address the business necessity requirement and that it would be willing to provide any and all supporting documentation needed. The CO issued a letter of reconsideration indicating that the Employer had not justified its foreign language requirement by demonstrating business necessity.

PERM Regulation 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(h) controls and it provides:

(2) A foreign language requirement can not be included, unless it is justified by business necessity. Demonstrating business necessity for a foreign language requirement may be based upon the following:

(i) the nature of the occupation (e.g., translator); or
(ii) the need to communicate with a large majority of the employer’s customers, contractors, or employees who can not communicate effectively in English, as documented by:

(A) the employer furnishing the number and proportion of its clients, contractors, or employees who can not communicate in English, and/or a detailed plan to market products or services in a foreign country; and
(B) a detailed explanation of why the duties of the position for which certification is sought requires frequent contact and communication with customers, employees or contractors who can not communicate in English and why it is reasonable to believe the allegedly foreign-language-speaking customers, employees, and contractors can not communicate in English.

In the instant case, there is no evidence establishing that the occupation of “Truck Driver” normally requires a foreign language requirement, and only mere assertions were made to attempt to satisfy the business necessity requirement without any actual supporting documentation provided by the employer. BALCA stated that the Employer did not meet its burden of justifying the foreign language requirement by demonstrating a business necessity.

Accordingly, the Board affirmed the decision of the CO in denying labor certification.

Matter of UMC Logistics, Inc.

Bookmark and Share

March 8, 2010

ICE Serves Form I-9 Audit Notices to 180 Businesses in 5 States

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) launched a bold new audit initiative in 2009 to combat the problem of hiring of an illegal workforce.

On March 2, 2010, 180 businesses in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Tennessee were served with Notice of Inspections (NOIs) indicating that ICE would inspect their hiring records (Form I-9) to determine whether they are in accordance with the employment eligibility verification laws and regulations.

Audits involve a comprehensive review of Form I-9s. Form I-9 must be completed and retained for each new hire. Under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (“IRCA”), all employers must verify that every person that is hired is either: a U.S. citizen, a lawful permanent resident, or a foreign national with authorization to work in the U.S. Within three business days of beginning the job, a new employee must furnish identity and employment eligibility documents (i.e., passport, permanent resident card, employment authorization card, driver’s license, birth certificate, military id, etc). It is the responsibility of the employer to examine the documents to determine whether they are genuine and relate to the specific employee. Once the I-9 form is completed, they are to be kept in office for the longer of three years after employment begins or one year after employment is terminated. Most importantly, if an employee has temporary employment authorization, a re-verification of employment eligibility must be conducted prior to expiration of the employment authorization.

DHS/ICE officers conduct an estimated 60,000 I-9 audits a year on employers around the country and have issued fines in excess of $1,000,000. Additionally, each mistake on an I-9 Form counts as a separate violation. All employers are further subject to civil and criminal penalties for knowingly hiring or continuing to employ aliens who are not authorized to work in the U.S.

In the News Release announcing the issuance of the NOIs, Raymond R. Parmer, Jr. acting special agent in charge of the ICE Office of Investigations in New Orleans stated that “ICE is committed to establishing a meaningful I-9 inspection program to promote compliance with the law. This effort is a first step in ICE’s long-term strategy to address and deter illegal employment.”

Accurate completion of I-9 forms is a good faith defense to a charge of hiring unauthorized workers. Therefore, the best way for an employer to avoid IRCA problems is to establish a meaningful I-9 audit system.

If you are interested in conducting an internal I-9 Audit to ensure your company’s compliance with the employment eligibility verification laws and regulations, contact our office today.

Bookmark and Share

March 5, 2010

Updated Administrative Appeals Office Processing Times

The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) Processing Times were released on March 2, 2010 with processing dates as of March 1, 2010.

If you filed an appeal, please review the links below to determine the applicable processing time associated with your particular case.

Administrative Appeals Office

The current processing time for an I-129 H-1B Appeal is 13 months. The current processing time for an I-140 EB2 Appeal for an Advanced Degree Professional is 24 months; for an I-140EB3 Appeal for a Skilled or Professional Worker is 24 months. Most other cases are within USCIS's processing time goal of 6 months or less.

Bookmark and Share

March 4, 2010

RECENT UPDATE on the Federalized Process for Obtaining PWD Requests

Effective January 21, 2010, the Department of Labor's iCERT online system was updated to allow the submission of electronic prevailing wage determination requests. This electronic process was intended to allow Employers and/or their Designated Representatives to submit and obtain prevailing wage determinations (PWD) for use in the H-1B, H-1B1 (Chile/Singapore), H-1C, H-2B, E-3 (Australia), and permanent labor certification programs through the iCERT portal. However, at this time, this federalized electronic process has caused delays in the issuance of prevailing wage determinations.

Prior to January 1, 2010, the date of enactment of the Federalized Process, employers and/or their designated representative were able to obtain PWDs from their State Workforce Agencies (SWAs), which normally took between two (2) to fourteen (14) days or even a months time. Currently, requestors are waiting between thirty (30) to sixty (60) days to obtain a response from the DOL further delaying the commencement of a new PERM case, or the filing of an AC-21 Portability Case.

Requestors who have submitted PWD requests to the NPWHC by U.S. Mail between January 1, 2010 and January 21, 2010, the launch date of the iCERT PWD System have received a response in regards to their PWD requests. However, at this time, there appear to be delays in the issuance of PWDs through the national DOL office with both hard copy and electronically submitted requests since January 21, 2010.

According to many interactive blog posts by various Immigration Law Firms, the DOL has reportedly not acted on any requests submitted online. The DOL has been advised of this situation and the effect that it has upon the Employment Based Green Card (PERM) and H-1B programs, as obtaining a PWD is the starting point in the PERM process for most foreign workers. Although the DOL is aware of the situation, no guidance, alternative route or explanation has been made available, as it is now March 4, 2010 and the delays continue.

You may still submit hard copy PWD requests to the address listed below:
U.S. Department of Labor-ETA, National Prevailing Wage and Helpdesk Center,
Attn: PWD Request:
1341 G Street, NW
Suite 201
Washington, DC 20005-3142

Or, you may submit electronic PWD requests through the iCERT portal.

Please be aware of the current delays and plan accordingly!

MVP Law Group will continue to monitor the situation and will provide you with any information that becomes available.

Bookmark and Share

March 3, 2010

The Last Frontier – Immigrants, Latinos and Asians are a Growing Economic and Political Force in Alaska

As the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) National Day of Action is swiftly approaching on March 25, 2010, we thought that it would be an appropriate time to provide some statistics on the Immigrant population in the United States as provided by research conducted through the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) of the American Immigration Counsel (AIC). The AILA National Day of Action is an opportunity to educate Members of Congress and their staff about the problems plaguing our immigration system so that they can be more effective in crafting, promoting and supporting legislative solutions.

The IPC has complied research on the Immigrant, Latino and Asian community for most of the states within our Nation. Every Wednesday, we will provide in our blog post, the highlights from the research conducted by the IPC.

Alaska – The Last Frontier

The IPC has complied research which shows that Immigrants, Latinos and Asians are an essential part of Alaska’s economy, labor force and tax base. Immigrants and their children are a growing economic and political force as consumers, taxpayers and entrepreneurs. With the nation working towards economic recovery, immigrants and their children will continue to play a key role in shaping the economic and political future of the Last Frontier.

Below, please find the highlights from Alaska:

 Immigrants made up 7.2% (or 48,928 people) of Alaska’s population in 2007.
 51.2% of immigrants in 2007 (or 25,046 people) in Alaska were naturalized U.S. Citizens who are eligible to vote.
 Latinos accounted for 2.6% (or 8,000 people) and Asians 2.3% (or 7,000 people) of Alaskans in 2008.
 The purchasing power of Latinos totaled $1.2 billion and Asian buying power totaled $1.1 billion in Alaska in 2009.
 If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Alaska, the state could lose $484.7 million in expenditures, $ 215.3 million in economic output, and approximately 1,980 jobs.

There is no denying the contributions Immigrants, Latinos and Asians make in Alaska and the important role they will play in the state’s political and economic future. For more data on their contributions to the Last Frontier, view the IPC fact sheet in its entirety.

Immigration Reform will not come until we as a Nation are fully aware of the problems plaguing the current system.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.

Bookmark and Share

February 23, 2010

USCIS Issues Information Collection for Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has issued information collection for Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker until April 9, 2010.

During this period, USCIS will be evaluating whether to revise Form I-129.

The purpose of this form is for employers to petition for an alien to come to the United States temporarily to perform services or labor, or to receive training, as an H-1B, H-1C, H-2A, H-2B, H-3, L-1, O-1, O-2, P-1, P-1S, P-2, P-2S, P-3, P-3S, Q-1 or R-1 nonimmigrant worker. Employers may also use this form to request an extension of stay or change of status for an alien as an E-1, E-2, or TN nonimmigrant.

Members of the public are encouraged to submit comments and/or suggestions to USCIS, especially comments regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Comments may be submitted to:
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), USCIS,
Chief, Regulatory Products Division, Clearance Office,
111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 3008
Washington, DC 20529-2210.

Comments may also be submitted to DHS via facsimile to 202-272-8352 or via e-mail at rfs.regs@dhs.gov.

**When submitting comments by e-mail, please make sure to add OMB Control No. 1615-0009 in the subject box.

Bookmark and Share

February 22, 2010

Updated List: SEVP Approved Schools

The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recently updated their list of Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) approved schools. The schools listed have all been certified to participate in the program.

The program allows foreign students interested in obtaining an education in the United States to complete a visa petition, pay the required fee, and attend a U.S. College or University.

Interested Foreign students: There is a process in obtaining a student visa, but it is not a difficult one. The student must first obtain Form I-20 from the U.S. College or University from which he/she intends to enroll, pay the required visa fee (Form I-901) and contact a local U.S. Consulate/Embassy to schedule an interview. The SEVP procedures differ among U.S. Consulates/Embassies; contact your U.S. Consulate/Embassy NOW to determine its particular procedure on applying for a visa before planning for the interview.

Interested Schools: There is a separate process to obtain F & M Certification. Authorized school officials must obtain and complete Form I-17. An overview of the SEVP Certification process can be found on the ICE website . If approved, the school will be certified and allowed to issue Form I-20 to qualifying foreign students.

If you need assistance or an explanation of the SEVP, please contact our office to schedule a consultation.

Bookmark and Share

February 19, 2010

Updated Service Center Processing Times

Processing Time reports for all of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) Service Centers were released on February 17, 2010 with processing dates as of December 31, 2009.

If you filed a petition with one of the Service Centers, please review the links below to determine the applicable processing time associated with your particular case.

California Service Center
National Benefits Center
Nebraska Service Center
Texas Service Center
Vermont Service Center

If your petition is out-side of the normal range listed, contact USCIS. (1-800-375-5283)
If you are a client of the MVP Law Group and would like our assistance please contact our office.

Bookmark and Share

February 18, 2010

Updated Administrative Appeals Office Processing Times

The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) Processing Times were released on February 17, 2010 with processing dates as of February 1, 2010.

If you filed an appeal, please review the links below to determine the applicable processing time associated with your particular case.

Administrative Appeals Office

The current processing time for an I-129 H-1B Appeal is 14 months. The current processing time for an I-140 EB2 Appeal for an Advanced Degree Professional is 25 months; for an I-140EB3 Appeal for a Skilled or Professional Worker is 23 months. Most other cases are within USCIS's processing time goal of 6 months or less.

Bookmark and Share

February 12, 2010

BALCA vacates denial of Labor Certification – Fundamental Fairness requires Employer be given a Second Opportunity to Produce the Relevant Document

The Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) recently vacated and remanded the final determination of a Certifying Officer (CO) denying labor certification (LC) for an alien worker for the Professional position of “Photographer."

The employer filed a LC which was accepted for processing on May 21, 2007. ETA Form 9089 indicated that the State Workforce Agency (SWA) determined the prevailing wage to be $7.31 per hour, and the skill level, “Professional.” Additionally, the employer did not provide a name or date of the second newspaper or professional journal advertisement. The Employer had attached several documents to ETA Form 9089, including documents showing the Alien’s qualifications and visa status; a March 2007 job order placed with the NY State Department of Labor; a print out of a www.flcdatacenter.com web page showing the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) wages for a photographer in the Middleton, NY area; tear sheets from one newspaper advertisement; and resume and interview notes for a couple of the rejected job applicants. The CO thereafter issued a letter denying certification based on the fact that the Employer had not selected a proper Skill Level, and did not provide the name of the second advertisement or professional journal. The employer then requested reconsideration by submitting a copy of the OES print out indicating that no skill level was set for the position of Photographer, and provided evidence of several additional newspaper advertisements. The record indicates that the Employer was asked to provide a copy of the SWA PWD to the DOL analyst and submitted a new SWA PWD for 2009, instead of one dated for 2007. The CO determined that its basis for denial was valid and forwarded the appeal file to BALCA.

PERM Regulation 20 C.F.R. § 656.24(a) controls and it provides that the employer must request a prevailing wage determination from the SWA having jurisdiction over the proposed area of intended employment. The SWA must enter its wage determination on the form it uses and return the form with its endorsement to the employer. Furthermore, the employer must maintain the SWA PWD in its files and be prepared to submit it if requested in the course of an audit.
In the instant case, the Employer should have obtained a PWD from the SWA prior to filing ETA Form 9089, and entered the skill level assigned by the SWA on Form 9089. However, the Board found that it may be possible that the Employer did not understand that what the CO was asking for was the 2007 PWD that the Employer should have obtained prior to filing and not a new PWD. Subsequently, the Board provided that fundamental fairness requires that the Employer be given a second opportunity to produce the relevant PWD.

Accordingly, the Board vacated the decision of the CO in denying labor certification and returned the matter to the CO for further processing.

Matter of Galaxy Studios, Inc.

Bookmark and Share