The first Passport Day in the USA was held last year and on that day, more than 57,000 passport applications were received nationwide. Due to the addition of new passport agencies in Detroit, MI; Dallas, TX; Minneapolis, MN; and Tucson, AZ, the DOS expects even more Americans to join in celebrating Passport Day in the USA.

Each passport facility is publishing details of their events in their local communities. Customers can find addresses of the nearest passport agency or participating passport acceptance facility on the DOS website.

The DOS Press Release also made reference to the proposed passport fee increases – total cost for a first time applicant aged 16 and older, applying for a passport book would be $135, and for those younger than 16, the price would be $105. Additionally, the cost of a passport card for a first time applicant 16 or older would run at $55 and at $40 for those younger than age 16. Passport books and cards for those aged 16 and older are valid for a period of 10 years, whereas they are only valid for a period of 5 years for those younger than 16. Currently, the public comment period for the proposed passport fee increases ends on March 11, 2010, and Brenda Sprague, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Passport Services indicated that if the fees are to be increased they would not be implemented until April with enough notice to the general public.

Accordingly, the proposed passport fee increases will not affect Passport Day in the USA this year. The current cost of a new passport book for an individual 16 or older is $100, and $85 for anyone younger than 16. The current cost to renew a passport book for an individual 16 or older is $75, and $85 for anyone younger than 16. The cost of a passport card for an applicant 16 or older is $55, and $35 for an applicant younger than 16. The current cost to renew a passport book for an individual 16 or older is $20, and $35 for anyone younger than 16.

The DOS comes from the perspective that the U.S. passport book and card are not just for travel anymore because they serve as proof of a bearer’s identity as well as of U.S. citizenship, something other portable documents do not do. Having a U.S. passport book or card means that wherever you go domestically or internationally, you can prove that you are a U.S. citizen entitled to the many benefits of U.S. Citizenship.

If you are a U.S. citizen and do not have a U.S. Passport or need to renew your passport, please visit your nearest passport agency or participating passport acceptance facility on Saturday, March 27, 2010.

Saturday, March 27, 2010 is PASSPORT DAY IN THE USA!

The employer filed a LC which was accepted for processing on May 17, 2007. ETA Form 9089 indicated that the position was a nonprofessional occupation. The CO denied certification on the grounds that the job order was not placed with the State Workforce Agency (SWA) for a period of 30 days in violation of the regulations. The Employer responded by requesting reconsideration stating that it had placed two different job orders but did not provide any supporting evidence that reflected proof of either of the posting dates listed on Form 9089. The Employer further added that “any errors are immaterial and minor in the overall effect and outcome of the labor certification.” The CO issued a letter of reconsideration finding that the application was denied because the job order placed with the SWA was not posted for a period of 30 days.

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

(2) Nonprofessional occupations: If the application is for a nonprofessional occupation, the employer must at a minimum, place a job order and two newspaper advertisements within 6 months of filing the application. The steps must be conducted at least 30 days but no more than 180 days before the filing of the application.

(i) Job Order. Placing a job order with the SWA serving the area of intended employment for a period of 30 days. The start and end dates of the job order entered on the application serve as documentation of this step.

In the instant case, the Employer did not place the job order with the SWA for a period of 30 days. As Form 9089 indicates, the first job order was placed for only a period of 29 days, and the second job order would have run afoul of the regulations, as it was filed less than 30 days before submission of the application. Additionally, the Employer did not produce any evidence of either of the job orders. BALCA stated that failure to post a job order for a period of thirty days is a substantive violation of the regulations.

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

Matter of Monir Attar, Inc.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The CBP inspector’s questions focused on (1) who the individuals worked for, (2) how their pay was computed, (3) who paid their salary, (4) their job duties, and (5) what they were paid. According to the reports, some individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.

After inquiring with CBP headquarters about these alleged incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised that many of the cases involved in the allegations involved companies currently under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for ongoing fraud. The CBP provided that upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal was based on “the totality of the circumstances” and was reviewed on a “case-by-case” basis. The CBP also confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.

AILA was provided with additional news regarding a new policy instituted at Newark Airport dealing with random checks of returning H-1B, L-1 and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person’s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further review, and if questions still surround the person’s admissibility they may possibly be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission to the U.S. or be subject to expedited removal.

The Newark Airport port of entry has another policy regarding Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs). The Airport has a mandatory detention policy for returning LPRs who have a post-1998 conviction. There are several exceptions to detainment for humanitarian reasons, and if the CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record within 24 hours, the person may be released.

Moving Forward:
Employment Based Immigration applicants - If you must travel outside of the U.S., you should thoroughly prepare for your return trip to the U.S. by reviewing all pertinent documents, as well as carrying certain evidence to support assertions made in the petition. Certain evidence may include but is not limited to the following: pay stubs, employment verification letter, income tax returns, W-2 Forms, Employment offer letter, Employment Agreement.

Petitioning Employers – You must be prepared for inquiries from CBP officers to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition. Additionally, you should keep and maintain adequate employee personnel and inspection files, and keep public information as accurate and current as possible.

Additionally, please note that the USCIS has revised I-797 Approval notices to include the following fraud related language:

NOTICE – Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.

Source: AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (Posted 2/2/2010)