H1B Visa Lawyer Blog

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.

February 22, 2010

Updated List: SEVP Approved Schools

by Kellie N. Lego

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.

February 19, 2010

Updated Service Center Processing Times

by Kellie N. Lego

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

February 18, 2010

Updated Administrative Appeals Office Processing Times

by Kellie N. Lego

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

February 12, 2010

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

by Kellie N. Lego

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.

February 11, 2010

H-1B Admissions at Newark, NJ Airport

by Kellie N. Lego

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies.

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.

February 10, 2010

USCIS Guidance for Recipients of TARP Funding Filing H-1B Petitions

by Kellie N. Lego

Due to the passage of the Employ American Worker Act (EAWA), the USCIS is required to collect Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) information on each H-1B petitioning employer. Under the EAWA legislation, any company that has received TARP funding and seeks to hire new H-1B workers is considered an “H-1B dependent employer.” An H-1B dependent employer must make additional statements to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regarding the recruitment and non-displacement of U.S. workers when filing a Labor Condition Application (LCA).

After enactment of EAWA, USCIS revised its Form I-129, Petition for Non-immigrant Worker, to include a question asking whether the employer has received TARP funding.

It has come to the attention of the USCIS that some businesses who have received TARP funds may have repaid their obligations and may not know how to proceed with completing Form I-129 when filing for new H-1B hires.

February 9, 2010

March 2010 Visa Bulletin

by Kellie N. Lego

The Department of State has released its latest Visa Bulletin.

The March 2010 Visa Bulletin still shows employment based third preference (EB-3) visas as oversubscribed while the employment based second preference (EB-2) is current for all areas of chargeability except for China and India.

Already applied in EB3, thinking about filing in EB2…if you are eligible, contact MVP Law Group toll free at 1-800-447-0796.

February 8, 2010

Immigrant Integration Partnership – USCIS and Los Angeles, CA

by Kellie N. Lego

The Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), Alejandro Mayorkas and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa have entered into an agreement to strengthen and enhance local immigrant integration efforts. Launched as a pilot, this agreement will remain in effect for two (2) years with evaluations conducted by the USCIS to analyze the program’s effectiveness and to determine whether this partnership may be replicated in other locations.

The purpose of the partnership initiative is to strengthen immigrant integration efforts in Los Angeles through proactive citizenship awareness, education and outreach activities. The partnership has planned a series of informational sessions as well as other activities for Los Angeles residents where USCIS educational materials highlighting the benefits and process of U.S. Citizenship will be available at city facilities.

Mayor Villaraigosa provided that “this outreach campaign is a model of cooperation and civic empowerment that will help enrich America’s continued success as a nation of immigrants.”

February 5, 2010

BALCA reverses denial of Labor Certification – Employer Omissions on ETA Form 9089 were not material as other information provided on the Form answered the essential question posed by the Form

by Kellie N. Lego

The Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) recently reversed the final determination of a Certifying Officer (CO) denying labor certification (LC) for an alien worker for the position of Household Assistant.

The employer filed a LC which was accepted for processing on June 5, 2006. On September 20th, the CO denied the application because several required selections on the form had not been made by the Employer. The Employer thereafter requested reconsideration at the end of October. In its request for reconsideration, the Employer’s attorney provided responses to the omissions and believed that the request for reconsideration was to determine that the 30 day deadline had not elapsed. The Employer argued that each of the omissions was not material to the adjudication of the application as other information provided within the form answered the essential questions posed by the form. The Employer clearly stated in the motion for reconsideration that it was providing reasons for omissions in the event that the CO accepted the motion despite its lack of timeliness. Thereafter the CO accepted the Employer’s explanations for several of the selections, but found that the denial was valid because the Employer still did not provide information on what should be completed for the omitted selections. On appeal, the CO moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that it was not timely. The Employer thereafter filed a response opposing the CO’s motion to dismiss.

PERM Regulation 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(a) controls and it requires that an employer who desires to apply for a labor certification on behalf of an alien must file a completed Department of Labor (DOL) Application for Permanent Employment Certification (ETA Form 9089). The regulation goes on to provide that incomplete applications will be denied. In the instant case, the Board found that the CO waived the issue of timeliness and made their decision based upon the materiality of the omissions. The Board recognized that some omissions may not be material to the review of the substance of an application and stated that the Employer made reasonable arguments as to why, in context, the omissions all were not material; however, the CO proffered no explanation for why the omissions prevented a complete review of the application.