OUTSIDE THE BOX THINKING, DELIVERING CUTTING EDGE SOLUTIONS!

The Department of State has released its latest Visa Bulletin. The December 2009 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.

Click here to view the December 2009 Visa Bulletin.

On November 3, 2009, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) updated the count of H-1B petitions received and counted towards the 65,000 cap.

As of October 30, 2009, 53,800 H-1B cap subject nonimmigrant visa petitions have been filed with the USCIS. The Service has advised that they will continue to accept petitions until the cap is reached.

Additionally, the Service has reported that they received 20,000 advanced degree H-1B petitions. Although the limit on advanced degree petitions is 20,000, past experience has tended to show that not all petitions received are approvable.

The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) Processing Times were released on November 4, 2009 with processing dates as of November 1, 2009

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

Administrative Appeals Office

On Wednesday, October 28, 2009, President Obama signed into law the FY10 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill. This Law provides a three year extension for four (4) immigration related programs. Specifically, the law extends the non-minister religious worker program, the “Conrad 30” program, the EB-5 visa program, and the E-Verify program through September 30, 2012.

The information contained in this web posting was provided by:
AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09102968 (posted Oct. 29, 2009)”

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) is offering FREE Naturalization Information Sessions in various places in the U.S. during the months of November and December.

Each session will cover the following topics: Naturalization eligibility requirements, the Naturalization process, the Naturalization test, and the rights and responsbilities of U.S. Citizenship.

In November, the free sessions will be held in Hartford, Connecticut; Oakland Park, Florida; Redding, California; and Atlantic City, New Jersey. Please click on the link below to find out more information or to register for a free informational session.

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has recently issued a fact sheet reminding qualifying applilcants to apply EARLY for an Advance Parole document, as Advance Parole processing times take about 90 days.

The list of applicants who must obtain an Advance Parole document before traveling outside of the United States is as follows:

• Applicants that have been granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS);

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 nonprofessional position of “Drywall taper.”

The employer filed a LC which was mailed on September 20, 2006 and accepted for processing on September 22, 2006. ETA Form 9089 indicated that the State Workforce Agency (SWA) job order was run from March 22, 2006 through March 26, 2006. The CO issued a denial letter on July 5, 2007 on the basis that the job order was completed more than 180 days prior to the submission of the labor application.

PERM Regulation 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(e)(2) controls and it provides that if the application is for a nonprofessional occupation, the employer must place a job order no more than 180 days before the filing of the application. Furthermore, the filing date for a mailed application is the date the CO stamps it as received, not the postmark date. In the instant case, the SWA job order was placed 184 days prior to the CO’s date stamp. Even if the date was calculated from when the employer shipped the application, the SWA job order was still untimely.

Processing Time reports for all of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) Centers were released on October 18, 2009 with processing dates as of August 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

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

The employer filed a LC on behalf of an alien worker and in November of 2007, the CO denied the application because he was unable to verify the Employer as a bona fide business entity. The Employer requested reconsideration by submitting its 2006 Federal Corporate Tax Return, its Business Certificate Registration and two utility bills. The Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) provided on the 2006 Tax Return only matched the first two digits of the FEIN previously provided on Form ETA 9089. Furthermore, the utility bills and the tax return provided a different address from that on the Business Certificate Registration. Thereafter, the CO issued a letter denying reconsideration because the FEIN on the corporate tax return did not match the FEIN on ETA Form 9089. The CO then forwarded the case to BALCA. The Employer filed a letter stating that its company had two addresses, one for its motor shop and the other for its main office, the CO did not file an appellate brief with the Board.

Upon BALCA review, it was determined that the requirement in ETA Form 9089 requiring submission of a FEIN was fully supported by the regulations and by policy of using the FEIN as a means of verifying whether an employer is a bona fide business entity. An employer MUST possess a valid FEIN when applying for labor certification pursuant to PERM regulation 20 C.F.R. § 656.3. In the present case, there was a discrepancy in the FEIN provided in ETA Form 9089 and in the 2006 tax return; however, the Employer failed to explain the discrepancy.

Contact Information