THE OH LAW FIRM

Dedicated Professionals in Immigration Law for 24 Years

Reported by Matthew Oh, Esquire.

(09/15/04 - 02/28/05)

The Oh Law Firm and its Lawyers are not responsible for reliance by the reader on this information as each individual situation may be unique and different. The readers are advised to seek legal counsel from a qualified immigration attorney. The information stated here is subject to change.

The posting in the Breaking News requires visitors' some level of knowledge of immigration issues. Reading one posting without closely following previous postings will result in reading it out of context. The laws, policies, and practices of agencies are constantly changing and people should be careful in reading old postings. People should not take the news in this page as a legal advice. The purpose of Breaking News is to feed into the immigrant communities up to the minute news, especially inside information of agencies' decision making. Just like any other news reporting, the life span of the news can be very short. This is not a text book or a law book. It is a "news report." This site will welcome "only" those visitors who follow the news reports everyday just like the subscribers of daily newspapers. The sole purpose of this site is to serve the immigrant communities and not immigration law professionals...

Current Page[08/01/2008 - Present]/Archive XVII[03/31/2008 - 07/31/2008]Archive XVI[08/01/2007 - 03/31/2008/Archive XV [04/30/2007 - 07/31/2007]/Archive XIV[06/15/2006 - 03/31/2007]Archive XIII [12/01/05 - 06/14/06]/ Archive XII [08/01/05 - 11/30/05]/Archive XI [04/30/05 - 07/31/05

02/25/2005: Obligation of 100% of Prevailing Wage Pay for H-1B and Permanent Labor Certification

• The so-called new H-1B legislation will change the rule of prevailing wage payment obligation effective March 8, 2005. It no only changes the prevailing wage determination from the current two levels to four levels but also from the current rule allowing 95% payment of prevailing wage to the obligation of payment of 100% of prevailing wage to file the H-1B.
• As for the PERM final rule, it removed the 95% rule from the current labor certification rule which will take effect on March 28, 2005. The question remains what happens with the labor certification filers of RIR or traditional regular application between March 8 and March 28, 2005. The answers to the question will be critical in that under the backlog processing system, one may not learn that the wage which the employers offered in the applications which they filed between March 8 and March 28 was 95% figure, which would be rejected by the DOL after a long wait. Close reading of the new H-1B legislation indicates that the 100% wage obligation may take effect not only in the H-1B filing but also permanent labor certification application filing effective March 8, 2005. The RIR filers during this period should seek legal counsel on the prevailing wage issue before they file the RIR applications.

02/25/2005: DOL Transition Guidance for Labor Certification Applications, February 2005

• On February 16, 2005, the DOL Deputy Secretary issued the transition guidance for the labor certification application, and the DOL Region V (Chicago) issued its own transition guidance to the SWAs in its jurisdiction on February 18, 2005 as follows:
  • HQ Transition Guidance
  • Region V Transition Guidance
• There are all sorts of rumors and confusions in the immigration community on the actual operation of the Backlog Processing Centers in Philadelphia and and Dallas. We want to clarify the following two points:
  • These Guidances made it clear that the DOL had changed its initial policy reflected in the first Transition Guidance of Bill Carlson, Chief of Foreign Labr Certificaion Division that the cases which were received after January 1, 2005 would be processed by the National Processing Centers. Under the Transition Guidance of the Deputy Secretary, currently all the cases which were received after January 1, 2005 have been shipped and forwarded by the SWAs to the Backlog Processing Centers after the date stamping.
  • The deadline for filing of current labor certification application under the current law is March 27, 2005 and any cases received by the SWAs after March 27, 2005 will be rejected and returned to the applicants. Some applicants may wish to file the applications, particularly RIR, before the DOL launchs the new system of PERM on March 28, 2005. The TG reminds the last minute filers that the deadline is determined not by the actual physical receipt but by "postmark." Accordingly, in the event that the RIR applications cannot be filed in person or by delivery services sufficiently ahead of time, they should make it sure that it is filed at the Postal Services with the postmark of March 27, 2005.
• The name of the new backlog processing offices is one other area which the immigration legal community and immigrant community are confused. For that matter, the DOL itself was confused. It used Backlog Elimination Center, Backlog Reduction Center, and Backlog Processing Center inter-mixedly. It also happened with the USCIS when there was reorganization and BCIS and USCIS were used inter-mixedly by the community as well as the government itself. By now, people should know that the official name of the offices is neither Backlog Elimination Center nor Backlog Reduction Center but Backlog Processing Center.

02/24/2005: Reminder of Consular Visa Application Fee Changes Effective 03/08/2005

• On February 2, 2005, the U.S. Department of State published its final rule changing the visa application fees for some applications effective March 8, 2005, including the following:
  • For immigrant visa applicants - $380 per visa
    For DV Lottery winners - $375 for the Diversity Visa (DV) Lottery application and $380 for visa
    For returning residents - $400 for the returning resident status application (DS-117) and $380 for visa
• See the final rule,

02/23/2005: Service Centers Processing Times 02/23/2005

• See homepage.

02/23/2005: Visas Mantis Clearance Policy Change and Additional Improvement Needed

• The Government Accounting Office (GAO) issued its February 2005 report on the recent improvement of Visas Mantis clearance policy of the U.S. Departments of State and Homeland Security. The report, however, recommended that something more would need to be done to assure travelling of certain foreign science-related students and researchers. Specifically it cited its survey results that a number of officials at certain visa posts were not knowledgeable and connected to the Visas Mantis clearance sources causing the delay in processing of nonimmigrant visas. It also reminded of serious problem for the Chinese students and scientists who were restricted to two-entry visas which are valid only for 6 months due to the failure of working out with the Chinese government to change the recriprocity agreement. This report did not reach other issues which this web site had brought up two or three days back, but reinstatement of visa revalidation and automatic visa revalidation for travellers to Canada and Mexico for visa applications should be seriously considered by the U.S. Department of State and Homeland Security to ease the current road blocks to the travelling of foreign scientists and researchers. For the Highlights of the GAO report, please click here.
• Effective January 15, 2005, Chinese visitors travelling on B-1 or B-2 visitors are issued one-year valid multiple entry visas thanks to the change of reciprocity agreement between the U.S. and China, but the change has yet to be taken place in the areas of other nonimmigrant visas.

02/23/2005: New USCIS Guidelines for RFE and Denials

• We reported on February 19, 2005 that the USCIS had withdrawn the previous memorandum on RFE and denials and issued a new guidelines for the same issues to the field offices. Here are the full texts of the withdrawn memorandum and new memorandum:
  • New Memorandum of 02/16/2005
  • Withdrawn Memorandum of 05/04/2004

02/22/2005: March 8, 2005 Implementation of New H-1B Legislation and Required DFLC Amendment of ETA 9035E Form

• The current Labor Condition Application for H-1B Nonimmigrants, ETA 9035E, was revised when the H-1B Dependent Employer attestation (recruitment attestation and no U.S. worker dispalcement attestation) requirement law sunset in October 2003 to remove such attestations from the form. Now, the new H-1B legislation will revive such attestation requirement for the H-1B dependent employers beginning from March 8, 2005. Accordingly, DOL is required to revise ETA 9035E form to revive such attestations. Curiously, though, DOL has yet to announce amendment of the ETA 9035E form when March 8, 2005 is only a few steps away. The new legislation was signed into law on December 8, 2004 by the President. On December 10, 2004, the DOL requested the OMB to review its "proposed rule" to amend the LCA filing procedure which has to be acted upon by the White House.
• The H-1B dependent employers should pay attention to this upcoming change in the law and the form when they file a Labor Condition Application for H-1B nonimmigrants (ETA 9035E) on or after March 8, 2005.

02/21/2005: State Department Reports Improvement of NIV Processing Times from Average 67 to 15 Days

• According to the news report, the nonimmigrant visa application processing times have lately reduced from average 67 days to 15 days thanks to the pounding pressures from the higher learning institutions and business community. Recent change of policy in the Visas Mantis clearance extending the expiration of cleance to several years is expected to help further the processsing times for the nonimmigrant visas. Since 9/11 the State Department had been tightening the nonimmigrant visa processing to the snail pace taking months or even over a year, and the traffics of foreign brains, scientists, and talents had continuously swifted from the U.S. to its allies in Europe and Asia. The colleges, universities, research entities, and hightech businesses, among others, sufferred visibly from such"paranoic" visa policy of the State Department and the intensity of their our cries and anger mounted in the political arena in the Beltway. Under such pressure, the State Department started recently loosening up the visa processing procedures.
• We commend the State Department for the change of policy and encourage the agency to show continuing improvement in other areas of visa procedures. Specifically, we urge the Secretary Rice to reinstate the visa revalidation procedure and the automatic visa revalidation procedure for the visa applicants in the neighboring countries. The recent improvement of political conflict in the Middle East, particularly between Israel and Palestine and other neighbors, conclusion of the war in Iraq, and no visible signs of international terrorists activities reflect that it is time for the State Department to free itself from the paranoic visa policies and improve the traffics of human beings between the U.S. and other countries in the world.

02/21/2005: Minnesota SWA Completed Transfer of Entire State Backlog Cases to Dallas BPC on 02/17/2005

• Minnesota State Labor Certification Unit (SWA) reports that on February 17, 2005, it shipped out all the labor certification applications at the state level to the Dallas Backlog Processing Center. This report implies that the state offices had apparently received further instructions from the National Office on the shipping schedules. The Minnesota SWA had been waiting for such instructions for a long time and pending the instructions, the state office had been holding on the applications without any action or processing. The applications which had been generated in Minnesota and forwarded to the former Chicago Region were forwarded by the Region to the Dallas Backlog Processing Center earlier, but the cases in some of smaller states at the state level had been in holding pattern as their processing times for the cases at the state level were much faster than other states such as the ten big states. Since the Backlog Processing Center scheduled the transfers from the states based on the priority dates, the cases in states such as Minnesota had to wait a longer time in the shipping schedules. It is expected that the applicants whose cases had remained at the Minnesota state office until a few days back will received the so-called 45-day letters from the Dallas Processing Center. Accordingly, these filers should direct their communication to the Dallas office pursuant to the recent instructions from the DFLC National Office, including the address changes or substitution of legal counsels.

02/20/2005: U.S. Master's Degree Holder H-1B Filing Beginning 03/08/2005 and Issues

• Beginning from March 8, 2005, employers hiring a nonimmigrant who holds a master's or higher degree from U.S. higher learning institutions but does not have a H-1B status will be allowed to file a new H-1B petition under the new H-1B legislation that has assigned special 20,000 H-1B annual cap numbers for U.S. advanced degree holders. There are, however, several issues the employers and the aliens should be aware of before filing. We will look at a few issues.
• Definition of U.S. Master's Degree Holder Requirement:
  • For the purpose of eligibility of H-1B petition under the new legislation, inasmuch as the alien beneficiary holds a master's or higher degree from a U.S. school, the employer is eligible to file the H-1B petition. Accordingly, even if the job by nature does not require a master's degree, the employer can still file the H-1B petition inasmuch as the alien beneficiary holds a U.S. master's or higher degree.
  • The new legislation does not also require that the alien must hold a master's or higher degree "in the specialty related to the intended employment." Accordingly, even if the alien beneficiary holds a U.S. master's or higher degree with a specialty which is not related to the H-1B job, the employer is eligible to file the H-1B petition on behalf of such alien. There is a following "caveat," though.
  • Caveat: The new H-1B legislation reinstated the requiement of employer attestation for no displacement of U.S. worker for 90 days prior to filing of the H-1B petition and for 90 days after filing of the H-1B petition if the employer is defined as "H-1B dependent employer." An employer is a H-1B dependent employer if the employer (1) hires 25 or fewer employees out of which more than 7 employees are H-1B aliens; or (2) hires from 26 to 50 employees out of which 12 employees are H-1B aliens; or (3) hires 51 or more employees out of which 15% are in H-1B nonimmigrant status. If the employer is a dependent employer, it is still exempt from the no U.S. worker displacement attestation requirement if (1) the alien is paid $60,000 or more salary or (2) the alien holds a master's or higher degree in the specialty related to the intended employment. Accordingly, the employers who file the H-1B petition for the U.S. Master's or higher degree holders may be grouped into the following three:
    • Group I: The employers are not "H-1B Dependent Employer." This employer can file a H-1B petition without such no displacement attestation regardless of the alien beneficiary's specialty. In other words, these employers will be able to file the H-1B petition even if the alien did not major in the specialty that is related to the job and without the fear of the requirement of No U.S. Worker Dispalcement Attestation.
    • Group II: The employers are "H-1B Dependent Employer," and the alien beneficiary holds a U.S. master's or higher degree but not in the specialty that is related to the job. These employers can file the H-1B petition for the alien beneficiary but only if they file No U.S. Worker Displacement Attestation. This will be a nightmare for the employers. However, there is unresolved question involving a H-1B petition which pays more than $60,000 salary. Supposedly such petition should be exempt from the attestation requirement for the reason of the amount of salary paid. If this reasoning works, the Group II employers will again be subdivided into the two sub groups:
    • Group II-A: The employer is a H-1B dependent employer and files H-1B petition for alien beneficiary who holds a U.S. Master's or higher degree but not in the specialty that is related to the job and pays less than $60,000 salary. These employers may be required to file the attestation.
    • Group II-B: The employer is a H-1B dependent employer and files H-1B petition for alien beneficiary who holds a U.S. Master's or higher degree but not in the specialty that is related to the job and pays $60,000 or more salary. These employers may not be required to file the attestation.
    • Group III: The employers are "H-1B Dependent Employer," and the alien beneficiary holds a U.S. Master's or higher degree in the specialty that is related to the job. These employers may not be subject to the attestation requirement no matter whether they pay more or less than $60,000 salary.
  • From the foregoing analysis, one should learn that the H-1B Dependent Employers should file one of the filing H-1B petitions for the U.S. Master's or higher degree holders to avoid the attestation:
    • (1) Hire an alien who holds a U.S. Master's or higher degree in the specialty related to the job; or
    • (2) If the employer hires a U.S. Master's higher degree holder with different specialty not related to the job, pay more than $60,000 salary.
    • Otherwise, be prepared to deal with the nightmare that comes with the attestation requirement.
• Wage Issues: We have several issues:
  • (1) Non-availability of 4-level prevailing wage determination: Currently, no state can provide the prevailing wage determination on 4-levels. The state offices provides the prevailing wage determination but only on two levels, Entry Level or Experienced Level. Unless the DOL releases the wage determination instructions to the state offices soon, the employers will have to make a hard choice of either filing the H-1B petition with the outrageously high "experienced-level" wage determination and file on March 8, or wait and get the four-level prevailing wage determination on or after March 8 and file the petition after March 8.
  • (2) As we stated earlier, the new legislation does not require that employer should requirement a master's or higher degree to file the H-1B petition inasmuch as the alien holds a U.S. master's or higher degree. Requiring a Master's or higher degree for the job tends to push up the prevailing wage and the employers may be required to pay a higher salary to file the H-1B petition. However, whether the employer should require a master's or higher degree should be decided on the basis of the following two considerations: (A) Impact on the foregoing discussion on the attestation requirement. (B) Impact on the permanent labor certification and green card journey by requiring less than a master's degree on H-1B filing and turning around, requiring a master's degree on the PERM labor certification filing.
• The foregoing discussion is the view of this reporter and not the view of the labor deparment nor the USCIS. In this regard, people should not take this posting as the authoritative view on the issues. This reporter and the Oh Law Firm will not be responsible for the consequences of reliance on this posting as the rule or law. People should seek legal counsel.

02/19/2005: DFLC Backlog Processing Center 45-Day Letter and Responses

• The Backlog Processing Centers in Dallas and Philadelphia have been issuing so-called 45-day letters to the labor certification applicants as a first step to process these cases. The 45-day letter instructs that the response should be sent to the Centers via either mail or fax.
• People must have noticed that currently there is no available channel to communicate with the Backlog Processing Centers. Accordingly, people do not have any evidence that their responses have indeed been properly received and processed by the Centers if they send their responses by fax. Transmittal by fax usually is confirmed by their fax machines in a form of printed report, but it is not a proof that any specific document was transmitted. This is particularly true with a large company or law firms that send out a number of responses via fax. A copy of their letter or transmittal sheet is not a proof. Considering the fact that the consequences of failure to file the response to the 45-day is very critical in that such application will be denied, it may be prudent that the filers use either certified mail return receipt request or overnight deliver services with the certified number or tracking number on the cover letter. The tracking confirmation and the cover letter with the tracking number will form a good evidence of the receipt of the responses by the Centers. Fax transmittal has an additional problem. The fax line of the Centers is constantly busy.

02/19/2005: USCIS HQ Issues a Memorandum to Restrict Denial of Cases Without RFE or Notice of Intent to Deny First

• On May 4, 2004, the USCIS HQ released a memorandum to the field offices to give authority to deny applications or petitions by the Service Centers without first issuing a RFE or Notice of Intent to Deny the application and petition in a broad authority. The memorandum was intended to reduce the workloads and backlogs which had been caused by the RFEs. However, the memorandum deprived the applicants and petitioners of an opportunity to either explain or submit additional evidence on the questions and issues the adjudicators might have. Subsenquently, the immigrant community witnessed a flood of denials without the opportunity of RFE and stirred outcry within the immigration law community. Some adjudicators abused the memorandum and denied outright in a broad brush using a boiler plate letter and without giving specific reasons for the denials.
• The USCIS has noticed that because of the abuse of the memorandum at the field offices, the memorandum had increased rather than reduced workloads and backlogs because of the flood of appeals and motion to reopen or reconsider, not to mention a loud outcry in the political and legal community. Accordingly, the USCIS rescinded the controvertial memorandum of May 4, 2004 and issued a new memorandum which mandated field offices not to deny a petition or application without first issuing a RFE or Notice of Intent to Deny unless the application or petition totally fails to meet the basic statutory or regulatory "thresholds." For instance, a permanent resident son or daughter cannot file an immigrant petition for the parents unless they first become a U.S. citizen. If such petition is filed, it is too obvious that there is no sense of issuing a RFE or Notice of Intent to Deny as the case fails to meet the fundamental statutory thresholds.
• The new memorandum not only restricts the adjudicators in the field offices of their authority to deny without RFE, but also mandates adjudicators not to issue a RFE or Notice of Intent using a boiler plate letter and languages in a broad brush without focusing on the specific circumstances and facts of each case. Additionally, the adjudicators are directed to act in an increased number of cases to seek a review of their decisions of denial by their supervisors.
• Immigrant community is likely to see no such denials from here on without first having an opportunity to explain or respond to any questions or issues raised by the adjudicators. We salute to the USCIS leadership for its bold act to resciend the prior memorandum and to issue a new memorandum to correct the ongoing arbitrary decision making activities by a few adjudicators. Let's send a big hat-off to Mr. Bill Yates!

02/19/2005: Washington Update 02/18/2005

• AILA's Washington Update provides a good summary of political, legislative, and administrative activities in Washington, D.C. on the issue of immigration each month. This month's edition also gives a plenty of information and news for the readers to update themselves with the Beltway activities during the weekend.

02/18/2005: HHS Published 2005 Poverty Guidelines

• The HHS published 2005 Poverty Guidelines effective today. But the effective date for the purpose of the immigration or immigrant visa proceedings will be determined by the USCIS and the DOS. The required income for the sponsor's Affidavit of Support, I-864 is 125% of the HHS Guidelines.

02/18/2005: State Department Proposed Rule for Electronic U.S. Passport

• The U.S. Department of State published today a proposed rule with the 45-day comment period to adopt an electronic passport for the U.S. citizen travellers. The eletronic passport will include an enhanced version of the traditional passport, using an embedded electronic chip to digitally carry the information printed on the data page, a biometric version of the bearer's photo, and coding to prevent any digital data from being altered or removed. See proposed rule.

02/17/2005: Pluses and Minus of H-1B Law Changes

• Beginning from March 8, 2005, the financial burden for the employers to file a H-1B petition for the H-1B transfer (change of employer) or to extend the H-1B status for the current employee first time will witness a big change because of the change of the laws. The changes bring some gains (pluses) to the employers and some losses (minuses) to the employers. Let's look at each of these pluses and minuses:
• Pluses: The prevailing wage level will be divided from the current two levels (entry-level vs. experienced-level) to the four levels (I, II, III, IV). When it comes to the entry level jobs and the highest level jobs, these wage level change will not affect the required prevailing wage. However, mid-experienced level jobs will see much lower prevailing wages since the current experienced-level wage will be divided into three levels. For illustration, let's assume for the present discussion that the current entry-level wage is $50,000 and the same for experienced-level wage is $80,000 for the occupation "A." In order to derive the level II and Level III wages from the current wage survey, the new rule requies to subtract the current entry-level wage ($50,000) from the current experienced level wage ($80,000). The difference is $30,000. The new rule requires to divide such difference by 3. In our illustration, the result is $10,000. In order to derive level II figure, we are required to add $10,000 to the current entry-level wage ($50,000). The level II wage is determined to be $60,000. For the level III wage, we are required to subtract $10,000 from the current experienced-level wage($80,000). The level III wage is determined to be $70,000. The four-level wages are: Level I=$50,000, Level II-$60,000, Level III-$70,000, and Level IV=$80,000. Under the current two-level prevailing wage system, the employers had to pay prevailing wage of $80,000 inasmuch as it was an experienced-level job, no matter whether the job requires one year experience or 30 years of experience. This ridiculously unreasonable determination will disappear. For the employers hiring mid-experienced level professionals (Level II and Level III), they will be able to file such H-1B petition with much lower wages (not $80,000 but either $60,000 or $70,000).
• Minuses: The employers are required to face the following financial burden:
  • $500 Fraud Prevention Fee.
  • 100% prevailing wage requirement as opposed to current requirement of 95% prevailing wage requirement.
• Result: Balancing the foregoing pluses and minuses leads to the conclusion that it will be much advantageous and financially less burdensome to file such H-1B petitions before March 8, 2005, as the minus factors more than offset the gains from wage level reclassification. Employers may file such H-1B petitions as soon as possible, certainly before March 8, 2005.

02/16/2005: USCIS and Visa Posts Closings Monday, 02/21/2005, President's Day

• The federal government offices are observing the President's day, coming Monday, and the offices will remain closed. Those who need to file petition/application before February 22, 2005 should file by tomorrow via overnight.

02/15/2005: Senate Confirmed Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security

• By a vote of 98-0, the Senate approved President Bush's nominee, Chertoff, today, February 15, 2005 as the Secretary of Homeland Security Department. Read on. He was also sworn in as the Secretary today.

02/15/2005: DOL Releases the Backlog Case Shipping Schedule

• DOL eliminate monthly online report of Regions and States Labor Certification Processing Times. Instead, it started reporting the news of foreign labor certification processing. The first reported news is the shipping schedule of the labor certification applications which are filed before March 28, 2005 as follows:

  • Phases	State Receipt Date	Date Delivered to Backlog Centers
    1	Prior to 01/2003	Completed 12/31/2004
    2	2003 - 2004	No later than 03/31/2005
    3	01 - 03/27/2005	No later than 04/22/2005

02/15/2005: USCIS District Office Processing Times of 02/14/2005

• See homepage.

02/13/2005: Inflation and Anticipated Increase in Proverty Income Guidelines for 2005

• The HHS is expected to release the 2005 Poverty Income Guildelines in coming month. The Poverty Income Guidelines provide minimum income which the sponsors, joint-sponsors, and co-sponsors, of I-864 Affidiavit of Support must prove in order to sponsor the relative immigration. The ongoing inflation is anticipated to push up the income guildelines, most likely beginning from either end of March or beginning from April 2005. Just beware!

02/13/2005: DOL FY 2006 Budget Proposes $40 Million PERM Filing Fees

• DOL FY-2006 budget proposal reflects that the DOL would introduce a legislation to charge filing fees for the PERM applications and $40 million will be funded by the PERM fee collection. The exact fee has yet to be disclosed. Please stay tuned to this web site for this information. For the DOL/ETA FY-2006 Budget proposal, please click here.
• In FY 2006, $13.1 million is requested for grants to States for the Foreign Labor Certification activity, which reflects a shift in resources from grants to States to Program Administration to reflect the new allocation of responsibilities under the Permanent Foreign Labor Certification program and the federalization of application processing through the operation of centralized backlog and national processing centers. In FY 2006, it is expected that the program will process 100 percent of H-1B applications within seven days of the filing date for which no prevailing wage issues are identified; process 95 percent of H-2A applications within 30 days of need where there are no pending State actions; increase the number of audits conducted for the H-2B program by 5 percent over the previous year's baseline and implement new procedures necessary to eliminate the remaining backlogged applications.

02/13/2005: State Department Extends Validity of Visas Mantis Clearance for F, J, H, B, and L Science-Related Nonimmigrants

• The U.S. Department of State announces on February 11, 2005 that the validity of Visa Mantis clearance is extended.
• Visa applications for persons to study or work in certain sensitive scientific and technical fields are subject to an interagency clearance in Washington, DC, called Visas Mantis. Since 1998, the Visas Mantis clearance process has been used to screen against the illegal transfer of technology. Once the clearance process is complete and a visa is issued, the individual may apply for admission at a U.S. port of entry. However, delay of and repeated requirement for the Visas Mantis clearance for these science-related nonimmigrants have caused nightmares to these scientists and academic and research institutions and the U.S. Department of State has been under fire for the visa backlogs for these nonimmigrants.
• Nows, the U.S. Department of State, in consultation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, has extended the validity of Visas Mantis clearances for the F (student), J (exchange visitors), H (temporary workers), L (intracompany transferees) and B (tourist and business) categories of visas. This means that if the original visa has expired and a new visa application is filed to return to the previous study or work program in the United States, another Visas Mantis clearance may not be required. Consular officers have the discretion, if warranted, to request a Visas Mantis clearance during any visa adjudication.
• International students (F visas) who have received a Visas Mantis clearance and been issued a visa will benefit from having that clearance be valid for up to the length of the approved academic program, to a maximum of four years. If a student changes academic programs, the clearance will no longer be valid and a Visas Mantis review would be required should the applicant reapply for a new visa.
• Temporary workers (H visas), exchange visitors (J visas) and intracompany transferees (L visas) can receive a Visas Mantis clearance valid for the duration of their approved activity to a maximum of two years. If the nature of the visa holder's activity in the United States changes, the clearance will cease to be valid and a new Visas Mantis review would be required should the applicant reapply for a new visa.
• Business visitors (B-1 visas) and visitors for pleasure (B-2 visas) can receive a Visas Mantis clearance valid for one year, provided that the original purpose for travel, as stated in the visa application, has not changed on subsequent trips. For the full text, please click here.
• The DHS also simultaneously announced the new policy. Read on.
  

02/12/2005: Reported Problem of Prevailing Wage Determination and Job Order for PERM Preparation

• As March 28, 2005, the starting date of PERM, approaches fast, the employers and immigration practioners had to take two preliminary steps in preparation for filing of PERM applications: One is the prevailing wage determination and the other is Job Order with the state offices. The DOL is requried to use the wage date for "four" levels for the PERM applications but currently has only "two" level data, entry level and experienced level. The state agencies are thus unable to give the required prevailing wage determination for the upcoming PERM application at this time. For the Job Orders, state agencies have been processing the 30-day Job Orders, but due to lack of guidance on the processing of Job Orders for PERM applications, state agencies take different positions when it comes to the details.
• In the immigrant community, a rumor started surfacing that the DOL allegedly issued a memoranum on January 27, 2005 to the state agencies not to assist the employers with the prevailing wage determination and job order if such request is filed for the PERM application. This rumor is reported by ILW.COM site.
• Lately DOL is, for unknown reasons, gradually operating and managing the foreign labor certification system and process behind the curtain and move away from the fundamental principle of "responsive" government. Currently the information on processing of backlog reduction applications and preparation of the PERM processing is shielded from the public and the consumers. Some may have access to such information, but for fear of the consequences of leaking of such information, the silent partners in the legal community remain in the closet as well, whispering only in the closet. The DOL is urged to return to the "open process" of government. This web site expressed yesterday a similar concern with the USCIS Pilot Program being operated without a notice and knowledge of the agency's consumers and public.

02/12/2005: Russian Orphan Adoption Snag by Russian Government

• The American Embassy in Moscow reported on February 11, 2005 that the adoption of Russian orphans was witnessing a snag due to the Russian government's delay in processing of such adoptions. Those U.S. citizen parents who are interested in adoption of the Russian orphans may review this posting.

02/11/2005: Reported Halt of USCIS NY District Pilot Program

• On February 3, 2005, the Metropolitan Desk section of the New York Times reported that the 90-day local I-485 fast-track processing Pilot Program ended on January 27, 2005. This report revealed two shocking information involving the USCIS Pilot Program. First, the report indicates that one of the main purpose of the Pilot Program was to detect swiftly 485 fraud cases rather than to expedite for the purpose reducing the backlogs. Secondly, a spokesman for the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services in Washington reportedly confirmed that the eight-month-old fast-track Pilot program had been implemented not only in Dallas and New York, but also in Miami, Chicago, and Los Angeles. The Pilot Programs in these districts other than Dallas District apparently have been undertaken without the notice of the public, not to mention any announcement! It sounds something must be straightened out.

02/10/2005: DHS 01/31/2005 Immigration Statistics Report

• The statistics of immigration benefits cases as of December 31, 2004 reflect a continuing reduction of backlog cases.

02/10/2005: DV-2006 Immigration Lottery Results - 6.3 Million Entries

• Notification to winners will be sent out between May and July 2005.
• Read on.

02/10/2005: March 2005 Visa Bulletin

• EB-3 EW "Other Workers" will retrogress to 07/01/2001 for all countries from March 1, 2005!
• EB-3 Professional/Skilled Workers for India, China, and Philippines will progress to 03/01/2002!

02/10/2005: Different Ports of Entries Give Different Asylum/Refugee Claim Chances

• The U.S. Commision on International Religous Freedom reportedly released its study and analysis of treatment of arriving aliens with the claims of asylum or refugee at the international airports in this country. According to the report, JFK is the toughest and harshest for the arriving asylum claimants and Miami is the most lenient airport with the record of allowing the asylum opportunities for the arriving aliens. Read on.

02/10/2005: Driver License Restriction "Real ID" Bill Passed the House Today

02/09/2005: Five Service Centers Processing Times 02/09/2005

• See the homepage.

02/09/2005: Is "March 28, 2005" PERM Deadline or Starting Date?

• March 28, 2005 is the first day when people can file the newly reengineered labor certification application under the PERM rule. However, the DOL does not appear to be well prepared for the new beginning of American labor certification system. There are so many areas of rules and standards which are vague and unclear and the DOL appears to be still at the stage of developing answers to all of these confusing rules and standards. On top of all of these, the state agencies that have to play one of the important roles in the labor certification processing by providing prevailing wage determination and job order processing do not have clue in a number of states as to how to do the job. One state official even raised a question of legality or ethicality of attorneys filing the job orders with the state agencies.
• The backlog reduction processing details seem to be also at the stage of developing because of the DOL's position of "wait and watch" as to how and in what scale the backlog reduction cases will be switched to the PERM cases.
• Pending the launch of the PERM processing, it appears that the immigrant community may remain in a state of confusion, watching carefully how the new system will unfold. By the end of April 2005, a number of the confusing questions may be answered by the DOL based on its experience during the first few weeks of the PERM program administration.
• Experts, including AILA, predict that the rate of PERM application filings may be fairly low at the initial stage because the immigrant community has yet to see how the confusing rules and standards will be cleared up. Unfortunately, however, some of immigration practitioners and immigration brokers drum up the PERM program and falsely give an impression that the applications should be filed on the first day of the new system, March 28, 2005, creating tensions and adding confusions in the immigrant community. Most of these practitioners and brokers have yet to find answers themselves to a number of questions. The immigrant community should understand that March 28, 2005 is the beginning of new process and not, repeat not, the deadline of filing of new applications. Prudence dictates that the immigrant community should calm down and take a little bit of time to see how the new system will unfold after March 28, 2005 considering a number of traps embedded in the PERM rule and potential high risks involved.

02/08/2005: DOL Notice of Mail Addresses for PERM Filing by Mail

• For those who opt to file the PERM applications from March 28, 2005, the DOL published a notice today to announce the addresses and jurisdictions of Atlanta Processing Center and Chicago Processing Center as follows:
  • Atlanta Processing Center: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Harris Tower, 233 Peachtree Street, NE., Suite 410, Atlanta, Georgia 30303; Phone: (404) 893-0101, Fax: (404) 893-4642
    
    Jurisdiction: Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virgin Islands, Virginia, Washington DC, West Virginia
  •  
  • Chicago Processing Center: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 844 North Rush Street, 12th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60611; Phone: (312) 886-8000, Fax: (312) 886-1688.
    
  • Jurisdiction: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Guam, Hawaii,
    Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota,
    Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio,
    Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin,
    Wyoming, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training
    Administration, 844 North Rush Street, 12th Floor, Chicago, Illinois
    60611; Phone: (312) 886-8000, Fax: (312) 886-1688.
• See F.R. Notice.
  
  
  

02/08/2005: USCIS FY-2006 Budget Proposal and Immigration Wonderland

• The USCIS FY-2006 budget proposal is characterized by the following three wonderland promises:
  • Slash the backlog initiative budget from $180 million in FY 2005 to $100 million in FY 2006; but
  • Achieving the 6-month immigration benefits processing times by the end of FY 2006;
  • Expand the premium processing services from the employment-based petitions/applications to the non-employment-based petitions and applications during FY 2006.
• Hmmmm..........................................................................

02/07/2005: DOL HQ 12/03/04 Technical Instructions for SWA Case Transfer Schedule to Backlog Processing Centers

• This instruction was issued on December 3, 2004 and the labor certification cases at the state offices have been shipped to the two Backlog Processing Centers in Philadelphia and Dallas. It is expected that additional Techinical Guidance will be issued in the near future. See Shipment Schedules.

02/06/2005: DOL Backlog Processing Center E-Mail Status Inquiry System

• Sources indicate that the Backlog Processing Centers have in place the e-mail inquiry system for those cases which have been issued 45-day letters. This inquiry will be available only after 90 days of responding to such 45-day letter. The BPC will respond to such e-mail inquiry in three days.
• E-mail inquiry requires (1) the exact employer name; (2) First and Last Name of the Alien Beneficiary; and (3) BPC case number which is printed in the 45-day letters. Any inquiries without these entries or premature inquiries or any other inquiries which are not related to the 45-day letters are likely to be ignored. Readers, please do not send the e-mails unless you meet the foregoing requirements.
• The e-mail addresses for Dallas and Philadelphia Backlog Processing Centers are: status@dal.dflc.us and status@phi.dflc.us

02/06/2005: 20,000 U.S. Master's Degree Holders' H-1B Filing from 03/08/2005 to be Centralized at the Vermont Service Center

• The USCIS officials have confirmed our earlier report that the 20,000 additional H-1B cases for those with a master's degree from a U.S. higher learning institution will be filed with and processed by the Vermont Service Center. It is expected that the USCIS will release an announcement to this effect in the near future.

02/05/2005: InfoPass - A Customer's Guide

• The USCIS has issued this Guide to assist the immigrant community with the appropriate use and access to the InfoPass. Read on.

02/04/2005: USCIS Memorandum on Eligible Classes of Battered Spouses and Children for Short-Cut Naturalization

• The USCIS HQ issue a memorandum to give guidance to the field offices for handling a naturalization application by those permanent residents who obtained the green card through the battered spouse and children petitions (I-360). Such permanent residents are eligible for naturalization after three years rather than five years in permanent resident status once the abusive spouse obtains a naturalization. The motion to reopen is available in certain cases. Please read the memorandum.

02/03/2005: Immigration Agenda Reflected in President's State of Union Address

• President Bush called on Congress to work with him to achieve significant immigration reform by:
  • controlling the borders;
  • matching a willing worker with a willing employer when no American is willing to fill the job;
  • protects workers from abuse;
  • provides incentives for temporary workers to return to their home countries and families; and
  • rejects amnesty and protects the rights of legal immigrants while not unfairly rewarding those who came here unlawfully or hope to do so.
• It appears that his immigration reform totally focuses on the Temporary Guest Worker Program. We will watch and see how successful his agenda will be materialized.

02/02/2005: NSC EAD Issuance Practice - Valid from Approval Date

• The Nebraska Service Center is currently issuing EAD or renewal valid from the "date of approval" of the application and not from the date of expiration of existing EAD except the F-1 OPT EADs. This practice reminds the EAD applicants of importance of applying for an EAD sufficiently early on in order not to experience expiration of existing EAD before the renewed EAD is approved and issued. This is particularly important considering the fact that the USCIS HQ takes a position that for the purpose of the eligibility of 245(k) benefits for the EB-485 filers, the employment during the gap is considered unauthorized employment and such period will be added to the period of six-month unauthorized employment for the purpose of 245(k) benefits for the EB-485 filers. The EB-485 waiters who are subject to the EB-3 visa number retrogression should be mindful of this advisory since they will have to keep extending their EADs for a number of times during the period of visa number unavailability and such gaps between the EADs will deprive them of the 245(k) benefits and their EB-485 can be denied for the unauthorized employment which is a bar to adjustment of status under the immigration regulation.
• The NSC practice is reportedly dictated by its needs to process the EAD cards through the automated production system and it is not likely that the NSC will change this practice in the future.

02/02/2005: Consulate Visa Application Fee Changes Effective 03/08/2005

• The U.S. Department of State publishes a final rule adjusting the fees for some visa applications and consular services effective March 8, 2005. This includes $500 Fraud Prevention Fee for L-1 applicants using the Blanket L-1 petitions. Read the final rule.

01/31/2005: Chicago Region V Cases Are on the Move in Dallas Backlog Processing Center

• We posted on January 21, 2005 the information from the DOL sources that the cases pending at the Chicago Region V office had been transferred to and data-entried at the Dallas Backlog Center. The next step was reportedly to mail out so-called 45-day letters. The attorneys including this law firm started receiving such 45-day letters indicating that the Dallas Center had moved to the next phase for the Chicago Region office cases. Small good news.

01/31/2005: Justice Department Mandates DHS Security Clearance Prior to Granting Reliefs by Immigration Courts & BIA

• We reported earlier that the EOIR was seeking OMB approval for this rule. Today, the EOIR published this Interim Rule which takes effect on April 1, 2005. This rule amends Department regulations governing removal and other proceedings before immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals when a alien has applied for particular forms of immigration relief allowing the alien to remain in the United States (including, but not limited to, asylum, adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident, cancellation of removal, and withholding of removal), in order to ensure that the necessary identity, law enforcement, and security investigations are promptly initiated and have been completed by the Department of Homeland Security prior to the granting of such relief. Read the rule.

01/30/2005: IT Occupations, EB-2, and PERM

• We discussed in the immediate preceding posting the problem of definition and treatment of Computer Systems Analyst under the PERM. Don't close your lips yet, though! Under the DOT Code which we use for the current labor certification application, a number of IT occupations belong to SVP 8, including but not limited to Software Engineer, Database Administrator, Chief Computer Programmer, Scientific & Engineering Programmer, etc. These SVP 8 occupations are considered typical EB-2 occupations that require a Master's degree or a Bachelor's degree plus 5 years of progressive experience as the years of vocational preparation time ranges from 4 years to 10 years. Shockingly, however, none of IT occupations are defined as SVP 8 occupations under the O*NET Job Zone definitions and the PERM. The Job Zone 5 is defined to include an occupation requiring SVP 8 or higher vocational preparation time. All the IT occupations other than Computer Systems Analyst are defined as Job Zone 4 that ranges higher than SVP 7 and lower than SVP 8. The SVP 7 can require maximum of 4 years of vocational preparation time. Traditionally, DOL has been scrutizing carefully SVP 7 labor certification application if the employer requires a Bachelor's degree and the employers had to carefully craft out the job description and qualification requirement to establish the professional nature of the job. When a Master's degree is required for the SVP 7 jobs, most of SWA officials and the Regional Certifying Officers challenged such requirement as unduly restrictive requirement for exceeding the SVP limit.
• Now, the DOL intends to insist that the employer takes the lower end of SVP in each Job Zone, meaning SVP 7 for the IT occupations. In order for the employer to require a Master's degree, employer may not be able to require any experience. Besides, even if no experience is required, a Master's degree requirement can be challenged for the SVP 7 occupations. Obviously, in practice, the Certifying Officers may consider the DOt definition of occupations in sorting out the EB-2 jobs as opposed to the EB-3 jobs even though the O*NET Job Zone is identical in all the IT occupations. For instance, even though both Computer Programmer and Software Engineer belong to the same Job Zone 4, if the employer requires a Master's degree for the Computer Programmer, it is likely that the Certifying Officer may challenge such requirement, while a Master's degree requirement for the Software Engineer may not be challenged by the Certifying Officers. Even if the employer manages sufficiently proper job duties and responsibilities to the level of a Master's degree education profession, there still remains an issue of whether the employer can require any experience on top of a master's degree because of the Job Zone 4. It is expected that this is the area where the Certifying Officers will have a broad range of discretion and power. For the same reasons, the Certifying Officers should be equipped with sufficient expertise and experience not to make an arbitrary decision without a clearly defined standard. Some observers feel nervous because the newly hired analysts may not have sufficient expertise and the decision on this issue can reveal arbitrariness based on one's idiosyncracies rather than clearly defined legal standards and concepts. We will have to watch it very carefully.

01/30/2005: "Computer Systems Analyst": Unfair Treatment as "Hybrid" Occupation Under PERM

• It is an irony that to bring in a Canadian computer professional on a professional TN-visa, employer must define the job as Computer Systems Analyst and none of other IT occupations are eligible for the TN visa. (Software Engineer is treated as an engineer and sometimes admitted on a TN). On the other hand, the employers may avoid the occupational title of "Computer Systems Analyst" when they file a PERM application because of the unfair and hybrid treatment of this occupation. The PERM requires that the employers follow O*NET Job Zone to determine the level of SVP and maximum vocational preparation requirement determination including the level of education and experience. Believe it or not, all the IT occupations other than Computer Systems Analyst belong to Job Zone 4. The Job Zone 4 stands in-between SVP 7 and SVP 8. Even Computer Programmer belongs to Job Zone 4. However, Computer Systems Analyst belongs to Job Zone 3. The Job Zone 3 stands in-between SVP 6 and SVP 7. SVP 8 occupations include those which requires from 4 years to 10 years of vocational preparation time. For the purpose of vocational preparation time, a Bachelor's degree is 2 years and a Master's degree is 4 years. Accordingly, when an occupation belongs to SVP 8, generally employers can require a Bachelor's degree plus from 2 years to 8 years of experience or a Master's degree plus from 0 years to 6 years of work experience. SVP 8 occupation is considered a typical EB-2 jobs. SVP 7 occupations include those which requires from 2 years to 4 years of vocational preparation time. Thus, for the SVP 7 jobs, employers can require a high school education and 4 years of experience or a Bachelor's degree plus 2 years of experience maximum at the high level. Accordingly, not all of the occupations in SVP 7 are even considered professional occupations requiring a Bachelor's degree. SVP 6 includes occupations that require less than 2 years of vocational preparation time and cannot require a Bachelor's degree.
• The foregoing formula dictates that if the employer files a PERM application with the occupational title of Computer Systems Analyst requiring a Bachelor's degree, the application will be denied unless the employer proves so-called "business necessity" for exceeding the standard vocational preparation time. Considering the general understanding of the occupation of Computer Systems Analyst as one of the professional occupations in the IT industry, the definition of this occupation in the O*NET Zone is literally absurd.
• However, the absurdity does not end there. The PERM does not treat this occupation as a professional occupation for the purpose of maximum education and experience the employer can require for the recruitment. On the other hand, when it comes to advertisement and recruitment requirement, Computer Systems Analyst is considered a professional occupation under the PERM and unless the employer completes three-mandatory recruitment steps (job order + two newspaper ads) plus three alternative recruitment steps, such application will be considered defective for the PERM. Obviously, employers will just avoid the occupational title of Computer Systems Analyst, but the DOL should act to remove such absurdity by one of two means: Either change the O*NET Zone definitions or change the PERM policy of taking lower end of the SVP in a Job Zone as the maximum an employer can require. For instance, Computer Systems Analyst is Job Zone 3 that ranges from SVP 6 to SVP 7. The PERM should adopt SVP 7 requirement for Job Zone 3 so that the DOL accept the reality that the IT industry requires minimum of a Bachelor's degree for the occupation of Computer Systems Analyst. The DOL is urged to announce its policy on this issue as soon as possible to avoid an embarrasing confusion in the immigrant community.

01/30/2005: Reminder to Chinese, Indian, Filipino EB-3 I-485 Waiters

• It appears that there are some Chinese, Indian, and Filipino EB-3 I-485 waiters who do not realize that there is currently a EB-3 visa cut-off date of 01/01/2002 and unless their labor certifications were submitted on or before 01/01/2002, their pending I-485 applications cannot be adjudicated. For these applicants, the I-485 processing times report of the Service Centers will remain irrevant because of the cut-off date. Accordingly, they should not waste their time to check the I-485 processing times in the USCIS online processing time reports. Rather they should check the Visa Bulletin each month to learn about when the USCIS will resume processing of their pending I-485 cases.
• This information is posted because there are apparently some Chinese, Indian, and Filipino clients who call their legal counsel's offices to protest why their cases have not been adjudicated when the Service Center Processing Time report passed their I-485 Receipt Date, not knowing that the Service Center Processing Time reports are irrelevant to their cases because of the EB-3 visa cut-off date.

01/30/2005: USCIS Processing Times Reports Changed Back to Post-Date of January 21, 2005

• USCIS changed back to its initial posting date of January 21, 2005 for the Service Centers' processing Times and January 14, 2005 for the local district offices processing times. Please see our homepage.

01/29/2005: Signs of NSC Unleashed from I-140/I-485 Concurrent Adjudication Mandate

• Ever since the USCIS withdrew the concurrent adjudication policy memorandum, the NSC started adjudicating the concurrently filed I-140 petitions and our firm started receiving the approval notices for I-140 petitions including those who are subject to the EB-3 visa number retrogression. This is a relief for some people who need to use AC-21 180-rule for change of employment.
• One other good news for those who are stuck with the visa number retrogression is that the USCIS will continue to adjudicate pending I-140 petitions regardless of the visa number unavailability, according to the USCIS HQ sources. Considering the fact that they may have to wait a long time before the EB-3 visa numbers become available again and face increased risk of losing jobs, this policy is indeed a big plus for these Indians, Chinese, and Philippinos.
• This policy for the employment-based immigrant petition is different from the current policy on family-based I-130 petitions which the USCIS will not adjudicate until the visa number becomes available. However, even for the I-130 petitions, the USCIS HQ sources indicated that once the current processing backlog are reduced, it would go back to the previous policy of adjudicating pending I-130 petitions even if the visa numbers would not be available.

01/29/2005: OPT International Travel and Requirement for Reentry to the U.S.

• The liaison minutes of NAFSA with the DHS elaborates the following policy of the DHS:
  • If the OPT is approved but the EAD has yet to be issued, the OPT can leave and reenter the country to resume looking for a job.
  • Once the EAD is issued, OPT cannot reenter the U.S. unless the OPT has (1) already had a job offer or (2) commenced employment before departure. In these cases, DHS will allow the OPT to reenter for the purpose of either taking the offered employment or resuming the employment.
• Watch out. Please click here for the NAFSA minutes.

01/28/2005: Michigan SWA Notification of Alien Labor Certification Processing Change

• Michigan SWA has sent out notification to the alien labor certification filers and customers regarding the ongoing procedural change in handling alien labor certification application in the office. The SWA advises that until March 28, 2005, people should keep filing labor certification application with the SWA, and the SWA is transferring the applications to the Dallas Backlog Processing Center. This letter implies that the cases which are filed at the SWAs in the jurisdiction of former Chicago Region V are not forwarded to the National Processing Center in Chicago but to the Dallas Backlog Center. See the letter notification.

01/28/2005: DOL/ETA Regional Information Alert on Labor Certification Application

• This ETA Regional Information Alert is issued and transmitted to all the Regions to alert the Regions and the State offices on the labor certification application program changes, reorganization, and contact information. Read on.

01/28/2005: GAO Reports to Congress Against the Requirement of Annual Report of Address for Nonimmigrants

• The Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 directed GAO to study and report utility of a new system mandating all the nonimmigrants report their address annually. The GAO reported negatively. Read on.

01/28/2005: USCIS New Premium Processing Request (I-907) Form

• USCIS has released a new I-907 form which is in effect but the old version may be accepted until September 30, 2005. The purpose of the change is not made clear but probably it is intended to incorporate additional types of petitions or applications in the days ahead. It is also intended to help the agency inter-lint the Premium Processing Request to the pending petitions or applications.
• Please take a note of the followings:
  • The I-907 check must be made payble to neither USCIS nor U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. According to the instruction, check must be made payable to Department of Homeland Security. The abbreviation of USDHS or DHS is "not" acceptable.
  • The I-907 is supposed to be filed not only for a petition but also an application as well. Currently, the only benefits one can seek for the Premium Processing Request are limited to the employment-based nonimmigrant petitions. Until the USCIS releases a regulation expanding the PPS to other types of benefits, the PPS will continue to remain with and limited to the eligible nonimmigrant employment-based petitions under the current regulation.
  • The form also reminds the legal counsels to file a separate G-28 with the petitioner's signature in the event that the petitioner already filed the petition and is seeking PPS for the pending I-129. Up to now, the Service Centers have been lenient in providing PPS even if there was no signature of the client in the follow-up G-28.
  • As usual, the alien beneficiary can pay the PPS fees but cannot sign I-907. Only a petitioner (employer) can sign and request the PPS request.
• Please review the new I-907 form.

01/27/2005: Bush's Temporary Guest Worker Program Push Facing Stalls in Congress by Fellow Republicans

• Report indicates that the President urged the Congress in the White House press conference yesterday to act on the Temporary Guest Worker Program. The President's move was reacted by cold shoulders among the fellow Republicans in the House. The powerful Rep. Sensenbrenner of the Judiciary Committee expressed his strong resentment and disagreement by two actions. First he, shortly after the President's press conference, introduced the REAL ID Act of 2005 which is the bill which he had failed to pass in December 2004 as part of the Intelligence Bill. Second, he declared that the Congress would have so many other pressing legislations to be taken care of this year and he did not expect to deal with the Temporary Guest Worker Program this year. His opposition to any positive immigration reform appears to be much broader than the Temporary Guest Worker Program in that he opposes any immigration reform this year. Mr. Congressman, please do not take your last year's driver license restriction bill failure too personally and emotionally. Read on.

01/27/2005: USCIS Changed Processing Times Report Date to 01/13/2005

• USCIS changed, for the unknown reasons, the processing time report date to January 13, 2005 across the board including local district offices, four Service Centers, and National Benefits Center. The reports of the Service Centers processing times have already confused the immigrant community because of the reporting of the same processing information by the two different sources, AILA and USCIS, on different dates. The USCIS' today's action to move backward the proceesing time reporting adds further confusion. If the USCIS was intended to use one fixed date for reporting all the field offices, it would have been better if it would adopt such reporting format in the future rather than moving backward the report date.

01/27/2005: USCIS/DOL Propose H-2B USCIS Direct Filing With Potential DOL Post-Filing Audit

• Today, USCIS and DOL simultaneously released proposed regulations to streamline the H-2B filing procedure from the current two-tier system to the single-tier system. Under the proposed regulation, H-2B employers will file H-2B petitions with the attestations with the USCIS and the DOL will be involved when it determines to conduct post-filing audit of attestations. Certain occupations are excepted from the procedural change. Comment period ends on 02/28/2005. Read on. DOL Rule. USCIS Rule.

01/27/2005: USCIS Memorandum on EB-5 Immigrant Investor, Investor and Regional Center Unit

• USCIS released a memorandum on Regional Center Unit Establishment for EB-5 Investor Immigration. Please check the followings:
  • Establishment of a Investor and Regional Center Unit Memorandum
  • Attachment: Investor and Regional Center Unit Mission and Organization

01/26/2005: PERM, EW Retrogression, and Importance of Priority Date Preservation

• The newly reengineered labor certification system, PERM, is more or less favorable to nonprofessional or unskilled workers than professional workers for a number of reasons. Firstly, it removed so-called Schedule B for these occupations. Currently, the Schedule B occupations are barred from the labor certification unless the applicants get a waiver. Removal of Schedule B is expected to open a flood gate of applications by the nonprofessional workers. Secondly, the PERM requires a very limited recruitment activities by the employer as a threshold requirement. For the nonprofessional occupations, it only requires a Job Order and two Sunday newspaper recruitments, as opposed to the professional occupations which require more or less national and electronic search of applicants using three additional recruitment sources which will be very expensive. This change projects a false image that this country's immigration policy is moving toward the direction focusing on bringing in nonprofessional workers and not professional workers. Among professional workers, the aliens who are and will be hit hard by the change is occupations that only require a bachelor's degree. The occupations that require an advanced education somewhat are welcome by the recent legislation on the new H-1B rule for medical doctors and U.S. advance degree holders and other legislative changes. The bachelor's degree holder professional workers are squeezed in the middle. The upcoming Temporary Guest Worker program will also focus on the nonprofessional workers.
• There are some indication that the sharks may mushroom and become pervasive to defraud the system and produce nonimmigrant worker victims with scams and fraudulent activities. These nonimmigrant workers should understand that there are only small number of annual quota available for "other workers" classification (EW) and it is expected that the backlog of this classification may grow tremendously in the future as it was before the visa numbers for EB-3 employment-based immigration classification became current not long ago. PERM may open a little bit of wider window for these workers to pass through the labor certification process, but then they will have to face a very high and thick wall ahead of them for their final journeys to the immigration, immigrant visa quota. It can be a long journey.
• Scam artists will induce these workers to fall into a trap by encouraging conversions of pending labor certification applications. Without doubt, a large number of earlier cases which are pending may include the nonprofessional occupations that has a promise of 245(i) benefits and swift processing of their applications under the First In First Out processing policy of the DOL. For these workers, preservation of their priority date will be much more important than obtaining the labor certification quick because of the upcoming visa number retrogression. They should not fall into a scam artist's trap. To a lesser degree, the same may apply to new filers. PERM does not guarantee a short cut to immigration as scam artists project for two reasons, among others: Firstly, they will have to face a tall wall of visa cut-off date. Secondly, the DOL and the DHS will without doubt reenforce the law enforcement activities to crack down the fraud rings and fraudulent activities. The eventual by-roduct of such reenforced law enforcement activities will turn out to be the defrauded alien workers who will have wasted a tremendous amount of money and time and face deportation. Sharks may be sharpening their teeth and they should exercise cautions.

01/25/2005: USCIS Memorandom : Determination of Good Moral Character in VAWA-Based I-360 Self-Petition

• Mr. William Yates issued a memorandum to the Director of Vermont Service Center to give a guidance on determination of good moral character which is condition for VAWA-based self-petition and waiver of good moral character in certain self-petitions. The following accompanying attachments give additional specific guidelines:
  • Attachment: Waiveable Conduct
  • Attachment: False Testimony Determination

01/24/2005: President Intends to Nominate Michael Jackson Deputy Secretary of DHS

• The President intends to nominate Michael Jackson, of Virginia, to be Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, according to the White House announcement today. Mr. Jackson currently serves as Chief Operating Officer of AECOM Technology Corporation, Government Services Group, in Fairfax, Virginia. From 2001 to 2003, he served as Deputy Secretary of Transportation at the Department of Transportation. Earlier in his career, he held several positions at Lockheed Martin IMS, Transportation Systems and Services, including Vice President and General Manager of Business Development and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Jackson received his bachelor's degree from the University of Houston and his Ph.D. from Georgetown University.
• The USCIS is under the direct command of the Deputy Secretary of DHS. Today's resignation of the Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson coincides with the announcement of the Deputy Secretary nomination.

01/24/2005: "Other Workers" Visa Numbers to Retrogress

• Visa Bulletin February 2005 indicates that the State Department was predicting that the other workers category might also show cut-off date worldwide, including India, China, the Philippines, as early as March 2005 Visa Bulletin.

01/24/2005: DHS Secretary Nominee Predicted to Bring Shake-Up in DHS Leadership

• Report indicates that the nominee of the DHS Secretary intends to bring his people to the key leadership positions in the DHS to ensure achievement of his agenda and reportedly the Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson is one of those who have been seeking the exit strategy. AILA reports that Asa Hutchinson may depart as early as March 1, 2005. The AILA is confirmed by the Washington Times that he resigned today. It is unknown whether the shake-up will lead to the harder-line policies in the immigration issues, but the line-up indicates that such swing could not be brushed aside. Read on.

01/22/2005: Service Center Processing Times Report 01/21/2005

• See the home page.

01/21/2005: PERM Processing Update

• Issue of PERM Filing Without Conversion: DOL has yet to make a final decision, but expressed its intent to prohibit a same employer to keep two applications for the same employee because of the concerns with the potential fraud.
• Prevailing Wage Determination: Currently state offices do not provide the prevailing wage determination per the new law that requires four-level wages and 100% payment. It is the DOL view that the new wage determination rule under the new law does not become effective until March 8, 2005 and implicitly hinted that people would not see such wage determination in the near future. DOL opined that in the event that employers want to use current wage determination, they may do so paying 100% of the SWA determination on the current level-structure.

01/21/2005: DOL Backlog Reduction Processing Update

• The DOL did not disclose in details a number of issues in the PERM Briefings which the consumers were interested in. It turned out that some of these issues had been discussed with the AILA in telephone conference before the PERM Briefing sessions began. Some of these issues had been answered as follows:
• Status of Processing at the Backlog Processing Centers:
  • The cases which were transferred from the Regional Offices were processed first. For these cases, initial letters have been being sent out. Once the responses come back from the applicants, they will start adjudicating the cases. The current state is as follows:
    • Dallas, Philadelphia, and San Francisco Regions Cases: Data entry for these cases has been completed and letters have been sent out and the Backlog Centers are awaiting the responses for further processing and adjudication.
    • Chicago and Atlanta Regions Cases: These cases have been transferred to the Backlog Centers later and currently being data-entried. Once the data entry is completed, letters will be sent out the applicants as it did with the Dallas, Philadelphia, and San Francisco Regions cases.
  • The cases which were transferred from the SWA (state offices) are at the stage of data entry. Once data entry is completed, the same steps will be taken as described above.
• Processing Queue per FIFO: Shockingly, there are no separate queues between RIR and Regular cases and both RIR and Regular cases are being processed on FIFO in a single national queue. Consequently, RIR cases will experience a substantial delay once the cases are transferred to the Backlog Centers!!
• Opened Cases vs. Unopened Cases: Under the Transition Guideline, unopened cases have been transferred to the Backlog Centers and opened cases will be completed by the SWAs. The definition of "opened cases" is the application packages which are at the SWAs in unopened boxes or where no letters have been issued by the SWAs to the applicants. Accordingly, those who received a letter from the state offices may be completed at the state offices rather than being transferred to the Backlog Centers.
• Notification of Address Changes of the Applicants or Attorneys: If one knows that his/her case has been transferred to the Backlog Centers, the notification should be addressed to the Backlog Centers. If one does not know, DOL suggests to such notification to both the Backlog Center and the SWA office.
• Address of Certifying Officers and SWA in the Notice Posting for Cases to be Filed before 03/28/2005: People should follow the same rules and requirements under the current labor certification regulation. Thus the notice posting should direct the public to file misrepresentation or complaints to the office of Certifying Officer's office and the state labor certification unit. Remember, though, some Regions, addresses have been changed: Chicago and Atlanta offices.

01/19/2005: Labor Certification Processing Time Report of January 13, 2005

• Note: (1) The Regions processing times dates have moved reflecting a shift of cases from the various offices to the Backlog Centers.
• (2) State Processing Times reflects the date the application was received by the State.
• Please see home page.

01/19/2005: President Bush's Inauguration on the 20th and Beltway Under Siege for Parties and Celebration

• As Washington prepared to celebrate President Bush's inauguration, the city appeared more like a place under siege, according to the New York Times. Government workers in the city, who already had been given Thursday off, were being encouraged to work from home on today, Wednesday, the day before the inauguration. Local law enforcement officials warned motorists that most downtown streets would be off limits. The AILA National Office follows the suite due to the access problem. Newsreport indicates that the authorities estimate that a half-million people or more will come into the city for the swearing-in at noon Thursday at the Capitol, and later, for the parade along Pennsylvania Avenue. On Thursday night, thousands of people are expected to attend formal inaugural balls, private parties and elegant dinners that will culminate the celebration. Throughout the day on Tuesday, disruptions were the norm. Drivers found no-parking signs, temporary street closings and public warnings that 100 blocks of city streets near inaugural events would be restricted. For the immigration offices, the local district office in DC and Application Support Centers in Alexandria-Huntington and Glenmore will remain closed on Thursday, tomorrow.
• The immigration news from the government offices may also be very sparce or nil for the rest of the week. Zz............................
  

01/18/2005: 01/18/05 Immigration Statistics Report: 23% Backlog Decline and $39% Denial Surge in Nov. 2004 over Nov. 2003

• The DHS has just released the immigration statistics as of the end of November 2004. This reflects the recent trend of immigration petition/application processing and adjudications. At the end of November 2004, the rate of denial of applications/petitions increased 39% over the statistics in November 2003, reflecting increasing trend of denials during the last one year. Meanwhile, the backlogs have reduced 23% in November 2004 over the fingures in November 2003. The statistics does not separate between the family-based and the employment-based applications/petitions, but apparently employment-based applications/petitions have been reduced quite substantially as well. This is reflected in the decision of the U.S. Department of State to set up a cut-off date in the Visa Bulletin for Indians, Chinese, and Filipinos.
• Please click the followings for the monthly statistics as of the end of November 2004 which was released on January 18, 2005:
  • Immigration Benefits
  • Other immigration statistics including naturalization, inspections, removals, asylums.

01/17/2005: PERM, Withdrawal for Conversion, and 245(i) Grandfathering

• The DOL Inspector General's audit of backlog cases indicates that a majority of the backlog cases were filed before April 30, 2001 for the benefit of 245(i). Indeed, in the backlog reduction processing by the Backlog Processing Centers, these cases may be processed fairly at the initial stage under the principle of FIFO. Accordingly, it is anticipated that these applicants are less prone to refiling of the labor certification application after withdrawing the long-pending applications.
• For these people, withdrawal of pending labor certification application may affect not only priority date (if they are Indians or Chinese or Filipinos), but also the 245(i) benefits. However, unlike the issue of priority date, withdrawal and refiling will have no affect on the 245(i) grandfathering inasmuch as the application was "approvable when filed." ``Approvable when filed'' means that, as of the date of filing of the application for labor certification, the application was "properly filed," "meritorious in fact," and "non-frivolous" (``frivolous'' meaning patently without substance). These are all technical terms and people should seek legal counsel. The same rule applies to denial or revocation of the labor certification application. The denial or revocation of the labor certification application will not affect the 245(i) grandfathering inasmuch as the application was "approvable when filed," but denied or revoked after filing because of certain events that developed after filing of such approvable application. In this regard, 245(i) is not an issue directly related to the labor certification application proceedings but rather an issue which is related to the USCIS adjudication proceedings.
  

01/15/2005: Parallel Filing of Conventional and PERM Labor Certification Applications: Issue of Policy

• This web site reported years back the DOL's 5-Year Strategic Plan which gave birth to the Permanent Labor Certification System Reengineering. The thrust of the reengineering was removal of backlogs and achievement of effectiveness and efficiency in management of the foreign labor certification program under the budgetary constraints. The reengineering was, for all the purposes and intents, never introduced to increase the backlog or to lower the level of effectiveness and efficiency of the program management. Change of the labor certification system from the two-tier (state-federal) to one-tier was never intended for political purposes nor for any other tricks. The goal was to reduce the backlogs and to handle future labor certification applications in a manageable manner such that the country would not experience another nightmare of mounting backlogs.
• From the standpoints and purposes of the reengineering, it is doubtful whether the labor certification system after March 28, 2005 will favorably accomodate any ideas that can create more backlogs rather than reduce backlogs. Playing a devil's advocate, one may argue that the new labor certification system to permit parallel filings by an employer for the same alien beneficiary and same occupation betrays the purpose of the labor certification system reengineering in the sense that such policy will increase the caseloads rather than reduce the caseloads and lead to inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the labor certification management.
• Without doubt, the DOL must have realized by now that the newly reengineered system under the PERM regulation has a serious flaw discouraging conversion of pending application to the PERM application. This in itself more or less slaps the face of the purpose of the reengineering. To allow parallel filings of pending application and new PERM application may be perceived by political forces another slapping of the face of the purpose of the reengineering leading to the total failure of the labor certification system reengineering. The immigrant community hoped that the PERM regulation would have devised a conversion process that meets the dual purpose of achieving reduction of backlogs and at the same time smooth transition of the applicants from the backlog reduction track to the PERM application track. Having failed that, the DOL may have a serious problem to adopt a policy that permits the applicants to keep pending labor certification applications and at the same time to file another applications under the PERM system as it can increase tremendously the number of cases. It turns out that the launch of the PERM program under the new regulation may hurt both the system and its customers unless it is amended quickly to accomodate both the needs of the government and the needs of the customers.

01/15/2005: Unresolved Issue of Withdrawal of Pending Labor Certification Application for PERM and 7th Year H-1B Extension

• The USCIS has been delaying release of the AC 21 regulation for years creating confusion on a number of issues. The USCIS' recent rule-making agenda includes enactment of AC 21 regulation, but failure of release of AC 21 regulation was repeated in the past despite its previous rule-making agenda. There is thus no certainty as to whether the USCIS will indeed enact this regulation in the near future.
• The PERM regulation has created a new issue on the impact of conversion of labor certification application to PERM and the required withdrawal of pending application on the availability of 7th year H-1B extension. Until the so-called DOJ Authorization Act of 2002 was enacted by the Congress, the 7th year extension issue had been more or less guided by an informal opinion by the USCIS officials in the form of responses to attorney's inquiry letters. These officials took a liberal position allowing transfer of accumulation of 365 days through prior filing of labor certification application.
• The DOJ Authorization Act provides that the extension of H-1B beyond 6 years be available indefinitely in one-year increment once the pending labor certification application or I-140 petition or I-485 application passes 365 days until the "final decision" is made on any such application or petition. The final decision includes "revocation" and "denial," when such revocation or denial is not appealed. Thus far, there is no specific guidance or interpretation of this provision in the DOL Authorization Act by the USCIS in the context of withdrawal of pending labor certification application and refiling of application with the same employer or a different employer.
• The USCIS should give the answer to this question and the AILA is urged to seek the USCIS opinion on this issue through its liaison as soon as possible. There are two theories that can support the argument that such withdrawal under the PERM regulation should not deprive the applicant of the 7th year H-1B extension opportunity. The first argument is the language "any application" in the DOJ Authoriztion Act. Accordingly, the 7th H-1B extension should be available inasmuch as "any labor certification" is pending for 365 days or longer. The second argument may be drawn from the PERM provision that preserves the "priority date" when the pending application is withdrawn for the purpose of refiling of the application under the PERM regulation. One wonders why the DOL did not make the immigrant's life easier by simply providing that the pending application be automatically converted to the PERM application when a PERM application is filed by an applicant whose labor certification application is pending. Whatever the reason was, it appears that the intent is clear that the DOL would consider the labor certification process to continue both before and after filing of the PERM application leading to the final decision by the DOL.
• Again, this issue could have been resolved by the DOL by providing "automatic" conversion of the labor certification application in the PERM regulation. With the DOL having failed to do the job, the USCIS should give a policy guidance on this issue as soon as possible either by enactment of AC 21 regulation or release of policy memorandum on this issue. The immigrant community trusts that the AILA would work hard with the USCIS to promptly work out a guidance on this issue.

01/15/2005: DOL PERM Follow-Up Transition Guides and Additional Rules Forthcoming

• The on-going PERM Briefing sessions have left a number of questions unanswered and the immigrant community is still in a state of confusion, particularly with reference to the detailed schedules and timing of processing of backlog reduction cases and impact of refiling after the PERM on the processing delays and validity of pending cases in the pipeline when the application is not withdrawn at the time of PERM filing.
• For the backlog reduction issues, the DOL is scheduled to release two more Transition Guides (TG) in February 2005. The DOL is also scheduled to release a follow-up processing rules in the federal register sometime next week or so. The additional TGs and the additional processing rules will certainly help in clarifying some of these issues in that without doubt the DOL may reflect some of the questions which were raised in the briefing sessions in these follow-up policy guidances. However, for those who would like to make a decision as to whether a labor certification application should be filed before March 28, 2005, these forthcoming additional guidances may not give enough time to build a case. Please stay tuned to this website for the forthcoming release of these TGs and federal register policy releases.

01/15/2005: Multiple-Entry One-year B-1/B-2 Visa Issuance for Chinese Effective Today

• Under the changed reciprocity agreement between the U.S. and PRC, the U.S. visa posts worldwide will start issuing 1-year valid multiple-entry visitor's visa to the Chinese nationals effective today, January 15, 2005. Read on.

01/13/2005: DOL NPC and BPC Recruitment Advertisement

• We reported that the DOL National Processing Centers in Chicago and Atlanta and the Backlog Processing Centers in Philadelphia and Dallas are actively recruiting the "Analysts" (Workforce Development Specialist) and "Certifying Officers" (Supervisory Workforce Development Specialist). The positions to be recruited at the National Processing Centers are "permanent" positions, and the positions to be recruited at the Backlog Processing Centeers are "temporary" positions not to exceed one year. The recruitment ads reflect that the analysts at the National Processing Centers will also perform the backlog reduction case loads on top of its main duties of the PERM application adjudications. Most of these position openings will be closed by the end of January 2005. The positions require some experience with the foreign labor certification applications. It is expected that a substantial number of permanent positions at the NPC may be filled by the existing staff who have been relocated from the former Regional Offices. For the details, please click here.

01/12/2005: New LC Filers: RIR or PERM?

• The current new filers apparently have three options: (1) RIR Without Conversion; (2) RIR With Conversion after the launch of the PERM; (3) No RIR filing and just file a PERM application after March 28, 2005.
• Until the PERM Briefing on January 11, 2005 in Chicago, the second in the above-list was an option. However, since now we know that the conversion will take longer time to process, this may not be an option anymore. Accordingly, people may now have only two choices: Either file the RIR before March 28, 2005 and do not refile in PERM later or just wait until March 28, 2005 and file the PERM application. For the new filers, there is practically no advantage and difference between the straightforward RIR filing and the straightforward PERM filing. However, depending on the circumstances of the employer and the record of recruitment, the PERM may or may not fit well. According to the DOL, the ETA 9089 PERM application form has incorporated machine-readable features and the machne will intially determine in lots of cases approvability of a case before there is touch by a human hand. These cases may be defined as "straightforward" cases. However, if the machine determines that the application is not a straightforward case, the machine will direct the analysts/certifying officer to review, analyze, and determine approvability. Since the PERM application must be determined without supporting documentation and strictly based on the information and data provided on the form ETA 9089 itself, the more wrinkes the application has, the less chance it will have to get approval even if the wrinkles could have been justified or defended in RIR situation by submission of evidence such as business necessity, combination of occupations, lay-off records, etc. Remember that in the PERM application, no submission of evidence is permitted unless the audit letter is issued by the Certifying Officer.
• The choice must be made on the basis of the assessment and advice of a legal counsel. The legal counsel should be able to place each case in the spectrum, 100% straightforward case at the one end of the spectrum and a number of deviations and variations from the requirement, even if justifyable, at the other end of the spectrum. Depending on where a specific case will fall on the spectrum, the employer should file either RIR or PERM. The 100% straightforward case may fit well with both RIR and PERM. In such case, there is no reason why one should file a RIR application. Clearly choice should be the PERM. On the other hand, there may be many cases that fall under other end of the spectrum. Obviously such cases should be filed before March 28, 2005 as a RIR case and not a PERM case. It appears that the 40-65 day processing times may just include the straightforward cases. Once the audit letter is issued or selected as an audit case of supervised recruitment, it can take a long time. Assuming that the overriding advantage of the PERM application over the RIR application lies with the processing times, in the latter cases, there will be absolutely no advantage of filing of the PERM application.
• Currently, employers and their legal counsels are struggling to determine which way to go. Time may run out soon as the longer they wait, the less chance they may have to develop and file a RIR case as we approach inch by inch March 28, 2005. They should undertake repeated "assessment-analysis" and make a decision quickly. Clock is ticking.

01/12/2005: USCIS Reminds Filing Address Changes for El Salvadoran TPS Re-registration

• The extended TPS registration for El Salvadoran must be completed between January 7, 2005 and March 8, 2005. The registrants should notice changes in filing address this year. If you have sent to a wrong address, you should refile it. Please read carefully the USCIS reminder.

01/12/2005: Who Is Michael Chertoff, Nominee of DHS Secretary?

• Profile.

01/11/2005: Last Report from Chicago: Fate of Substitution of Employee for the Certified Labor Certification

• The certified PERM application may be used for the substitution of the alien beneficiary just as it has been the rule under the current labor certification practice. This is a very positive note. In closing this report from Chicago, this reporter wants to say "thanks" to the DOL officials for their good work for sharing information with the attendants. From the floor, the DOL received a large number of questions and comments, but as we reported yesterday, the DOL did not respond to any of these questions and comments at the end of the Briefing. It promises that the answers will be published on its web site in due course.

01/11/2005: Report from Chicago: Consequences of Failure to Respond to 30-day Audit Notice

• The National Processing Centers may issue a 30-day audit notice for collection of information/documents. If the employer fails to respond to such notice, the future cases of the employer will be audited! Watch out.

01/11/2005: Report from Chicago: "Job Order" Requirement for PERM filing