.

THE OH LAW FIRM

Dedicated Professionals in Immigration Law for Over 24 Years@

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..

Current Page[07/01/2010 - Present]/Archive XXI[03/01/2010-06/30/2010]/Archive XX[05/01/2009-02/28/2010/Archive XIX[10/01/2008-04/30/2009]/Archive XVII[03/31/2008 - 09/30/2008]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 - 06/1/06. ]

07/31/2007: Rep. Zoe Lofgren Introduced Bill to Void USCIS Filing Fee Increase

• The Chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee Immigraton Subcommittee introduced a legislative bill to void the immigration fee increase which took effect on July 30, 2007. For the press release by the Congresswoman, please click here. We will monitor the progress of this legislative bill in the House. Under the U.S. Constitution, any legislative bills that are related to the tax burden must be initiated by the House and not the Senate. The support of the bill in the House and the Senate is unclear at this point. People may contact the House members in their districts to solicit the support for this bill.
• The fee increase is also destined to face a challenge in the federal district court. The AILF is currently preparing for the lawsuit against this regulation. Details have yet to be developed but the community should show their appreciation for the AILF's continuing actions to achieve the justice in the immigration management. People may contact the AILF through www.ailf.org.

07/31/2007: Employment-Based Immigrants Schedule to Stage a Rally in DC on 09/13/2007

• The professional foreign worker groups have been suffering from the Congress' inaction on the employment-based immigration reform and in order to make their voice heard, they are reportedly scheduling to stage a rally in the Hill. Those who are interested in participating in the rally and supporting the rally may contact immigrationvoice.org for the details.

07/31/2007: House Passed Liberian TPS Extension Bill for One Year from October 1, 2007

• The USCIS failed to extend the TPS for the Liberians and the Houe has come forward to extend the TPS for the Liberians legislatively.
• The text of H.R. 3123 is as follows:
  • SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DESIGNATION.
  • (a) In General- The designation of Liberia under section 244(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(1)) is extended through September 30, 2008.
  • (b) Applicability- Subsection (a) shall be applied so as to render eligible for temporary protected status and work authorization, in accordance with subsections (a), (e) and (f) of section 244 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1254a), an alien who is a national of Liberia (or in the case of an alien having no nationality, is a person who last habitually resided in Liberia) and is otherwise eligible under subsection (c) of such section, if the alien--
  • (1) was granted such status under the designation of Liberia that is effective until October 1, 2007 (71 Fed. Reg. 55000);
  • (2) applied for such status under such designation, and such application is still pending; or
  • (3) is eligible for late initial registration under section 244(c) of such Act and the regulations implementing such section.
  • (c) Requirements- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall publish in the Federal Register procedures for aliens to register for temporary protected status under the extension made by this Act, and to apply for any applicable work authorization or extension of work authorization. Such registration period shall be not less than 60 days long.
  • (d) Extension of Current Work Authorizations- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any work authorization provided under section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act pursuant to the designation of Liberia that is effective until October 1, 2007, is extended until not earlier than April 1, 2008.
    

07/31/2007: USCIS Suspends July 2007 VB EAD and Advance Parole e-Filing Between 07/30/2007 and August 17, 2007

• USCIS announced that on or after July 30, 2007, those applications (paying old fees and filing using July 2007 Visa Bulletin) may not be electronically filed and must be submitted to a Service Center via regular mail or courier service. Read on.

07/31/2007: Correct Filing Fees for July 2007 VB I-485 Filing

• The immigrant community is confused by the filing fees that should accompany the I-485 applications between July 17 and August 17, 2007 for July 2007 Visa Bulltin filing. The USCIS is scheduled to release a federal register to clarify the filing fee issues. There correct filing fees for these cases are:
  • I-485: $325 for adults and $225 for children under 14
  • Biometric Fee paid with the I-485 applications: $70 for adults
  • I-765 EAD application: $180
  • I-131 Advance Parole application: $170
• Please stay tuned.

07/31/2007: Lapse in This Website Reporting

• This reporter has been extremely tied up with July VB 485 filing for the past three days and was unable to update this website. We apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused to our loyal visitors.

07/28/2007: Time for Democrats in the Senate and House to Give Equal Shake to Employment-Based Immigration Relief Legislation

• Even since the CIR failed, the Democratic leaders in the Senate have moved and introduced such important legislations as AgJOBs, DREAM, and other blls to deal with the low-end industry and undocumented alien relief legislations. We whole-heartedly welcome such move. The Senate Democratic leaders have attempted over and over again the passage of these bills as a rider to other unrelated legislation bills. We regret that the Senate failed to pass these bills.
• We, however, want to call these Democratic leaders' attention to the importance of the high-end and professional foreign workers employment-based immigration reform legislation. They will agree with this reporter that the employment-based legal immigration system is currently facing a serious crisis when the nation increasingly needs the services from these foreign talents. We have already reminded these leaders in the earlier posting that the total annual allocation for the entire employment-based immigration visas (including high-end and low-end industries workers) is limited to 140,000 including the foreign workers and their accompanying or following-to-join spouses and children. It de facto means that the actual number of foreign workers the U.S. businesses can sponsor is probably less than 70,000 or even 60,000 for an entire year!! The July 2007 Visa Bulletin debacle one time totally shut the doors to all the new foreign workers for applying for green cards, but later the agencies turned around and decided to open the door wide for the submission of green card applications to practically all types of foreign workers with the exception of "unskilled other workers." Only God knows how many applications the U.S. Citizenship and immigration services will receive during the period. Conservative estimate may turn out to be upper 6-digit figures. Considering the fact that currently annual quota is limited to 140,000, one can easily imagine the number of years these immigrants should endure to leave the "grren card pipeline." This is not acceptable. The immigration restrictionists often advanced their anti-immigration campaign with their demagogues that the foreign workers would massively take away Americans jobs. Really? 60,000 for the entire year is a massive number? Can the current American educational system produce and meet the market's demand for these number of high-end workers of higher education with maths and sciences? Granted there is a fallacy in their statistics. Don't they also know that their campaign will lead to the increased "oursourcing" of American jobs and business to foreign countries? Which is more damaging to the American job market, foreign workers's contribution in the U.S. or outsourcing of the number of jobs and businesses to foreign countries? C'mon! Report indicates that AFL-CIO has come to the terms of the reality and is not as opposed to the foreign workers in the same fervor and passion they one time took. There are some American high tech worker groups who want to close the workforce supply pipeline as narrow as possible so that they can take advantage of the shortage of the needed high tech workers and pressure the businesses to pay them higher wages to an unreasonable rate. The impact of these groups on the future of this nation's economy and economic growth does not need elaboration.
• Senators, the legislators should not ignore the needs of the high-end industries in the country. This reporter supports the Senate Democrats' continuing efforts to pass legislation to address the need for foreign workers in certain service industries and low-end industries. This reporter, however, wants to see the Senate Democrats to show a same kind of attention to the high-end industries at the same time. These industries need at least "equal shake" in the nation's legislative policy. This reporter keeps hearing from some busnesses that under the circumstances, they would not be able to do business unless they outsource part of their businesses. Unless these Democratic leaders pay attention to this critical issue, they may pay a good and high price for their anti-business stance in the upcoming 2008 national election. The southern border workforce issue and global high-end high tech workforce issue need same amount of attention and deserve an equal shake. We also take this opportunity to encourage Rep. Lofgren to intiate the employment-based immigration legislation on the House side as soon as possible.

07/28/2007: 140 e-Filing Link

• As is made clear in the CIS 485 filing FAQs, people can e-file I-140 petitions. The USCIS previously announced that e-filing system needed maintenance and would be shut down for a few hours on July 27, Friday. However, July 27 was a critical day for the last minute filers to pay the old filing fees and to avoid the increased filing fees which was scheduled to take effect on July 30, Monday. Considering the special needs of the customers under the circumstances, the USCIS generously withdrew and postponed the e-filing system maintenance schedule. According to the AILA, they might reschedule the maintenance on July 31, Tuesday. On July 26, 2007, however, we posted on this site not to reschedule the maintenance with the consequences of the system outage on July 31 for the reason that July 31, 2007 might turn out to be more critical day than July 27 in that July 27 would have affected only the amount of filing fees for filers but July 31 would constitute the last day for filing of labor certification waiver I-140 filers and failure of I-140 petitions for these filers within July would result in very serious consequences in that they would not be allowed to file July 485 applications by August 17, 2007. The CIS FAQ1 clearly stated that unless the priority was established by filing of the LC waiver I-140 petition within July 2007, they would not be able to file I-485 applications using the July 2007 Visa Bulletin.
• We note that the USCIS announcement did not set rescheduled maintenance date. It just postponed the maintenance schedule. We welcome such decision. It is thus likely that the USCIS might not perform the e-filing system maintenance on Tuesday, July 31, and people may be able to use e-filing system to file the last minute I-140 petition on July 31, 2007. Again we thank the leaders of the USCIS for their thoughtful postponement of maintenance schedule indefinitely. It is hoped that the maintenance is not undertaken until after August 17, 2007 such that people can file the last minute I-140 petitions timely online.

07/27/2007: USCIS Releases Important FAQ2 for July-August 485 Filing and Fees

• People must have noticed that the USCIS has extended compassion and extreme generosity on behalf of the July 2007 Visa Bulletin I-485 filers to releasing very "liberal" policies on the I-485 filing procedures between July 2 and August 17, 2007. They truly deserve a BIG applause and hats-off.

07/26/2007: USCIS Cancels Scheduled e-Filing System Outage Tomorrow

• As seen on the USCIS website, they removed the announcement of e-filing outage tomorrow, Friday. According to the AILA, they will reschedule on next Tuesday, July 31, 2007. This rescheduling announcement has yet to be published.
• What does this mean? People can keep filing I-140 petitions tomorrow for the purpose of paying the old filing fees. However, as it is always true to any news, there is a downside to this rescheduling. Those who try to file labor certification waiver I-140 petition online at the last minute on July 31 which is working day will not be able to do so, depending on the start time of the rescheduled outage. It is hoped that they do not reschedule on July 31. If they indeed need system maintenance, they should rather schedule on Wednesday, August 1 or during the weekend after August 17, 2007.

07/26/2007: BEC Labor Certification Status as of 07/20/2007

• AILA's teleconference with DOL on 07/24/2007 reflects as follows: [Courtesy of AILA]
  • Total balance: 28,300
  • RIR=Fewer than 1,000
  • TR=More than 27,300
    • Recruitment process has yet to be initiated=2,000
    • Recruitment process underway=More than 25,300
• Obviously, these cases will have to be adjudicaed within the next two months. The positive side of this report is that most of the cases are currently undergoing the supervised recruitment process and some of these cases are likely to be adjudicated as soon as they receive the recruitment result report. We thank these officials for their hard work at the BECs despite their uncertain future for their employment. However, we urge the BEC leaders and officials to give a special consideration to the USCIS deadline for accepting concurrent I-140/I-485 cases by August 2007 only and unless such concurrent filing is completed, these foreign workers will have to suffer from a unknown tremendous delays before they could file I-485, work permit, and international travel. These people are those who have gone through a long and long process to reach the current stage. Acceleration of the backlog cases before August 17, 2007 is strongly urged.

07/26/2007: USCIS Issues Guidance for Immigration Filing Fee Waiver Determination

• On July 20, 2007, the USCIS issued an Inter-Office Memorandum to give a guidance for the USCIS field offices to determine fee waivers under the new fee increase rule which takes effect on July 30, 2007. Read on.

07/25/2007: USCIS e-Filing System Outage on Friday, July 27, 2007

• The e-Filing System will be temporarily unavailable on Friday, July 27, 2007 from 3:00 PM EDT until 11:00 PM EDT for necessary maintenance.

07/25/2007: USCIS Inadvertent Publishing of 07/30/2007 Version I-485 Form on 07/23/2007

• USCIS has announced that on Monday, July 23, USCIS inadvertently posted on its website a version of Form I-485 that reflected the fee increase which does not take effect until July 30, 2007. USCIS has now posted the correct version of the Form I-485. The new version will be published on 07/30/2007.
  

07/25/2007: Special Information on Filing Form FB-485 for Persons Living in the Jurisdiction of the Dallas, El Paso, and Oklahoma

• As we reported earlier, in these districts, the I-485 filers at the local jurisdiction cases have two alternative filing options: By mail or in person. This USCIS release gives a specific instructions on procedures how to file in one of the two options. Read on.
  

07/25/2007: I-140 Premium Processing Unavailability and Its Impact

• The premium processing services for I-140 petition has offered a number of benefits to the foreign workers who are going through a long immigration journey. Accordingly, its extended temporary suspension of this services indefinitely will affect the following foreign workers in some cases seriously:
• Problem of Retention of Priority Date: There are a number of people who filed the traditional labor certification application many years back and expect to obtain the approval of these labor certifications from BEC in the next two months. Most of them involved EB-3 labor certifications. The ongoing frenzy July-August 2007 massive EB-485 filings are likely to affect the future immigrant visa numbers and visa bulletins. Accordingly, the past record reflects that these workers file an EB-2 PERM labor certification through the same employer or a different employer. The need for such option may turn out to be increasingly demanding because of the unavailability of the labor substitution opportunity in the market. In such case, the sole purpose of filing EB-2 PERM application is to transfer the priority date from the tranditional labor certification application. However, such transfer of priority date is not available unless the priority date of the traditional labor certification is "retained." Under the immigration rules, the priority date is retained for the purpose of the priority transfer only if the I-140 petition is filed using the approved labor certification application and, more importantly, "approved." Once the priority date is retained by such approval, such priority date is available for the transfer in the future unless the petition is revoked for fraud or meritlessness. Consequently, the approval of the I-140 petition will be crucial for some foreign workers, particularly those who filed the EB-2 PERM labor certification application through another employer to continue their immigration journeys with a less amount of impact from the changes in the circumstances. For the reason, the foreign workers have been seeking an earlier approval of I-140 petiion through the PPS.
• Problem of Extension of H-1B Status Beyond Six Year Limit: There are a large number of people who have stayed in the U.S. for a long period of time with some previous efforts to complete the labor certification process or I-140 or EB-485 but because of the changes in the employment, who became ineligible for the 7th-year H-1B extension since the one-year increment 7th-year H-1B extension beyond the six-year limit requires that the labor certification or I-140 or I-485 has been pending 365 days or longer before the alien reaches the 6th year limit. For these workers, the only means to extend the H-1B status beyond six year limit was the three-year increment H-1B extension opportunity under AC 21 Act when the alien has obtained "approval" of I-140 petition and the visa number was not available for him/her at the time of filing such H-1B extension. In August and September 2007, visa numbers will not be available and the visa numbers for the coming years appears to be not too promising. Accordingly, most of these people may not have an opportunity to file I-485 applications for a long time and need the continuing exension of H-1B petition at least until they file I-485 applications. For the reason, people used the PPS in the past to survive and continue the immigration journey. The longer the suspension of PPS lasts, the riskier these workers will face because of their inability to maintain a nonimmigran status through the H-1B extension beyond the six-year limit.
• Problem of Change of Employment Pending EB-485 Application: As an immigrant worker goes through a "long" road, obviously there arises an increased risk of termination of employment that supports the green card petition either because of the employer decision or sometimes because of the alien worker decision. Currently, AC 21 Act allows such change of employment after the I-140 petition is approved and I-485 application has been pending for 180 days or longer inasmuch as the new job is a similar or same job with the labor certification job. In the worst case, this opportunity may also be available even before the I-140 petition is approved inasmuch as 180 days has passed after filing of I-485 application and there is a solid and sufficient evidence to prove that the I-140 petition was "approvable" at the time of filing of I-140 petition by the former employer. The latter situation will however go through a tough evidentiary fight and scrutiny by the USCIS, especially when the former employer is an "angry" employer. Supposedly withdrawal of the I-140 petition by the former employer after 180 days of filing of I-485 application should not affect the I-485 application unless there was a fraud involved, but the angry employer can use a tool not to cooperate in providing evidence to establish "approvability" at the time of I-140 petition filing. For this reason, the foreign worker has been seeking earlier I-140 petition approval through the PPS for the portabilility to the new job after 180 days of I-485 filing.
• The July-August 2007 I-485 involves a substantial number of concurrent I-140/I-485 filing additing a tremendous workload and burden to the I-140 petition processing and adjudication resources within the Servvice Centeres. Besides, in view of the number of applications which they will receive during July-August 2007, the Service Centers may have to switch around the available resources within the Centers. This may affect the processing times for I-140 petitions in the future. Remember that the USCIS has just decided to extend the temporary suspension of I-140 petitions exactly for this reason. The I-140 petition processing time has been already bad for the last few months and it may turn worse. This will indeed present a hardship for those who need earlier I-140 approval for the foregoing reasons, particularly those who will have to use one of the foregoing processes just to survie in their immigrant journey.
  

07/24/2007: USCIS Indefinitely Suspenses I-140 Premium Processing Services

07/24/2007: USCIS Generous Interpretation of Priority Date Based July 2007 EB-485 Filing Eligibility and Our Urge for OFLC's Certification of PERM Applications Before 08/17/2007

• The USCIS FAQ indicates that those who filed a PERM application in July 2007 establishing his/her priority date and and will receive cerification of these PERM applications will be eligible to file a concurrent I-140/EB-485 application on or before August 17, 2007. The current DOS and USCIS actions following the July 2007 VB fiasco is giving a life-time opportunity for these filers to file EB-485 applications such that during the forthcoming long backlogs in adjudication of their applications, they could at least work and travel internationally using EAD and Advance Parole, and when they should be laid off, they could still complete the green card process inasmuch as they would find a similar job after 180 days of filing of the EB-485 applications. We thus urge the leaders of the Office of Foreign Labor Certification, particularly Dr. William Carlson, Chief of the National Program of U.S. Department of Labor, to acclerate the July PERM applications such that they are certified at least within the first two weeks of August 2007. We also urge the AILA to work with the OFLC to seek such cooperation from the agency. As affected by the surge of H-2B applications, we understand that Atlanta National Processing Center has been experiencing some delays in the processing of PERM applications and we strongly urge the Atlanta Center leaders to consider the current exigent circumstances and to accelerate the July 2007 cases adjudication within the next two weeks. Those who should desperately seek such help will include:
  • Those who have already filed and are waiting for the certification at this time.
  • Those who will file the PERM application on or before July 31, 2007 in the next one week. Those employers who will complete the required recruitment process by July 31, 2007 should make it sure that the PERM applications be filed online "on or before" July 31, 2007 so that once the PERM application is certified in the first two weeks of August, they submit the concurrent I-140 and EB-485 applications "swfitly" not missing the deadline of August 17, 2007. These aliens may also want to prepare for such potential opportunity and start collection of required supporting documentation in preparation for the situation. This will be particularly true for EB-3 filers as they are the ones who will suffer the most from the upcoming severe visa retrogression in coming years.
• We thank in advance for Dr. Carlson's special attention to this request on behalf of the U.S. employers and the foreign workers.

0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007

• Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
• Under the update July 2007 VB, visa number was unable for the entire July 2007. It remained such until July 17, 2007 when both DOS and USCIS reversed their positions. There could be some 104(c) H-1B three-year extension petitions filed in July bore the 17th. Since the July 2007 VB has been reversed and remains "current" in July, it will remain a challenging issue for these filers. Those who file after July 17, 2007 and before August 1, 2007 may not be entitled to the benefit of 104(c) extension. Accordingly, those who need three-year extension under 104(c) should not file the H-1B extension until after August 1, 2007 to obtain three year extension, even though they will have to pay the increased filing of $320 rather than the current $190. In August, the EB visa number will remain "unavailable" for the entire EB classifications, presenting the best opportunity to file such 104(c) three-year increment H-1B extension petition. What a twist and irony of the development of events?

07/24/2007: Confirmed Cases of No Cause for Rejections of July-August 2007 EB-485 Filing Under USCIS FAQ1

• The FAQ confirms that the USCIS will not reject the EB-485 application in the following situations. However, readers are cautioned that FAQ does not have a legally binding force, even though the Service Centers are likely to follow the FAQ.
  • No medical examination report enclosed
  • Concurrent I-140/EB-485 filing accompanied by a labor certification which was filed in July 2007 or earlier date and thus has a priority date of July 31, 2007 or earlier date, but it was certified by the DOL on or after August 1, 2007. Such EB-485 application should be filed on or before August 17, 2007. Any similar filing on or after July 18, 2007 will be rejected.
  • Filing with a wrong Service Center. Obviously, such filing is likely to be forwarded to the right Service Center, and a question remains what would be date of receipt, wrong Service Center receiving date or the right Service Center receiving date. The practice in this situation varied in the past to a great extent.
• Again, the foregoing is not the entire situations where the USCIS may not reject applications in excercise of discretions. But such discretion is likely dependent on each individual adjudicator rather than the entire USCIS policy or practice.

07/24/2007: Confirmed Reasons for Rejection of July-August EB-485 Filings, Particularly Between 07/17/2007 and 08/17/2007 Under USCIS FAQ

• According to the FAQ, the following EB-485 applications will be rejected, meaning the cases will not be considered filed. Since it is likely that the rejection notice and return of the papers can arrive after 08/17/2007, those who have detected the following problems may consider refiling:
  • No certified labor certification in concurrent I-140/EB-485 packet
  • Incorrect or missing filing fee checks
  • Missing employer or alien signatures on the forms
  • After 07/30/2007, enclosing check in the amount of $195 for concurrent I-140/EB-485 packet rather than new I-140 filing fee of $475. This will result in rejection of both I-140 petition, EB-485 application, I-765 EAD application, and I-131 Advance Parole application in the packet
  • After 07/30/2007, enclosing check of new EB-485 filing fees instead of $395 (adult) or $225 (minor) of current fee in the concurrent I-140/EB-485 filing. If the new filing fee of $475 is paid for I-140 petition, the I-140 will not be rejected and will be continuously process. However, accompanying EB-485 application will be rejected and return. For the accompany EAD and AP applications, regardless of whether correct fee amount is paid or not, these applications will also be rejected and returned once the EB-485 is rejected for the incorrect amount fee payment. If correct amount is paid for I-140 and EB-485 but incorrect amount or no fee is paid for EAD and AP applications pursuant to the new filing fee schedules, only EAD and AP will be rejected and I-140 and EB-485 will be accepted and processed without EAD and AP applications. If one check is written to cover fee payment for I-140, EB-485, I-765, and I-131 and any one of payment is incorrect, entire packet of I-140, EB-485, I-765, and I-131 will be rejrected. People should never write a check to cover fee for more than one specific petition or application.
  • After 07/31/2007, concurrent I-140/EB-485 application with a priority date of August 1, 2007 or any later date. In labor certification-based cases, if PERM application was filed on or after August 1, 2007, EB-485 application will be rejected. But again, the underlying I-140 petition will be continuously processed. In labor certfication waiver cases of EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-1C, EB-2 NIW, Schedule A, unless the I-140 petition was filed before August 1, 2007, the EB-485 applications concurrently filed with such petitions will be rejected and return. However, such I-140 petitions will be continously processed as a stand-alone I-140 petition.
• The foregoing reasons have been confirmed by the USCIS HQ through the Q&A. There may be additional reasons causing rejections. People are thus warned that the foregoing list is not exhaustive.

07/23/2007: USCIS July-August VB 485 Filing FAQ Released: CIS 485 Filing FAQ

• Summary of USCIS Announcement:

Concurrently filed I-140 Filing Fee: $475, new fee, from 07/30/2007
Concurrently filed I-765 and I-131: Old fees, $180 for EAD and $170 for AP until 08/17/2007
USCIS will accept EB 485 if the priority date is before July 31, 2007 but the certification is granted after August 1, 2007 and such 485 is filed by August 17, 2007!!
USCIS will reject EB-485 application with a labor certification waiver EB petitions ( such as EB-1, NIW, etc) concurrently filed with the I-485 if the priority date is not established before end of July 2007. It is thus extremely important for the labor certification waived I-140/I-485 concurrent filers to immediately file I-140 petition first before the end of July 2007!!!!!!!! Please use e-filing.
USCIS will not, repeat will not, reject EB-485 applications which are not accompanied by the medical examiantion report.
Without I-797 of pending I-140 notices, USCIS will accept EB-485 if certain information which is described in this announcement is provided.

• Since USCIS has released the FAQ, we are removing our own FAQ to remove potential confusion.
• We are very happy that some of our recommendations which were posted on 07/21/2007 are reflected in the FAQ. Thank you, USCIS leaders for leniency!

07/22/2007: Service Centers Receipting Update As of 07/20/2007

• The update reflects the status "three days after 07/17/2007 announcement." It indicates that Texas Service Center's receipting compliance will be 10/26/2007. The Nebraska Service Center situation appears better: 08/01/2007. Remember, though, most of these cases are those which were received before the announcement and once new cases are flooded into the system, it is expected that the receipting frontlog may turn indeed terrible. One cabeat: Close reading of the NSC reflects that it includes not only employment-based but other I-485 cases such as refugees and asylees I-485 applications and others, while the TSC counted only EB-485 cases. Accordingly, should the NSC have counted only EB-485 cases, the situation could have been worse than August 1, 2007. There is no noticleable report that July 2 filers are receiving receipt notices en masse from the NSC. One unconfirmed report indicates that NSC alone received 8000 by Fedex alone on July 2, 2007. It appears that people should be prepared for the potential delays in receipt notices for post-July 2 receipt notices.

07/22/2007: Increased Piecemeal Immigration Legislative Activities Post-CIR with Disappointing Results

• As we reported earlier, the Congress and the nation are in a better mood to resolve the immigration issues on a piecemeal basis after the devastating failure in passage of the CIR. Senator Feinstine introduced AgJOBS bill again which was part of the CIR which is pending. Senator Durbin introduced DREAM bill for illegal youngsters which was also part of the CIR. He agressively pushed this as an amendment to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget bill, but unfortunately, the Senate passed H.R. 2669 on July 20, 2007 without the DREAM bill. Without doubt, he will keep pushing this bill as he has a passion over the issue. We are grateful for that. On the other hand, Senator Durbin has been pioneering a move to restrict H-1B and L-1 visas for the alleged misuse and abuse by foreign job shop employers. He introduced this bill in the Senate and eventually pushed it as part of the CIR, which resulted in the misfortune as like any other part of the CIR. He apparently has a passion on the issue of abuse and fraud in the H-1B and L-1 visa and pushed this bill again as an amendment to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget bill. For good or for bad, his bill failed to make it in H.R. 2669 which was passed on Thursday. The bill will go to the Conference, but the House passed H.R. 2669 did not include this part of legislation. Accordingly, his zeal for the restriction of H-1B and L-1 visas is likely to remain under control for awhile. Republican Senator Cornyn tried again his SKIL bill in the Senate as part of the CIR and faced same misfortune. Senator Cornyn is facing reelection for his Senate seat in 2008 facing an anti-immigration constituency back home in Texas. He is a strong supporter of the business and employment-based immigration, but does not appear to project the image of an immigration advocate in his constituency. His fight against the CIR reflected his political reality in the coming Republican Primary and national election in November 2008. He discreetly, though, introduced an employment-baeed immigration bill as an amendment to H.R. 2669, FY 2 008 Budget bill, but it was not the SKIL bill. It was a bill to recapture of unused visa numbers and temporary relief for the H-1B shortage. A soft-touch approach, one may call it. However, one cannot deny that had the bill made it, the employment-based immigrant community would have benefited from the legislation tremendously as a large number of the EB visa numbers could have been recaptured, giving the immigrants a relief from the retrogression. Unfortunately, his amendment failed to make it.
• The piecemeal immigrations bills have been continuously struck down in the Congress, but this should not end the efforts. Eventually, the legislators will come to realize that the actual annual visa numbers which are currently available to the "foreign workers" may be not 140,000 but less than 70,000 as the rest of the numbers are used by the spouses and children at the rate of approximately average 1.5 per each foreign worker. The number is indeed "striking and shocking!" Particularly considering the total demand for high level foreign workers by the world-leader economy, the current employment-based system has a serious problem, continuously inducing increased outsourcing of employment and the business to foreiign countries. Lou Dobb is right on this issue, even though he has a distorted view of immigration and has been fighting against immigration. We are firmly convinced that the Congress and political leaders of far right and far left will eventually come to the realization of the damage they are causing to the nation's sustained growth, not only economically but all other aspects of a society "in the long run." We thus keep our hopes high and remain optimistic rather than pessimistic for the future.

07/22/2007: Rep. Lofgren's Statement on July Visa Fiasco Resolution

• With graditude, we are pleased to link to her statement on July 17, 2007 relating to the Secretary of Chertoff's phone call informing her of the DOS and USCIS reveral decisions. We are also happy and grateful to hear a rumor that Rep. Lofgren, the Chairwoman of Subcommittee of Immigration, Judiciary Committee, The Houe of Representatives, is looking into a possibility of introducing an employment-based immigration reform bill to increase the annual EB numbers after realizing that VB Fiasco was not a solution for anything when it came to the shortage of annual employment-baed immigrant visa allocations under the current law. We truly hope that she takes up such a bill soon. Again, Thank You!

07/21/2007: RFE/NOID Flexible Time Frame Rule and Need for USCIS Discretion for Pe-July 17, 2007 EB-485 Filers

• July VB Fiasco was a tragic event in the American immigration history and we are grateful that the USCIS rectified the problem on July 17, 2007 by reversing its decision to deny July 2007 EB-485 applications. We do not have specific statisics on EB-485 filers from July 2, 2007 until July 17, 2007. However, for the two reasons, among others, a large number of applicants sent in EB-485 applications during the period. Firstly, they more or less anticipated that either DOS or USCIS would rectify the problems because of the potential serious flaws in their decisions. Secondly, AILF was preparing class action lawsuits and they wanted to make it sure that they took advantage of being a member of the class without actually being named as plaintiffs. One time, people thought it was a smart move and right thing to do it, even though this reporter suggested to the people to wait until August VB was released.
• Currently, these early filers are literally going through nightmares, hardships, and sleepless nights because of the two reasons. The first reason is that their cases have been on hold and no Receipt Notices have been issued. The second reason is that recently the USCIS revised its rule (1) allowing the adjudicating officers to exercise a discretion and issue a RFE with the response time of less than 12 weeks and (2) to exercise a discretion to either reject or deny a petition or an application without issuing RFE when the "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Combination of these facts is currently creating a turmoil to these filers for the two reasons. There are some filers who submitted I-140/I-485 application without a sufficient documentation in haste, for instance, medical report, or other flaws in the submitted evidence. These people are restless not knowing whether their application could be rejected or denied, indeed a truly deadly consequences. The circumstances force them to wonder whether they should refile the petition/application before August 17, 2007 not to take any chances. There are, however, two hurdles to such decision. One is the recent denial of I-140 petitions by the adjudicators if the petition was not accompanied by the "original" labor certification. The another reason is no fixed rule or policy on the filing of multiple I-485 applications. This creates a fear that their second filing may also be rejected or denied. They are thus trapped! The second victims are international travelers. If the application is either rejected or denied and they are present in the U.S., they will be able to refile it after correcting the flaws in their initial evidence before August 17, 2007. However, when they are not present in the U.S., they will be deprived of such opportunities, which may be considered "deadly." Some people are still present in the U.S. at this time, but because of business or personal emergency, they will have to travel outside of the country using their H-1B/H-4 or L-1/L-2 visa. If their cases are rejcted or denied during their absence, they will not be able to refile it timely before August 17, 2007. They are trapped again! Their act which was considered a right thing to do to one time turns out to be a nightmare. Who would have anticipated the nightmare?
• We urge the USCIS to consider the following actions to relieve these applicants from the unnecesary hardship:
  • Under he RFE/NOID Flexible Timeframe rule, a decision to reject or deny without a RFE remains a "discretion" of the individual adjudicator in each case. This reporter proposes that considering the unusual circumstances involving the July VB fiasco and the USCIS unusual remedial action at the last minute, the USCIS exempts these filers from the rule and make it mandatory to issue RFE before rejection or denial unless the following flaws are found in the filing:
    • No filing fee checks or flaws in the filing fee checks
    • Missing signatures in the forms
    • Missing forms
    • Missing underlying certified labor certification application for I-140 petitions (either original or copy).
  • Should the filers decide to refile it before August 17, 2007, the USCIS should accept a copy of the certified labor certification application rather than rejection or denial of the refiled I-140 petition. In fact, it has been the INS/USCIS tradition to accept I-140 petition with a copy of the certified labor certification application inasmuch as the original was on file with the agency, albeit in other file of the same applicant or other applicants. Accordingly, it should be a matter of adhering to the tradition and to instruct the adjudicators not to reject such refiling on the issue of a copy of the certified labor certification application. Additionally, inasmuch as there is an evidence that the labor certification has been certified by the DOL but the applicant was unable to submit the original or copy because the application was lost or yet to be delivered to the applicant, such I-140 which was filed during the period should not be rejected or denied. Again, it has been a tradition of the agency to request a duplicate certified labor certification from the DOL by the agency itself when there was a proof of certification. We urge the USCIS to exercise the discretion and instruct the adjudicators not to reject or deny I-140 filed during the problem period for the reasons of missing "original."
• Foregoing actions will relieve these filers from most of the nightmares or status of being trapped. It is thus strongly urged that the leaders of the USCIS extend a compassion on a human level and exercise a discretion immediately to take the foregoing actions. This reporter has been receiving hundres of emails from these filers and had to share the pains and emotional despair since there was no answer to the foregoing issues under the curcumstances. Since the deadline of filing is August 17, 2007, the USCIS should swiftly release an announcement to relieve these people from the problem "effectively." On behalf of all these trapped, this reporter personally pleas the leaders of the USCIS to act quickly.

07/20/2007: DOL FY 2008 Budget Proposal Passed the House 07/19/2007

• Yesterday, the House passed the DOL FY 2008 budget proposal. As we reported earlier, DOL budget proposal includes user-fee based PERM labor certification system. It is not clear whether this legislation to charge filing fees for the PERM labor certification applications will be legislated as part of the budget bill or a separate bill. We predicted that the likely fee may amount to between $750 and $500. This prediction is based on its proposal to charge $1,500 years ago to raise the fund for the backlog elimination program as well as the PERM program. Since the Backlog Elimination Program will be ended, the fee income needs to support only PERM Program. Please stay tuned.

07/20/2007: Senator Cornyn's Amendment for Temporary Relief of Employment-Based Immigration Failed

• Yesterday, Senator Cornyn introduced on the Senate floor Amendment 2339 to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget, proposing the following temporaary relieffor the employment-based immigrants. Sadly, the bill was rejected. Do you want to know who supported this bill? Click here.

SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.

(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)--(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--

``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and

(2) in paragraph (2)--(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:

``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.

(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end; (2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:

``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.

• Congressional Record:

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, no one disputes that a key part of America's economy is our ability to innovate and retain the most qualified workers, especially in areas such as math, science, and engineering. There is one step Congress can take this year to help provide at least temporary relief. My amendment would allow the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security to recapture unused employment-based visas. These unused visa numbers would go to nurses, physical therapists, and other key areas for people with extraordinary ability with advanced degrees. This amendment would also include a one-time H-1B visa increase of 115,000 for fiscal year 2008 only, given if that cap was hit in the first day this year. This amendment will go a long way to help provide the legal workers who are the lifeblood of the U.S. economy. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this H-1B visa issue was debated during the course of the immigration bill. We decided to increase the number of the H-1B visas but also increase the safeguards against abuse. We know abuses are taking place. We wanted to be sure American workers have first chance at these jobs, No. 1; and, No. 2, we want to stop these foreign job shops that are using thousands of these H-1B visas to outsource jobs in the United States then back to their home country. None of those reforms are included. All we have is an increase in the H-1B visa numbers. We need a balanced and coordinated approach that increases the numbers with the safeguards. Unfortunately, Senator Cornyn's amendment does not do that, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 55, the nays are 40. Three-fifths (60 votes) of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is rejected. The point of order is sustained and the amendment falls.

• The foregoing record reflects that as we predicted earlier, employment-based immigration reform requires a compromise with Senator Durbin's proposal on prevention and abuse of employment visas at some level. Accordingly, the reform in employment-based "immigration" and employment-based "non-immigrant" visas may have some room to succeed if the two Senators negotiate towards a compromise bill. As it is made clear in the foregoing record, the Senator is not necessarily opposing adjustment of visa numbers and other reforms inasmuch as legal devices to prevent frauds and abuses in the visa processing systems. At this point, Senator is seeking a very hard-line device which is not workable by any means. It is thus obvious that Senator Durbin must tone down his position to procedure a workable compromise bill. We urge Senator Cornyn and Senator Durbin work together to produce and introduce a compromise bill in the near future either as an attachment of another bill or as a separate bill. This reporter takes this opportunity to thank Senator Cornyn for his continuing support for the employment-based immigration reform. We also thank Senator Durbin for not opposing employment-based immigration reform inasmuch as the reform would include legal mechanisms to prevent frauds and abuses. We look forward to Senaotor Durbin's continuing interest in the employment-based immigration reform.
• We also urge Madame Pelosi and Madame Lofgren to initiate the employment-based immigration reform legislation in the House as soon as possible.

07/20/2007: Draft of AILF Class Action Lawsuit on VB Fiasco

• AILF has released the drfat of complaint which could have been filed, had the DOS and the USCIS not reversed themselves on July 17, 2007. This will be an interesting reading material for the readers during the weekend. Here we go!

07/20/2007: Business Week Report of Potential Congressional Action on Employment-Based Immigration Reform

• Our visitors will recall our report and call for Congress action on the employment-based immigration refom on July 18 nd July 19, 2007. We now see a newsreport that is consistent with exactly what we advocated. It appears that the immigration.voice group is also acting on the lobby move to push forward such legislation. As we reported on July 18, the Congress and the public are not on our site at this time, but we should still try it rather than giving up. We hope this

07/19/2007: What Does 140,000 Annual EB Visa Number Mean and EB Reform Legislation is Urgent

• Probably the public is mislead by the information that the current immigration law allows the U.S. employers to sponsor and bring in 140,000 foreign workers for the permanent employment every year. Is that so! No, that is absolutely not true. 140,000 includes not only the foreign workers themselves but also the spouses and children of the foreign workers. Then what would be the actual numbers which the foreign workers themselves are allowed to be brought in? Go figure. This reporter is not a math major. How much of this reality does the public know? The public talk a lot about numerical figures of "foreign workers" this country needs, but they are not aware of the actual number of "foreign workers" the U.S. employers are allowed to bring in for the permanent position annually. It is indeed small in number. For this reason, the CIR or other legislations which were introduced and failed by the "do-nothing-Congress" proposed to take out the spouses and children of the foreign workers from numerical limit and from counting the employment-based immigrant annual quota. The July VB fiasco is just a reflection of a serious flaws of the current immigration system and the stress and frustration of the U.S. employers that need educated foreign workers to sustain their businesses. Business leaders, stand up and whip the legislators and political leaders to wake them up so that they can act and work for the American business!

07/19/2007: H-2B Nonprofessional Temporary Worker Frequently Asked Questions and Answers by Office of Foreign Labor Certification, DOL

• This Round 1 FAQ provides answers to questions on the details of new filing procedures and other guidance. Read on.

07/18/2007: Reinstated July Visa Bulletin, August Visa Bulletin, and H-1B Three-Year Extension Under AC 21 Section 104(c)

• The State Department apparently withdrew prior update July VB and reinstated the original July VB which was released on June 12, 2007. There are people who are not eligible for the 7th-year extension under AC 21 because 365 days have yet to pass before the current six-year limit H-1B status expires. There may be three group of AC 21 H-1B extension people: (1) Those who filed H-1B extension petition between June 12 and June 30, 2007; (2) Those who filed the H-1B extension petition between July 2, 2007 and July 17, 2007; (3) Those who filed or will file the H-1B petition after July 17, 2007. It is likely that the group one filed one-year increment H-1B petition since they learned that visa number will become current in July 2007.

07/18/2007: July-August 485 Filing Q&A

• Filing papers frawlessly will be extremely important so that the filing is not rejected and returned after the visa numbers become unavailable. Additionally, there are many other questions including filing fees and family members that will have to be answered. Accordingly, we will start answering some of the questions from tomorrow just as we did in the past relating to the visa number retrogression and new legislation issues. Those who have questions may send us email using ohlaw@immigration-law.com. The questions and answers will be formated by this reporter such that no identity information is part of the Q&A and people understand that the answers are not a legal advice to any individual or to anyone for that matter. People should avoid any information in the questions that can identify the person or persons.

07/18/2007: On the Occasion of Closing the Chapter of Visa Bulletin Fiasco

• This reporter cannot close the fiasco chapter without addressing his personal gratitude to the leaders of the DOS and the USCIS. Whether in personal matter or public business, reversing one's decision before the millions of people needs a tremendous courage not necessarily because of the potential embarassment but more because of the potential risk which people may take it as a wrong message. We want to thank the leaders of the DOS and the USCIS for showing such courage and close the chapter of the visa bulletin fiasco. We should move on.

07/18/2007: Reinstatement of Original July Visa Bulletin and Uncertain Impact on Pre-July "Tagged" EB-485 Applications and Processing Time of I-485 Applications in the Future

• As we explained it at the beginning of the visa fiasco, when it comes to the visa number requirement in the green card proceeding, there are two different steps which should be clearly distinguished. First step is "permission to enter the door in the form of filing of a permanent resident status application, I-485" and second step is "permission to leave the door as a permanent resident through its approval." Both of the steps fall under the jurisdiction of the USCIS. Under the USCIS regulation, the controlling standard for the first step is the monthly Visa Bulletin and not actual visa number availability, meanwhile for the second step, the controlling standard is not monthly visa bulletin but actual visa number availability. Accordingly, if all the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will be unable to approve any I-485 applications regardless of the Visa Cut-Off dates in the Visa Bulletin as the DOS will be unable to authorize a visa number beyond the annual cap under the statute. For this reason, the USCIS first contacts the DOS in each and every I-485 application case to obtain the visa number authorization before they "finally" approve the I-485 application for a specific individual. However, the job for the USCIS is totally different when it comes to decision of "accepting" I-485 applications. They totally rely on the monthly Visa Bulletin regardless of the actual visa number availability and the agency is not required to first contact the DOS to determine whether they should accept the I-485 application for each individual I-485 filing. The USCIS thus automatically performs "receipting" I-485 application inasmuch as the priority date of the specific individual I-485 application is the same or earlier date of the cut-off date shown in the Visa Bulletin.
• In the present situation, the USCIS has taken out almost all the EB visa numbers for FY 2007 (09/30/2007) before July 1, 2007 to adjudicate the pending and backlogged I-485 applications. Most of these applications have yet to be adjudicated using the visa numbers which have already been authorized. When it comes to these two cases, there are two open questions which have yet to be answered. The first question is whether the USCIS will continuously return the visa numbers for these cases. Report indicated that the USCIS started returning some of these numbers back to the DOS. Should this take place, the existing EB-485 waiters will expererience a long-wait to obtain approval of their backlogged EB-485 applications. The second question is "whether one's EB-485 application was tagged before July 1." At this time, this information is not available to anyone other than the USCIS itself. It is likely that this information will remain under the rug indefinitely. Accordingly, once his/her case was tagged, even though there is a chance that his/her visa number has been returned to the DOS, he or she will have a good chance to get I-485 application approval in the coming months. We may call them "lucky devil you!"
• The other EB-485 waiters will turn out to be a big victim to the DOS/USCIS decision yesterday. Since there will be no visa numbers available until October 1, 2007, the people whose EB-485 applications were "not tagged" before July 1 will experience a tremendous delay in obtaining the green card. When it comes to the delays in obtaining the green card approvals, the new filers in July and those filers before August 17 will also witness a tremendous delays and will have to endure a long and long journey to leave the pipeline of the green card process. Why? As we reported quite earlier in this visa fiasco, we even estimated that approximately 750,000 individual EB-485 applications can be poured into the system during this unusual period of visa number availability as affected by the upcoming filing fee increases and more importantantly the anticipated potential huge visa number retrogression ahead during when they may not be able to file their 485 applications because of the retrogression. After all, the system has only 140,000 numbers for the entire EB categories for each year. Go figure! What would look like the waiting time for the current EB-485 filers and the current EB-485 filers before July 1, 2007!
• We have no intention to spoil the exhuberation which a huge number of new filers will experience for the next 30 days. We are writing this just to remind the immigrants that the journey is not over and there is more important task ahead for the foreign workers. It is a legislative fight. The current employment-based immigration system is horribly broken and choked to the level of Microsoft Corporation proclaining that they would outsource the work to Canada. The system has failed to meet the new challeges under the ciber age and globalization of world economy by refusing to reform the employment-based immigration system years and years. The current employment-based annual quota, annual national limit, and prohibition of recapture of unused EB visa numbers are just a tip of iceberg which were enacted years and years before the current new age arrived. The system is too archaic to meet the new challenge in the current global economy and the ciber space technology age. The country has grown from a child of 10 years in age to an energetic teen-ager and still asks the child to live on with the outfits which were given to them when they were ten years old! The country desperately needs the reform of the employment-based immigration system, even for the purpose of just updating and accomodating the changes during the last two or three decades. It cannot go on with the current system. America should remain a vibrant society and keep remain a leader of the global world. America cannot retreat to the old archaic isolationism and a nationalism under the ever changing global world. Rather than breeding a fear of growth into the global economy, the leaders of the country should come forward to squaredly meet the new challenges with a vision under the inevitably changing global economy. The America started with pioneers whom the nation cherishes. We should never abandon the sprit of a pioneer and lose the identity of "America."
• We call on the political leaders and legislators to collect pieces together which were smashed and buried during the difficult political battle of CIR and introduce a bi-parisan employment-based immigration reform legislation as soon as possible. Madame Zoe Lofgren showed an incredibly powerful strenth and leadership in the very difficult visa number viasco. We urge Rep. Lofgren continuously show such leadership and initiate the legislative process for employment-based immigration reform in the House. During the visa number fiasco, we were somewhat disappointed with the Senate leaders distancing themselves from an issue that touches lives of hundreds and thousands people. However, we want to look at the situation from moe positive perspectives of the event and believe that the Senate leaders had enough confidence in the leadership of Rep. Lofgren and did not disrupt the political process which was initiated by the Congresswoman. However, it is time for the Senate leaders to actively initiate and participate in the employment-based immigraion reform legislation. We understand that Senator Cornyn's SKIL bill had a bi-partisan support for the past two years in the Senate and we urge the Senate to work on this bill again. We understand that current employment-based immigration system has a room for correction to prevent frauds and abuses. In a way, we understand Senator Durbin's leadership to clean up the problems in the current employment-based system. The Senator has been working on introducing H and L visa reform bill for preveention of frauds and abuses to pass as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill, H.R. 1585. We urge Senator Durbin to also join in the Senator Conyn's SKIL bill incorporating his H and L reform proposal. We realize that the H.R. 1585 bill is about to complete the process and head for passage soon, and under the circumstances, it may already be too late to reintroduce the SKIL Act as an amendment to this bill. But the legilstive process should not end with the Defense Authorization bill. We strongly urge Senator Cornyn to work with the leaders of both sides of the aisle in the Senate to reintroduce the SKIL bill as soon as possible. We understand the passion of Senator Cornyn against certain issues in the CIR. That issue should be left to another chapter of the future legisaltive process. We urge him to keep his same passion for needs for reform of employment-based immigration system and quickly work on reintroducing the bill in the Senate. The public opnion appears to be skeptical about such bill in the aftermath of the CIR death, but the nation desperately needs political support for the businesses, research industry, academic institutions, small and medium businesses, and continuous new bloods flowing into the nation by the foreign brains. Time appears to work against us, but we should try. Otherwise, millions of talented foreign workers and their family members will suffer for a long time with no clear light at the end of tunnel for their journey for immigration.

07/17/2007: Our Website Server Was Down

07/17/2007: USCIS Accepts EB 485 Cases Until 08/17/2007 As We Reported Earlier

• Please see the USCIS announcement!

07/17/2007: 4:20 p.m. Hurray for July Visa Bulletin

• State Department has withdrawn Update July 2007 and reinstated original July 2007 where all the EB categories other than "other workers" were current.
• Congratulations to all the July filers. The ordeal is finally over.

07/17/2007 4:10 p.m. August Visa Bulletin

• EB number will not be available for every single category and every country.
  • July EB Visa Availability: After consulting with Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Visa Office advises readers that Visa Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for purposes of determining Employment visa number availability, and that Visa Bulletin #108 (dated July 2) is hereby withdrawn.
    

07/17/2007: USCIS Deal Reached

• Various sources confirm that the USCIS has finally reached the deal, which will be announced within today. As to the specifics of the deal, there are differences in reports that one report indicates that the USCIS will retreat from their July 2 announcement that they will reject all the EB-485 filings received on or after July 2, 2007 and will announce that they will accept the EB-485 applications based on the DOS' initialy July Visa Bulletin (everthing was current other than other workers). Besides, in order to recover the past 17 days in July during when people could not file, they will accept the applications until August 17, 2007, which will be 30 days (one month) from the date of announcement, July 17, 2007.
• It still remains a rumor until the USCIS announces and the actual announcement can be different. Please do not jump into the water yet. Please stay tuned.

07/17/2007: USCIS Transformation Program and 07/17/1007 GAO Report to Congress

• The future of the USCIS services system will depend on the success of the web-based Transformation Program which the USCIS has been pushing on very hard. However. the GAO has just reported to the Congress that the Transformation Program needs a careful review owing to some potential issues. It is coincident that this GAO report is released the same day when the USCIS launched the Pilot Transformation Program in Inter-country Adoption to test this program. Read on.

07/17/2007: AILF Class Action Status Report

07/17/2007: CIS 07/16/2007 Processing Times Report

07/17/2007: DREAM Act Introduced as Amendment to H.R. 1585 Defense Authorization Act

• Yesterday, Senator Durbin, for himself and Senators,Hagel, Lugar, Leahy, Obama, Lieberman, Feinstein, Kerry, Feingold, Clinton, Bayh, Menendez, Murray, Boxer, Cantwell, Salazar, and Dodd, submitted an amendment SA 2237 to the bill H.R. 1585 which was ordered to lie on the table. It is a bi-partisan amendment with a strong support from both sides of the aisle. We will report the full text soon.

07/17/2007: Government Scheduled to Announce Something "Today"

• AILA has reported that the government is scheduled to announce something which can be bad or good. Bad means that the government could not find appropriate fix for the problem, and good means some relief may be provided. It sounds that they appeared to have been in discussion of a number of options and may not have reached yet an agreement. It is indeed a difficult time for the government as well as the immigrants and employers.

07/17/2007: C'mon, Who Is Going to Announce First, DOS August Visa Bulletin or CIS VB Fiasco Relief?

• Clock keeps ticking towards the end of July and not much time has left for these two federal departments to answer the call for fix of the VB fiasco. Currently rumors abound for these agencies' potential actions to fix the problem, but nothing is coming out of wires. The nation just wants to know who intents to fix the problem, the State Department or the USCIS. It is submitted that enough time has been spent for them to relieve hundreds of thousands of immigrants and employers from emotional pains, agonies, and distress.We call for their immediate actions and announcement. No matter whether August Visa Bulletin first or the USCIS relief actions.

07/17/2007: Passport Processing Meltdown to Receive Some Help from Retired Diplomats

• Currently, the department is receiving more than 1 million passport applications a month and holds a backlog of about 500,000 that have been pending more than 10 weeks, instead of the usual six to eight The Senate passed S. 966 bill late last month to allow State to rehire retired Foreign Service employees to staff overwhelmed passport processing centers across the country. Retirees now have little incentive to return because current law cuts their salaries by the amount of their pensions. The House yesterday agreed to the Senate bill and passed it yesterday which is likely to grant the State Department the flexibility to rehire retired and fully trained passport processors on a temporary basis to help existing processors manage the increased demand. The President is likely to sign the quickly. Read on.
  

07/16/2007: USCIS Launches First Transformation Program ("Account System")

• We reported a few days ago that the USCIS has been actively developing the so-called Transformation Program which will convert the current petition and application process and system into the "account" based system for all the petitions and applications in the future. Accoun system is to develop database for each employer, legal representatives, aliens, etc in the form of accounts which will allow sharing of the data and information in the accounts in all the petitions and applications filed by each party. As a pilot program of this program, the USCIS is launding inter-country adoption program as the first transformation system. Read on.
• See Q&A

07/16/2007: Advisory for Labor Certification Employer on Employer Obligation from Fraud Prevention and Cost Payment Obligation

• The commonly called "labor certification elimination" final rule which took effect today covers three broad subjects: (1) Elimination of labor certification beneficiary after July 16, 2007; (2) Limitation of validity of approved labor certification for 180 days after the date of certification; (3) Prohibition of sale, bargain, etc of labor certiication, employer obligation of the cost of labor certification, debarment of labor certification for violation, and sanctions for violation of violations by the representatives.
• The rules on the third subject is vary vague, complex, with serious consequences for violations. The Office of Foreign Labor Certification has just released Frequestly Asked Questions (FAQ), answering some of the questions. It is extremely important that the employers and legal representatives make themself knowledgeable of these questions and answers. This FAQ is a employer's "must read" material.

07/16/2007: AILA Statement on Current Rumor

• As everyone will agree, when it comes to this issue, the AILA should be on the top for the breath-taking events within the government. For the obvious reasons, AILA has remained silent apparently not to affect the negotiation process and the behind the door activities to pressure on the agencies. However, considering the ongoing rumors which have been going out of control, it has just broken its silence at about 5:30 p.m. EST, with a statement that the situation is extremely fluid and they will report the outcome of the ongoing events to the members on the Infonet when time comes.

07/16/2007: Notice to The Oh Law Firm July 485 Clients

• Please send us emails tonight.

07/16/2007: Ongoing Wild Forest Fire of Rumor for USCIS to Accept July EB-485 Filing

• There is a rumor speading fiercely like a wildest forest fire to the effect that the USCIS is imminent to release an announcement that they will accept July 2007 filings of EB-485 applications. This is more or less consistent with the Wall Street Journal report this morning but the details on definition of "July 2007" filing have yet to be clarified, to wit, whether there is certain cut-off date in July that will be covered by this announcement or any filings in July 2007. Please stay tuned.

07/16/2007: Advisory for H-1B LCA Filers

• DOL has updated the online wage library reflecting data for 7/2007-6/2008. The new wage data is effective as of 07/16/2007. Accordingly, those who file the LCA based on the wage determination using SOC/OES wage data on Online Library, must use this new wage figure. If internal notices were posted yesterday or last week and the prevailing wage failed to meet this new prevailing wage, they are likely to violate the labor condition application using the wrong prevailing wage and outdated and invalid wage data. People may want to print out a copy of new wage data "today" to post a notice and file the LCA today.

07/16/2007: USCIS Reportedly To Accept Some July 2007 EB-485 Filings

• Wall Street Journal reports this morning that the USCIS is poised to announce its change of initial decision to reject all the July 2007 EB-485 new cases. The report indicates that they intend to accept and process some early July filing cases. The report indicates that AILF will file the class action lawsuit this week. The report also indicates that on July 5, Microsoft Corp. announced that it plans soon to open a software-development center in Vancouver, Canada, with a view to "recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S." to send a clear signal to the government of the high-tech industry's dissatisfaction with the visa situation.
• However, as the newspapaer also make it clear, the details have yet to be known. Please stay tuned. Hmm...................................
• For those who have yet to make a decision as to whether to file it before the end of July, there are couple of questions which have yet to be answered. One is the involvement or strategy of the AILF lawsuit team. There has been a report that the team has been negotiating wit the USCIS behind the scene. The second question is August 2007 Visa Bulletin. Granted that people understand the fluid situation and almost moment by moment changing situation, overall the situation appears to suggest that they may consider filing the applications as soon as the August Visa Bulletin is released.

07/15/2007: Immigrants Start Reporting EB-485 Approvals After July 1 Using Visa Numbers Taken Out Both Before and After June 30, 2007

• There are fairly large number of reports by both immigrants and immigration lawyers that they received I-485 application approvals which were decided in the last few days. These approvals include two groups. The first group is those whose visa numbers were available but not decided in June but after July 2, 2007. The second group is those whose visa numbers were not available in June but decided after July 2, 2007. The lawyers use a term "tagged" to explain the situaiton where visa number was taken out but the case has not been adjudicated until the visa number became "unavailable" because of the reconfigulation of July Visa Bulletin by the State Department on July 2, 2007.
• Obviously for the first group, the visa numbers were massively taken out before July 1, 2007 using the June Visa Bulletin. For the second group, the visa numbers were again massively taken out on July 1 and part of July 2. The evidence reflects that at 11: 27 a.m. of July 2, 2007, the Visa Control Office of the State Department frantically sent out an "Urgent" fax to the Adjudication Office of the USCIS notifying that all the FY 2007 EB visa numbers had been authorized and exhausted and effective July 2, 2007, there would be no more visa authorization available for the EB 485 cases. The fax notice advised the USCIS to quickly notify all the officials involved in the EB-485 processing and adjudications. Considering the fact that these officials are located in the four Service Centers and local fields offices in 50 states and other locations, these officials might not have received actual notice quite late afternoon on the date. Assumedly, the second group are those people whose visa numbers were authorized by the State Department on July 1 and July 2, 2007 using the July 2007 Visa Bulletin before reconfigualtion. Obviously, the USCIS has been continuously processing and approving these cases at a late date in July 2007. As we all know, there was information that the USCIS had been returning the visa numbers to the State Department on the ground that they could not determine the cases. Soon, we will find out what type of cases have been returned and how many, but from the fact which was described above, the most typical cases could have been those which they took out on July 2, 2007. Accordingly, the total number of visa authorization which the USCIS has returned to the State Department may not turn out to be that large in numbers.
• Assuming that the visa numbers have indeed been returned to the State Department, it is mysterious why the State Department has not revised again the July Visa Bulletin to reflect the visa numbers which have become available through such recaptures. Considering the fact that they made July Visa Bulletin "Current" in all categories in the inital release on June 13, 2007, but they reconfigured July Visa Bulletin "Unavailable" effective July 2 based on their record that all numbers had been exhausted, obviously the reconfigured July Visa Bulletin is no longer correct since some numbers have been made availabve since then because of the returning of some numbers by the USCIS. Notwithstanding the fact, the State Department has remained silent. There has been delay in releasing the August 2007 Visa Bulletin, but without doubt, it may be released tomorrow or very soon. It is interesting to watch how the State Department will handle the situation in the August 2007 Visa Bulletin. Educated guess is that they may not be able to say in the August 2007 Visa Bulletin that the visa numbers will be totally unavailable when the fact of the matter is that some visa numbers may be there in the Department's storage. Please stay tuned.

07/14/2007: Silence of Employment-Based Immigration Legislation Sponsors and Backers Post CIR Death

• A few days ago, we stated that after the failure of the CIR in the Congress, the Congress and the Nation are better prepared to take "piecemeal" immigration bills. However, the employment-based immigration backers show loosing steams and energy to collect themselves together to work on the piecemeal employment-based immigration legislation. Amidst the ongoing Visa Bulletin fiasco, the lobbysts and supporters of the employment-based immigration legislation appear to fail to seize an important opportunity to bring back the SKIL bill into the Congress. Currently, the Senate is actively debating and poised to pass H.R. 1585, FY 2008 Department of Defense Authorization bill and there have been "hundreds" of amendments introduced some to attach the non-defense related important legislative bills to this critical legislation. Considering the fact that the Visa Bulletin fiasco is an important but small part of overall employment-based immigration issues and unless the SKIL Act type of legislation is enacted, the employment-based community will continuously remain "choked" due to the limited visa numbers and annual national limitations, etc., the employers, businesses, academic institutiions, and foreign workers and their backers appeared to miss a momentum to bring this important legislation back to the center of national attention and debates.

07/14/2007: DREAM Act Bill to Return to Congress

• The Senate is currently debating on one important legislative bill, FY 2008 Department of Defense Authorization, H.R. 1585, and Senators Durbin, Hagel, and Lugar are poised to offer the DREAM Act as an amendment. The DREAM will relieve millions of undocumented youngster from the closet and granted permanent resident status. As soon as this amendment is on the floor, we will monitor the progress of the amendment. In the meantime, the youngsters and their parents should start contacting their Congressmen and Senators in support of this amendment.

07/13/2007: Persons Obtaining Permanent Resident Status in 2006 by Type of Immigration and by Country

• This statistics shows people from which countries obtained the permanent resident status in 2006 through what types of immigration. Read on.

07/13/2007: USCIS Updates Service Centers Receipting Status as of 07/13/2007

• The Service Centers experienced receipting and approval notice backlogs as affected by the H-1B cap and lottery fiasco. However, this week it has witnessed a substantial catch-up, particularly in California Service Center. Please click here for the updates.

07/13/2007: USCIS Issues Correction of Previous Guidance Regarding Form I-140 Immigrant Alien Worker Filings with Labor Certification Substitution Requests

• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that it will accept labor certification substitution requests in the context of Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, filings that it receives on Monday, July 16, 2007. USCIS previously announced, on May 24, 2007, that it would reject all labor certification substitution requests filed on or after the effective date of the Department of Labor (DOL) substitutions regulation, which is July 16, 2007. The new DOL regulations prohibit substitution of an alien beneficiary on any application for permanent labor certification after July 16, 2007. The new procedures outlined in the previous USCIS announcement will now take effect on July 17, 2007 instead of July 16, 2007.

07/13/2007: Agonizying Moments for DHS/USCIS Leaders

• There is no doubt that people from time to time go through a tense and agonizying moment while the noise of clock ticking is getting louder and lauder. Reportedly, that is what the leaders of the agencies have been going through to abate things going out of control politically. Rep. Zoe Lofgren is a powerful chairwomea of the Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommitee of the House of Representatives. Day before yesterday, she served a request for information, record, documents, and evidence in the tone of a discovery in the court proceeding. The letter resembled the combination of request for admission and demand for records in the federal court proceeding. The Secretary of Homeland Security was given only three days to meet the demand. Apparently, the leaders of the DHS and USCIS have been struggling to work out some kind of solutions and thereby prevent thing going out of control as the records, emails, documents, etc. etc. can turn out to be very smelly and juicy depending on which side of the party politics one is involved. Under the circumstances, the leaders have been talking about various options with the departments and pending the discussions, everything has been on hold including the visa bulletin release schedules.
• Yesterday, we described potential four options for the DOS and the USCIS. Unconfirmed sources indicate that the last option appears to be "out." Obviously there are still under a tremendous pressure to work out a solution before the three-day deadline of the Congresswoman's investigatory demand. It is going to be a very tense and stressful weekend for these officials. For that matter, the immigrants may also go through a similar process emotionally during the weekend, not knowing when and what information will be released during the weekend or Monday. Eyes of the many immigrants will be glued to the computer monitors.

07/13/2007: DOS Issued Guidance for Visa Posts on Processing Visa Applicants with Drunk Driving Hits

• According to the Guidance, while alcoholism constitutes a medical condition, INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii) does not refer explicitly to alcoholics or alcoholism. Evaluation for alcohol abuse or dependence is included in the evaluation for mental and physical disorders with associated harmful behavior. An alcoholic is not ineligible to receive a visa unless there is harmful behavior associated with the disorder that has posed, or is likely to pose, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the alien or others. To ensure proper evaluation, you must refer applicants to panel physicians when they have a single drunk driving arrest or conviction within the last three calendar years or two or more drunk driving arrests or convictions in any time period. You also must refer cases to a panel physician if there is any other evidence to suggest an alcohol problem.
• Requirement of mandatory referral to the panel physicians in most cases may delay the visa adjudication process. Readers should remember that this applies not only to the charged or convicted but also "arrested" as reflected in the fingerprint hits. People should not take a drunk driving lightly. For the full text of the cable guidance, please click here.
  

07/13/2007 01:00 AM: Watch for August Visa Bulletin to be Released Shortly

07/12/2007: Original July 2007 Visa Bulletin and Long Overdue Change of Immigration Procedures

• Thus far, the issue of Visa Bulletin fiasco has been focused on the potential sources of the problem particularly as related to the decisions of the two agencies, Department of State and USCIS. However, we should not neglect to look at the issue from the perspectives of the immigrants and the employers, a positive review rather than a negative review of pointing a finger at the agencies that are involved in the sources of the problem. The first question the immigrants and the employers should ask themselves should be what the original Visa Bulletin meant to them. We all know that it is not the total number of green cards the Visa Bulletin would have produced within the fiscal year as opposed to a Visa Bulletin that retained cut-off dates for the EB immigrant visa categories. In either situation, the system could probably have produced a similar number of green cards or immigrants as, without doubt, they would have processed about the same number of backlog 485 applications to exhaust the FY 2007 EB visa numbers. Accordingly, the real issue is not that the visa fiasco prevented or will prevent the system from producing certain number of green cards or immigrant visas with the given fiscal year but that it prevented hundreds of thousands of "legal" immigrants who have been suffering from the flaws in the immigration procedures that did not permit those who had obtained the labor certification approvals from applying for I-485 application, employment authorization, and travel documents while they waited for severely retrogressed EB visa numbers, despite the fact that they have passed the test of the nation's need for their workforce through the labor certification process. The orignal July Visa Bulletin would not have affected the first issue in one way or another, but it could have brought about the solution to the second issue by allowing the immigrants with the approved labor certifications to file I-485 application, employment authorization application, and travel documents, even during the period of visa number unavailability and while they had to wait for the visa numbers. The original July Bulletin could have brought about this "dream come true" as it opened all the EB visa categories current other than "other workers," whereby it could have allowd those with the appproved labor certification application to apply for I-485 application, I-765 employment authorization, and I-131 travel document "even during the period of the EB visa number unavailability at any point of time in July 2007. Accordingly, as we guesstimated earlier, the orginal July 2007 visa bulletin could have permitted approximately 750,000 skilled and talen foreign workers, their spouses and children, to file these applications. The benefits which the July Visa Bulletin fiasco have taken away afterwards were not green cards but the opportunity to file I-485 application, employment authorization, and travel permit, potentially even during the time of visa number unavailability.
• The foregoing review would suggest that there might be potentially four options to correct the current visa bulletin fiasco. One option is for the USCIS to reverse itself and abandon its decision to reject the I-485 applications and start accepting the I-485 applications under the original July Visa Bulletin. In fact, this is do-able regardless of legality of the DOS act to revise, if there was revision at all, the visa bulletin in the middle of the month, or the legality of the releasing "updates" without revision of the visa bulletin and changing it to "unavailabile." Probably, there was no precedent of such action in the DOS history. From the perspectives of the USCIS, they do not have to follow such an act of the sister agency. They should just stick to the USCIS own regulation to authorize accepting I-485 applications when the visa number was available since the legality of the DOS act was arguably of suspect in all accounts. Sometimes, however, reversing one's decision may not be that easy because of potential complex political and legal issues involved. The second option is to release August 2007 Visa Bulletin with all the EB visa categories other than "other worker" categories "current." This option will save the face of the both agencies and achieve the purposes of removing the current debacle. The information that the USCIS is probably sending back the visa numbers may allow the DOS to such Visa Bulletin which may be released tomorrow. We really hope that the DOS shows a courage to take such an action. The third option, which is likely another way to save the faces of both agencies, is for the DOS releases the revised July visa bulletin probably with some cut-off dates for different categories based on the number of visas which have been returned by the USCIS. The open question is how far the USCIS has gone in returning the visa numbers to allow the DOS to release such August Visa Bulletin or another Revised July Visa Bulletin. The fourth, which is important but difficult, option might be to change its rule to permit I-485 application, I-765 employment authorization application, and I-131 applications for the foreign workers and their spouses and children if the foreign workers have obtained the labor certification approvals. Without doubt, the USCIS has been looking into the feasibility of changing the policy without legislation on the procedural issues which are described here. The fact that this reform was introduced in the Congress as part of the SKIL bill or Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act bill would not preclude the USCIS from looking into feasibility of achieving such changes in the procedures under the given legislative authority. All of the current debacle or fiasco would have been prevented, had the Congress passed the SKIL bill or CIR. At this juncture, though, the nation and EB immigrants do not have a luxury to point a finger at the failures of the Congress as it serves no purposes whatsoever. We really hope that the USCIS will work out one of these two solutions promptly to save the nation from further confusion and nightmare.
• Again the current issue is not directly related to the annual EB visa quota issues as there is nothing any agency can do about the law that stipulates the numerical limits. However, the Congress should take the current event as a momentum to fix the long ailing and suffering "legal" employment immigration system as related to the needs for increase in total numbers for the employment-based immigrant visas and other reforms that were incorporated in the SKIL bill or other bills. We urge Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren to pick up this employment-based immigration legislative bill as soon as possible to fix the employment-based immigration system aside from the anticipated remedial action for the current and immediate visa bulletin fiasco by the agencies. The nation's economy and international competition cannot afford any further delays in fixing the current employment-based immigration system. We admire the Congresswoman's courage and leadership that have been demonstrated during the last few days and urge the Congresswoman to keep a similar courage and and leadership in the overall employment-based immigration reform legislation initiatives in the House.

07/12/2007: USCIS Confirms That Sub I-140 Will Be Received Monday, 07/16/2007

• AILA reported that the USCIS had confirmed that the substitution I-140 petition which would arrive at the appropariate Service Centers would be considered timely filed for the purpose of the elimination of substitution I-140.

07/12/2007: USCIS Reportedly Returning Visa Numbers to DOS

• AILA has reported that when Rep. Lofgren issued a letter to Secretary Chertoff, she also disclosed that "It has also come to my attention that USCIS began returning visa numbers to the State Depaartment as early as Thrusday, July 5, 2007." It could be the answer to our question why they are holding July filing cases and why they stopped adjudicating 485 cases for which they pull out the numbers before July 2, 2007. What a mess! See Rep. Lofgren Statement.

07/12/2007: Truth to Rumor of Resrictionist Senators Having Influenced USCIS Decision of July 2007 EB New Filing

• There is an unconfirmed source of information that a couple of restrictionist U.S. Senators influenced the USCIS decision to reject July applications for their alleged fear that since July 2007 Visa Bulletin would open a flood gate of hundreds of thousands of 485 applications, the public might take it as the government giving out a sort of "amnesty" to these floods of people. We hope that there is no truth to such rumor. However, if it is true, it is indeed shocking that individual legislators could interfere with the government process on "personal" basis and without the formal legislative process of public notice and participation. We urge the U.S. Senate to get to the bottom of this rumor and take appropriate action for correction under the Senate rules.

07/12/2007: Pre-July 2 EB-485 Cases - Where Is the Beef?

• According to the government announcement, the USCIS took out more than 60,000 EB immigrant visa numbers and 25,000 during the two-day weekend bofore the fiasco started on July 2, 2007. Common sense should then dictate that a flood of mail-out of the approved EB-485 should have followed to such visa numbers take-out. However, there is no noticeable report that the applicants and their representatives have since been receiving a flood of approval notices in the mail. That includes this reporter's office. In the mid-June, we witnessed some approval notices, but that did not last too long. The USCIS status site shows no noticeable changes in the status of pending 485 cases. What is going on? Are they holding actual adjudication of the visa-number authorized EB-485 applications pending FBI security clearances or these cases are also on hold? 60,000 is a large number!

07/12/2007: OES/SOC Wage Update Delays and Advisory for H-1B LCA Filing

• DOL was supposed to release new wage library effective July 1, 2007, but they are currently experiencing delays. However, the site indicates that the new wages are likely to be relased mid-July. Accordingly, those who file the labor condition application for H-1B using the current wage library without checking it "at the time of LCA filing" may learn that it was precarious. Since the OES/SOC wages must be current in the notice posted and at the time of online LCA filing, if the wage library date was printed out one day earlier and the new wage is released on the date when the LCA is filed using such notice posting and such wage data, they may learn that they violated the labor condtion application using outdated wage. It is thus recommended that people not only double check the wage library but print out and keep a copy on the day of actual LCA filing for potential audit in the future. Just reminder.
• The wage library update delay for PERM filing does not raise such problem as the wage must be determined by the SWAs.

07/12/2007: USCIS Announcement of Scheduled Websites Systems Outages

• On Thursday, July 12, 2007, at 9 PM EDT, certain USCIS web-based systems will be taken out of service for maintenance upgrades. They should be restored in approximately three to four hours. These systems include:

Case Status Online (and processing times)
Field Office Locator and Information
Civil Surgeon Locator; and
Change of Address Online

• The outages are expected to give de minimus inconvenience to the community considering the time and the duration.
  

07/11/2007: California Service Center System Problem Fixed and Approval Notices Due Delivered by 07/20/2007

• USCIS has announced that the CSC system problem has been fixed and all the approval notices would be delivered by July 20, 2007.

07/11/2007: Rep. Zoe Lofgren's Demands Records and Evidence Relating to July Visa Bulletin Fiasco

July 11, 2007

The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528

Dear Secretary Chertoff:

On July 2, 2007, the Department of State (DOS) issued an "Update to July Visa Availability," which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) apparently relied on to suspend its acceptance of adjustment of status applications based on employment-based immigrant petitions. DOS and DHS acted on these matters despite my request that the agencies provide the Subcommittee with certain information before taking such actions.

At no point since my letter to you dated July 2, 2007, have I received any information in writing from the Department. Given this failure, I am now requesting that you provide to me, within three days of the date of this letter, the following information:

1. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the July Visa Bulletin, which made all employment-based immigrant visa categories (except the "other worker" category) current. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.

2. All e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.

3. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation between the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, the Department of Justice and/or the Federal Bureau of Investigation relating to the availability of visa numbers for the month of July 2007, the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007, the processing of security or name checks in connection with visa number requests through the end of FY 2007, and/or the determination to suspend or reject the acceptance of adjustment of status applications. The terms "Department of Homeland Security," "Department of State," "Department of Justice" and "Federal Bureau of Investigation" include DHS, DOS, DOJ, FBI or any components of those agencies.

4. A detailed description of any existing or proposed understanding, arrangement and/or agreement between DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) and the FBI (or any component thereof) relating to name checks or other security checks conducted with respect to immigration applications or petitions.

5. A detailed description of how DHS and/or the FBI expect the processes for such name or security checks to change through the end of FY 2007, and, in particular, within the month of July 2007.

6. A detailed description, including, but not limited to, a statistical tallying, of all employment-based immigration cases, petitions, applications or other files for which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) requested a visa number between May 2007 and July 2, 2007, inclusive, for which any name or security check was pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action on a security or name check. (Hereinafter, such cases will be referred to as cases for which visa numbers were "pre-requested.")

7. The specific legal authority on which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) relied to "pre-request" visa numbers for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action. The response to this question shall include copies of the specific legal authority, including statutory provisions, regulations, field manuals, policy memoranda, policy guidance or other documentation relied upon, as well as the date or dates on which such authority was last revised or issued, the substance of any revision and the original text that was revised.

8. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, field guidance, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's decision to "pre-request" visa numbers for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action.

9. Any and all field guidance, e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's plans, policies or other proposed or expected actions in the event security or name checks for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which the agency "pre-requested" visa numbers are not or do not get completed during July 2007 or the remainder of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, whether the agency has proposed or intends to return, or has discussed returning, visa numbers for such cases to DOS.

10. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes or other documentation between DHS (including any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) and DOS regarding the availability of visa numbers for June 2007, July 2007, or any remaining month of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, the anticipated numbers available during such months, the expected or anticipated usage of or requests for such numbers and/or the update, revision, restatement or alteration of the July Visa Bulletin.

11. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of overtime ordered for work on weekends, including specifically the weekend leading up to July 2, 2007, and the reasons in each case that prompted the overtime, for the past three years.

12. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of adjudication of adjustment of status cases, including a breakout for adjustment of status cases based on employment-based immigrant petitions, on a monthly basis for the past three years.

13. Any and all records, analyses, spreadsheets, related e-mails, memoranda, correspondence or other documentation evaluating the potential financial effects to DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) if adjustment of status cases eligible for filing under the initial July 2007 Visa Bulletin were filed before, on or after July 30, 2007.

Thank you for your immediate consideration of this very important matter.

Sincerely,

Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security & International Law

cc: Secretary Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Department of State

07/11/2007: Fate of U.S. Senator Vitter on the Edge for Involvement in the Madam's List

• This Senator from Luisiana who vigorously underminded and killed the CIR 2007 by introducing tons of amendments to S. 1639 for the purpose of filibuster turned out to be a customer of the madam services in the Beltway, according to the news report, and reportedly confessed himself that he was the sinner. He is the first term Senator. This has brought him to the edge of a thread for his political future. The madam's phone list has been recently released, putting a number of prominent legislators in the Beltway restless. The politcal enemies are fumbling through the stacks of phone lists to look for the names. Hmm.................................... Wonder who else are there?

07/11/2007: July 2007 EB 485 Filers, Please Keep the Original of Supporting Documentation

• The potential drawback of filing EB-485 during July is the currently unanswered question of "what happens if the rejected applications are not returned for months and if visa number becomes current for him or her in October 2007?" At this time, no one knows how many EB-485 applications have been received by the Service Centers since July 2, 2007. Additionally, there is no way to find out how many more applications they will receive during the next 20 days. Obviously, the number of filings must have slowed down lately as affected by the AILF that they will seek certification from the court to include certain non-filers as members of the class action. Still, the number may turn out to be quite substantial by the end of July. No one knows when the "hold order" will be lifted and how long it will take to process rejection notices and mailings in the future.
• Under the USCIS policy, the applicants are not required to submit any "original" evidence for filing of applications and petitions. It will thus be prudent that people may not want to submit original documents "other than medical report" as part of the supporting documentation to the EB-485 applications. Please keep original documents safe against the future need for refiling of the EB-485 applications in the future.

07/11/2007: Sources of Rumor of USCIS Potential Reverse of July 2007 485 Applications Rejection

• There has been going around a rumor lately that the USCIS was internally discussing retreat from the 485 rejection decision. It appears that this rumor probably started from the USCIS HQ order over the Texas Service Center to hold all the July 2007 EB-485 applications abeyanbce and not to return the applications to applicants. Unconfirmed sources indicate that because of the order, the Texas Service Center is not returning the EB-485 applications which have been received since July 2, 2007. However, there is no evidence that the decision is necessarily related to its potential decision to withdraw the rejection decision. At this point, its reasons are completion unknown. Please stay tuned.

07/10/2007: AILF Visa Bulletin Lawsuit Update

• AILF intends to file the action as soon as possible in view of the urgency. As reported earlier, the action will cover "nonfilers" as well, but needs court's certification for this group separately. AILF would like to hear from the non-filers and "other worker" groups applicants as soon as possible. Please contact AILF, visabulletin@ailf.org.
• AILF is reminding the pre-mature filer of July Bulletin cases (those who sent in 485 packages and arrived at the agency before July 2007) that their applications are likely to be rejected not because of unavailability in "July" Bulletin but because of unavailability in "June" Bulletin. If they want to be classified as the first group member (those who filed I-485 in July), they may have to refile it as soon as possible...

07/10/2007: Response of USCIS Director to Visa Bulletin Fiasco Related Flower Campaign

• We reported yesterday that foreign professionals have been sending flowers to the heads of involved agencies with a message of protest for the ongoing visa bulletin fiasco. Dr. Emilio Gonzalez responded to such flower campaign in the USCIS site. The flower campaign appears to be a gesture from the community of foreign professionals to thaw out the tension created by the fiasco and at the same time calling the agency leaders' swift attention to the problem and sufferings of the foreign professionals and their family members. This camapaign has been initiated and pushed ahead by the immigrationinvoice.com group. Salute to the members of this group for the job well done.

07/10/2007: USCIS July 2007 Newsletter

07/09/2007: Congress Returns to the Session This Week and Hot Agenda

• The Congress is returning to the Hill after the Fourth of July break with the nation's hottest issue of Iraq war funding. The country is expected to witness a surge of political confrontation and a sharp division in the nation.
• In immigration legislation, no one will anticipate immediate take up of the CIR by the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, but the immigrant watch carefully a potential chance of the CIR coming back by the Democrates in the Senate down the road, even though the success of the bill will be very questionable. The Congress will rather focus on picking up the piecemeal immigration legislation bills which have been left out by the massacre of CIR before the 4th. Senator Diane Feinstine has already announced to introduce AgJOBS bill as soon as she returns. Besides, the nation and the Congress appear to be in a mood to fix the immigration problems on a piecemeal basis. The next several months will give the immigrant community a mementum for pushing ahead piecemeal immigration bills both in the House and the Senate. As for the Visa Bulletin fiasco, there may or may not have any investigary heaning scheduled in the House, which can fire up into a broader political issue of immigration reform. Please stay tuned.

07/09/2007: Guesstimate of Potential July 2007 I-485 Eligible Cases [Copyrighted. Do Not Copy Without Permission or Disclosure of Link]

• There is no specific information available about the total number of I-485 cases that could have been filed in July 2007, had there not been the revision of July 2007 and the decision of the USCIS to reject applications. To estimate the numbers, we need the numbers for the labor certification waiver cases of EB-1, and EB-2 (National Interest Waiver) plus labor certification-based cases plus Schedule A labor certification waiver cases.
• We have no statistics whatsoever for EB-1 and EB-2 (NIW) that could have been filed during one month period of July 2007. However, it is not difficult to assume that the numbers would have been more or less very limited. Accordingly, most of the I-485 cases would have been generated by two sources: One is allied healthcare workers, particularly nurses, and the other is labor certification cases.
• For the allied healthcare workers, we could guestimate that ever since 50,000 recapture numbers were exhausted, practically all of these cases have been subject to EB-3 allocations and could not file I-485 applications. Liberal guesstimate may be around 90,000 for this group alone who would have rushed to file I-485 in July 2007.
• For the labor certification-based cases, we have two sources of information. One is pre-March 28, 2005 cases which are called BEC cases. The other is post-March 28, 2005 cases. Total BEC cases were 364,000, according to the BEC report in Orlando, Florida. As of June, they reported that most of RIR cases (approximately 160,000) have been completed and TR cases (approximately 150,000 cases) are actively processed and adjudcated lately. In Orlando, they reported, they completed 310,000 cases out of total 364,000 cases. As far as the processing time was concerned, they did not go into the details that we all know that both BEC cases and PERM cases practically did not move much while they went through the transition stage under the labor certification reengineering program on March 28, 2005. Thus most of the cases were decided in 2006 and 2007. The timing is important to guesstimate the potential I-485 traffics in July 2007 because some of the earlier cases could already have been filed and considered I-485 pending or backlog cases. The later certified cases have been caught in the visa number retrogressions and they could not file I-485 cases and have been waiting for the visa number "current." The National Processing Centers of Chicago and Atltant reported in Orlando that they received total of 200,000, out of which they had certified approximately 160,000 (80%) as of June 2007. For the BEC cases, they reported that they completed processing of 310,000 cases as of June 2007. They did not give us the certification statistics, but there was a release of statistics through informal sources in early this year. According to this sources, the approximately certification was 50% since a chunk of cases had been withdrawn. Accordingly, we may guesstimate that the certified cases may number in the range of 150,000. Combining PERM certification guesstimate of 160,000 and BEC certification guesstimate of 150,000 will lead us to approximately 310,000 cases. Assuming that most of these cases were caught up in the visa number retrogression, close to total in the range of 200,000 and 300,000, including Schedule A, could have been waiting for I-485 filing in July 2007!
• The numbers do not end there. What about spouses and children of these foreign wokers. We do not remember the exact average numbers but we believe the conservative figure is 1.5 for each qualified foreign worker. Therefore, we will have to add at least 450,000 numbers for the spouses and children who would also have filed I-485 applications in July 2007. The foreign workers plus spouses and children would have added upto 750,000 more or less. Assuming that the difference between the old filing fees and the filing fees after July 30, 2007 is between $200 and $300 per individual including children under 14, the filing fee loss for the USCIS would have been between $150,090,000 and $225,000,000.
• Yesterday, we brought up the issues of potential lack of communication and coordination between the DOS and the USCIS behind the July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco. But the foreigoing guestimates also adds potential lack of communication and coordination not between two agencies of DOS and USCIS, but among three agencies of DOS, USCIS, and DOL in determination of the July Visa Bulletin!
• The actual figures can be rather more than less of the guesstimate figures herein. They are the victims of the DOS and USCIS actions for whom the AILF lawsuite are expected to address There are concerns which are expressed by the backlog I-485 waiters that they could be seriously negatively affected and the numbers that have already beeen given to them for their I-485 approvals before July 2, 2007 can be revoked. However, once they understand the issues, they will learn that it will not work the way they are currently worrying about. The issue is not actual EB visa numbers available in July 2007 but availabiliy of new "filing of I-485 applications" which will not affect the backlog cases. In other words, one of the theories for the class action could be that it is violation of the law that they revoked the July 2007 visa bulletin and because of the violation, the qualified applicants (assumedly 750,000 some applicants according to the foregoing guesstimate) who were eligible for filing of I-485 applications could not be filed in July because the agency rejected the application when the original July 2007 EB visa numbers were "Current." Under this theory, the real issue is not actual visa number available in July 2007 but the law that allows the aualified applicants to file I-485 applications as provided in the USCIS regulation. Of couse, the legal team may advance second or third theories in the name of "claims," but at least in this theory of violation of the specific regulation, the backlog I-485 waiters are not supposed to be negatively affected by this specific claim, at least in this reporter's opinion.
• We are posting this information not intended to give a scientific and precise figures but intended to present the extent and scale of the problems and stakes which the current Visa Bulletin fiasco potentially raises.

07/08/2007: Some Foreign Professionals Sending Flowers to Agency Leaders Involving Visa Bulletin Fiasco

• Reports indicate that some foreign professionals have been sending out flowers with a message of protest to the leaders of the USCIS and the State Deparment, including Director of USCIS, Secretary of Department of State, and others relating to the ongoing Visa Bulletin commotion. Interesting news. There is also a report that other foreign professionals went out to the street to protest before some USCIS offices.

07/08/2007: AILF VB Litigation Update

• We reported yesterday that the litigation team of the AILF had expanded the definition of the "class" in the class action which they are working on. The lawyers intend to ask the court to certify the following three groups of people as the members of the class, regardless of actual plaintiff or not:
  • (1) A foreign national who submitted I-485 in "other worker" category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007 who was otherwise eligible for adjustment of status but did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of adjustment application.
  • (2) A foreign national who submitted I-485 in "any" EB category other than other worker for receipt by USCIS in July 2007 and is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status but did not or has not yet received a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment of status
  • (3) A foreign national who is otherwise statutorily eligible for adjustment of status in an EB category other than other worker and "who "would have submitted EB I-485 application" by USCIS in July 2007, BUT FOR these USCIS and DOS actions.
• The legal team advises that each of these classes will be certified by the court differently and probably handled differently. Accordingly, it will be upto the court when it comes to the certification of classes as to each of three different classes. Accordingly, those who want to be certified under the second category should keep filing EB-485 applications before the end of July 2007. The options between the group 2 and the group 3 have both practical different advantages and disadvantages. It should remain the decision of each EB-485 applicant.
• We have been contacted by many readers expressing their wishes and desires to contribute to the AILA Legal Action Center for this work to express their "thanks" to the lawyer team headed by Nadin Wettstein, Esquire who has been tirelessly litigating against the government agencies to protect the rights of the immigrants for years and years. As we stated previously, it would be more than appropriate for the readers to send in some contributions to the organization for this litigation work: There are following two ways to send in contributions:
  • Online Contribution: Please go to www.ailf.org and click contribute link;
  • Mail-In Contribution: Make checks payable to "AILF" and mail to AILF, 918 F Street, NW, Washington, DC 20004.
• On behalf of the readers, this reporter takes this opportunity to personally thank the AILF lawyers involved in the litigation for their nonprofit litigation!

07/08/2007: AILF I-485 Litigation "Class" and Importance of Filing of I-140 Petitions for Certain Aliens

• As reported yesterday, the AILF lawsuit will cover the aliens "who did not file EB-485 in July 2007 but who were statutorily eligible to apply and would have applied in July 2007 but for the DOS and USCIS actions." Obviously, the following types of people may be considered statutorily eligible or not eligible to apply for I-485 application in July 2007:
  • Those who have filed labor certification waiver I-140 petition: Under the current rule, these people are eligible for "concurrent I-485 filing" pending I-140 petition and may be considered a class for this litigation even if they do not participate in the lawsuite as a plaintiff.
  • Those who have obtained either labor certification based or labor certification waiver I-140 petition approval: It is obvious from the foregoing that they may be convered.
  • Those who have yet to file labor certification waiver I-140 petition such as EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-1C, and EB-2 (NIW) may be difficult to prove the eligibility for the class membership unless their I-140 petition has been filed and pending or approved. Accordingly, these people should file I-140 petition as soon as possible.
  • Those who have filed I-360 (Religious Worker) or I-526 (Investor Immigrant) will not be covered unless the petition is actually approved because the concurrent I-485 is not available for these employment-based immigrants. Once they obtain I-360 or I-526 petitions, however, they would have been eligible for I-485 filing in July but for the DOS and USCIS action and they should be covered unless the AILF lawsuit specifically excludes these employment-based immigrants.
  • Those who have obtained the labor certification application approval but have yet to file I-140 petitions. Theoretically, they are eligible for concurrent I-485 filing. However, to make their class membership clearer, they may want to file the I-140 petition as soon as possible. Or they may even file concurrent I-140 petition and I-485 with separate filing fee checks, in which case their I-485 application will be rejected but their I-140 petition will be processed and remain pending during the litigation.
  • Those who intend to utilize a substitution I-140 petition. Again, theoretically, they are entitled to file concurrent substitution I-140 and I-485 application. However, since the substitution issue, particularly withdrawal of I-140 petition on behalf of the original beneficiary, has yet to be determined before the I-140 is approved, they may be vulnerable unless they file the substitution I-140 petition immediately. Obviously, the substitution I-140 should be filed before July 16, 2007 as the substution labor certification will be totally eliminated after July 16, 2007. Again, they may be able to file concurrent I-140 and I-485 with the separate filing fee checks before July 16, 2007.
• There are certain types of people whose eligibility for the "class" under the AILF class action are uncertain at this time:
  • Those who filed concurrent I-140 and I-485 and whose I-140 petition has been denied. In this case, the concurrent I-485 is considered automatically denied. Assuming the appeal of denial of I-140 petition is pending before AAO, they may be eligible for the class if the AAO sustains the appeal in July 2007 as the denied I-485 can be reinstated in the USCIS own motion or they can file a new I-485 based on the approved I-140 petition. If there should be no decision by the AAO in July 2006, it may be a stretch to argue that these people should be included as a member of the class.
  • I-140 amendment petition by the new employer that is considered a "successor-in-interest" for EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-2, and EB-3 and same qualifying relationship entity for EB-1C, following merger and acquisition: It is likely that these aliens may be covered in the class.

07/08/2007: July VB and H-1B Three-Year Increment Extension Under AC 21

• For the purpose of I-485 application and AILF VB class action lawsuit, the EB immigrant visa numbers are arguably considered "current" per the original July 2007 Visa Bulletin. However, for the purpose of the H-1B extension beyond six year limit in three-year increment during the visa number retrogression for those who have obtained I-140 petition approval, people will be able to file and obtain the three-year extension beyond six year limit in July as the USCIS and DOS consider that no EB visa numbers are available in July 2007. The three-year extension will be particulary important for those who have filed a labor certification or labor certification-waiver I-140 immigrant petition but have yet to accumulate 365 days before reaching five years in the H-1B status and are not eligible to apply for the 7th-year H-1B extension under AC 21. Accordingly, those who have obtained or will obtain I-140 petition should file the three-year H-1B petition before the July VB I-485 litigation is resolved. In this regards, PPS filing of such H-1B extension may be recommended depending on when they will file the extension petition.

07/07/2007: SPECIAL REPORT: AILF Will Include Those Who Did Not File EB-485

• AILA has reported that the AILF classaction will include individuals who do not file EB-485 in July 2007, but who were statutorily eligible to apply and would have applied in July 2007 but for the DOS and USCIS actions.
• This decision of the legal team will help a host of the eligible potential filers of EB-485 who were not able to make decision!

07/07/2007: Mathematics of July VB 485 Fee Income and Likely Sources of On-Going Fiasco or Commotion [Copyrighted. Do Not Copy Without Permission or Disclosure of Link]

• By now, people may have some idea on the likely scenario or sources of this commotion. Obviously it could have been related, one way or another, to the fee revenue before and after July 30, 2007. One likely scenario might go like this. As this reporter reported from Orlando, Florida in the middle of June, 2007, there was unconfirmed sources of information that the DOS had made all the EB categories current because allegedly by the end of May, they had used only 50% of the annual allocation for whole EB categories and they allegedly made the EB visa numbers totally current to encourage the USCIS and consulates to adjudicate EB-485 applications or EB immigrant visas en masse so that no EB visa numbers for FY 2007 would be wasted at the end of September 2007. Good deed, all right! However, from the perspectives of the USCIS, such decision could have created a huge problem for its intended budgetary decision in introducing the fee increase regulation effective July 30, 2007.
• The likely sources of the problems for the USCIS could have been like this. By now, we know that there were approximately 70,000 visa numbers left when they released the July Visa Bulletin. Assuming hypothetically that the increased fee revenue from 70,000 I-485 applications including both adults and minors would have generatged $14 million (if it is assumed at $200) or at best $21 million (if it is assumed at $300 per each application). Without doubt, a stake of either $14 million or $21 million would have meant indeed "no big deal." Probably there lied the miscalculation or confusion on the part of officials whoever had decided to open the EB numbers totally "current." Why? From the perspectives of the USCIS, the number would not be limited to 70,000. Under the law, when the Visa Number was current in the Visa Bulletin, any EB immigrants would have been eligible to file EB-485, no matter whether the number would turn out to be 100,000 or 200,000 or any other higher numbers inasmuch as they were eligible for I-485 applications or immigrant visa applications, and not just 70,000 in numbers! Unlike the adjudication of EB-485 applications or immigrant visa applications, which would have been required to stop issuing green cards after reaching 70,000, neither consulates nor the USCIS, particularly the USCIS, would have had an authority to reject the pouring-in EB-485 applications under the regulation simply because they had received 70,000 applications. As we reminded the readers earlier, the specific number of EB-485 applications which they should adjudicate and approve will be controlled by the available annual visa numbers, but there was no limit under the rules that the USCIS should stop receiving 485 applications when the Visa Bulletin showed for the specific month completely "current." Consequently, the estimated loss of revenue from EB 485 applications would have been not millions but probably even much higher figures depending on the avalanche or storm of EB-485 applications which they could have received unless the avalanche was blocked before July 2007.
• It appears that there is some indication that the DOS probably belatedly realized the serious nature of its mistake. One indication is that the DOS proactively(?) allocated all the consular immigrant visa numbers for the July scheduled interview cases and authorized all the visa number requests by the USCIS "during the weekend," probably with the knowledge that the FY 2007 EB visa numbers could be exhausted before July 1, 2007. The likely problem was the whole numbers were not exhausted by the end of Saturday, June 30, 2007 and it was end of the day of July 1 that the USCIS took out enough numbers to exhaust the entire FY 2007 EB visa numbers on July 1, 2007, Sunday. Had they exhausted the numbers at the end of June 30, Saturday, the problem could have been less complicated for the DOS as they could have released new revised Visa Bulletin rather than "updates" or any other actions which the DOS have been taking since then to deal with the "dillemma" - keeping the initial Visa Bulletin intact, and at the same time try to change the visa numbers for July "from July 2, 2007." Remember that they have been trying to make EB numbers unavailable not from July 1 but from July 2, 2007. This action of the DOS has created very complicated legal tangles which will eventurally be be corrected by the federal courts.
• We reported earlier that probably the problem must have originated in the probable lack of communication and coordination between the DOS and the USCIS which would not have created a commotion in normal daily businesses. The situation in the present case turned out to be different. Probably, in a way the USCIS was a victim taking over a moutain of problem which had been created by the DOS by opening potential avalanches of EB-485 applications in July 2007 without considering the potential enormous implication of such decision on the USCIS.
• The foregoing scenario is purely this reporter's "guess" and speculation not supported by any evidence. The litigation will dig out the sources of the problem based on evidence and facts. We will just have to wait and see to learn the truth behind the current fiasco and commotion. This reporter hopes that the snowballing effect of the current commotion would stop somewhere and soon.

07/06/2007: Revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin

• The State Department has just released new July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than "Update." It appears that this is intended to make it official July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than previous release which was "update" in anticipation of the ALF class action lawsuit. One of the claims which have been addressed by various sources, INCLUDING THIS WEBSITE, was whether "update" can be considered a revised Visa Bulletin for the purpose of the regulations of DOS and USCIS. If it is not, the USCIS would have no authority to reject the I-485 applications in July.
• There is still confusion as to which one is considered July Visa Bulletin which is provided in the DOS and USCIS regulations as they have released three versions: (1) Visa Bulletin released in June; (2) Update of July Visa Bulletin; and (3) July Visa Bulletin which has just been released today. This can affect the definition of "class" of the class action and latter two releases can fall under the two different classes. I wonder why the DOS is adding further confusion to the nation which is already in a state of extreme confusion and in despair because of their previous action.

07/06/2007: SPECIAL ALERT: U.S. Visa Posts Will Continue to Issue Immigrant Visas in July for July Interview Scheduled EB Applicants?

• AILA has reported a very interesting or confusing DOS LegalNet Office letter which one of the members received towards the fact that the consular posts had already been allocated their numbers for the month of July prior to EB visa numbers becoming unavailable on July 2 and that the posts may continue to use their July allocations of EB numbers, and continue to issue Immigrant Visas for the rest of this month, July, for those applicants who were scheduled for IV interviews in July. Hm.....................................
• It thus appears that those who are scheduled for IV interviews should immediately contact the consulate to inquire of availability of the immigrant visas after the scheduled interview. Readers may also ignore our previous message on the consular processing. It is an extremely confusing time. Please check the visa interview appointment letters from your American consulate. Please stay tuned to this website for further information on the IV consular processing. We ask those who have received the July Interview notice from the visa posts to provide the information to this office via email, ohlaw@immigration-law.com.
  

07/06/2007: Hard Working Women and Men in USCIS Behind the Visa Number Fiasco

• From the information available thus far, this reporter believes that no one in the agencies intended to bring about this fiasco. It was lack of close communication and coordination between the USCIS and the DOS and more or less a poor handling of the situation at some level within the USCIS. The people should remember that there are many and many women and men in the agency involved who worked hard just like you and me to do the given jobs, including managers, supervisors, and other higher ups. The agencies should take this fiasco as a good opportunity to learn a lesson on what could go wrong in the management of immigration services and responsibilities affecting hundreds and thousands of other human beings. This reporter has been visiting the field offices, particularly Nebraska Service Center and other local field offices, almost every single year for over past 20 years and have met the "human" faces of hard working officers and other workers working in tiny cubicles without telephones and facilities that cannot be described as fancy offices but more or less factories and plants. When I report the current news, this reporter sees the faces of the women and men that I have met who worked in the not necessarily fit office space and environment. Without doubt, the current fiasco should be one way or another corrected and prevented in the future. However, the people should not take this opportunity to dehumanize the current event and easily demonize other people with no faces. Probably this is the time when these women and men need most an emotional support and boost from their invisible customers. After all, things will go through the legal process or other processes to correct the mistake. Low morale of these women and men will help no purposes and causes. On behalf of our readers, we want to send a big "CHEER UP" to these women and men!

07/06/2007: USCIS Updates Receipting Backlogs

• The USCIS has just released Service Center Receipting Update. It appears that I-140 and I-485 are expected to continue experiencing receipting backlog until after August 1, 2007. The following reflects NSC and TSC compliance dates:
  • NSC Compliance Date:

I-131 EB 8/1/2007
I-140 EB 8/1/2007
I-485 8/1/2007
N-400 8/1/2007

• TSC Compliance Date:

I-131 7/20/2007
I-140 7/13/2007
I-485 EB 7/20/2007
I-765 7/20/2007
N-400 7/27/2007

07/06/2007: State Department Record of EB Visa Number Authorization Involving Current Fiasco

• According to the State Department, from October 1, 2006 through May 30, 2007, the USCIS requested and was authorized the total EB visa numbers of 66,426. Between June 1 and the first few days of July (?), the USCIS requested and was authorized over 60,000 EB visa numbers, in approximately one month. Since it has been made clear by the USCIS that during the last weekend of June 30 and July 1 (2 days) the USCIS approved 25,000 EB 485 applications, apparently over 40,000 visa numbers were requested and authorized before the weekend in a period of less than one month. Obviously the 60,000 plus cases must thus have been approved (?) in one month. Unconformed sources indicate that they processed and approved (?) a substantial number of applications on Sunday, July 1, exhausting the EB numbers by July 1 and making the EB number unavailable not from July 1 but from July 2, 2007. It is interesting that even before the legal team initiates any discovery, the truth starts coming out of the cabinet a bit by bit.

07/06/2007: USCIS Reportedly Admitted Some I-485 Approvals at Last Minutes Without Completion of FBI Security Clearance

• New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?hp, has reported:

"To complete the applications in time, the immigration agency put employees to work both days last weekend at service centers in Texas and Nebraska, immigration officials said. They said that 25,000 applications were processed in the final 48 hours before Monday’s deadline. In some cases, security clearances required by the F.B.I. were not entirely completed, immigration officials said. The agency approved some applications “when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly,” Mr. Aytes said."

• The report also indicates that the State Department and the USCIS tend to disagree with each other for the root of the problem for the current fiasco. Earlier there was a report in the Washington Post that the USCIS denied that the USCIS worked ceaselessly and frantically during the weekends (two days) before July 1, but it has been admitted since then the employees indeed worked hard during the two days. According to the NY Times report, during the weekend alone, they approved 25,000 I-485 backlog applications.
• We are afraid that the alleged admission of approval of I-485 application before completion of the security clearance is likely to face the legal challenge for violation of the rules which is likely one of the main claims of the AILF lawsuit as well as the political backfire as an issue of security lapse relating to the homeland security. Additionally, such evidence may affect a huge number of mandamus action lawsuits which are pending in federal courts throughout the country. It appears that the July visa bullen fiasco has opened a pandora box and is going totally out of control and pushes the two agencies into an edge.

07/06/2007: Visa Bulletin Class Action Lawsuit, Potential Members of the Class, and Issue of I-485 Filing in July

• The AILF is currently developing a lawsuit against the USCIS and the DOS. As reported earlier, apparently the AILF has been successful in finding the potential plaintiffs for the lawsuit. The plaintiffs will automatically become members of the class in the class action who will get the relief if they win in the lawsuit. The details of the relief this lawsuit is pursuing are articulated in the AILF's Visa Bulletin Lawsuit FAQ. For the summary, please click here.
• The lawsuit team lawyers are still developing the strategies and details of the members of the class this lawsuit will cover who are not members of the plaintiffs. As they move along, the details can be changed, but according to the FAQ, membership of the class would require filing of EB I-485 applications in July 2007. Accordingly, those who fail to file EB I-485 applications are likely not included in the membership and will not be able to receive the fruits of the litigation, once the class wins in the litigation. Relevant to the issue of when the EB I-485 should be filed to receive the benefit as a class member is the number of July visa numbers which will be made available to the members of the winning class of the lawsuit. Obviously, the visa numbers will be limited in numbers. The members of the class will have to compete each other for the numbers. According to the FAQ, the number will be taken under the principle First In First Out bases. Accordingly, the earlier his/her EB I-485 is filed, the better the chance of getting the number before they are exhausted. It appears that those who fail to get the numbers are likely to be left out of any benefits of the litigation.
• It thus appears that some people may want to file the EB I-485 applications with the full knowledge that the applications will be rejected and returned by the USCIS, just to become a member of the class of this lawsuit. Consdering the fact that some visa numbers may become available in October 2007 for certain people, they may be less desperate and eager in seeking membership of the class of the lawsuite. While, the nationals of ovesubscribed countries such as India, China, Mexico, and Philippines will need the fruits of this litigation much more desperately than the people from other countries. Additionally, EB-3 people may have such need more than EB-1 or EB-2 since when new visa numbers become available in October, the EB-3 numbers are likely more oversubscribed than EB-1 and EB-2. Lastly, the lower the priority date is, the more they will need the fruit of the litigation as the higher priority date applicants will have a better chance to get their priority date becoming current in October or soon thereafter. These variants should give a guide to the people to determine whether or not they should file EB I-485 applications to become a member of the class.
• However, these factors alone should not be considered absolute determinants in deciding whether they should file the EB I-485 applications in July. The FAQ indicates that the downside of becoming a member of the class by filing EB I-485 applications in July is potential extensive and in-depth scrutiny of the cases by the USCIS to weed out the applicants on the ground of ineligibility of I-485 applications. Accordingly, people with some potential issues of whatever nature may be considered poor candidates for the membership of the class. The straight forward case should be considerred a better candidate for filing EB I-485 applications in July, while those with some potential wrinkes in the case may stay away from filing the application in July.
• For the foregoing reasons, people should seek assessment of one's case by legal counsel for appropriateness of filing EB I-485 now and becoming a potential member of the class of the lawsuit. It is absolutely no and no to jump into filing the applications without the appropriate legal counsel.

07/05/2007: USCIS Advises Importance of Reviewing Frequently Instructions for Each Form

• The procedure for immigrant and nonimmigrant petitions or applications is confusingly in flux including the filing jurisdiction, adjudicating agencies, filing fees, availability of premium processing services, etc. etc., owing to the USCIS transformation program and bi-specialization preparation as well as newly published rules such as increase in filing fees, etc. Accordingly, the USCIS is advising the customers to check and review their "form" site and review the specific form instructions before they prepare and file a case so as not to experience undesirable experiences of rejections or other negative actions by the USCIS. This will cause the increase in traffic to the USCIS website. One caveat, though. Sometimes, even the USCIS cannot catch up with the ongoing changes in procedures and instructions, etc. For the reasons, people should keep up with the upto-date news releases meticulously either through the USCIS or through the AILA. Important, important!

07/05/2007: Definition of I-485 "Filing" and Receipt of June VB Cases in July 2007

• Readers are sending us email inquiry whether the USCIS will reject the I-485 application for the June 2007 current cases for them which they post marked and shipped out via US Postal Services or via overnight delivery services which was delivered on July 2, 2007. These cases will also be rejected as under the revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin, entire EB visa numbers will remain unavailable effective July 2, 2007. Since filing of I-485 is not determined by a post mark but by physical receipt of the application, these cases are likely to be rejected as it physically arrived at the Service Center buildings on July 2, 2007 when the unavailability of the EB visa numbers took effect.
• If the June application was shipped out in June when their visa number was current and delivered on June 29 or earlier date, the application is considered timely filed unless there were flaws in filing such as missing filing signatures, defective checks, or even missing important initial evidence. These applicants should preserve the overnight delivery tracking certificates and the cancelled checks of filing fees to prove that the applications were timely filed before July 1, 2007. Issuance of hard copy Receipt Notice does not control for the purpose of the proof of "filing."

07/05/2007: I-751 Removal of Conditional Resident Status Application Processing Centralized in CSC

• AILA has announced that the NSC and TSC will no longer fee receipt of I-751 filing effective 07/02/2007. The I-751 received at these Service Centers will be shipped without receipting to the CSC, which will instead issue the WAC recceipt notices. Direct filing of I-751 with CSC is not in place yet, but the AILA confirms that direct filing of I-751 with the CSC will not be rejected.

07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco

• The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
• Aside from the lawsuit, there is some indication that some members of the employment-based immigrant community and other stakeholders are actively contacting the members of the Congress encourating the Congress to hold a hearing to investigate the background of the fiasco.
• We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
  • Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
  • Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
    • Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
    • Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
  • Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
    • Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
    • Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
• The foregoing analysis of the hypothetical facts, issues, and conclusions would give the readers some ideas of complexity of the issues, either political or legal, that require "untangled" through the legal or politcal process. On top of these potential issues involving the hypothetical facts, there are also other issues relating to potential technical violation of rules and laws by both State Department and the USCIS. The untangling process can be long and painful, affecting different immigrants differently, but the law must assure that justice be done, should there be any injustice created by the government process. There are people who question the necessity of such political or legal process to correct any potential issues and problems considering the fact that the EB visa numbers might be current in October for some of these potential victims of the July 2007 Visa Bulletin revision, but these people should understand that the EB visa numbers in October 2007 may not become "current" for everyone, particulary Indians, Chinese, Mexicans, and Filipinos, as well as very late priority date applicants including those who will obtain the labor certification application within July 2007.
• Please enjoy back yard barbeque and fireworks!

07/03/2007: Congresswoman Lofgren's Statement on July Visa Bulletin Revision and USCIS 485 Rejection

• Rep. Lofgren released the statement expressing concern on the incident. The statement indicates that she sent Secretaries Rice and Chertoff letters asking them to reconsider any mid-month updates of the July Visa Bulletin. As people know, she is the powerful Chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee. Her statement is very important in two areas. One is the political attention we desperately need. The other is potential impact on the House action on employment-based immigration legislation as impacted by the incidents. There is currently a very serious conspiracy theory going around like a wild forest fire all over the country and the Congress can schedule a hearing for the purpose of investigation, if they will. This could be another tool to get to the bottom of conspiracy theories. Very important development politically. Immigrants, hold your breath. Again, do "not" trash your 485 packet yet!

07/03/2007: Minnesota SWA Practice of Job Order and America's Job Bank Transition

• Minnesota SWA has just released a very helpful guidance for foreign labor certification filers as related to the Job Order in Minnesota. We are grateful to the MDEED for this timely release of the guidance. Please click here.

07/03/2007: Various Rumors on Conspiracy Theory on July Visa Fasco and Power of Litigation

• There are a number of unconfirmed "rumors" flying around in the country as related to the government decision to completely cut off employment-based green card applications "at the last minute." We will not go into the rumors as at this point all of theories are unfounded. However, should the AILF bring a lawsuit, one of the first things the lawyers do is so-called "discovery." This is a powerful tool to dig the truth out of the dark closet. There are several forms of discovery. One is "Request for Admission." The lawyers list a number of questions and request the agency to answer each question under oath. False answer will subject them to the criminal charge of perjuy. Second discovery tool is "deposition." This is examination of witnesses out of court, most typically in the plaintiff's lawyers offices, and testimonies of the witnesses are introduced in the trial as part of the evidence. The third tool is to request the agency's records including emails, documents, etc. The employees of the agencies or othr parties can be subpoenaed to testify under oath to dig out consiracies or cover-ups and they will be subject to the criminal offense of perjury. Bush just pardoned Libby yesterday who was convicted of perjury. These are very powerful and scary methods the lawyers and the court use to dig out the truth. Whatever conspiration theories one hears in the community will eventually be clarified through the litigation process unless the case is settled out. One of the reasons cases are settled in a litigation against the big businesses and government agencies is to protect certain evidence from public records. Let's watch the drama that may unfold in the present case.

07/03/2007: Time for Businesses, Employers, and EB Immigrants to Stand Up for Employment-Based Immigration Justice and Reform

• Since the S. 1932, "employment-based immigration reform" bill, which was passed by the Senate but struck down in the House in late 2005, the employment-based immigration has been ailing to reach a climax which was revealed by the system in the form of late EB-485 fiasco. The anti-immigrationists have always brough forward an argument that the employment-based immigration reform should be passed as part of the comprehensive immigration reform legislation. People will remember that after the Senate passed S. 1932, the Congressman from Texas, Lamar Smith, engaged in a campaign through the media that the employment-based immigration should be debated and handled as part of the CIR which was scheduled to be introduced in February 2006. Since then, the restrictionists used the same strategies. They were fully aware that the country's businesses were suffering from the ailing employment-based immigration system and the employment-based immigration reform has been supported by the legislators accross the board in both the Senate and House except the hard-core immigration restrictionists. The way they could block the employment-based immigration legislation was to hook it up to the CIR. The fact that the country needs employment-based immigration reform was vividly demonstrated by the CIRs, SKIL, other legislative proposals consistently demanding in the bills adjustment of EB numbers, partially remmoving the annual limits, permitting 485 during the period of visa number retrogressions. These bills have received a broad support except a limited number of far-left legislators. And then, the nation witnessed a shock bomb in this year's CIR bill that practically eliminated all these employment-based proposals by introducing the point-system to practically restrict the employment-based immigrations in the short term as well as in the long run. For this disasterous proposal, indeed the far-right immigration restrictionist and the far-left union supported pro-immigration legislators became bed-fellows as the point system in employment-based immigration system more or less satisfied their agenda forming a common ground, despite at the cost of the employers and employment-based immigrants. No wonder why the business community and high learning institutions and employment-based immigrant community stood up and fought against the CIR because of the point system and misguided employment-based immigration reform proposals in the CIR.
• Now is the time that the system must be corrected to alleviate the damage which was caused by the recent visa number fiasco. The AILA appears to stand up and fight it out in two fronts. One is to litigate the July 2007 Visa Bulletin revision and the USCIS rejection of I-485 applications through its litigation arm, Legal Action Center of AILF. In parallel, AILA intends to mobilize support for the employment-based immigration legislations and pressure the Congress and the White House to pass the employment-based immigration bills as early as possible, hopefully within this year. We urge the businesses, employers, higher learning institutions, and foreign workers to support and join the AILA's advocacy efforts to correct arbitrary and capricious management of the visa numbers on the one hand and to pass legislations to heal the wounds in the employment-based immigration system. Please visit the AILA website to join the campaign.

07/02/2007: To File or Not To File, That Is the Question!

• The USCIS Service Centers Operation office confirmed that the Servce Centers would reject any I-485 applications whose visa numbers are unavailable under the DOS reviised Visa Bulletin that received today would be rejected and returned. In the concurrent I-140 and I-485 application filing, if the I-140 petition filing fee is paid by a separate check, they will accept the I-140 petition only and complete the case and reject and return I-485 and ancillary applications packet to the filers.
• As we have advised, the American Immigration Legal Fund Lecal Center is currently working on preparating a lawsuit, but it has yet to be made clear which agency they would sue. In all likelihood, those who keep a record of filing of I-485 and rejection may be covered when they win in the lawsuit. Accordingly, those who filed today should preserve the evidence of rejection from the USCIS safe. This raises a question of whether people should keep filing I-485 with the full knowledge that the application will be rejected and returned. We do not recommend it one way or another. However, one benefit of such rejection will be either to officially participate in the lawsuit as a plaintiff or if not participate in the lawsuit as a plaintiff, they will still preserve the certain right to claim as a member of the class to take advantage of the outcome of the lawsuit. Another benefit can include claim of the attorney fees, which is called EJALA claim. Once the court grants, the attorney fees and the litigation expenses will be recouped. The amount could be monstrous and may force the agency to settle the case. If people decide to participate in the litigation as the plaintiff, they should first file the I-485 application and contact the AILF to volunteer as one of the plaintiff. If they do not want to participate as a plaintiff, they may still file the I-485 application and preserve the rejection evidence for the potential benefit if the AILF wins in the lawsuit. Those who did not file within July may not be convered if the AILF enters into certain settlement agreement on behalf of a class of applicants or wins in the litigation. Otherwise, they will just have to wait until October to see whether their priority dates will become current.
• Today's release of the State Department will lead to cancellation of all the interviews scheduled for these cases. The consulates are likely to halt processing the immigrant visa application processing and scheduling for interviews for these cases. Those who suffer from such delay may continuously seek AC 21 benefits inasmuch as they are presently present in the U.S.
• The supporting documentation which they have obtained will remain valid, including the medical report which will be valid for one year. They should keep the file safe so that they do not have to spend time and expenses to collect the evidence all over again. We hope no one has thrown the papers in their trash cans!

07/02/2007: EB Visa Retrogression in July, August, and September 2007 and I-140 Premium Processing Services

• The USCIS temporarily suspended I-140 premium processing services effective today on the "sole" ground that they will be flooded with the I-140 PPS and they do not have resources to process the cases in 15 days. That is perfectfully understandable. But now, July 2007 I-485 fiasco totally evapolated and they will practically receive no EB-485 applications for the next three months. During the period, they will have more than enough resources to process many other types of immigration benefits petitions and applications, including PPS within 15 days.
• Approval of I-140 is critically important for those who suffer from the delayed immigration proceedings. One is availability of AC 21 portability and change of employment for those who are in the pipeline of EB-485 applications. The total vaccuum in adjudication of their I-485 applications during the next three months is likely to cause additional pains and hardships when the I-140 petition is not approved because of unavailability of the portability and change of employment. The other important reason is three-year increment extension of H-1B status for those who are not eligible for H-1B extension beyond the six-year limit because they have yet to accumulate 365 days of filing of labor certification application or immigrant petition and who are ineligible for extension beyond the six years for other reasons. Beginning from today, the H-1B professionals from "any" countries will be eligible for the H-1B extension in "three year increment" owing to the total EB visa number retrogressions for the next three months, provided that they have an "approved" I-140 petitions. For these H-1B professionals, it will be crucially important that the USCIS "immediately" reinstates the premium processing services for I-140 petition partially to overcome the hardship which the today's announcement of retrogression of the employment-based immigrant visas will create.

07/02/2007: USCIS Decided to Reject All EB Filing "Effective Today"

• USCIS has released an announcement that they will reject any EB cases that come in from today.

07/02/1007: All EB Number Unavailable Until New FY 2008

• The State Department has released the update. The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following: Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation have been made available. Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.
• If visa number is unavailable in the Visa Bulletin, it appears that the USCIS is unable to accept the 485 applications under the USCIS regulation. It is thus likely that all the applications which they received or will receive today may be rejected and returned. The current situation is different from the other worker cases rejection in June in that in that case, the State Department did not officially revised the Visa Bulletin. However, we will have to wait and see the anticipated announcement from the USCIS.
• This Visa Bulletin revision also implies that there will be no EB-485 approvals during July, August, and September 2007!!!!! Accordingly all the recent approvals practically ended as of July 1, 2007 and there will be no adjudication of any employment-based I-485 applications. For the reasons, those EB-485 waiters who fail to receive the approval notices within this week will have to endure further hardships and emotional trauma. Now, people understand what Washington did to them. Had they passed the SKIL bill, all of these problems would have disappeared. We still wonder who invented the point system that helped to induce the business community to oppose the CIR and partially killed the bill. History will tell.

06/30/2007: Potential EB Visa Number Exhaution in July and Probable Actions of State Department or USCIS

• By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
• Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
• Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
• Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may not have a standing to sue the State Department. Remember that it will be foolish to act on denial of the events based on one's opinion that it is illegal. Legal or illegal cannot be determined by anyone other than the federal courts and not even the agencies or lawyers. Lawyers do not have any authority to determine that certain events are illegal. It will be just an opinion that will not bind anything. The courts are the only authority to determine the legality based on the litigations.
• For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.

06/29/2007: Time to Keep Emotion Under Control

• The news of potential revision of the July Visa Bulletin is understandably taken very hard by everyone including this reporter. After spending sleepless evenings and weekends, this reporter feels like being hit by lightening rod from sky. But people should keep their emotion under control for a number of reasons: First, the AILA reports that they are working hard to stop the State Department from doing this. No one knows how much it will work, but no one knows whether they will change their mind either. Just calm down. Secondly, even if it is released, we have no idea which categories and how much there will be a retrogression. Some categories may turn out to be not too bad. We will just have to wait and see. Thirdly, the AILF is seeking a legal remedy should this rumor indeed materialize. This lawsuit threat may or may not affect the State Department one way or another. We are all educated people and should have received a proper training to maintain a decent composure and not to lose morality and reveal weakness of the personality. Losing one or two days will not induce the sky failling down. Availability of July 485 filing is at this juncture depends on two factors: One is whether the July Bulletin will indeed be revised and the numbers will be retrogressed. The other is whether the USCIS and the visa posts around the world will be able to adjudicate all the backlog I-485 or immigrant visa applications in a very short period of time. Until the Visa Bulletin revision news popped up, the only factor that would control the issue of how soon one should send in their I-485 applications was the speed of USCIS backlog 485 application adjudications during the next two weeks or beyond. Now, quite unexpectedly, our July 485 filing opportunities have been further mystified by not one but two yet-to-be-known factors - Visa Bulletin Revision and USCIS Backlog I-485 Processing Speed. As we reported earlier, we started receiving increasing number of backlog I-485 application approvals in the mail, but we do not know how fast it is undertaken by the USCIS at this time.
• All of us have consumed ourselves for a couple of weeks this month by the CIR. The emotional distress have been futher exacerbated by the I-140 pps suspension decision. By now, we come close to the level of being exhausted. We should go home, take a deep breath, and enjoy family. Shutting this website will not give a peace to the wanderers. Have a nice weekend.

06/29/2007: American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) Seeks Plaintiffs for the Lawsuit on Visa Bulletin Fiasco

• The AILF is an affiliate of the AILA and its litigation arm. They are seeking the victims who would participate as plaintiffs in the lawsuit by the organization against the government agencies relating to the outrageous and lawlessness of the agencies involving the management of immigrant visa numbers and implementing the visa bulletin in compliance with the law. Please contact your attorneys if you are willing to participate in the lawsuit.

06/29/2007: Notice to The Oh Law Firm Clients

• We have suspended the work for July 485 filing development pending the clarification of the rumor next week. Please bear with us in this confusing and difficult time.

06/29/2007: EB-Visa Number Retrogression?

• There is a rumor going around that the State Department will issue a revised Visa Bulletin for July 2007 next Monday (July 2) or Tuesday (July 3) and that it may show retrogression of some or all EB categories, very likely to the point of unavailable for the month of July! Please stay tuned.

06/29/2007: Today Will be the Last Date for I-140 PPS Filing

• USCIS has confirmed that the last day when they will accept the I-907 premium processing request for I-140 petition is today, June 29, 2007.

06/29/2007: Advisory for July 485 Filers

• AILA has reported that these I-485 applicants who are experiencing medical examination backlog problems can take medical examination by the USCIS designated civil surgeons "in any area." They can thus shop around in other cities or other states to shop around and make a quick appointment and medical examination by going to our hompage and check the "Immigration Medical Examination Doctors Locator" link and shop around. Good luck.

06/29/2007: S. 1639 Death Update

• Not only the cloture motion was defeated, but also reportedly the bill itself was withdrawn by the Senate majority leader Harry Reid yesterday. Consequently, this bill is officially closed.
• The voting record reflects that the cloture motion was defeated primarily by the Democrats rather than the Republicans. There were a number of Democrat Senators who jumped ship, particularly far-left Democrats. After the defeat, Sen. Reid made a statement that this defeat was for this session of the Congress and there would be another after the Summer break. However, it is consensus that the CIR is gone and will remain gone for a long time.

06/29/2007: Senate Foreign Relations Committee Passed S. 966 to Give a Helping Hand in Support of Volunteer Work of Retired Diplomats To Ease Passport Processing Clog

• We reported yesterday that the State Department was seeking a help from the retired diplomats to perform U.S. passport processing as a volunteer to resolve the current crisis U.S. passport processing backlog. Apparently, these retirees would not be available unless a law was changed to remove condition for the retirees pension benefits involving certain work. That is what the Senate committee did yesterday so that these retirees can participate in the passport volunteer work. It is hoped that the Senate floor acts quickly enough such that the State Department would get the retirees' assistance before the peak load crisis is over. Read on.

06/28/2007: CIR 2007 - What Went Wrong and Where We Go From Here?

• Probably this is the only immigration reform bill in our history that practically everyone hated. Why? We labelled it as a mosaic of incompatible far-right and far-left agenda without middle of the ground. Far-right group hated it because of the far-left agendain it, far-left group hated it because of the far-right agenda, and independent or middle of the road group hated it because of the far-right and far-left agenda and no middle of the ground in the bill. The pro-Democrat agenda of illegal immigration relief and family-based immigration was assaulted by the far-right group from all directions and with a far-right restrictive bills with no room for compromise. The pro-Republican agenda of employment-based immigration was not only assaulted by the pro-left group backed by labor unions but also assaulted by the far-right group itself in the name of point-system. The so-called "Grand Bargain" was nothing but a mosaid of incompatible, unworkable, and worst proposals in one plate. This was the ugliest masaic reflecting total failure in leadership, no matter right or left.
• We hear that the next CIR may be brought up probably not until the next Administration after 2008 national election. Again? The nation may be better off without the term "Comprehensive Immigration Reform." The past three years of painful and sour experiences with the CIR clearly indicate that the comprehensive immigration reform can also be achieved through piecemeal immigration reforms. There is absolutely no reason why all the immigration issues must be resolved and reformed in a single bill. If the country has a leadership, their vision will direct various piecemeal immigration reforms into a consistent matter for the best interest of the nation and the people.
• The nation is in despair at this time. The Congress' job is however not over with the death of the CIR. They should pick up various immigration bills piece by piece when they return from the Summer recess and pass legislations one at a time. Yes, the nation's immigration system is broken. But the comprehensive approach should never be taken as the sole medicine and panacea. Let's fix arms now, and next fix legs, next fix head, and next body. Why shouldn't this work? The nation should be no longer obsessed with the comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Let's tackle very pressing immigration issues one by one. There are a host of immigration bills that have been introduced and pending in the Congress. The honorable mesdames and gentlemen, please do not be discouraged by the painful experience in the last three years. Please roll up your sleeves and get back to work on each pending immigration bill. That is the path the nation should follow.

06/28/2007: DOL Important Announcement on H-2B Guidance Changes

• Important Announcement: On April 4, 2007, the Department of Labor issued TEGL 21-06, which updated procedures for State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) and ETA National Processing Centers (NPCs) to use in the processing of temporary labor certification applications under the H-2B program. The Department then held two public briefing sessions in Chicago and Atlanta on May 1 and May 4, 2007, respectively. Employers and other stakeholders who attended those public briefing sessions raised important questions and concerns with regard to the effective implementation of TEGL 21-06, and the purpose of this document is to outline certain modifications to TEGL 21-06 as a formal response to those issues and concerns. Attachment A: Procedures for H-2B Certification of Temporary Non-Agricultural Occupations (Revised June 2007) of TEGL 21-06, Change 1, replaces and supersedes the prior corresponding operating procedures issued under TEGL 21-06. To obtain a copy of TEGL 21-06, Change 1, please click here. (accessible version can be found here.). See DOL site.

06/28/2007: All I-140 Premium Processing Services Suspension from 07/02/2007 to 08/01/2007

06/28/2007: S. 1639 Cloture Motion to End Debates Rejected!

• This practically means the death of S.1639. Your Senators' vote record.
• Just for the record, the reader may want to know that there were "140" amendments before this bill was killed by rejection of the cloture motion. Debating 140 amendments would take "how long?" You guessed it.
• There is one interesting question that needs answer. The DHS/USCIS, DOL, and other agencies have been workinng on the Temporary Guest Worker preparation jobs and in some cases, even formed a special task force, all in vain.

06/28/2007: State Department, in Desperation, Seeks Its Overseas Diplomats for Volunteer Work for U.S. Passport Processing in July and August

• Report indicates that unable to cope with almost 3 million backed up applications and thousands more that are pouring in each day, the department has issued an urgent all-points global appeal seeking volunteers to return to the United States at government expense in July and August to deal with the problem. Wow! What a mess!

06/28/2007: S. 1639 Faces a Crucial Vote at 10:30 a.m. This Morning

• The Senate is scheduled to vote on cloture motion to end debates for the amendments, which will be the second test for survival of S. 1639 for this bill. The third and last test is expected to take place before the end of the week. Read on.
• The Senate took the following actions yesterday:
  • Amendments Rejected:
    Division I of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934, (By 53 yeas to 45 nays (Vote No. 229), Senate tabled the amendment.)
  • Division II of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934, (By 79 yeas to 18 nays (Vote No. 230), Senate tabled the amendment.)
  • Division III of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934, (By 56 yeas to 41 nays (Vote No. 231), Senate tabled the amendment.)
  • Division IV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934, (By 56 yeas to 41 nays (Vote No. 232), Senate tabled the amendment.)
  • Division VI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934, (By 55 yeas to 40 nays (Vote No. 233), Senate tabled the amendment.)
  • Amendments Withdrawn:
    Division V of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
  • Amendments Pending:
    Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934, of a perfecting nature.
  • Division VII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934, (By 45 yeas to 52 nays (Vote No. 234), Senate earlier failed to table the amendment.)
  • Division VIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division IX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division X of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
  • Division XI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XIV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XVI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XVII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XVIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XIX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XXI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XXII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XXIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XXIV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XXV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XXVI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Division XXVII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934.
    Kennedy Amendment No. 1978 (to Division VII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934), to change the enactment date.
  • Other Actions Taken: The following amendments fell when their respective Divisions were tabled:
    Feinstein Amendment No. 1957 (to Division I of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934), to change the enactment date.
  • Specter Amendment No. 1958 (to Division II of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Modified Amendment No. 1934), to change the enactment date.
  • A unanimous-consent-time agreement was reached providing for further consideration of the bill at approximately 9:30 a.m., on Thursday, June 28, 2007; that there be one hour, equally divided and controlled for debate only between Senator Kennedy and Senator Specter, or their designees; that Senate vote on the motion to invoke on the bill; provided further, that Senators be authorized to file germane second-degree amendments until 10 a.m.
• Please check the vote monitor in our home page.

06/27/2007: SPECIAL ALERT: I-485 Cap for FY 2007 Can Be Exhausted Before End of July? Then What Will Happen?

• According to the AILA, approximately 40,000 visas remain in all employment-based categories, other than EW, for FY2007, according to its sources, and that the USCIS has far more than 40,000 adjustment applications in the backlog queue that are ready for approval, not to mention the additional numbers which will be consumed in concular immigrant visa processing. It is thus possible that the cap may reach within a short period in July, even though no one can predict it until after July 2, 2007. The USCIS at this time does not have any policy announced with reference to July 2007 I-485 filings which are filed after certain date in July when the total number is exhausted. However, considering the fact that the USCIS currently rejects the "Other Worker" category I-485 applications even though June 2007 Visa Bulletin show current for certain applicants because the "other worker" category quota was exhausted on June 5, 2007. This raises a serious concern because as we reported earlier today, the USCIS appears to be picking up the speed of processing of backlog I-485 applications in anticipation of flood of July 485 applications. The USCIS hands may be tied, should the EB visa numbers for FY 2007 is exhausted before the end of July.
• The situation is particularly critical because of the USCIS decision not to accept the I-485 filings without the medical report. AILA demanded leniency but the USCIS reportely refused to accept such demand. Since medical report is "initial evidence" to I-485 filing, under the recent rule change, any I-485 filing without the medical report can be rejected or denied. Reports indicate that there are a huge backlog in scheduling medical examination in most of the areas in the country.
  

06/27/2007: S. 1639 Amendment Status

06/27/2007: CIR Amendments Increased from 65 to 109!

• As of June 25, 2007, a total of 65 amendments to S. 1639 had been introduced. Yesterday alone, 44 additional amendments were introduced to a total of 109 amendments. Reportedly, 27 amendments out of these amendments will be packed for floor debates by the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid and voted upon before the end of the week. The list of the 109 amendments reflects that Senator from Alabama, Jeff Sessions, is flooding the Senate floor with the amendments as an apparent strategy to delay the Senate floor action and kill CIR. During today and tomorrow, there will be a "500 degree heat" burning in the chamber of the Senate. What a fighter! Yak!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

06/27/2007: Some Good Signs in the Mail Box for Pending EB-485

• We reported from Orlando that the USCIS might try to clear out some pending EB-485 cases to give a room for the storm of EB-485 applications which would flood the floors and shelves of the Service Centers beginning from next Tuesday, July 2, 2007. This office starts witnessing increasing fingerprint notices for pending cases and approval of long-clogged EB-485 cases.
• Reminder: Those living in highrise apartments or large apartment complex should put up the names of their family members on the mail box such that the green card mails are not returned to the USCIS. Under the current USCIS policy, the U.S. Postal Services are not permitted to deliver the USCIS enevelope with "Return Requested" red stamp other than the specific individual named on the envelope. This is particularly true with the green card delivery.

06/26/2007: USCIS Reports California Service Center Receipting or Notice Delays and Advisory

• USCIS announced today that the California Service Center is currently experiencing system problem and receipting delays.
  • If USCIS has cashed your remittance check and you have yet to receive a receipt notice, please verify your case's status on-line using the receipt number indicated on your cancelled check. If you don't know your receipt number, please contact the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) toll-free at 800-375-5283 for your receipt number.
  • If you believe that you haven't received an approval notice (for example - you check the online system and it indicates that your case was approved and you have not received an approval notice), USCIS encourages you to submit an inquiry to the e-mail box: CSC.NoNotice@DHS.Gov. Please include your receipt number and/or your "A" number with your inquiry. USCIS expects to respond to email inquiries within 30 calendar days.

06/26/2007: Senate Passed CIR S. 1639 Cloture Motion by 64 : 35

• Senate will start debating the amendments beginning from 2:30 this afternoon. Real confrontation is expected here on. Now, everyone's body temperature should rise! Please watch how the drama will unfold!
• If you want to know who voted yeas and who voted nays, click here.

06/26/2007: Senate CIR Agenda Today and This Week and Issues Involved

• Today, the Senator majority leader, Harry Reid, will put to vote the Cloture motion. The White House is engaging in a full-court pressing on the Republican senators and the Congress to vote for the motion. There is no serious issue involved in the cloture motion in this regard. The issue involves the Senate floor agenda that will follow the cloture motion. Apparently, the Senate is reportedly attempting to put to vote the S.1639 as early as day after tomorrow after short debates on the predetermined set of amendments which were reportedly agreed upon by the Grand Bargain negotiators and the Senate majority and minority leaders. This agenda is prepared to shut out any filibuster attempt by the Republican anti-immigration Senators by introducing amendments after amendments to delay the process and eventually kill the bill. In this regard, there should not be any opposition from the immigration supporters. However, there is some concern relating to this unusual Senate procedure because the 20-some amendments which will be introduced on the Senate floor in a packet deal following the cloture motion have yet to be made public. The Grand Bargain was produced behind the door concocted by a few political leaders. Now, the Senate is about to repeat such process practically shutting out the public debates on the amendments. Rumor indicates that the packet amendments accomodated the Republican demands for tightening illegal immigration and border security issues and the Democrat demands for liberalizing legal immigration issues, particularly family-based immigrantion. This is about all the information which is available at this time and the amendments are not likely to be publicized until they are introduced on the Senate floor next one or two days after the today's cloture motion. This raises some concerns in both pro immigrant community and con immigrant community.
• One website reports that since June 18, 2007, a total of 65 amendments had been introduced in the Senate as of yesterday. Obviously, most of these bills are intended for filibuster. For the list of amendments, please click here.

06/25/2007: U.S. to Expand Biometric Collections and Checks at the International Airports by Year-End

• Report indicates that a program being launched at 10 U.S. airports this year will expand existing identification checks for visitors, including requiring 10 digital fingerprints. The border checks could include other biometric data, such as facial and eye retina scans, as the U.S. upgrades security at its ports, airports and border crossings. The pilot program will affect travelers from countries participating in the U.S. Visa Waiver Program, as well as those coming from nations where visas are required. Airports chosen for the pilot project include Boston Logan International, Chicago's O'Hare, George Bush Houston Intercontinental, Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International, Miami International, John F. Kennedy International, Orlando International, San Francisco International and Washington Dulles International.
  

06/25/2007: USCIS Updates Four Center Centers Frontlog Situation

• As people are aware, the Service Centers are witnessting frontlog in processing and issuing various notices including receipt notices and approval notices. The update gives some details for each Service Center. Obviously, the USCIS is affected by the H-1B cap filing fiasco on April 2, 2007 and storm of filing to beat the fee increase at the end of July 2007. The USCIS assures that the receipt notices will reflect actual receipt date to avoid potential problem in proving status maintenance or the issue of "timely" filing. But it still creates other problem such as the Receipt Notice requiremednt for state's driver license application or renewal, filing of petitions or applications for change of status or extension of status which require proof of timely filing of prior applications and petitions. We really hope that the USCIS leaders work out a solution to help such applicants as soon as possible.

06/25/2007: Wouldn't You Want to Kow the Profit and Its Use by the Five Major Oil Companies?

• This is not an immigration law news, but the major oil companies' late skyrocket profit that affects everyone of us should be a valuable information. The Congressional Research Services released this report on June 19, 2007. Read on.

06/25/2007: Senate Floor This Week

• Congressional record indicates that today at 1 p.m., Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of H.R. 800, Employee Free Choice Act. On Tuesday, at 11:30 a.m., Senate will continue consideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of H.R. 800, Employee Free Choice Act, and vote on the motion to invoke cloture thereon; following which, Senate "may" vote on the motion to invoke cloture on S. 1639, Comprehensive Immigration Reform. There is thus a chance that a critical showdown may take place on the Senate floor tomorrow, and should the Senate floor fail to pass the motion by 60 votes yeas, S. 1639 may face another potential requiem. Please stay tuned.
  

06/24/2007: Errata Notice

• There was an error in reporting removal of AC 21 Change of employment under S. 1639 and we stand corrected. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused to the readers.

06/23/2007: Senate to Take Up S. 1639 Next Tuesday and Planned to Vote by Next Weekend

• Report indicates that the Senate majority leader fixed the floor schedule at next Tuesday for S. 1639. However, this bill is heading to a direction which is totally hopeless. The text of S.1639 is unworkable compromise and as reported by the Washington Times, the Republicans are set to tighten it further. The future for this CIR is hopeless.

06/23/2007: Winding Down of Backlog Labor Certification and Remedy for Denial of RIR Application Without Second Chance for TR Opportunity

• The DOL is scheduled to eliminate all the backlog cases including RIR and Traditional Recruitment Applications by September 30, 2007. However, there appear to be incidents where the Certifying Officers in the Backlog Elimination Centers erroneously denied the application itself without giving the employers an opportunity to go through the supervised recruitment process under the TR track when they denied the RIR for the insufficient recruitment issue. In other words, there is an issue whether – if the Certifying Officer grants a RIR but finds that the application failed to document adequate consideration of U.S. workers or unlawful rejection of a U.S. worker – the CO can deny the application at that point, or must the CO refer the application for "supervised" or "traditional" recruitment.
• This issue was recently litigated before the BALCA, and the BALCA held that where an RIR request is based on pre-application recruitment that the CO finds was deficient, the CO's option is to deny the RIR and refer the application for supervised recruitment with appropriate instructions if there are special sources of recruitment which the CO finds need to be considered. See Photo Express, Inc.,, 2005-INA-128, et al. (May 16, 2007) (en banc). Those whose RIR application is denied and closed without the TR opportunity may consider a motion to reconsider based on the BALCA decision. Considering the fact that the EB immigrant visa number will remain "current" probably only in July or in August at best, one wonders how much such motion will help at this point, but reversal of the denial of ETA 750 application will at least preserve the priority date allowing them to apply for I-485 when their priority date becomes current in the future Visa Bulltin.

06/22/2007: USCIS Announces "Direct Filing" of Immigrant Petitions and Ancillary Applications Effective 07/30/2007

• USCIS has already launched the direct filing of nonimmigrant proceedings. Yesterday, the USCIS announced that the agency was launching the direct filing of I-140, I-485, I-765, I-131, I-907, I-360, and I-129F effective 07/30/2007 with a 30-day grace period during when the filing of the cases with a wrong Service Center would not be rejected. The announcement states that the starting date of the direct filing coincides with the effective date of new filing fee rules. The new filing procedure is as follows:
  • Petitioners will file all Forms I-140 (and concurrently filed Forms I-907 for a classification that is Premium Processing eligible), as well as employment-based Forms I-485 (and related Forms I-131, I-765) with the Nebraska Service Center or the Texas Service Center. This represents a change from current filing instructions, which direct all of these filings to the Nebraska Service Center. The filing location for a Form I-907 filed to upgrade a pending Form I-140 to Premium Processing, for a classification that is Premium Processing eligible, will remain unchanged. The Form I-907 is filed with the location where Form I-140 is pending.
  • Petitioners will file the Form I-129F with either the Vermont Service Center or California Service Center, depending on where the petitioner resides, and regardless of whether it is filed for a K-1
    fiancé(e) or a K-3 spouse. This represents a change from current I-129F filing instructions, which direct the filing of K-1 petitions to all four USCIS service centers and the filing of K-3 petitions to the Chicago Lock Box.
  • USCIS will release new forms with updated filing instructions in the near future. In order to assist the public in determining the proper “Direct Filing” location, USCIS will also release filing charts that list proper filing locations on the online forms entry page for each form in advance of July 30, 2007.
• During the lead period from 06/21/2007 to 07/29/2007, people can make a direct filing or in old ways. Accordingly, the July 2007 EB I-140 and I-485 filers using the July Visa Bulletin can make direct filing to eather Texas Service Center or Nebraska Service Center depending on where their place of intended employment is located. Currently, the Nebraska Service Center is the window agency for filing and the filed cases are split between the NSC and TSC internally.
• For the announcement, please click here.

06/22/2007: Senate Likely Take Up S. 1639 CIR Cloture Motion Today

• On June 20, 2007, Senate began consideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of S. 1639, to provide for comprehensive immigration reform. A motion was entered to close further debate on the motion to proceed to consideration of the bill, and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Friday, June 22, 2007. Subsequently, the motion to proceed was withdrawn.
• Yesterday, the Senate passed the Energy bill. Now, since the Energy bill is out of the way, the Senate is expected to take up S.1639. Once they pass the first test of Cloture Motion with 60 votes, it is expected that the Senate will either pass or reject the CIR bill about considering about 20 amendments from each party and heated debates next week. Please stay tuned.
  

06/21/2007: USCIS Changes DORA Pilot Progam in Dallas, El Paso, Oklahoma Districts from Mandatory to Optional Effective Today and Until 09/21/2007

• The USCIS has released a notice that effective 06/21/2007, certain I-485 applicants (most typically marriaged-based) at the district offices in Dallas, El Paso, and Oklahoma are allowed to file their marriage-based I-485 application using either direct mailing filing at the address in Chicago Lockbox by mail or alternatively current procedure of in-person filing through INFOPASS appointment at the district offices for District Office Rapid Adjudication (DORA) Pilot Program. The USCIS is giving the optional Direct Filing by Mail opportunity to allow them to file the application before the filing fee increase on 07/30/2007. The USCIS is opening this optional filing opportunity until September 21, 2007. Currently, it is mandatory for these applicants to file in person for the rapid adjudication at these local offices, which requires INFOPASS appointment and in-person appearance for filing and the same day interview. However, the upcoming fee increase on July 30, 2007 created a rush and surge of filings at these offices to take advantage of the current filing fees and this surge in turn reportedly created INFOPASS appointment backlogs for about three weeks. Accordingly, should the mandatory procedure continue, these applicants would be forced to pay the increased fees since they will not be able to appear and file before July 30, 2007. For the full text of the notice, please click here.
• See also USCIS Announcement.
• However, there is a downside to this optional procedure of direct mail filing through Chicago Lockbox. It may save the filing fees at the cost of delays in processing and adjudication of the I-485 applications. Since the DORA Pilot Program will be continuously available, those who are prepared to pay the increased filing fee for the rapid adjudication of I-485 may opt the current in-person filing at these local offices.

06/21/2007: DHS and DOS Announced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Land & Sea Portion of Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI)

• This proposed rule will be published in the federal register soon. [See Advance Copy]. This proposed rule provides the following documents will be acceptable at the sea and land borders:
• For most citizens of the U.S entering the United States at sea or land ports of entry: A U.S. passport; a U.S. passport card; a trusted traveler card such as NEXUS, FAST, or SENTRI; a valid Merchant Mariner Document (MMD) when traveling in conjunction with official maritime business; or a valid U.S. Military identification card when traveling on official orders. The NPRM also outlines ongoing efforts to provide other alternative documents.
• For citizens of Canada, Bermuda and Mexico, the following documents are accepted forms of identification:
  • Canadian citizens: May present a valid passport issued by the Government of Canada, or a valid trusted traveler program card such as NEXUS or FAST
    Bermudan citizens: May present a passport issued by the Government of Bermuda or the United Kingdom.
    Mexican citizens: As under current entry requirements, Mexican nationals, regardless of age, must present a passport issued by the Government of Mexico and a visa, or a valid Form DSP-150, B-1/B-2 laser visa (Border Crossing Card)
• The departments have also identified unique circumstances for specific groups of travelers that warrant permitting the use of alternative documents.
  • U.S. citizens on round trip cruise ship voyages that originate and end in the United States may present a government-issued photo ID and birth certificates, Consular Reports of Birth Abroad or Certificates of Naturalization.
    U.S. and Canadian citizen children under 16 as well as children ages 18 and under traveling in designated groups may present certified copies of their birth certificates. U.S. children may also present Consular Reports of Birth Abroad or Certificates of Naturalization.
    Alien Members of the U.S. Armed Forces and Members of NATO-Member Armed Forces may present military identification and official orders.
    Members of the Kickapoo Band of Texas and Tribe of Oklahoma may present the Form I-872 American Indian Card.
• The Air portion WHTI requirements were implemented for all air travel on Jan. 23, 2007, and have shown compliance rates in excess of 99 % since implementation. DHS and DOS recently announced that U.S. citizens traveling to Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Bermuda who have applied for but not yet received passports can nevertheless temporarily enter and depart from the United States by air with a government issued photo identification and Department of State official proof of application for a passport through Sept. 30, 2007. The federal government is making this accommodation for air travel due to longer than expected processing times for passport applications in the face of record-breaking demand.

06/20/2007: Kennedy-Specter CIR S.1639 [Typo in Bill Name]

• Well, here is the full text of the bill the Senate is about to debate. Hmm....................................................

06/20/2007: USCIS District Office Rapid Adjudication Pilot Program of I-485 Applications

• The USCIS is scheduled to release a notice on the filing procedures for these Pilot I-485 filing and the optional participation requirement. Please stay tuned to this website for the details of this Pilot program.

06/20/2007: AILA Statement on Revival of Senate CIR Bill

• We strongly agree with the AILA's position in the statement and demand the Senate to pass "workable" bill. We strongly disagree with the initial "Grand Bargains" unless it is amended into a workable bill.

06/20/2007: Notice to the Oh Law Firm 485 Filing Clients

• Please do not fax the supporting documents to this office. Our fax machine is clogged by these faxes. Faxing documents will not assure earlier processing of the I-485 applications in this office. Please send the "entire documents" to this office via overnight delivery services. Just sending certain pages of the required documents which you consider sufficient will not help this office to process development of the papers for filing. We will not, repeat not, process the papers until we receive the entire required evidence. PLEASE DO NOT STAPLE THE DOCUMENTS!!! ALL THE INQUIRIES SHOULD BE MADE THROUGH EMAILS.

06/20/2007: USCIS Issues Guidance Memorandum on Implementation of New Rule on Flexible Response Timeframe for RFE/NOID

• This new rule took effect on 06/16/2007. In order to guide the field offices and amend the Adjudicator's Field Manual of USCIS, Mr. Donald Neufeld issued a memorandum giving some detailed guidance. This memorandum should be in a list of "must-read" materials for the practitioners and immigrants. Please click here for the full text.

06/20/2007: USCIS Issues Guidance on Implementation of DOL Final Rule on Substitution Elimination Rule as Related to Its Policy on I-140 Petitions

• The USCIS has already announced its positions on the various issues involving the DOL final rule implementation by the then Associate Director of Domestic Operations, Michael Ayetes, one of its clarification included the cut-off date of "filing" of I-140 petition rather than requiring "approval" of I-140 petition before July 16, 2007 for substitution of alien beneficiary at the stage of I-140 petition proceedings. Since then Mr. Aytes has been reassigned to a different mission to head comprehensiuve immigration reform legislation (including Guest Worker Program) implementation preparation team and the postiion has been taken over by Mr. Donald Neufeld, a long-time Director of the California Service Center, as the Acting Domestic Operation Associate Director of the USCIS. Mr. Neufeld has released a guidance for implementation of the DOL final rule and amendment of the Adjudicators Field Manual to reflect its policy on the related I-140 petition processing and adjudication. For the full text of this new memorandum, please click here.
• The following portion of this memorandum on exception to the cut-off date needs a special attention by the immigration stakeholders:
  • Approved labor certifications carried no expiration date and were valid indefinitely prior to the effective date of the DOL final rule. DOL has established an implementation period for the imposition of a validity period on labor certifications that were or are approved prior to the effective date of the rule, and a validity period for labor certifications that are approved on or after the effective date of the rule. An approved labor certification must be filed in support of a Form I-140 petition during the validity period established by DOL.USCIS will reject Form I-140 petitions that require an approved labor certification that are filed with a supporting approved labor certification that has expired. Such petitions that are accepted by USCIS in error will be denied based on the fact that the petition was filed without a valid approved labor certification.
  • Exception: USCIS will continue to accept amended or duplicate Form I-140 petitions that are filed with a copy of a labor certification that is expired at the time the amended or duplicate Form I-140 petition is filed, if the original approved labor certification was filed in support of a previously filed petition during the labor certification’s validity period. Such filings may occur when a new petition is required due to successor-in-interest, where the petitioning employer wishes to file a new petition subsequent to the denial, revocation or abandonment of the previously filed petition and the labor certification was not invalidated due to material misrepresentation or fraud relating to the labor certification application3, in the instances where the amended petition is requesting a different visa classification than the visa classification requested in the previously filed petition, or when the previously filed Form I-140 petition has been determined to have been lost by USCIS or DOS. [Please also note that some petitioning employers may have requested labor certification substitution during the labor certification application process with DOL. Labor certification substitution requests that are granted by DOL on or before the approval of the labor certification application do not impact the validity of the labor certification. Such an approved labor certification may be accepted in support of the Form I-140 petition filed on or after the effective date of the DOL final rule.
• The DOL final rule takes effect on July 16, 2007.
  

06/20/2007: House Republicans Introduce Border Security Bill

• The House pro and con immigration representatives gradually come forward reacting to the Senate CIR bill. We reported yesterday that a group of Democrats was considering to propose breakage of the CIR into small pieces and pass the piecemeal immigration bills that received less resistance and oppositions in the constituencies and the Congress. Yesterday, reportedly a handful of anti-immigration House Republican group including Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas and two committee ranking members introduced sweeping border security legislation [border security and enforcement only bill] to try to get in front of House Democrats on the issue and roll back political momentum for the Senate's comprehensive immigration package. The GOP lawmakers argued that the Senate bill is unacceptable because it would give illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. "It's as logical to give amnesty at the beginning of an immigration reform to stop illegal immigration as it would be to drill a hole in the bottom of a boat to let the water out," said Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Calif., who chairs the Immigration Reform Caucus. These activities in the House sheds some light on the difficulties the CIR will have to face after the Senate completes its ongoing CIR legislative process. On the Senate front, as we reported yesterday, the Senate decided to replace S. 1348 by a new Kennedy-Specter bill, S. 1639 which is nothing but the original "Great Barains" compromise bill with some amendments reflecting a few prior amendments. Senate schedule appears to be to take care of cloture motion within this week. If the cloture motion gains the required 60 votes, it will allow 20 some amendments from each party, debate and act on these amendments and attempt to pass the Senate bill before the end of next week and before the Senate goes into Fourth of July break. Please stay tuned.
  

06/19/2007: Senator Kennedy Introduced Yesterday S. 1639 with Republican Co-Sponsor, Sen. Specter

• Yesterday, Senators Kennedy and Specter introduced the CIR bill under a different bill title which appears to reflect some of the amendments which were introduced in the Senate. As soon as the bill is made available to the public, we will post it. For the background of introducing this new bill, please click here. Please stay tuned.

06/19/2007: USCIS Releases Revised Service Center Processing Times Report 06/18/2007

• The USCIS released the report initially on 06/15/2007, but re-released it with the correction of errors on 06/18/2007. As we reported on June 16, 2007, there was a serious error for I-140 skilled worker processing time for TSC moving backward for several years. Obviously it was an error. The USCIS 06/18/2007 timely corrected it. Thank you to the USCIS for the timely correction.

06/19/2007: Approaching Summer Tourism Seasons and Information on Visa Waiver Entry to the U.S. for VWP Country Travelers

• If you are from a visa waiver country, and you are coming for tourism or business (but not for employment or as a working member of the media) you may be in the U.S. (including Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands) for up to 90 days. If you wish to visit the U.S. for a longer period of time, you will need to obtain a visa. If visiting the U.S. under the visa waiver program you may not apply for an extension of stay. While in the U.S., you may go to Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean and re-enter the U.S. using the I-94W you were issued when you first arrived in the U.S., although the time you spend there is included in the 90 days allotted for your visit.
• If you visit other countries such as England or Costa Rica, then return to the U.S., your re-entry will be considered to be a new admission (thereby restarting the 90 day clock), rather than a re-entry from a contiguous country in the course of your initial visit, and the admission inspection may be more strenuous. The Officer inspecting you will want evidence that you intend to go back home to your country of citizenship to live as opposed to returning again and again to the U.S. after visits to other countries.
• If you are from Canada, the length of stay for tourism is 6 months. Canadians may file for an extension of stay with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. If you are not from a visa waiver country, you will need a visa. For more information please contact the U.S. Consulate in your country. For the details, please visit USCBP site.
  

06/19/2007: House Democrats Considering Break-Up of CIR into Small Piecemeal Bills

• The Washington Times reported today: House Democrats say they may break the immigration issue up into a series of smaller bills that would put off the tougher parts and allow others to pass, such as border security, and high-tech and agriculture worker programs that have clear support. Read on.
  

06/19/2007: Revised J-1 Program for Certain Trainees and Interns

• The Department has released an interim final rule to eliminate the distinction between ``non-specialty occupations'' and ``specialty occupations,'' establish a new internship program, and modify the selection criteria for participation in a training program. The new regulations also require sponsors to screen, vet, and enter into written agreements with third parties who assist them in recruiting, selecting, screening, orienting, placing, training, or evaluating foreign nationals who participate in training and internship programs. Sponsors must fully complete and secure signatures on a Form DS-7002, Training/Internship Placement Plan (T/IPP) for each trainee and intern prior to issuing a Form DS-2019. The Department adopts no changes to existing flight training regulations.
• This rule becomes effective July 19, 2007. For the full text of the rule, please click here.
  

06/18/2007: USCIS Transformation Program for Electronic Filing/Processing System Based on "Account" System

• We reported a few days ago that the USCIS was moving toward the "account system" of the immigration benefits filing and processing using electronic system. This is a new concept which everyone has to understand to prepare themselves for upcoming new world of immigration system.
• The Transformation Program states that it reflects in part the USCIS Ombudsman's recommendation. Readers may be interested in reading the Ombudsman's FY 2007 Report to the Congress that gives the details on the state of the USCIS, issues, and recommendations.

06/18/2007: Religious Worker Premium Processing Will Remain Unavailable Until 12/18/2007

• Six months ago, the USCIS suspended the religious worker petition premium processing services for six months. Now they are extending the temporary suspension of the PPS for another six months until December 18, 2007. Read on.

06/17/2007: Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule and Advisory for July EB-485 Filing

• As we advised earlier, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discredtion and control over the two issues: One is shortening of the timeframe for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit. The second rule is their authority to either reject or deny petitions or applications without issuing RFE where "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Previously, the so-called Yates memo indirectly required the agency to avoid rejection and denial with a recommend to issue RFEs as much as possible. This part of the Yates memo is overridden by the new rule who took effect yesterday, June 16, 2007. It is thus likely that the Service Centers will more aggressively reject or deny the I-485 applications where the "initial evidence" are missing in the filing packet. It is thus very important that people understand the definition of "initial evidence." The initial evidence varies between the nonimmigrant and immigrant proceedings and for that matter, each type of proceedings. The immigration regulation lists in details the initial evidence. However, the instructions sheets to each petition or application lists the initial evidence that are required for filing. Accordingly, beginning from today, people may want to read the instruction sheet for I-485 form carefully to learn the list of initial evidence and not to miss omitting these evidence in filing I-485 applications.
• One of the initial evidence which is listed is the sealed I-693, the Medical Examination results completed and sealed by the USCIS designated civil surgeons who examined the applicants per the immigration rules. As we reported yesterday, attorneys asked the USCIS authorities to accept I-485 applications without the medical result, but their answer was that they were taking it under advicement but as it stands now, the sealed medical report would be required as initial evidence, accoring to the USCIS authorities who were present at the AILA Annual Conference in Orlando. We understand that in some areas, there are a huge backlog in the physician's clinics for such medical examination. However, people can shop around the authorized physicians in much broader areas. For instance, people usually were asked to schedule such medical examination in the local "district" office where the applicants resided. The definition of "district office" has been broaden lately. Former district offices have been turned into field offices of a district office. Accordingly, people can schedule the medical examination through a physician located outside of their residence if the area falls under the jurisdiction of "district" even if it is outside the jurisdiction of "field office."

06/17/2007: CIR Debate Schedule Update

• Senate is to table the CIR mark-up after completion of Energy Bill, which will take another three or four days. It thus appears that the CIR (S. 1348) debate may not resume until next Wednesday or Thursday. Please stay tuned.

06/17/2007: Background of EB-2 and EB-3 Numbers Current

• Unconfirmed sources indicate that the State Department allocated the EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 "conservatively" with the expectation that the USCIS and USDOL would remove backlogs in a fairly rapid pace. Accordingly, at the end of May 2007, reportedly they allocated only 50% of the total annual quota for the EB numbers. Now, since it is not anticipated that the USCIS will produce enmasse I-485 approvals taking out a large number of the EB visa numbers, the State Department was afraid that unless the FY 2007 quota would be used before the end of September 2007, some of the visa numbers would be wasted. From such judgment, the State Department had to open the EB visa numbers current in July so that no EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 would be wasted. Anyway, it turned out to be a good gift for large number of EB immigrants. We thank the State Department for making a timely and right decision.

06/16/2007: Confusing I-140 and I-485 Processing Times in 06/15/2007 Report

• The June 15, 2007 USCIS Service Center processing times report has caused a substantial confusion in the immigrant community relating to the I-140 and I-485 processing times. The retrogression of EB-3 Skilled Worker I-140 petition from 2006 to 2003 particularly shocked the involved aliens.
• The first explanation should be derived from their explanation of change of reporting method as follows: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has improved the reporting procedure for processing times of immigration benefit applications. In the past, USCIS benefit processing reports indicated the specific type of applications or petitions that were being processed and the date the cases were received. However, the date the case was received did not provide a clear indication of when USCIS expected to complete the case, nor did it provide a clear indication of USCIS’ commitment to process cases within a certain cycle time. It also did not align with the processing times and cycle times the agency reports in other contexts. This improved reporting procedure is an effort to give our customers more accurate information that better reflects current processing time and USCIS service level commitments. Effective immediately, when we are completing applications and petitions within our service level goals we will report that as the processing time. For example, when our service level goal is to process a particular kind of case within six months, and if our processing time is six months or less, we will show a date consistent with our service level goal because that reflects our commitment. When we are not meeting our service level goal, the date posted will reflect the filing date of cases that are being completed. It should be noted that while in some instances reported processing dates may appear to have regressed due to this change, they do not reflect a lengthening of USCIS processing times, but simply the change in reporting. Our goal is to provide accurate projections and thus give customers clear expectations as to what they can expect as a processing time. Under this reporting method, it appears that the current I-485 target processing time is four months starting March 15, 2007 to June 15, 2007, the reporting date. March 15, 2007 does not reflect the receipt date or priority date. It is the date that start the counting of a period upto the reporting date. On the other hand, people see very irregular dates for different types of I-140 and different service centers. Obviously the I-140 report thus reflects the actual receipt date of the I-140 petition rather than the starting point to count the period.
• However, the foregoing general explation does not fully explain unusual pattern of reports. For instance, there is no reporting at all for EB-1 categories. Additionally, the Texas Service Center EB-3 report does not make sense at all in all aspects. We hope that the USCIS releases additional information to clarify the confusion. This is particular painful because of the all-out current of EB visa numbers in July 2007 and projected steep regression of EB visa numbers that will follow thereafter.

06/16/2007: Potential Quick Retrogression of EB Visa Numbers Before End of FY 2007

• There is ongoing fear and prediction from the unconfirmed sources of information within the government that EB-3 and, potentially EB-2 some countries, in September 2007. Under the circumstances, people should make it sure that their cases are filed as quickly as possible in July with the following cautions:
  • Please make sure that the papers are filed "flawless." If the papers are filed with flaws, the cases can be rejected not in days or in months just as the H-1B cap cases are currently experiencing now. In view of the volume of files they are going receive in July, processing of rejections will also take a long time. If the filings are rejected after the visa number retrogresses, the case will be stuck in the retrogression situation. "Flawless" means, among others, no missing signatures on the forms, no missing required forms, no filing checks that can be rejected by the banks, no missing "initial evidence" required for I-140 and I-485 filings. When I-140 and I-485 are filed concurrently, rejection of I-140 petition for its flaws will result in rejection of I-485 application regardless of its flawless filing!
  • If people have both EB-2 and EB-3 I-140 approvals, make it sure that I-485 is filed with the EB-2 approved petition. The EB-3 approved petition can be used later for recapture of the priority dates.
  • If EB-3 labor certification or petition is in process, they should continue the strategy so that they can recapture the priority dates after the visa number retrogresses and request the transfer of the priority date.
• For those with pending concurrent I-140 petition and I-485 application, they should manage it carefully such that the underlying I-140 does not face denial as it will result in the denial of I-485 application after the retrogression. The forthcoming retrogression can be very steep.

06/16/2007: Unskilled Worker EB Category Visa Exhausted Even in June 2007

• This is a truly bizzare news. AILA has reported that State Department had advised the the USCIS that the EB-3 Other Worker category had been exhausted., and based on this advice, thedUSCIS HQ has informed the Texas Service Center and the Nebraska Service Center to reject EB-3 Other Worker I-485 applications even though the June Visa Bulletin shows visa availability. It is indeed a double blow news to the Unskilled Worker community. AILA is looking into legality of this action. Hmm................................................................................................................?!...................................................................................................................................!?

06/16/2007: Status of Employment-Based Nonimmigrants Pending Extension Petition Beyond 240 Days for Security Check Delays

• The USCIS authories confirmed that the alien is not authorized to stay and work beyond 240 days of expiration of the current I-94 pending the extension petition. Reportedly, there are a number of cases of extension petitions which have been stuck beyond 240 days from the expiration of current I-94. Obviously the USCIS may exercise discretion not pursuing such violation. The opinion of the USCIS HQ official is indeed troublesome in that strictly speaking such alien can be pursued by the USICE for the immigration enforcement.

06/16/2007: The Rule on Direct Filing of I-140 and I-485 Expected to be Published in the Federal Register at the End of July 2007

• USCIS authorities disclosed here in Orlando that the direct filing of I-140 petition and I-485 application will be announced in the federal register at the end of July. They have already launched the direct filing procedure for I-129 and I-539 nonimmigration proceedings.

06/16/2007: USCIS Will Continue and Finish up Processing of Pending I-485 Applications As Much As Possible in Preparation the Storm of I-485 Applications Effective 07/01/2007

• The USCIS Service Centers authorities assures that the pending I-485 cases will be continuously processed as quickly as possible in preparation for the upcoming flood of new I-485 cases beginning from 07/01/2007. Please stay tuned to this website.

06/15/2007: June 15, 2007 USCIS Service Centers Processing Time Report

• See our homepage.

06/15/2007: June 15, 2007 USCIS Local Offices Processing Time Report

• See our homepage.

06/15/2007: USCIS Policy on Filing of New H-1B Petition For Change of H-1B Status Within the United States for Those Who Won H-1B Lottery for Consular Processing

• The USCIS plans to release policy on this issue shortly. This issue involves those who filed the FY 2008 cap H-1B petitions with the request for consular processing because they could not prove continuing maintenance of nonimmigrant status through October 1, 2007 because of the cap gap such as expiration of OPT/EAD and grace period prior to October 1, 2007. The details have yet to be released but the policy is allow such alien to file change of status without being subject to the cap and without paying ACWIA fees and fraud prevention fees. Please stay tuned to this website for the upcoming announcement of this policy by the USCIS.

06/15/2007: Medical Examination Scheduling Backlogs at the Physicians Offices and July 2007 I-485 Filing Problem

• There are reports that there are a huge backlog in medical examination appointments in certain areas. Currently, the USCIS requires the sealed medical report as the part of "initial evidence" for filing of I-485 applications. The attorneys here in Orlando asked the USCIS to change the current policy, allowing I-485 filers to file I-485 without the medical report. The USCIS took such request under advisement. Considering the fact that EB numbers could move backward again, such change of policy may be critically important for some filers.

06/15/2007: Transfer of Employment-Based Cases to National Benefits Center (NBC) for Scheduling of Interviews at the Local Field Offices

• Since May 1, 2007, the Service Centers have been transferring the interview-required employment-based cases to the National Benefits Centers for scheduling and coordination of interviews at the local field offices just the way it has been handled for the family-based cases. Accordingly, all the interview required cases are currently streamlined through the National Benefits Center. The transfer from the Service Centers to the NBC is electronically done.

06/15/2007: FY 2008 H-1B Cases Processing Status

• The USCIS has approved 41,000 cap-subject cases and 12,500 U.S. master degree cases as of now. They have issued about 10,000 RFEs for cap-subject cases which are pending. Approximately 4,000-5,000 RFE have been ossied for U.S. master degree cases and they are in this regard still pending. They held-up approximately 1,000 cap-subject cases for potential availability beyond those cases which had been selected, it appears that these may be rejected and returned. For the Chile-Singapore cases, they have already exhausted the special number for these cases and there are no numbers that add to the cap-subject quota from the Chile-Singapore unused numbers.
• By now, they fixed no-winners in the lottery. There has been some delay in sending out rejection notices and return of checks. These rejection notices and return checks will be completely mailed by July 20, 2007.
• The California Service Center has been experiencing delays in processing of receipt or approval notices for the selected cases and approved cases. Soon, the CSC will post a special email number for inquiry of these cases on the USCIS website.

06/15/2007: BEC Backlog Elimination and PERM Processing Status as of Today

• DOL reports that as of today there are only 48,600 cases remaining to process, out which only about 200 cases are RIR and the balance is the TR cases. This total balance amounces to 13% of total cases received which was 364,000 altogether.
• On PERM front, as we reported earlier, they had received more than 200,000 cases, out of which they processed 92%. At this time, denial rate is 20%, but they said the rate would keep going down.
• Couple of good news. They are improving the certification notice via e-mail just like the current sponsorship notice via email so that the employer can quickly get the status report and seek remedy, should the employers fail to receive the hard copy certified application or other issues. They will start this email notice services from July 2007.
• In July 2007, DOL is scheduled to publish a regulation in federal register to amend the current PERM application form, ETA 9089. The rule will be published with the two months comment period. Once the comment is reviewed and reflected, DOL will publish another rule with 90-day comment period on the revised form itself. The new ETA 9089 will not go into effect until March 2008. The new form will incorporate positive changes, particularly the H Section of the form.
• With reference to the Visa Bullen for July 2007 and any relief including unresponsive amendment of the labor certification, DOL is aware of the problem and will try to resolve such issues as soon as possible such that the applicants do not suffer from inability to file I-485 applications because of such delays.
• As to the problem of Atlanta National Service Center delays, there were rush of H-2B case filings and that Center had to switch around the resources from PERM to H-2B cases. However, the situation is under control and the Atlanta Center will see positive changes from here on in terms of the processing times. There are aware that in light of the immigrant visa number changes in July 2007, such changes should help in achieving some level of fairness.

06/15/2007: July EB-2 and EB-3 Visa Numbers Open and Consular Processing

• The State Department states that they allocated a large number of EB-2 and EB-3 visas because of the USCIS I-140 and I-485 backlogs and because if the visa numbers are not used before the end of the fiscal years, some of them can be wasted. Assuming that the USCIS may continue their current processing times and backlogs in I-140 and I-485, the EB-2 and EB-3 may continue to remain current. However, it is just a speculation and risky to rely on such speculation when one handles his/her immigrant status.
• In time like this, the consular immigrant visa application is very risky for the two reasons. For instance, if the EB-2 or EB-3 numbers face a cut-off date again in August or September, unless their immigrant visa is "actually" issued and they enter the U.S. before the retrogression, they will be stuck abroad. For those who are currently residing in the U.S. and intend to apply for the immigrant visa through the consulates rather than adjustment of status through the USCIS, a similar risk will prevail, but unlike the those who are residing abroad, they will be able to extend the H-1B extension under AC 21 Act pending the visa number availability. In this regard, their risk is less but still high in that since they did not submit I-485, they will not be able to take advantage of obtaining EAD and Advancer Parole, not to mention AC 21 portability of the approved I-140 petition for change of employment. All in all, the consular immigrant visa application is not recommended when the future of the visa numbers remins unpredictable.

06/15/2007: FY 2008 H-1B Cap Consular Visa Application and Admission to the United States

• It is expected that a large number of people whose H-1B cap petitions have been approved and who intend to apply and enter the U.S. on the H-1B visa from outside of the U.S. Under the current U.S. Department of State policy, the FY 2008 cap H-1B visa can be applied 90 days prior to the valid date of the H-1B petition. Accordingly, they will be able to apply for the visa at the consular posts beginning from July 1, 2007. However, this does not mean that they can enter on the H-1B visa 90 days prior to October 1, 2007. Admission to the U.S. is regulate4d by the DHS USCBP. Currently the CBP policy does not permit such alien to enter the U.S. until 10 days prior to October 1, 2007. Accordingly, the earliest they can enter the U.S. on the H-1B cap visa which has been issued will be September 21, 2007. Finally, the fact that they are allowed to enter the U.S. 10 days prior to the effective date of the H-1B petition does not mean that the alien can start working for the petitioning employer. This rule is regulated by the USCIS. Under the USCIS rule, the earliest such alien can take the employment with the petitioning employer is October 1, 2007. The employers and the alien beneficiaries should be mindful of these three different policies and rules.
• It is thus recommended that they apply for the visa sufficiently ahead of time but keep patience in traveling and starting employment with the H-1B employer. Visa should be applied early because of the huge number of applicants who may seek the visa application when it comes to close to October 1, 2007.

06/15/2007: 92,000 I-140 Petitions Backlog

• AILA sources indicate that there are currently 92,000 I-140 petitions pending. Obviously, some increased number of labor certification waiver I-140 petitions are likely to be filed in July 2007 increasing the number of I-140 backlog cases.

06/15/2007: July 2007 Visa Bulletin Affected Oh Law Firm Clients

• As posted earlier, this reporter is currently attending the AILA National Annual Conference in Orlando and will not return to the office until Monday. This reporter is unable to reply to your individual emails at this time. We will schedule your appointments as soon as possible to file your applications on July 1, 2007. There is likely a tremendous pressure on the USCIS civil surgeons for scheduling the required medical examination and people may schedule the medical exam appointments as soon as possible. Thank you in advance for your anticipated patience.

06/14/2007: DOL Backlog Processing Status

• BEC cases have been shrunk to 15% at this time and the DOL is expected to eliminate all the cases by the end of September 2007 as scheduled.

06/14/2007: Fall-Out of July 2007 Visa Bulletin on USCIS I-140 and I-485

• USCIS has expressed their concern with the fall-outs of the July 2007 visa number changes which will dumpt a huge cases more or less unexpectedly. Reportedly there are 92,000 I-140 backlog cases. The USCIS has been working on the processing times of six months at this time, but they are concerned that the processing times may be affected.

06/14/2007: AILA Celebrates Initiation of New Leader, Kathleen Walker

06/14/2007: Potential Re-Markup of CIR Debate Next Monday

• There is unconfirmed report that the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid may mark up the CIR next Monday and attempt another motion to invoke cloture next Friday. Please stay tuned to this web site for the developing news. As related to this report, please read the news report.

06/14/2007: July Visa Bulletin and EB-1, NIW, and Schedule A Concurrent Filing

• Since the visa number will be current for EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3, except unskilled workers, not only those who have obtained the labor certification but also the labor certification exempt cases will be eligible for I-485 applications. Under the current rule, they are eligible for the I-140 and I-485, and they may be able to file it in July 2007. People do not have to file Premium Processing for I-140. They will just have to make it sure that the I-140 petition and I-485 application are filed concurrently along with the ancillary applications of I-765 (EAD) and I-131 (Advance Parole). One important reminder: The fee increase takes effect on July 30, 2007, Friday. To avoid the incresed fees for I-485 filing, people should make it sure that the I-485 packet reaches the agency on or before Friday, July 30, 2007. It will be prudent to file a few days ahead of time via commercial overnight delivery services. Remember that if a case is filed by U.S. postal services express mail, the file remains in the post box in the Postal Services building until they are picked up by the agency. Usually they pick up from the post boxes once a day. If it is not picked up the day, the case not considered filed. Accordingly, it is recommended to use commercial overnight delivery services rather than U.S. postal express mail.
• It is uncertain how this visa number change will affect the pending H-1B extension petitions beyond six years under 104(c) based on the approved I-140 petition. There is some chance that it may be denied. Additionally, those who need H-1B extension beyond six years and are not eligible for one-year increment extention because 360 days have not passed since the filing of labor certification or I-140 petition (labor certification waiver cases) will face a problem in extending the H-1B status. They should, however, take advantage of 245(K) benefit that makes I-485 eligible inasmuch as the unauthorized employment or unalwful status did not last more than 180 days since the latest admission to the United States. Those who can file the I-485 timely under 245(K) should cease employment before it reaches 180 days and wait for the EAD approval. Record keeping will be extremely important in this case.
• Those whose three-year extension under 104(c) has been granted will not be affected by the visa number change and will be able to work continuously in H-1B status.

06/13/2007: EB-2 and EB-3 Current Effective 07/01/2007 and Anticipated Huge Surge of USCIS I-485 Caseloads

• July 2007 Visa Bulletin means that effective July 1, 2007, there will be a mountain of either concurrent or stand-alone I-485 filings. Without doubt, it will affect the processing times for the I-485 applications. Accordingly, those who have certified labor certification applications or who will receive the certification of labor certification should file the I-485 applications as early as possible in July 2007. Remember the following prediction of the DOS!!!
• EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY DURING THE COMING MONTHS: All Employment Preference categories except for Third “Other Workers” have been made “Current” for July. This has been done in an effort to generate increased demand by Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) for adjustment of status cases, and to maximize number use under the annual numerical limit. However, all readers should be alert to the possibility that not all Employment preferences will remain Current for the remainder of the fiscal year. Should the rate of demand for numbers be very heavy in the coming months, it could become necessary to retrogress some cut-off dates for September, most likely for China-mainland born and India, but also possibly for Mexico and Philippines. Severe cut-off date retrogressions are likely to occur early in FY-2008.
  

06/13/2007: July Visa Bulletin

• All EB2 and EB3 Current

06/12/2007: How Successful Was Bush in Today's Lunch with GOP Leaders in the Hill?

• Senator Sessions reportedly said "Bush Should Back-Off." Additionally, the up-beat statement of the President on the plane to the U.S. from the trip in Europe yesterday and today's speech for the press after the lunch very much speak for itself that he has failed to twist arms of his party leaders to support and move ahead with the dormant compromise CIR bill in the Senate. Report also indicates that the Senate Majority Leader is not ready to change his mind unless Bush assures support from the Respublican Senators and Madam Pelosi, the House Speaker, maintains a position that unless the Senate passes the bill, she would not pick up CIR in the House. The news on Bush's plan to visit the Capitol building today raised hopes high in the CIR support communities and today's news should be certainly a disappointment. Read on.

06/11/2007: Our Website Passed 13 Million Visits Today Thanks to All of You

• People must have noticed that as of today, we recorded 13 million visits by the loyal visitors who are mostly foreign professionals, business people, employers, news media, and stakeholder government agencies. We had approximately one million visits in about less than four months. We want to thank all of you for making this site as the primary sources of information for the immigration law issues in the United Sates.

06/10/2007: What Were the Failures That Led to Collapse of CIR 2007?

• As the key players of the CIR negotiation including the team of two-party leaders and the White House attempt to bring back the CIR bill on the Senate floor, we will have to look back the inherent failures in the compromise bill that eventually have killed the CIR process last week. Without defining the causes of the failure, they will not be able to go anywhere when they return to resume the CIR process in the Senate. Clarification of causes of problems should be a starting point for a diagnosis for correction of the failures.
• We submit that the compromise CIR had two inherent failures, anong others: One was the basic concept that the system would legalize the 12 million illegal aliens and as a solution to control the immigration in the future, the system should reinforce the borders against the inflow of illegal aliens (allegedly half a million a year) and at the same time reform the legal immigration system to control the immigration. Second failure was the misguided concept of "compromise" producing a "mosaic" of completely unworkable and incompatible far right and far left political agenda rather than finding a solution that moved to the middle of the spectrum. The first failure has produced a sense of injustice in the legal alien community that the people who had abided by the laws were punished by the compromise bill and those who broke the law were rewarded for their acts. The legal immigrant community felt that such compromise would encourage rather than discourage illegal immigration for the future. This sense of injustice was brought about particularly by the concept of "elimination of chain immigration" and " point system or merit system" as the two pillars for control of future immigration. The negotiators had wrongfully focused on devices to punish and control legal immigrants rather than focusing on resolving the current illegal immigrants and the devices to prevent such flows of illegal immigrants in the future. That was the most critical failure in the compromise bill. As for the second failure, it was funny to review the bill as it was a simple accomodation of the far-right political agenda and the far-left political agenda side-by-side rather than a solution to truly compromise the differences and produce workable solutions that involved some give-and-take, which was the basic political skill of negotiation and compromise. This phase of failures further deteriorated during the process of debates and amendments last week. It was deplorable that the far-left Senators assaulted the compromise bill from a wrong direction and not in a direction to rectify the inherent flaws in the compromise bill. Accordingly, these Senators behaviors made the bill more "unworkable" rather than "workable."
• One wonders why this happened. The Senate could have just picked up the bill which they passed last year and try to amend it through the debates and negotiations. Or, the Senate could have just picked up the bi-partisan bill of STRIVE in the House and tried to amend it by the art of negotiation and compromise. As the New York Times editorial appropriately chastisized, the leaders involved in the compromise and Senate majority and minority leaders and the White House totally failed. There was a vacuum in the nation's leadership. The other serious vacuum was evidenced by introduction of ridiculous concept of point system when the negotiators's job was to produce compromises based on programs which had already been identified by the last year's CIR bill and the bi-partisan House bill.
• Sadly, there is a sense of impotence in the country at this time as to how the Senate would be able to rectify the problems at this point of time. The Senate may have two options. Option one will be to return to the amendment process for the existing compromise bill. Option two will be to replace the compromise bill by either the last year's CIR 2006 or the STRIVE bill in the House. All of the foregoing three options are not that easy to achieve at this point of time and requires a courage and strong leadership in the nation. This is the time when the nation needs a true leadership.

06/09/2007: What's Happening with Phase III Bi-Specialization Implementation?

• On April 2, 2007, the USCIS more or less launched the Phase III program for I-129 and I-539 proccedings in a limited fashion. There is no information availabe about the schedule of launch of Phase III program for I-140 and I-485. Unconfirmed sources indicate that the USCIS may revisit this program as it may not square well with the upcoming electronic filing program. As people know it, the electronic filing may adopt so-called "accounting" system based on the development of databases for (1) each employer (2) each alien (3) each legal representative, which will automaically translate into the entire filings by the same employer, same alien, and same legal represenatative. Accordingly, as the USCIS disclosed earlier, the USCIS has been developing these forms and once the electronic filing system is launched, each of these three parties will be required to file such forms and updated from time to time. The basic information and date in these forms will then provide information for any future filings, no matter what type of petitions or applications. We wonder whether the concept will be similar to the current PERM labor certification application filing system.
• There is no information available about the detailed schedule of completion of the foregoing reengineering job. However, it would help to a great extent, should the agency release some information about the progress of the reengineering program so that the stakeholders can preprare themselves for the forthcoming changes.

06/09/2007: USCIS Corrects Error of National Customer Service Center Telephone Number in Notices

• The USCIS reports that between March 23 and June 5, 2007, USCIS mailed notices listing the wrong phone number for the NCSC. This error has since been corrected and all notices sent after June 5 contain the correct telephone number. USCIS is in the process of sending letters to affected customers informing them of the correct telephone number. Customers who received a notice from USCIS between March 23 and June 5 are asked to disregard the NCSC number listed in the notice and direct all customer service inquiries to 800-375-5283.

06/09/2007: Potential Re-Markup of CIR 2007

• Report indicates that the CIR 2007 was pulled from the floor because of failure to pass the motion to invoke cloture led by certain acts involving four Republican Senators who had changed votes on certain amendments and it led to failure in cloture votes. President Bush is reportedly coming forward to get the bill back to the floor. For the purpose, he is scheduled to meet with Republican Senators in the Senate next Tuesday, June 12, 2007, to add pressure on the Republican Senators, particularly those who revolted. On the Senate front, apparently Senator Kennedy is working hard to bring the bill back to the floor and add pressure on the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
• The New York Times is very critical about the leadership failure that led to the failure of CIR this week. Read on.
• However, no one knows exactly when the bill will be returned to the floor. There are a number of admendments which passed in the Senate which are extremely troublesome. The AILA is demanding the Senate to pass a "workable" bill " and "as soon as possible." Please stay tuned to this web site.

06/09/2007: DOL Opens E-Mail Case Status Check System for Pending H-2B Temporary Labor Certification Applications

• The DOL has just released the H-2B application e-mail case status check systems as follows:
  • Chicago National Processing Center: TLC.Chicao@dol.gov
  • Atlanta National Processing Center: TLC.Atlanta@dol.gov
• For the instructions for the e-mail inquiries, please click here.

06/08/2007: Immigration Statistics As Testified by the Director of Office of Immigration Statistics, DHS on 06/06/2007 Before the House Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee

• OIS estimates that there were approximately 10.5 million unlawful residents in the United States as of January 1, 2005, and project that there may be as many as 12 million here as of now. About 57 percent of the unlawful residents are from Mexico, and nearly half of the 12 million residents live in California, Texas, or Florida. The average annual net growth in the number of unlawful residents has been 500,000 a year since 1990. DHS has not estimated other characteristics of this difficult to measure population. Turning to legal immigration, the DHS has granted lawful permanent resident (LPR) status to an average of 1.1 million persons during the past three years. More than 4 out of 10 of these immigrants are immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are admitted without limitation. The next leading categories are family-sponsored preference immigrants (19 percent), employment-based preference immigrants (17 percent), and refugees or asylees (13 percent). About 1 of 4 immigrants derives their status through a spouse or parent. We estimate that there were approximately 11.6 million lawful permanent residents in the United States as of October 2004 and that 8.0 million were eligible to naturalize. Approximately 60 percent of legal immigrants admitted during the 1970’s and 1980’s had naturalized as of 2005 . More recent immigrants are naturalizing sooner than earlier immigrants, though it is not known whether this will result in lifetime naturalization rates higher than 60 percent. About 33 percent of immigrants admitted before 1986 had naturalized after 10 years, while between 45 and 50 percent of immigrants admitted from 1992-95 had naturalized after 10 years of residence.

06/08/2007: Senate CIR Dead "For Now"

• There was a completedly unexpected event developed on the floor of the Senate yesterday, practically killing this bill. As the readers know, the Senate floor was flooded with the amendments after amendments, particularly by the restrictionist legislators. Their strategy appeared to be to filibuster the CIR via the endless debates and amendments after amendments with the resultant delays. The Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy, attempted to place a cap on this and pushed forward a motion to invoke cloture to close the debates, amendments, and vote the final bill, but the motion failed not once but twice. The motion was put to the vote in the morning, which was rejected. The motion was put to the vote again late in the evening but rejected again on the floor.
• The consequences? The Senate Majority Leader pulled off the CIR from the floor. It means that the Senate will no longer deal with the CIR unless the two parties bring it back through a successful negotiation. The prediction indicates that the party leaders will continue to negotiate but even if the negotiation is successful, the CIR will not come back to the Senate not for days but for weeks or months. WHAT A TURN OF THE EVENT!
• What does it mean? The CIR 2007 is practically dead! Firstly, people know well by now that because of the 2008 election politics, unless the bill is passed before the Summer recess (August) of the Congress, the CIR has been predicted "unrealistic." There is another reason why this bill is practically dead. The House took a position that it will take up the CIR only when the Senate passes the bill and if the Senate fails to pass the bill, the House leaders did not intend to pick up the CIR on its own. Conclusion of the Senate CIR action was important from this perspective. It is practically gone, at least "for now."
• The negotiators of the compromise bill de facto have torn apart the nation and the immigrant community with the hybrid and masaic picture which was ugly and which everyone hated, no matter whether pro-immigrationists or anti-immigrationists. No wonder why people hate and love politics!
• Let the nation move on from insanity to sanity.

06/08/2007: Document Requirement and Detailed Instruction by USCBP(Port-Of-Entry Inspectors) on U.S. Citizen Travel in Western Hemisphere Without Passport During the Summer

• The U.S. Departments of State and Homeland Security announced today that U.S. citizens traveling to Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Bermuda who have applied for but not yet received passports can nevertheless temporarily enter and depart from the United States by air with a government issued photo identification and Department of State official proof of application for a passport through September 30, 2007. The federal government is making this accommodation for air travel due to longer than expected processing times for passport applications in the face of record-breaking demand.
• Adults who have applied for but not yet received a passport should present government-issued photo identification and an official proof of application from the U.S. Department of State. Children under the age of 16 traveling with their parents or legal guardian will be permitted to travel with the child’s proof of application. Travelers who have not applied for a passport should not expect to be accommodated. U.S. citizens with pending passport applications can obtain proof of application at: http://travel.state.gov.

06/08/2007: Western Hemisphere Travel U.S. Passport Requirement Rule To Be Temporaroly Suspended

• Report indicates that State Department will announce today that this rule requiring U.S. citizens to carry a passport to travel over the border countries and caribbean islands will be temporarily suspended to ease the summer travel of the citizens. This susenpension applies to the U.S. travelers who have a proof that their passport applications are "pending." Otherwise, they will still not be able to travel without the U.S. passport.

06/07/2007: AILA Annual National Conference 06/13/07-06/16/07 and Inaccessibility of Most of Attorneys Next Week

• Most of the immigration attorneys are members of the AILA and will be heading for the conference next week. This reporter is also scheduled to attend the conference and will not be available for the whole week. This reporter will keep monitoring and reporting important news but will not be accessible during the period. Those clients who need this reporter's personal attention should send us an e-mail (ohlaw@immigration-law.com) as soon as possible.

06/07/2007: CIR Legislation Timeline and Fear of Potential Abuse of the Circumstances

• The CIR has a long road ahead, no matter whether the Senate will pass it this weekend or not. We say a "long road" for the three reasons, among others. Firstly, the Senate is just one chamber of the Congress in this legislative process and we have another process ahead by the House, which has yet to initiate the process. The disagreements between the Senate and the House will be particularly noticeable in the current CIR process. As we reported earlier the two most important leaders of the House in the immigration matter, Madam Speaker of the House and Madam Chair of the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee, happen to represent the State of California who hear earful of opposition to the Senate version of the CIR. Reports keep coming out that the Silicon Valley is in full of anger over the ongoing Senate's CIR process. For the Senate, California takes only one seat out of total 100 seats but 53 seats out of total 435 seats in the House, in excess of 12%. The heat reached to certain level as for the Governor to come forward pleading the Senate to make changes. Secondly, even if the House takes up the CIR of its own, it is almost 100% certain that the bills should go to the Senate and the House conference. Thirdly, even if the Senate and the House iron out the final bill through the conference process, and for that matter, even if it is followed by the President's quick signature, there will be a long road before this law will be implemented, particularly Title IV and Tile VI which inolve the illegal alien community, because there is a "trigger" provision for these two Titles in both the Senate bill and the House bill (STRIVE). Additionally, for any new legislation to be implemented, the involved agencies must go through the rule-making process in most cases which also take time. There is indeed a long road ahead.
• Currently people are so obseesed with the Senate amendment process as to take the Senate bill as a future law. There are plenty of sharks out there trying to take advantage of the vulnerability of the immigrants. The USCIS was thus forced to release a warning to the immigrants to watch against the frauds. The danger is exacerbated by the fact that people, including the Senators, do not even know the details of entire text of the ongoing amendments and even very high-level legal professionals, legislators, and agencies will have to take time to sip through the myriads of impactsand implications which are buried in the specific provisions. Accordingly, people should keep patience before jumping into any conclusions and, worse yet, any actions!

06/07/2007: See Hotch-Potch Amendment Activities for CIR 1348 as of End of 06/06/2007

• Temporary guest worker program and legalization of illegal aliens have survived the challenges from the restrictist Republicans, lyaing path for the way to the final passage before the end of the week.

06/07/2007: BECs to Switch from AJB to AJE for Backlog Cases Recruitment Activities Effective 06/01/2007

• Believe it or not, backlog labor certification cases will be completely eliminated in less than four months. DOL has announced that in anticipation of America's Job Bank (AJB) ceasing operations as a recruitment tool, the Backlog Elimination Centers (BECs) will be switching to America's Job Exchange (AJE) as an alternative site for posting recruitment advertisements for backlogged Foreign Labor Certification recruitment activity. AJE is one of the alternatives authorized by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA). The BECs have coordinated with AJE staff and we believe this transition will cause little if any disruption. According to the description provided by AJB, "AJE will offer the same national labor exchange services that AJB provided … [using] the same screens and functions as AJB ensuring a seamless transition between sites." Because AJB is going to stop operations by June 30, 2007, in order to ensure full recruitment periods, the BECs will switch to AJE as of June 1, 2007. Therefore, employers and job seekers will be able to find the job postings on AJE starting on June 1st. Advertisements posted on AJB prior to June 1st will continue on AJB through their full recruitment periods on AJB. AJE can be found at: http://www.americasjobexchange.com/
  

06/07/2007: CIR Point System: Losers and Winners

• Find out who are the losers and who are the winners in the workforce.

06/06/2007: Senate CIR Action Yesterday and Today

• As we reported earlier the Senate passed one amendment and rejected one amendment yesterday. For today's schedule, the Senate floor reached a unanimous-consent agreement providing for further consideration of the bill at 9:30 a.m., on Wednesday, June 6, 2007, that there be 2 hours of debate equally divided and controlled between Senators Kennedy and Cornyn, or their designees; with the time to run concurrently on Cornyn Modified Amendment No. 1184 (to Amendment No. 1150) (listed above), and a Kennedy amendment relating to the same subject; and that there be no amendments in order to either amendments prior to the vote, that upon the use or yielding back of time, Senate vote on or in relation to Kennedy amendment, to be followed by a vote on or in relation to Cornyn Amendment No. 1184 (to Amendment No. 1150), with 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the second vote. For the details, click here.

06/06/2007: House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee Held Two CIR Hearings Today

10:00 a.m. "CIR: Business Community Perspectives"

Laszlo Bock, Vice President, People Operations Google Inc.
John Gay, Senior Vice President for Government Affairs & Public Policy National Restaurant Association
William Hawkins, Senior Fellow U.S. Business and Industry Council
Jerry Mixon, Partner Mixon Family Farms

2:00 p.m. "CIR: Government Perspectives on Immigration Statistics.

Ellen Wasem Ph.D., Specialist in Immigration Policy Congressional Research Service
Ron Bird Ph.D., Chief Economist and Director of the Office of Economic Policy and Analysis U.S. Department of Labor
Michael Hoefer , Director of the Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Charles Oppenheim , Chief, Visa Control and Reporting Division U.S. Department of State

06/06/2007: USCIS Receipting Frontlog and Hardship on Aliens

• As reported by the USCIS, the Service Centers are currently experiencing the receipting frontlogs. In some cases, there are frontlog of 45 days or longer. It is understandable that the Service Centers have to face the receipting frontlogs as affected by the FY 2008 H-1B cap cases filing.
• The Receipt Notice serves more than an evidence of payment of filing fees. For instance, the driver license renewal requires the Receipt Notice for pending extension of nonimmigrant status. The Receipt Notice also serves the proof of legal status by filing of petitions timely. For the employers, I-9 compliance requires a proof of filing and ovenight delivery tracking is insuffient when the employers are audited. In June 2007, the immigrant visa numbers become current for many employment-based immigrants and they are required to file "lawful stay" evidence for filing of I-485 applications. Receipt Notice serves the purpose of proof of pending extension petitions or applications establishing their legal stay pending the adjudication of the petitions and applications. These nonimmigrants also need to travel within the country and can face a problem of legal status proof because of their expired I-94.
• We understand that USCIS has been doing everything possible to remove the current receipting frontlog, but it may still take time. We urge the USCIS adopts an emergency policy to allow a copy of the filing checks which record the USCIS check cancel stamps and file number to serve the purpose in lieu of the actual Receipt Notice to relieve the involved aliens from the hardship.

06/05/2007: USCIS Monthly Newsletter of June 2007

06/05/2007: One Down #1189 and One Up #1231

• As people watched on C-Span live, today the Senate passed Durbin's Amendment #1231 to require the U.S. worker market test even for the shortage occupations and rejected the Allard's Amendment. Senate Majority Leader file closture motion but amendments will be continuously taken on the floor. It thus appears that the Senate will move ahead with the final vote as scheduled either on Thursday or Friday. The future of this Senate bill is unclear as the House Speaker, Madame Pelosi and the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee Chair, Madame Lofgren have expressed strong opposition to the legal immigration reform in the Senate bill.
• We will summarize the final bill once the Senate completes the process. Please stay tuned.

06/05/2007: Reminder of 06/16/2007 Effective Date of Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule

• This rule will take effect in about ten days from now. Since everyone is so obsessed with the CIR news, people may miss this critical date that will give a lot of stress over to the employers, petitioners, aliens, legal representatives, because of a short notice which the USCIS can send out with a very limited time to respond. Beware of this approaching nightmare!

06/05/2007: Today's Senate Vote Schedule

• A unanimous-consent agreement was reached yesterday providing that Senate continue consideration of the bill at approximately 11 a.m., on Tuesday, June 5, 2007, that the time until 11:50 a.m., be for debate with respect to Allard Amendment No. 1189 and Durbin Amendment No. 1231, with the time to run concurrently on both amendments and divided as follows: 10 minutes each, the Majority and Republican Managers, or their designees, and Senators Allard and Durbin; that no amendments be in order to either amendment prior to the vote; that the amendments be voted in the order listed here and that there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the second vote, and that the second vote be ten minutes in duration.
• For details of the Allard Amendment and Durbin Amendment, please go back to our report on Senate's Floor Action yesterday.

06/05/2007: I-140 Petitions Ineligible for Premium Processing

• Under the regulation, the USCIS is authorized to suspend certain types of I-140 petitions for the premium processing on its website notice. As of now, the following I-140 petitions are not eligible for the premium processing:
  • 1. A second filing of a Form I-140 petition while an initial Form I-140 remains pending;
  • 2. Labor Certification substitution requests; and
  • 3. Duplicate Labor Certification requests (i.e., cases filed without an original labor certification from the Department of labor).
• It appears that the third category includes any I-140 petitions filed without the original labor certification regardless of whether they should obtain a duplicate labor certification from the DOL. It also appears that they refuse to process on the premium processing basis the I-140 petitions to request the priority date transfer unless the original labor certification application is filed with the request.

06/05/2007: State Prevailing Wage Determination Problem and DOL Policy

• The State SWAs determine the prevailing wage for the foreign labor certification application program, particularly PERM application. They use primarily SOC/OES wage data. The data is semi-annually updated by the new surveys. The current OES wage data on the DOL website is valid only until June 2007 and it is expected to be updated in July 2007. This poses a predicament to the state agencies that should issue prevailing wage determination whis is valid not less than 90 days or more than 180 days. Since the 90-day or 190-day cross the line of database between the two semi-annual surveys and the new survey will not be available until July 2007, some of the state agencies have been issuing the prevailing wage determination which will expire by June 30, 2007, much less than the required 90 days. Supposedly, such wage determination that expires less than 90 days should be no good for PERM filing. However, the DOL is aware of this problem and notfied the AILA that the employers should contact the state agencies to correct the problems, but even if it is not corrected, the DOL will not deny the PERM applications solely based on the prevailing wage determination that will expire on June 30, 2007 and less than 90 days. What a relief. Thank you, the Office of Foregin Labor Certification!

06/05/2007: State Department Proposes "Student Interns" J-1 Exchange Program

• The State Department published this proposed rule with a comment period ending on 08/06/2007. The proposed rule will create a new subcategory of the College and University Student category--``Student Interns''. Participation in this new sub-category is open to foreign students enrolled and pursuing full-time studies at a post-secondary educational institution outside the United States. Student interns may participate in a student internship program for up to 12 months at each degree level.
  

06/05/2007: Senate Floor Action on CIR 06/04/2007

06/05/2007: White House Fact Sheet on Termination of Chain Immigrations for Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Implication for Racial/Ethnic Rebalance of Population

• This subject is politically so sensitive and volatile that the law makers as well as politicians maintain a low key on the intended or unintended consequences of such reform. However, the truth of matter is that the concept is intended to restrict and control the immigration from the traditional main sources of immigration. It is not too difficult to understand the consequences of this reform in terms of race and ethnic rebalance. First analysis should focus on the history of immigration in this country. The first immigrants to the U.S. came mostly from the European countries as part of exodus from their native countries or searching for the new lives. The Ellis Island is the symbol of this immigration history. These sources of immigration were then divided into two groups in the early 20th century because of the cold war between the communist countries (Eastern Europe and Soviet Unions) and Western allies (Western Europe and the USA). This practically blocked flow of immigrants from the former Soviet Unions and Eastern Europe until they collapsed not too long ago. Besides the flow of immigration from the Western Europe also practically ceased quite along time back in the history because of the changes in the political structures as well as the economic stability in those countries. Consequently the origin of the main sources of the immigration to the U.S. turned out to be so-called "Third World," particularly Asian countries. They are the ones who still have so-called "extended family" including aged parents, brothers, sisters. The first group U.S. citizens no longer have such extended family in their countries of origin because their immigration practically stopped quite long time back.
• In the mid-1980s, the media and politicans started bringing up and reporting the status and forecast of the racial/ethnic composition of the country's population and anticipated break of population balance between the so-called "Whites" and "Non-Whites," in that by 2010 or soemthing, the non-while population will exceed 50% of the total population. This was reported big in the U.S. World News" magazine. This created "Xenophoebia" in the country. Soon there was introduction of the immigration reform bill, the predessor of the current comprehensive immigration bill. Believe or not the bill indeed resembled the current "compromise" CIR in concept that the country should grant the amnesty to the illegal aliens and as a trade-off to restrict the future legal immigration by reshaping the family immigration annual quota and types as well as employment-based immigration. Underlying legal immigration reform was either intended or unintended purpose of rebalancing the future population composition between the so-called whites and non-whites. There was a huge political storm at the time and eventually the majority party at the time totally abandoned the legal immigration part from the final immigration reform bill and passed the amnesty part only. The current "compromise" bill highlighting so-called "chain of immigration" and English requirement and other so-called point sytem remind and haunt the nightmare in the immigration history in this country. No one will deny that the compromise immigration bill not only will restrict the total immigration in the long run but also result in rebalance in the racial and ethnic composition of future population of this country. We urge the Congress and the people to pierce the veil of the compromised immigration reform bill to see the truth and intent of this bill, which is wrong. We strongly supprt the rest of the bill, but we cannot support the "legal immigration reform" in this bill because of the cloud of suspicision for this part of reform. The truth should be told to the public and let the public decide the future direction of immigration. One wonders why the compromise was done in the backroom rather than in the open. Let the reader be judge of this bill from the Fact Sheet on Chain Immistration released by the White House.

06/04/2007: Timeline for Senate CIR Floor Action

• Sources indicate that Senate Majority leader Harry Reid is determined to end the debate of CIR by Thursday, June 7, and to schedule a roll call for thevotes on the Senate's final CIR bill before the end of this week. Considering the number of amendments which have been and will continuously be introduced in the next couple of days as well as the voting pattern, the final product of the Senate CIR may turn out to be a hatch-patch legislation. The White House initially focused on selling the illegal immigration reform to push for the compromise CIR, but it appears it has switched the gear drastically and to direct its focus on reform of legal immigration by heavily promoting elimination of chain immigration and the point system. Without doubt, the audience of the switched gear is the conversative base of the Republicans who face challenges in their constituencies on the illegal immigration reform issues and growing friction and confrontation between the White House and these Republicans relating to these issues. Currently, the refocused push of CIR based on the termination of chain immigration and point system appears to be intended to minimize its stance on illegal immigration issues and instead, to throw a sweat bargain chip which the conservative and restrictive Republicans can hardly resist "for the obvious reasons." Hmm..............................................

06/03/2007: List of 33 Senators Up For Reelection in 2008 and Potential Impact on Their Votes in CIR 2007 Legislation

• Report indicates that the upcoming 2007 Senatorial election is growingly back of the minds of the Senators who are up for reelection in November 2008. Accordingly the readers may be interested in the list of the U.S. Senators who will be up for reelection in 2008 as they are the ones who will be most vulnerable in the reelection depending on how they vote for the compromise bill. Here is the list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...lections,_2008. There is a report that Senator Cornyn of Texas will eventually end up adding his name to the list of Senators who will oppose the CIR of 2007 at the end because of the loud voices against the CIR in his constituency. This is reflected in the record of his introduction of amendments. There are totally 108 amendments introduced in the Senate, out of which 26 amendments were introduced by the Senator Cornyn alone. Most of these amendments involve restrictive bills. It appears that Senator Cornyn is not alone when it comes to the nervousness which these reelection Senators must face. Without doubt, their voting activities will affect the outcome of the upcoming Senate floor votes in the coming weeks. For the news on mounting pressures against the CIR in their constituencies back home, please read New York Times report.

06/03/2007: Compromise Bill (CIR 2007), Section-by-Section Summary, and Amendments to Compromise Bill

• The Compromise bill was introduced as part of the motion to substitute of the text of S.1348. Accordingly, in order to understand the controversial Compromise Bill and various amendments introduced during the past weeks, the readers should read the following texts:
  • Original S.1348 Bill Text
  • Full Text of Compromise Bill to Amend the Original S. 1348 Bill
  • AILA's Section-by-Section Summary of the Compromise Bill
  • Amendments Introduced to Amend the Text of Compromise Bill
• Please stay tuned to this website for monitoring of the debates and actions on the Senate floor coming weeks.

06/02/2007: NSC Procedure of Transfer of Pending I-1485 From Current Approved Underlying I-140 Petition to New I-140 Petition

• This posting involves aliens who are waiting for the I-485 applications where the underlying I-140 petition was approved but due to retrogression, I-485 cannot be approved. Most of these cases are EB-3 cases. When the same alien obtains an EB-2 labor certification approval through the same employer or a different employer and the visa number is available for the EB-2 for him or her, he should be eligible for filing another I-485 application based on the visa number available EB-2 I-140 petition. This can be achieved either by concurrent I-140/I-485 filing or if the new EB-2 I-140 has already been approved, by filing of stand-alone I-485 application.
• However, in the foregoing situation, the Pearson Memo of 2000 allows the alien to transfer the pending I-485 application from the existing underlying approved I-140 petition to a new EB-2 I-140 petition such that the alien does not have to file another I-485 application to use the second I-140 petition. For this to happen, two conditions must be met: (1) The existing underlying I-140 petition (most likely EB-3) must have been approved before the I-485 transfer is requested. (2) Secondly, the visa number must be "current" for the new I-140 petition (most likely EB-2) before the I-485 transfer is requested. Inasmuch as the visa number is current, the pending I-485 application that suffer from the visa number retrogression can be transferred to the nex I-140 petition.
• According to the Nebraska Service Center, people should take the following procedure to request such transfer of pending I-485 application from one I-140 petition to another I-140 petition:
  • Request for Transfer of Pending I-485 Application to a Newly Filed I-140 Petition That Has Visa Number Current: In this situation, he/she is filing a new I-140 petition (probably EB-2 with visa number "current") with the agency to transfer the pending I-485 application and attach it to the new I-140 petition. The NSC states that if he/she files such new I-140 petition, he/she should use "large, bold print in the cover letter or with a separate, brightly colored cover page and notation 'Inter-file I-140 with Pending I-485' and include the Receipt/File Number of Pending I-485 Application, both on the Envelope and Cover Letter.
  • Request for Transfer of Pending I-485 Application to Already Approved New I-140 (most likely EB-2 category): NSC asks to print the attached over sheet on brightly colored paper, and submitting it with a cover letter providing the following Information:
    • Name of 485 applicant
    • Name of I-140 petitioner (employer)
    • I-485 Receipt Number
    • "A" Number of the 485 applicant
    • Prior I-140 petition (1) Receipt Number, (2) Filing Date, and (3) Approval Date
    • New I-140 to be inter-filed
    • Statement requesting new I-140 be inter-filed with the pending I-485 application.
• These new procedures may be particularly helpful to Indians whose EB-3 number is still heavily backlogged and who filed and obtained a second labor certification application of EB-2 and its EB-2 priority date became "current" in June 2007. Good luck.

06/01/2007: NSC's General Guidelines for EB-2 Educational Requirements and EB-3 Education Requirements [Retracted]

• [Post Script 06/07/2007: The AILA NSC Liaison Committee released a clarification that (1) the involved liaison issue is related only, repeat only to the EB-2 and Master's degree question and any statement in this posting on "Bachelor's degree equivalent" issues relating to the 3-year degree is not necessarily acceptable as the NSC appears to continuously require a U.S. bachelor's degree or single sources of foreign equivalent degree, not foreign equivalent education; (2) there is "no fixed rule" the NSC has adopted on these issues; and (3) NSC has not reversed its prior position on requiring single sources degrees for bachelor's degree equivalency.]
• According to the AILA-NSC Liaison minutes of 04/12/2007, the following standards generally applies in determining EB-2 requirement:
  • (1) U.S. master’s degree – as long as it is in the field required no additional documents would be required
    (2) 4 yr bachelor’s degree + 2 yr master’s degree (India) – with degrees in the same or related fields this will generally be considered the equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree with no additional documents required
    (3) 3 yr bachelor’s degree + 3 yr master’s degree (India) – with degrees in the same or related fields this will generally be equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree with no additional documents required
    (4) 3 yr bachelor’s degree + 1 yr postgraduate diploma + 2 yr master’s degree (India) with degrees in the same or similar field : generally be considered the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree plus one additional year of education so the beneficiary would also need to have 5 yrs progressive experience. If the postgraduate diploma is determined to be progressive postgraduate education that is a continuation of the 3 yr bachelor’s degree it is possible that this would be considered the equivalent to a U.S. Master’s degree and there would be no need to establish 5 yrs progressive experience.
    (5) 3 yr bachelor’s degree + 2 yr master’s degree (India) – Generally this would be the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree + 1 year and would require 5 yrs progressive experience to qualify under the 2nd preference category: However, foreign credential evaluation using the following additional evidence could make it to EB-2, Master's degree equivalent:
    • Examples of comparable U.S. master’s degree programs requiring only one year to complete (indicating that a total of 5 years of undergraduate and graduate level education is sufficient); or
    • Credential evaluations that provide a detailed comparison of credit hours completed by the beneficiary for the 3 year bachelor’s degree program with credit hours required by comparable U.S. bachelor’s degree programs.
      
  • (6) 3 yr bachelor’s degree + 2 yr master’s degree (India) + 5 yrs progressive, post-master’s degree experience – Generally the educational degrees would be determined to be the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor’s + 1 year and the beneficiary would meet the statutory requirement
    (7) 3 yr bachelor’s degree + 2 yr master’s degree + 1 yr postgraduate diploma (India) – Generally this would be the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree + 1 year and would require 5 yrs progressive experience to qualify under the 2nd preference category. If the postgraduate diploma is determined to be progressive postgraduate education that is a continuation of the 3 yr bachelor’s degree or the 2yr master’s degree it is possible that this would be considered the
    equivalent to a U.S. Master’s degree and there would be no need to establish 5 yrs progressive experience
  • (8) If a master’s degree is required and the beneficiary does not have a U.S. master’s degree in the specified field of study the petitioner should be prepared to submit sufficient documentation to establish that the education that the beneficiary possesses is the equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree in the required field.
  • [Matthew Oh Note: The positions of the NSC for the situations in (4), (5), (6), and (7) appear to have loosen up substantially and very flexible and accomodative. Very good news. We thank the NSC leaders for the new policy on these issues.]
• Education Requirement in Labor Certification Not Restricted to U.S. Bachelor or Foreign Equivalent Degree: Following will be acceptable for "Skilled Worker" catogory of EB-3:
  
  • (1) Will accept a combination of degrees or diplomas;
    (2). Will accept 3 or 4 yr degrees;
    (3). Will accept education evaluation prepared by a qualified credential
    evaluation service;
    (4) Will accept educational equivalency evaluation prepared by qualified
    evaluation service or in accordance with 8 CFR § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D);
    (5) Will accept a bachelor’s equivalent based on a combination of
    education as determined by a professional evaluation service;
    (6) One year of experience in the job offered will substitute for one year of
    education toward a bachelor’s degree;
    (7) Will accept single degree or any combination of degrees, diplomas or
    professional credentials determined to be equivalent by a qualified
    evaluation service.
  • Since there is no difference between the Professional EB-3 and the Skilled Worker EB-3 for the purpose of the immigrant visa numbers in the Visa Bulletin, sometimes it can be very important that the labor certification is drafted such a way that if the alien cannot meet the Professional EB-3, the alien has a backup of Skilled Worker EB-3 so that EB-3 I-140 petition is not denied.
  • [Matthew Oh Note: Again, the NSC has loosen up somewhat on this issue, accomodating a part of Grace Korean Methodist Church decision on this Skilled Worker issue, which the NSC one time applied very narrow reading of the langugae in the labor certfication application and denied I-140 petition unless the skilled worker option was met and requested by the petition. We want to reiterate our "thanks" to the NSC leaders for taking a reasonable interpretation of the regulations.]
    

06/01/2007: Why Compromise Bill is Disaster for Employment-Based Immigration?

• See AILA's good summary.
  

05/31/2007: USCIS Warns of Fraud Relating to CIR

• USCIS reminds the people that the ongoing CIR process in the Senate is not a law and it takes time for a legislative bill to pass the Senate and the House. Until the Congress passes the bill and the President signs the bill, there is no law. Apparently there are some crooks and bad people out there who attempt to take advantage of the situation for the fraud scheme. It appears that they take two actions to achive the wrongdoing. One is to scare people with the very restrictive "compromise" immigration proposal. This reporter has been receiving phone calls from the people who are scared because of some groups' reporting as though the current restrictive CIR will soon become a law. The second attempt is to entice people to seek their services or help against the allegedly upcoming "immigration hell" in this country. Some of them appeared to be shaken by the crooks' scary tactics.
• People are advised to calm down and watch the event unfold which will take at least two months or longer. The United States is a literally democratic country. Unlike most of other countries in the world, the decision making or political process is very complex and dynamic. Accordingly, the final product of the political process is unpredictable because a few in the apparent power core do not necessarity control the political process. There lies a distinctive difference between the so-called "American democracy" and the other "democracies" in most of other nations. In such time as the current crisis, immigrants should keep their faith in American democracy and let the political process work. "Do not be scared" and "do not let scam artists or other crooks take advantage of the current crisis." Whatever the end result of the Senate CIR process will be, this reporter assures the readers that it will be not as scary or bad as the rumors picture.
• We will summarize the details of the bill and the progress with some analysis and comment during this weekend to give the readers the correct information and some perspectives. Please stay tuned.

05/31/2007: Simple Solutions to the Broken Immigration Systems

• The task of the comprehensive immigration reform should start from definition of "broken" immigration system. Once the broken system is clearly defined and identified, the mission of the Congress will be to look for both the solution for the existing problems, which is sort of "curative" devices, and the solution to prevent such broken system in the future, which is sort of "preventive" devices. In order to determine the curative solutions as well as preventive solutions, the Congress should look into the issues in two broad areas: One is "legal immigration" and the other is "illegal immigration." In the legal immigration, the system is considered broken as the immigration system has been suffering from a serious illness, named backlogs in both family and employment immigration. Obviously curative or relief solution will be to remove the current backlogs to save the system from the serious illness regardless of the causes of the illness, since the mission of finding causes for such illness should remain the task to work out a "preventive" devices. In the illegal immigration system, the system is considered broken as the system has been suffering from illness, named 12 million undocumented aliens. Again, here the task of the Congress should be divided into two: One is to resolve the current illegal immigrants, which is a "curative" task. The other task is to look into the causes of the illegal immigration and work out the devices to "prevent" such illegal immigration, which is a "preventive" task. Any proposal for the comprehensive immigration reform may be considered unworkable and crippled if the answers to these curative and preventive tasks are not clearly presented.
• Let's look at the current so-called "compromise" bill from these angles to find a score for their jobs.
  • Legal Immigration: (1) Curative Solutions: The compromise bill literally failed to carry out this mission of finding solution for the current backlogs and its removals. In both family and employment immigration areas, the bill does not suggest any immediate relief for current backlogs and expected mounting of further backlogs in the next several years. (2) Preventive Solutions: The first task should be to analyze the causes for the current backlogs to devise a preventive solution. In family immigration, the backlog was not caused by the chains of immigration but system's failure to meet the changing needs. The demographic statistics show native-born population gradually declining or barely sustaining the level of population. No one can deny that the country needs continuing inflow of immigrants to sustain balance of population. Along with the growth of population will come the growth of economy, culture, and enrichment of the system. The country has failed to meet the challenge. There lies the causes of the current backlogs. Such failure to meet the challenge is more obvious in the employment-based immigration. Accordingly, the CIR of 2006 rightfully proposed a preventive solution by increasing the annual quota and removing current procedural hurdles to the immigration process and readjusting the allocation of immigration quota per different types of preferences. What do we find in the compromise bill for preventive device? Point system? Eveyone knows by now that it is totally unworkable solution when it comes to the preventive solutions. The country needs a balanced infllow of foreign workers both in the highly skilled and less skilled or unskilled. The point system will prevent the highly skilled foreign workers from immigrating to this country because of the unworkable points. When the country will continuously require inflow of foreign brains, this proposal is proposing to control and restrict such foreign workers. It is indeed a joke. There will be many and many Einsteins or nobelites who will fail to meet the points because of their ages, languages, etc, etc. What a joke!
  • Illegal Immigration: (1) Curative Solutions: The compromise bill is more or less moving towards the right direction after finding that they will not be able to deport 12 million people out of the country, not to mention its devastating impact on the nation's economy, particulary certain industries. Additionally, DREAM Act and AgJOBs bills appear to move along without too much hurdle. (2) Preventive Solutions: Obviously the causes of the broken system in the illegal immigration issues are rooted in the system's total failure in the immigration enforcement system and broken borders. The compromise bill proposes a number of options including reinforcement of employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, reinforcement of the border security, systemization of temporary guest workders needed in certain industries, etc. etc.
• The foregoing analysis reflects that the most serious flaws with the compromise bill involve the legal immigration issues rather than illegal immigration issues. Accordingly, for the Congress to produce a workable comprehensive immigration reform legislation, they should take a quick action next week to correct the problem. The answer appears to be very simple: To replace the proposal of overhaul of immigration through point systems by the legal immigration proposals under the STRIVE Act of 2007 which is pending in the House. That should be the "real" compromise through the amendment process next week. Such compromise will not only correct the serious flaws which are inherent in the current compromise bill, but also turn out to be a workable option in that such bill has a better chance to make it in the House. Senators, dump that ridiculous POINT SYSTEM!!!

05/31/2007: USCIS No-Premium Processing Services List Update for I-140

• Currently USCIS is not entertaining premium processing services for the following three types of I-140 cases:
  • 1. A second filing of a I-140 petition while an initial I-140 remains pending. For instance, if EB-2 I-140 petition has been filed and pending and the employer wants to file EB-3 petition using the same underlying certified labor certification application for whatever reasons, no premium processing will be available for the second I-140 petition.
  • 2. Labor Certification substitution requests.
  • 3. Duplicate Labor Certification requests (i.e., cases filed without an original labor certification from the Department of labor).
• USCIS blocked out these cases from the list of I-140 PPS because of their special processing requirements, including locating and transferring other files or documents internally and requesting initial evidence from an outside agency, that make it difficult for USCIS to guarantee that it will process the case within a 15 calendar day period. The substitution I-140 was available for PPS until May 17, 2007 inasmuch as the original labor certification application was available. But the USCIS totally suspended all the substitution I-140 premium processing effective 05/18/2007. It appears that there are some people who misunderstood the USCIS announcement of termination of I-140 petitions for labor substitution. The termination is limited to the "substitution" I-140 and the premium processing services of I-140 is still available for all types of cases other than those which are listed above. There is one area of problems relating to the priority date transfer I-140 initial filing or amendment petition. Texas Service Center tends not to process such priority date transfer cases for premium processing services on the ground that they consider that such type of cases is similar to the substitution I-140 petitions. There are a number of reports that the TSC even denies the transfer of priority dates. These cases remain the critical issues which the AILA will have to resolve sooner or later. Obviously, when the petitioner file a second I-140 petition to amend the approved I-140 to transfer the priority date with the original approved labor certification application, there is absolutely no reason why such cases should not be processed under the current premium processing rule. This is contrasted to a situation where the petitioner requests the priority transfer with a "copy" of certified labor certification application. In the latter situation, the premium processing should not be available under the foregoing reason #3.

05/31/2007: USCIS Q&A for Hondurans and Nicaraguans TPS Extensions

• Hondurans
• Nicaraguans

05/31/2007: USCIS Announcement of Outage of Part of Its Website This Weekend

• On Friday June 1, 2007, at 9 PM EDT, certain USCIS web-based systems will be taken out of service for maintenance upgrades. They should be restored by the morning of Monday June 3, 2007. These systems include:
  • Case Status Online (and processing times)
    Field Office Locator and Information
    Civil Surgeon Locator; and
    Change of Address Online
• Those who need access to these sites for urgent work should take care of their job before 9:00 p.m. EST today.
  

05/30/2007: Official USCIS Fee Increase Rule Published Today

05/29/2007: Senators Earful of Pro or Con CIR Voices Before They Return to the Hill on 06/04/2007

• Both in and outside of Beltways, pro or con CIR groups are extremely busy to promote their agenda through all the media available. The President was no exception in releasing his statement in support of the compromise CIR. They all want to take advantage of the opportunity to reach the Senators more individual basis during the Memorial Day break. It is, however, time to sort out the real culprit of the current problem and confusion in the comprehensive immigration reform legislation process this year. Soon, people will find it out.

05/29/2007: USCIS Memorandum to Tighten EAD and Advance Parole Relating to Security or Other Eggregious Cases

• This memorandum changes its prior policy on handling of these types of cases. Read on.

05/29/2007: Open Letter to the Immigrants and Their Supporters Relating to CIR

• As everyone knows by now, the CIR involves diverse immigrant groups and the ongoing compromise process involves the process of negotiation between the far right political forces and the far left political forces. In this process, the immigrants can initiate certain acts that can trigger a serious backfire from the opposing forces. The so-called compromise agreements of the two party leaders and the White House and the ongoing amendment process reflect that there is a strong resentment to the employment-based immigrants, especially by the far left forces. Accordingly, the employment-based immigration reform is currently under attack by both left and right forces in that the proposed overhaul of the legal immigration system by the far right political forces also turned out to be to restrict foreign immigration workers in the long run. In this regard, the illegal immigrants are attacked by only one force, to wit, the far right political forces, but the legal immigrants, particularly employment-based immigrants are surrounded by three forces, to wit, the far left political forces backed by the labor unions, the illegal immigrant supporters, and more importantly, family-based immigrant supporters who believe in the family unity. Without doubt, no matter how the CIR is amended in the next one week or so, it appears that the employment-based immigrants may turn out to be the ultimate victims in this legislative process. Some good lessons to learn from this tragic event.

05/29/2007: Full Text of USCIS New Immigration Fee Final Rule (Advance Copy)

05/29/2007: USCIS FAQ of New Immigration Fees

05/29/2007: New Immigration Fee Schedules Effective 07/30/2007

05/29/2007: USCIS Fee Increase Final Rule Scheduled to be Published Tomorrow, 05/30/2007

• This rule was approved by the OMB on 05/24/2007 and the USCIS is scheduled to publish this rule in the federal register tomorrow, 05/30/2007. According to the USCIS announcement, the fee will take effect on 07/30/2007. What a relief!

05/29/2007: Honduras TPS Designation Extension Rule Released

05/29/2007: Nicaragua TPS Designation Extension Rule Released

05/27/2007: CIR Status

• The CIR, S. 1348, was supposed to be substituted by the compromise agreements. Indeed, the Senate Majority Leader introduced a motion on behalf of himsel and the two party leaders of Kennedy and Spector, but believe it or not, this motion has never been acted upon. Accordingly, the original CIR which was reintroduced version of the last year's CIR still stands and host of amendments have been introduced based on the agreed compromise. As of now, a total of 108 amendments have been introduced, including the motion to substitute, and only a handful of the amendments have been acted upon. They passed two amendments, one of which represented Senator Sanders amendment on H-1B visa.
• The number of pending amendments will give readers some ideas as to what the Senate floor is going to look like when Senate returns next week. Besides, a large number of new amendments are expected to be introduced next week. Weird, enough, though, all of these amendments have been introduced as amendments to the substitution amendment (compromise bill) which has yet to be adopted. All of these procedural things confuse the public . For the full text of the draft of substitute CIR for debates, please click here.

05/27/2007: Final Version of Sanders' Amendment of H-1B Supplemental Fee and American Student Scholarship Fund as Passed

• The controversial Sanders' amendment initially was passed in the Senate last week which imposes $3,500 (or $1,750) for a supplemental fee for the American Student Scholarship Fund. The supplemental fee is added to the current fees that include $1,500 (or $750) ACWIA fee, $500 fraud prevention fee, and $190 H-1B petition (which will in itself increase substantially when the fee increase regulation is implemented). Go figure! The text of the final amendment is as follows:
  • SEC. 713. SUPPLEMENTAL FEES.
    • Section 214(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:``(15)(A) In each instance where the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Secretary of State is required to impose a fee pursuant to paragraph (9) or (11), the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Secretary of State, as appropriate, shall impose a supplemental fee on the employer in addition to any other fee required by such paragraph or any other provision of law, in the amount determined under subparagraph (B).
    • ``(B) The amount of the supplemental fee shall be $3,500, except that the fee shall be 1/2 that amount for any employer with not more than 25 full-time equivalent employees who are employed in the United States (determined by including any affiliate or subsidiary of such employer).
    • ``(C) Fees collected under this paragraph shall be deposited in the Treasury in accordance with section 286(x).''
• Initially it was proposed to charge $10,000!!!
  

05/27/2007: Conflicting Media Polls of Current Senate CIR

• Report indicates that there are two conflicting polls reported on the CIR. One report shows that only 26% of the public opposed the current bill, while another poll reported that only 26% of the public supported the current bill. Hmm...... Read on.

05/26/2007: Unconfirmed Rumor of House Take-Up of House Version CIR Bill on June 4th

• An immigration website has reported that the House is scheduled to take up the House version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill on June 4th when the Congress returns to the Hill after the Memorial Day holidays. Acccording to the website, the House CIR legislation and the Senate CIR legislation will thus proceed in parallel beginning from June 4th and these two bills will then go to the Conference Committee. Until this report, it has been understood in the community that the Speaker Madam Pelosi intended to take up the House bill not until July 2007 and unless her two conditions are met. One condition is that the Senate first passes its version of CIR before the House will take up the CIR. Additionally, should the Senate fail to pass the CIR, reportedly, the House will not take up the CIR at all. The second condition is that President Bush assures the House a sufficient number of the Republican House members who will support the CIR. We will find out on June 4th.

05/26/2007: FY 2008 USCIS Proposed Appropriations, Fee Increases, and Issues

• According to the Congressional Research Services report, in the President’s FY2008 budget request, the agency requested $30 million in direct appropriations (from general revenue). The remaining $2,539 million of the appropriations requested would be funded by revenues from collected fees. The requested USCIS budget for FY2008 is approximately $2,569 million. This requested amount constitutes and increase of $583 million or 29% over the enacted appropriation amount from FY2007. The requested direct appropriation of $30 million would be designated for the Employer Eligibility Verification Program (EEV), while all other program and operations would be fee funded.
• Issues for Congress. The 110th Congress may face a number of issues relating to legal immigration and USCIS’ role in the process. These issues may include whether the Administration’s proposed fee increases for visa applicants should be implemented or whether there are alternatives to fee increases that could be considered, whether USCIS is effectively dealing with their adjudication backlog, and whether the proposed fee structure would provide sufficient funding to cover the elimination of the USCIS backlog.
• Proposed Fee Increase. On February 1, 2007, USCIS proposed a new fee schedule for immigration adjudications and benefits. These fee adjustments would constitute the first fee revision since October 26, 2005, and would increase application fees by a weighted average of 96% for each benefit. USCIS officials claim the fee increase is necessary to maintain proper service levels and to avoid the accumulation of backlogs. Congressional reactions to these proposed fees have been strong and divergent. Some opponents of the fees have called for congressional action to prevent the new fees from being implemented. Although generally not opposed to the increased revenue for USCIS, the fee increase opponents want USCIS to implement a sliding scale fee structure or request direct appropriations to offset the benefit costs for lower income families.109 Fee increase supporters contend that the proposed fee structure would help deter possible public charges from applying for immigration benefits. These fee proponents further contend that the immigration benefits these individuals receive are a “good deal” by world standards, even under the proposed fee structure.
• Adjudication Backlog. The fee increase has also raised issues and questions concerning the adjudications backlog that USCIS has worked towards reducing. USCIS Director Emilio T. Gonzalez has stated that the current backlog of applications for immigration benefits has been significantly reduced, and that the share of the backlog due to factors under the control of USCIS was approximately 65,000. Critics continue to be concerned, however, about the more than 1 million additional applications that have been pending for more than six months that USCIS does not count in its backlog figures, and that the seriousness of the USCIS backlog is masked by changes in the agency’s backlog definition. It has been the stated goal of President George W. Bush to reduce the application processing time for immigration to a six month standard.113 Some argue that in order for USCIS to be able to accomplish this goal, it needs a fee structure that more accurately reflects the cost of processing immigration benefit applications. USCIS claims that the proposed fees are more aligned with the agency’s adjudication costs. Some additionally believe that the fee increases would be necessary in order for USCIS to handle any potential future increases in applications. Since USCIS is fee funded, any passage of comprehensive immigration reform legislation that includes either earned legalization or a temporary worker program would likely result in a significant increase in the number of incoming applications.
• Status of Fee Increase Final Rule Implementation and Ongoing/Upcoming Challenges in the Congress and the Court: According to the unconfirmed sources, the USCIS was initially targeting at implementing the fee increase rule in June 2007. Another unconfirmed sources indicate that the final rule will be implemented with the effective date of two months post release of the rule in the federal register. The USCIS requested the OMB to review the final rule on April 17, 2007, and the community, based on the foregoing sources of information, had a fear that the USCIS might publish the rule soon. However, for unknown reasons, the OMB has been delaying the completion of its review. It is still predicted that the final rule may be released sooner or later and the immigrant community should be prepared for the release of the fule sooner or later. This rule is currently facing two present or future changes. One is the Congressional challenge. In February 2007, Congressmen Gutierrez and Shakowsky introduced a bill, H.R. 1379, which would prevent USCIS from increasing the citizenship application fees to levels above application processing costs. This bill is pending in the Congress. More seriously, the American Immigration Lawyers Association is seriously considering a lawsuit through its litigation arm, AILF, once this rule is published and implemented. Please stay tuned to this website for the development of this news.

05/25/2007: Amendments Introduced or Acted Yesterday for S. 1348 CIR

• Passed:
  • By 87 yeas to 9 nays (Vote No. 176), Akaka Modified Amendment No. 1186 (to Amendment No. 1150), to exempt children of certain Filipino World War II veterans from the numerical limitations on immigrant visas.
  • By 59 yeas to 35 nays (Vote No. 179), Sanders Modified Amendment No. 1223 (to Amendment No. 1150), to establish the American Competitiveness Scholarship Program.
• Rejected:
  • By 48 yeas to 49 nays (Vote No. 177), Coleman/Bond Amendment No. 1158 (to Amendment No. 1150), to amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to facilitate information sharing between federal and local law enforcement officials related to an individual's immigration status.
  • By 48 yeas to 49 nays (Vote No. 178), Dorgan/Boxer Amendment No. 1181 (to Amendment No. 1150), to sunset the Y-1 nonimmigrant visa program after a 5-year period.
  • By 29 yeas to 66 nays (Vote No. 180), Vitter/DeMint Amendment No. 1157 (to Amendment No. 1150), to strike title VI (related to Nonimmigrants in the United States Previously in Unlawful Status).
• Pending:
  • Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) Amendment No. 1150, in the nature of a substitute.
  • Grassley/DeMint Amendment No. 1166 (to Amendment No. 1150), to clarify that the revocation of an alien's visa or other documentation is not subject to judicial review.
  • Cornyn Modified Amendment No. 1184 (to Amendment No. 1150), to establish a permanent bar for gang members, terrorists, and other criminals.
  • Dodd/Menendez Amendment No. 1199 (to Amendment No. 1150), to increase the number of green cards for parents of United States citizens, to extend the duration of the new parent visitor visa, and to make penalties imposed on individuals who overstay such visas applicable only to such individuals.
  • Menendez Amendment No. 1194 (to Amendment No. 1150), to modify the deadline for the family backlog reduction.
  • McConnell Amendment No. 1170 (to Amendment No. 1150), to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require individuals voting in person to present photo identification.
  • Feingold Amendment No. 1176 (to Amendment No. 1150), to establish commissions to review the facts and circumstances surrounding injustices suffered by European Americans, European Latin Americans, and Jewish refugees during World War II.
  • Durbin/Grassley Amendment No. 1231 (to Amendment No. 1150), to ensure that employers make efforts to recruit American workers.
  • Sessions Amendment No. 1234 (to Amendment No. 1150), to save American taxpayers up to $24 billion in the 10 years after passage of this Act, by preventing the earned income tax credit, which is, according to the Congressional Research Service, the largest anti-poverty entitlement program of the Federal Government, from being claimed by Y temporary workers or illegal aliens given status by this Act until they adjust to legal permanent resident status.
  • Sessions Amendment No. 1235 (to Amendment No. 1150), to save American taxpayers up to $24 billion in the 10 years after passage of this Act, by preventing the earned income tax credit, which is, according to the Congressional Research Service, the argest anti-poverty entitlement program of the Federal Government, from being claimed by Y temporary workers or illegal aliens given status by this Act until they adjust to legal permanent resident status.
  • Lieberman Amendment No. 1191 (to Amendment No. 1150), to provide safeguards against faulty asylum procedures and to improve conditions of detention.
• During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action:
  Graham (for Hutchison) Amendment No. 1168 (to Amendment No. 1150), to provide local officials and the Secretary of Homeland Security greater involvement in decisions regarding the location of border fencing, previously agreed to on Wednesday, May 23, 2007, was modified by unanimous consent.
• Subsequent to its adoption, a unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that Akaka Amendment No. 1186 (to Amendment No. 1150) (listed above) be modified.

05/25/2007: Senator Durbin (D. IL) Introduced a Special Immigration Bill for Certain Iraqis and Afghans

• Yesterday, Senator Durbin introduced a bill, S. 1104, to increase the number of Iraqi and Afghani translators and interpreters who may be admitted to the United States as special immigrants.
  • This bill will increase the annual quota for this special immigrant visas to 500 in FY 2007 and FY 2008, and reduced to 50 to each subsequent years.
  • These aliens shall be exempt From Employment-Based Numerical Limitations and they will not be counted against the numerical limitations under sections 201(d), 202(a), and 203(b)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151(d), 1152(a), and 1153(b)(4))'' before the period at the end.
  • These aliens will be permitted for adjustment of status if the alien---
    • ``(1) was paroled or admitted as a nonimmigrant into the United States; and
    • ``(2) is otherwise eligible for special immigrant status under this section and under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  • For the naturalization, their absence from the United States described in paragraph (2) shall not be considered to break any period for which continuous residence in the United States is required for naturalization under title III of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401 et seq., inasmuch as it is an absence from the United States due to a person's employment by the Chief of Mission or United States Armed Forces, under contract with the Chief of Mission or United States Armed Forces, or by a firm or corporation under contract with the Chief of Mission or United States Armed Forces, if (A) such employment involved working with the Chief of Mission or United States Armed Forces as a translator or interpreter; and (B) the person spent at least a portion of the time outside of the United States working directly with the Chief of Mission or United States Armed Forces as a translator or interpreter in Iraq or Afghanistan.''.

05/25/2007: TPS Designation and EAD Automatic Extension for Hondurans and Nicaraguans Scheduled to be Published Next Tuesday, 05/29/2007

• As we reported earlier, these notices were approved in one day by the OMB early this week along with the same for El Salvadore. However, the notices for these two nationalities will be published first on next Tuesday. It is expected that a similar notice may follow these two notices soon for the Salvadorans soon.

05/25/2007: CIR Legislation Totally Out-of-Control and Waning Hope for CIR Legislation This Year

• The Senate floor during last three days is characterized as a legislature that has lost direction. There were a flurry of amendments introduced, debated, and voted yeah or nays. The immigrant community has been closely following the floor activities in the Senate through c-span live broadcasts and close monitoring and reporting by various organizations, particularly AILA that has done a wonderful job. The result of these amendment processes and vote has revealed a total vacuum in a coherent national immigration policy and direction..
• If we look at the score cards, credit should be given to the restrictionists for their job well done. The legal immigration reform and illegal immigration reform have been inseparably tied together and unless these two reforms are resolved together, the CIR is destined to die. Last year, they killed both legal immigration and illegal immigration reforms by targeting at and killing the illegal immigration reform. On the other hand, this year, in a quite reverse role, the legal immigration reform may turn out to be a killer of the comprehensive immigration reform thanks to the merit or point system of immigration. One wonders what brought into this mess such unworkable proposals when there was a workable legal immigration bills such as SKIL, STRIVE, last year's CIR, etc. The answer is simple. The restrictionists brought in unworkable merit or point system as the focal point for total overhaul of immigration system practically abandoning the traditional family-based immigration and employment-based immigration systems. If the CIR fails this year because of the legal immigration issues, all the credit for such failure should go to those restrictionists and their supporters.
• Well, the Senate will return to the floor this morning, Friday, and continute to debate the CIR but there will be no roll calls and voting activities. However, when they return to the floor in the first week of June, they will have a very limited period of time to deal with the anticiped flurry of new amendments on the floor. Under the circumstances of no-winners for the compromise bill, the future of the Senate resolution of this new CIR bill appears to be bleak in two sense: Firstly, its fate in the Senate itself is increasingly unclear. Secondly, even if the Senate is successful in passing the new CIR, the future of such bill in the House is dubious at best. The Speaker of the House has already expressed her strong opposition to the Senate compromise bill. So did the Chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee. The political process involving the House is more rooted in the narrow neighborhoods, communities, and districts unlike the Senate, and the current compromise bill is likely to face a serious challenge in the geographically narrowly drawn consituencies of the House members.

05/24/2007: USCIS Issues Service Center Receipting Update on 05/24/2007

• Today's receipting update refelects that the California and Vermont Centers are still experiencing frontlogs in data entry and issuing the Receipt Notices. The situation has created a confusion and panic for the last minute filers whose current nonimmigrant status have expired without the evidence that their petitions or applications have been timely filed and their stay is legal. Today's announcement indicates that the Service Centers are aware of the concerns but the delay will not affect their legal status.

05/24/2007: Cut-Off Time for Substitution I-140 Petition is "Filing" and Not "Approval" of Substitution I-140 Petition Before 07/16/2007

• AILA has reported the USCIS announcement that answered the question on survivability of the certified labor certification application for substitution as of effective date (07/16/2007) of the DOL's substitution elimination rule. It states that inasmuch as the substitution I-140 is "filed" before 07/16/2007, the USCIS will complete adjudication of such substitution I-140 petition. Thank you, USCIS!
• This is a huge relief in that currently PPS is not available for the substitution I-140 petitions. Accordingly, had the cut-off date been "I-140 approved," most of the pending or new substitution I-140 petitions could have been gone on 07/16/2007. Now, since the cut-off time is "filing" of substitution I-140 petition before 07/16/2007, people do not have to worry about it inasmuch as they can file it before July 16, 2007. No PPS would have been necessary, had there been PPS continuously available for the substitution I-140 petitions! Read USCIS Announcement Today for other related issues as well.

05/24/2007: Compromised CIR in Total Mess!

• As we discussed yesterday, the backbone of the new strategy of the restrictionist Senators lies with the overhaul of the legal immigration system of the current family-based and employment-based preferences into point or merit system on the theory that America needs immigrants to contribute to the economy. However, the point or merit system is not only strongly challenged and opposed by the supporters of the traditional value of family-unity but also surprisingly by the employers. The most powerful employer lobbyst, CompeteAmerica, has come forward opposing the merit system proposed for overhaul of the employment-based immigration system. The CompeteAmerica and employers assert that contrary to the intent and purpose of the compromise negotiators, the merit system will seriously hurt the employers and the nation's needs for attracting and retaining the brightest foreign workers because of the employers' loss of control over the employment. The strong opposition of the employers and their assertion that the proposed merit system will hurt rather than contribute to the country's economy de facto destroys the fundamental foundation of these legislator's scheme to restrict immigration through the point system. For the release of CompeteAmerica opposition, please click here, and the news report of Business Information Week on the problem, please click here.
• What a mess!!! Quo Vadis, Senators? Alas, there are no ones who are happy with the compromise bill in the country other than the restrictionist Senators! Please forget about the seriously flawed point sytem. For the employment-based sysrem reform, just adopt STEVE bill or SKIL bill. The point system will never work. Senator Obama, the country does not have to waste five years just to test this unworkable point system! Please let this reporter give you one simple illustration of serious flaws in the point system which should never make it. Certain young age group will receive 3 points and the workers outside of the age group must be discriminated in immigration simply because of age, huh? How funny and ridiculous! Does this point system consider only physical laborers? What made the legislators to think that workers outside of this age group are mentally, intellectually, and otherwise less capable to contribute to the nation's economy and what made the legislators to think they can create such classes based on the age? The U.S. citizens outside of the age group are entitled to be outraged for the perception of the legislators on the people of certain ages with absolutely no scientific basis and creation of a class for outright discrimination based on the age? Think twice, Senators!
• Please copy and send this message to any one or any organizations via email or web posting or fax as quickly as possible!

05/23/2007: List and Text of Amendments to CIR S.1348 Introduced 05/22/2007

05/23/2007: U.S. Passport Standard Processing Time of 10-12 weeks and Expedited Processing Time of 2-3 weeks

• U.S. Department of State reports today that they are currently producing a record number of U.S. passports, but the processing time still remains at 10-12 weeks for standard applications and 2-3 weeks for expedited applications. As we approach the summer vacation season, people should apply way in advanc of the trip. For the DOS report, please click here.

05/23/2007: IMPORTANT CIR UPDATE MESSAGE

• For the last two days, the Senate floor focused on the procedural motions as to whether the Senate should take up and continue S. 1348 Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. People know that this is the bill which the Senate passed last year and was killed in the House. S. 1348 is this bill which was reintroduced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. By agreeing to proceed and go into debate, the Senate floor at least overcame the opposition by a few anti-immigration Senators.
• On May 21, 2007, the Senator Reid introduced, for himself, Senator Kennedy and Senator Specter, a motion to substitute the text of the S.1348 by the bi-partisan compromise which was produced by a bi-partisan group of Senators and White House during the weekend. Accordingly, there was no serious debate about the controversial issues in the compromise during last two days other than Senator Dorgan's motion to amend the Senator's Reid's amendment to substitute S. 1348 to kill temporary worker program. The floor rejected his motion and his motion was defeated yesterday.
• The debates on controversial issues in the compromise bill are expected to be heated up from today after the Senate floor passes the Senator Reid's motion to substitute the S. 1348. A series of amendments to the substituted bill are expected to be introduced from today on. This means that those who oppose the controversial poisonous elements in the compromise bill must mobilize their forces to pressure the Senate to amend these poisonous proposals in the compromise. This is the most important time for people to arise and act!
• It appears that the restrictionist Republicans opposed the CIR last year on the issues of relief of illegal immigrants including temporary guest worker program and legalization of 12 million illegal aliens in the country. Since then, as affected by the pressures from in and outside of the country, including the swift of position in the Christian forces, Hispanic forces, White House, and other forces, these core groups of restrictionist Republicans shifted their strategies in such a way that they give concession to the issues relating to the illegal aliens including guest worker program and legalization of illegal aliens, and instead focus on strategy to overhaul immigration system to achieve control and reduction of the number of immigrants allowed to come into this country and more importantly to control the types of immigrants allowed to immigrate to this country in terms of the ethnic and racial backgrounds, and immigrants from non-English speaking countries. Underlying the point systems, concept of control of chain of immigrants, and removal of certain family-based immigrant categories are the hidden agenda of the restrictivonist and right wing Republican forces to control immigrants and more importantly immigrants from certain part of the world. This hidden agenda is disguised in the name of the country's need for immigrants who can contribute to the nation's economy. The center of development of this concept and proposal was the Heritage Foundation, the think-tank of the conservative Republicans. This agenda has been pushed forward for the last few years through its arms in various communities, including some immigration groups. They penetrated into some immigrant groups, particularly employment-based immigrant groups, to divide the immigrant community and their supporters.
• By now, people have learnt the hidden agenda of the conservative and restrictionist group, and the opposition to the poinonous agenda that are conceived in the compromise is growing fast. It is clear that the country and the immigrant community have to pass a comprehensive immigration reform legislation this year. The way to achieve this goal is to contact with the legislators en masse to remove the poinonous segments in the bill and the hidden agenda of the restrictionists and pass the bill. Accordingly, the amendment process is extremely important to achieve the overall goals of passing the CIR and passing the CIR without poisons. This is achievable since this is the Democrat Congress. This reporter assures the readers that should the Senate fail to pass such workable bill, there will be no, repeat no, CIR legislation enacted this year and in the next few years.
• Please copy and send this message to any one or any organizations via email or web posting or fax as quickly as possible!

05/22/2007: Dorgan Amendment Rejected

• One down!

05/22/2007: Urgent Call for Senators Right Now

• The Senate has changed the voting of S. 1348 to June, but it does not mean that there are no debates and passage of amendments. In fact, the most critical time is now and this week and before the Memoridal holiday!! If readers have problem with the so-called compromise bill, please pick up the phone or fax or send e-mail to the senator in their areas.
• As for the point system, one may ask them why they did not add color of eyes, color of hair, color of skin, female as opposed to male, religion, etc., when they have decided to discriminate people based on the age, no matter whether the people are aliens or U.S. citizens. How can a country openly systemize the age discrimination regardless of the nationality? Let them add to the list all of the factors which are listed herein, particularly females as they may think that foreign women are less contributive in labor foces as a lot of them were housewives and some of them "do not fit?" to a lot of jobs because they are female? They did not have a gut to systemize the sexual discrimination as the half of world population are females?! This reporter cannot believe this is happening in my beloved country, the United States of America. Why don't they enact the CIR applying retroactively and sort out all of these "undesirables" and kick them out of the country or do some harms just as the Nazis did based on their perceived "undesirable class?"

05/22/2007: Senate CIR Deadline Changed to June 2007

• In the yesterday's floor, the Senate agreed to take up the CIR bill, S. 1348. This morning at 10:00, the Senate will start debate of the CIR. The CIR bill which is currently on the floor is S. 1348 which was passed by the Senate last year and reintroduced in the Congress by Majority leader Reid. This bill will be amended by the so-called compromise provisions. Senator Kennedy is schduled to introduce part, not entire provisions, of the compromise to the floor today as an amendment to S. 1348. The debates and amendments will be continued through early June and then the roll call will be scheduled in June 2007. For the report of the Senate floor activities yesterday, please read Fox News report.
• Information indicates that the anti-immigrationists are engaging in a massive campaign to achieve their restrictive immigration agenda, but the immigrants are confused with the intents and purposes of some of the provisions in the compromise and fail to come forward to have their voice heard through a massive campaign.
• In order to find out who are the hard-core anti-immigrationists, please review the yesterday's voting record of the Senators by State.

05/21/2007: USCIS Processsing Times

• Service Centers 05/18/2007
• District Offices 05/21/2007
• (See Home page)

05/21/2007 2:00 p.m.: Compromise Bill Already in Big Trouble

• Washington Times has reported today that fewer than 20 senators are publicly committed to supporting the immigration deal that hits the Senate floor today while nearly 40 are already opposed or have serious concerns, underscoring how difficult it will be for President Bush and his allies to craft a coalition that can pass the bill. A Washington Times survey of Senate offices and public comments after the deal was announced Thursday found an additional 32 senators who said they cannot even take a position yet -- a result of the fact that the deal was written in secret by a dozen senators and the Bush administration, wasn't even finalized until yesterday and still hasn't reached many Senate offices. Read on.
• For the full text of discussion draft of the bill, please click here.
  

05/21/2007: DOL Labor Certification Substitution Elimination Rule Update

• There is a confusion on the cut-off date for availability of the substitution of beneficiary of the labor certification application which has been certified on or before 07/16/2007. Specifically, issue is whether the substitution I-140 "filing" is sufficient on or before 07/16/2007 or the substitution I-140 must have been approved on or before 07/16/2007. The answer to this question is critical since the USCIS suspended on 05/18/2007 premium processing services for the substitution I-140 petitions and regular processing times for I-140 petitions are hopelessly backlogged at this time, and the chances of most of the substitution I-140 approvals for the pending cases in regular proceeding before 07/16/2007 are very slim. This question has been raised because unlike the proposed regulation, in the final regulation the DOL removed the language "I-140 filed" in the preamble. Sources indicate that the DOL is expected to release announcement on this issue within this week to clarify the rule which the DOL intended in enacting the final rule. Please stay tuned to this website for this important news development.

05/21/2007: Senate CIR Floor Schedule Today

• As we reported earlier, the only votes people will expect to see from the Senate floor are the motion to proceed with the CIR legislative bill and motion to invoke cloture so that they can start debates on the bill. In order to monitor the roll calls and voting activities on the floor, we have set up the monitor link at our home page.

05/21/2007: USCIS to Extend TPS Designation and Automatic EAD Extension for Nicaraguans, Hondurans, and El Salvadorans

• In an unsual move, the USCIS requested the White House OMB to review these TPS extension rules on Thursday, 05/17/2007, which the OMB completed in one day and approved on 05/18/2007. These rules are expected to be published in the federal register soon.

05/21/2007: AILA Finds Compromise Bill Unworkable for Five Serious Reasons

• Starting today, the Senate will take up the CIR legislation and debate the legislation obviously focusing on the compromise bill rather than the S. 1348, the bill which the Senate passed last year. The compromise agreement is currently in the storm of controversity in the country and the nation will undergo a difficult process for the next one week or two.
• As it may be true with any compromises, whether private or public agreements, such compromises involve both plus side and minus side. Question is which way the tip of the scale falls. The AILA rightfully believes that because of the following problems, the compromise agreement as it stands now is not acceptable:
  • 1. Decimation of Family Immigration: The bill eliminates current family preference categories and limits future family immigration to spouses and minor children of citizens and permanents residents, caps parents of citizens at 40,000, and makes no provision for those who have been in the family backlog for two years or less. This legislation flies in the face of other reform proposals which increase the 2A category or place it the immediate relative category
  • 2. Decimation of Employment-Based Immigration: The bill eliminates current employment-based immigration categories and puts in their place a new "merit-based" point system with totally inadequate numbers (approximately 40,000 per year while current backlogs are cleared over 5-8 years). The new "point system" would be wildly skewed toward highly educated, English-speaking professionals, with few visas for essential workers or adult children or siblings of citizens. The point system contains no provisions for multinational managers, extraordinary ability aliens, outstanding professors or researchers, or those doing work in the national interest. There would be no labor market test to protect native-born workers.
  • 3. Lack of Path to Permanent Status for Future Flow Essential and Highly Skilled Workers: The new Y temporary worker program would create a constantly churning workforce, as it provides only a two-year nonimmigrant visa and requires that workers leave the U.S. for one year before being eligible to renew their work visa for a subsequent 2-year period. There is no "bridge" to allow essential and highly skilled but non-degreed workers a path to eventual permanent lawful status. There is a carve-out of 10,000 green cards per year for "essential" Y workers, but it appears they could not seek a permanent visa while in the United States.
  • 4. Lack of Adequate Future Green Cards for Families and Workers: The future legal immigration program (after 8 years of backlog clearance) provided for in the Senate bill contemplates a legal immigration system composed of 380,000 work visas and 127,000 family-based visas, plus unlimited visas for spouses and minor children of citizens, and some number of refugee visas. These numbers are totally inadequate. All economic projections and assessments of family unity needs point to the need for at least 1.8 million visas per year in the future. The provisions of the current Senate bill guarantee that new backlogs will grow immediately, and that undocumented immigration will continue. This is no solution.
  • 5. Obstacles to Legalization: The legalization provisions in the Senate bill require currently undocumented workers to register for a temporary work permit, and then, before receiving final lawful permanent status in 8-13 years, travel to their home countries and file applications with the U.S. consulate there. The cost for a single Z visa holder to legalize would be at least $8,500, and could be as high as $11,500. Z holders would not be permitted to sponsor spouses or minor children who are outside the U.S. as of January 2007. While the legalization program provisions are broad and include a generous cut-off date of January 2007, the obstacles inherent in too-tight deadlines, costs and required contact with overseas consulates are obstacles that must be addressed to assure that all who qualify for legalization can obtain permanent status.
• As we reported earlier, it is very welcome and a positive move that both sides of the aile after all agreed to negotiate and compromise towards a bill both parties agree. We just hope that both parties keep this sprit of compromise and continue working on the negotiation such that they produce a bill that tips heavily in favor of the nation as well as the immigrants. Obviously the Senate floor should work hard to remove the foregoing unworkable elements in the compromise through the heated debates and amendment process. We urge the Senate to take time and not to rush because a hasty action in rush may work counterproductive. Let these closed-door bargains be fully debated openly in and out of the Hill to allow the public to participate in the compromise process directly or indirectly. Ten Senators should not dictate such an important immigration policy as the CIR without their closed-door agreement fully scruitized and reviewed by the nation under the microscope. The same is true with the President. For this purpose, we hope that more pro and con voices will be heard loud and wide in the coming weeks to make a truly democratic process work in this country ruled by people and for the people.
  

05/20/2007: Discussion Draft of Compromise Bill "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007"

• AILA has obtained the full text of this bill which is draft being under development as of May 19, 2007. This is not yet a bill and the final text will see some changes to this draft which is still at the stage of discussion. However, this draft for discussion gives a chance to see where the compromise is heading. As we reported earlier in the form of summary, the whole text covers several Titles and it will be a huge document. Today we are just posting the summary of Title V "Immigration Benefits" which constitutes so-called "overhaul of legal immigration system" including the reform of family-based and employment-based immigration systems. We repeat again that this is not yet a bill. It is a draft for discussion within the compromise group.
  

05/19/2007: Likely Event That Will Take Place in the Hill for CIR

• Yesterday, we discussed the potential two options the Senate Majority Leader and the Senate floor will take next Monday, May 21, 2007 for the steps to take up the CIR. One is to keep S. 1348 and amend or replace the text by the compromise bill or to withdraw S. 1348 and take up the compromise bill as a new bill. It appears that the Senate is likely to take the first option rather than the second drastic option taking new procedural schedules and procedural motions. The following is a likely scenario for the steps the Congress will take from hereon:
• The compromise agreement may be drafted into legislative language and introduced as an amendment or replacement of the current CIR bill on the floor, S. 1348 either on Monday or soon thereafter. As we reported yesterday, there is a Motion to Invoke Cloture scheduled for 5:30 p.m .on Monday on the Senate floor. Debate will begin throughout the day Monday, and the amendment process will start after the motion for cloture is voted. Then two party leaders in the Senate may reach an agreement as to the number of amendments that will be allowed to be introduced by each party. The debates and votes on the amendments will take place throughout the week with a potential vote on final version of the amended bill before the end of the week. Sources indicate that if the Senate fails to pass a CIR bill, the House is not likely to take up any comprehensive legislation this year.
• Assuming that the Senate will pass a CIR bill next week, the House may complete the ongoing series of immigration oversight hearings next week, and may begin markup of the proposed House CIR bills including STRIVE Act of 2007 and/or another new bill introduced by the Subcommittee Chairwoman in the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee. It will be followed by various amendments introduced, debated and voted in the Subcommittee. The Subcommittee actions will then be presented to the House Judiciary Committee t, followed by a cycle of its markups, amendments, debates, etc. The House Judiciary bill will then move to the Rules Committee to determine which and how many amendments should be allowed to be offered during House floor debate. The Judiciary bill will then be presented on the full House floor in July, followed by markups, debates, motion cloture, amendments, and final vote of passage or rejection of the House version bill of CIR on the floor.
• The Senate version and the House version of the CIR bill then go to the Senate-House Conference to resolve the differences. The delegates to the Conference will be selected by both House Speaker and Senate President at the advice of the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Representative Conyers and the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, Senator Kennedy., and the Majority leaders of the two Houses. Because of the August break of the Congress, such conference activiteis will not take place until the Congress returns to the Hill after the Summer break. What will be the fate of the conference and how long it will take? Only God knows. Here the majority leaders, minority leaders, chairmen of the Judiciary Committees of the two Houses will play a key role. Once the House and Senate differences are resolved in the Conference Committee, the conference report will be presented to the House and Senate floors again for final passage as the Congressional bill. It will be followed by the debates on the floor of both Houses, but the law does not allow introduction of any amendments at this stage of the legislative process. If the Congress is successful to pass the bill, then it will be presented to the President for his signature or veto. For the CIR to be successful, all of these steps must be completed befoe the end of the year.
• As we know by know, the comprehensive immigration reform process has been complicated by the Republicans' takeup of new issue under the name of overhaul of the legal immigration system aside from other issues which had been fully debated and resolved during the CIR legislative process in 2006. It is so-called "point system" and "merit system" as a means to restrict and control the number and types of immigrants to be accepted by this nation in the future. As people must have noticed in the House Judiciary Committee Immgration Subcommittee immigration oversity hearings during the last week, this bold-move is initiated by Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, which a group of the Republican leaders in the Senate and the President Bush took up as part of the compromise agreement or so-called "Grand Bargain." The Republican Senators who had initiated and voted for the CIR of 2006, including John McCain, Alene Specter, and other leaders in the Republican Senate had to abaindon the bill which they passed last year and came forward with the opposition to the last year's CIR bill. When the Senate returns to the floor next Monday, the first Senator who is scheduled to make a speech is Senator Session from Alabama who will obviously make a long statement in support of the monstrous point system as a condition for the passage of the Senate CIR bill. Since the point system is adopted as a key component of the Compromise this week, there is a chance that the Senate bill will incorporate this part of the Compromise. This will lead to a stormy reaction in the public and in the House. The House bills do not include this monstrous reform and reportedly the Chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee expressed oppostion to the Senator Session's point system during the immigration oversight hearing in her committee last week. If the Congress fails in passing a comprehensive immigration reform legislation this year, it will be not the illegal immigrant relief issues which indeed rocked and killed the bill by the House last year, but the so-called point system and legal immigration overhaul proposal that will be the culprit for the failure. It will be really an irony that it was the House that killed the CIR last year, but it will be the Senate that will potentially kill the CIR this year. The stormy and emotional reactions to this proposal will mount moment by moment as the people start to learn more about the essence and intent of this proposal and the consequences of the proposal for the future direction of this nation's immigration policy. Please stay tuned.

05/19/2007: Who Wants to Hear "Grand Bargain?" Joke?

• The so-called "Grand Bargain" is literally a joke, particularly when it comes to the overhaul of "legal" immigration system, no matter whether family-based or employment-based. Let's look at the family-based immigration overhaul. They say they will shave off the family immigration system in return for an award of the elimination of the current family-based immigration backlogs. Really? " 8(eight) years" is a reward? It is a laughing matter. What about employment-based immigration system overhaul? Where is the beef? Point system in family-based and employment-based will create more opportunities for the employment-based immigration? The foreign scientists and engineers should be able to figure out what those figures will be. Again, a laughing matter. What about the point system in employment-based immigration? How can point system help the employment-based immigrants in the current crisis created by the visa number retrogression? Why should people bargain off the increase in the employment-based immigrant quota to point system? Isn't that what is happening in the grand bargain compromise? Where is the exemption of numerical limits for their spouses and children? Where is the proposal for the employment-based backlog reduction? All laughing matters. If this is the bill the Senate will pass, forget about the passage of the immigration reform legislation this year. For that matter, probably forever!

05/18/2007: CIR-Agreement - Senate Floor Schedule on Monday, 05/21/2007

• Yesterday, in the Senate a unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that at 1:00 p.m., on Monday, May 21, 2007, Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of S. 1348, to provide for comprehensive immigration reform; that Senator Sessions be recognized to speak pursuant to the order of May 15, 2007, and that following his remarks the time until 5:30 p.m. be equally divided and controlled for debate between the Majority and Republican Leaders, or their designees; provided further, that at 5:30 p.m. Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to consideration of S. 1348.
  

05/18/2007: AILA Position on "Great Bargain" Compromise

05/18/2007: Uneasy Union in Compromise and Survivability

• Sources indicate that the whole packet has yet to be developed and only basic skeleton has been agreed to. It is expected that more agreements other than those which have been informally released will be compromised and added to the final packet before the packet is introduced in the Senate next week.
• Reactions to the compromise have been positive and negative. It is positive in that finally the politians are "negotiating" and "compromising" to produce a legislative bill. It is negative when it comes to the contents of the compromise. On the Senate side, the Senate Majority Leader has yet to release the information on the procedural matter. As it stands now, the Senate floor is scheduled to vote on Monday, 05/21/2007 on the procedural motion involving the S. 1348, a renumbered former CIR which the Senate passed last year. Specifically, we will have to find out which bill will be taken up between S. 1348 and the upcoming compromise bill. There are some predictions that the Senate floor may take the compromise bill, pass the motion to cloture quickly, and vote on the bill within next week. If this prediction is correct, there will be introduced only a few amendments before the motion is agreeded to. Should this happen, it is anticipated that this bill will face a steeper resistance in the House which is scheduled to take up the CIR legislation in July 2007, and there will be an increased chance that the CIR may fail this year again. We hope this does not happen. The Senate should take time to debate and amend the bills to lead to a truly bi-partisan concensus through the amendment process rather than the so-called "compromise" bill which is a backdoor product of handful leaders in both parties in the Senate and the White House. People should remember that the Senate does not enact a legislation. Two Houses enact legislation. Because of the differences in constituencies for the members of the House, the House is different from the Senate in color and texture in the dynamics in local political process. We urge the Senate to pass a CIR that is also acceptable to the House and not repeat the disastrous experience in 2006.

05/17/2007: USCIS Terminates 05/18/2007 PPS for Labor Certification Substitution I-140 Petitions

• USCIS announced today that beginning on Friday, May 18, 2007, it will terminate Premium Processing Service for Form I-140 petitions that request labor certification substitution. USCIS anticipates a substantial increase in the number of petitioning employers that will file Form I-140 petitions requesting Premium Processing Service and seeking labor certification substitution prior to July 16, 2007. The volume of such petitions filed requesting Premium Process Service is expected to exceed USCIS’ capacity to provide the Premium Process Service according to the program guidelines. For the announcement, please click here.

05/17/2007: Compromise Announcement for Immigration Reform the Negotiators and White House

• It is now formal that a compromise has reached among the negotiators and it is likely that the Senate will debate this bill rather than the CIR which the Senate passed last year. For the summary, click here.

05/17/2007: Shocking Compromise Poised to be Announced Before the Senate Floor's Rescheduled CIR Debate on Monday, 05/21/2007

• The following report of the AILA requires the immediate action by the immigration stateholders and supporters, particularly legal immigration community!
  • "It appears that Senate Democrats, Republicans and the White House are poised to announce that their backroom negotiations have produced a "grand bargain." The deal, as described, raises at least four major concerns. As a trade-off for a strong legalization program (including AgJOBS and the DREAM Act) and significant reductions in the current family backlogs, the negotiators propose to:
    • (1) Eliminate four of the current family preference categories (1, 2B, 3, and 4);
    • (2) Overhaul our current employment-based immigration system and replace it with a "merit-based" point system;
    • (3) Maintain annual green card numbers at their current levels guaranteeing continued systemic dysfunction from burgeoning backlogs; and
    • (4) Preclude a meaningful path to permanent residence for new temporary workers.
  • This radical shift from an immigration system grounded in familial and employment relationships to one disconnected from direct ties to the U.S. amounts to large-scale social experimentation. Combined with the creation of a large, fluctuating pool of "guest workers" who cannot lay down roots in the U.S., this point system raises the specter of a new generation of immigrants lacking the infrastructure and opportunity to effectively assimilate into this country. A practical solution for the undocumented population is an enormously important step in the right direction. But the cost of fixing our current problems cannot be the creation of bigger problems in the future."
• Please contact your Senators now and urge them to oppose any deal that:
  • Eviscerates family-based immigration;
    Includes a radical new, untested "merit" system;
    Fails to expand the pool of green cards critical to high-skilled and low-skilled industries throughout our economy; and
    Prevents temporary workers from earning and pursuing permanent residence.
• This webside all along has been advocating and supporting a balanced approach to the comprehensive immigration reform legislation and national policy. This so-called Grand Bargain has tipped the scale completely 180% around in that it focuses on the illegal immigration reform at the sacrifice of legal immigration system including both family-based and employment-based immigration. What this compromise is attempting to do is to accept flood of temporary or illegal immigrants (millions) and narrow the door for future legal immigrants (both family-based and employment-based).
• This is the time for the immigrant community to stand up, unite, and fight against such crippled immigration reform. Please start contacting Senators, Congress people, employers, and other groups to publicize the upcoming twisted backdoor compromise. Please read yesterday's posting on Senator Durbin's statement on the floor. It is dispicable that the CIR which they themselves passed last year is opposed by the same people who participated and voted for the bill!
  
  

05/17/2007: Official Final Rule of Labor Substitution Elimination with "Effective Date" of 07/16/2007

• Effective date of this rule is July 16, 2007. Good Deal!!

05/17/2007: Summary of Liberman-Hagel H-1B Relief Bill, S. 1397

• H-1B visas.
  
  • (a) Creates exemptions from the H-1B cap for holders of:
    • i. US masters or higher degrees (currently, the exemption is capped at 20,000/year);
    • ii. medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the US; and
    • iii.non-US masters or higher degrees in science, technology, engineering, or math (STEM).
      
  • (b) Increases the cap on H-1B visas to 115,000 in FY07. (Currently, the cap is 65,000/year, although the cap was at 195,000 at the beginning of this decade).
    (c) Beginning in FY08, creates a flexible market-based escalator with a base limit of 115,000 visas/year. If the cap is exhausted in a given fiscal year, then the subsequent fiscal year’s base limit would increase by 20%, up to a ceiling of 180,000. (This is similar to a provision included in last year’s Senate-passed immigration bill, S.2611.)
    
• Employment-based immigration.
  
  • (a) Creates exemptions from the employment-based (EB) green card cap for:
    
    • i. holders of US masters or higher degrees, or non-US masters or higher degrees in STEM fields who have been working in a related field in the US for three years preceding their application;
    • ii. aliens of “extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics”;
    • iii. “outstanding professors and researchers”;
    • iv. recipients of national interest waivers; and
    • v. immediate relatives of employment-based immigrants.
      
  • (b) Enables employment-based immigrants and their dependents to file an application for adjustment of status, regardless of whether a visa is immediately available.
    
• H-1B visa fraud and abuse protections.
  
  • (a) Prohibits employers from advertising a job as available only for, or as giving preference to, H-1B visa holders.
  • (b) Prohibits employers with over 50 employees from having more than half of their workforce on H-1B visas.
  • (c) Gives the Department of Labor (DOL) authority to review employers’ H-1B labor certification applications for “clear indicators of fraud or misrepresentation of material fact.” (DOL is currently restricted to screening applications for “completeness and obvious inaccuracies.”)
  • (d) Expands DOL’s authority to conduct employer investigations and streamlines the investigative process by expanding DOL’s authority to conduct investigations from 12 months to 24 months; eliminating the requirement that the DOL Secretary personally certify an investigation; and removing limits on types of information can be used to investigate unlawful activity.
  • (e) Authorizes DOL to hire an additional 200 employees to administer, oversee, investigate and enforce the H-1B program.
  • (f) Raises the petition fee by $500, to fund compliance.
  • (g) Authorizes reasonable improvements to coordination among DOL, DHS and DOS (as recommended by the US Government Accountability Office).
  • (h)Gives DOL the ability to conduct random audits of any company that uses the H-1B program, and requires DOL to conduct annual audits of companies with more than 100 employees that have 15% or more of those workers on H-1B visas.
    
    • (i) Doubles penalties for employers who violate any of the H-1B program’s requirements and protections for U.S. workers.
    • (j) Requires DOL to provide H-1B visa holders with information about their rights, including wage and labor protections.

05/17/2007: CIR Compromise and Fate of Family-Based Immigration System Hanging by a Thread

• As reported yesterday, the two party leaders are coming close to a compromise bill. So far the information indicates that the Republican hardliners are conceding their staunch opposition to the legalization of illegal aliens as a bargain to gain its stance on the overhaul of the family-based immigration system: to wit, immigration based on point systems. Apparently, the Democrats tend to concede its opposition to such overhaul. It will be interesting to see the final product of the negotiation soon.

05/16/2007: Sen. Durbin Statement 05/15/2007 on Senate Floor in Support of S. 1348 CIR

• Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it is obvious to most Americans our immigration system is broken. There are 12 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States today, and hundreds of thousands are arriving each year. In America today, unscrupulous employers hire undocumented immigrants because they can pay them less than American workers and force them to work in conditions that Americans would not tolerate. Employers can do this with impunity because our Government doesn't enforce immigration laws that prohibit hiring undocumented immigrants. Immigration is a complicated issue that ignites strong passions. Some would rather avoid this issue because it is so sensitive. But Congress has an obligation to fix our broken immigration system. We need a comprehensive approach, one that is tough but fair. We need, first, to improve border security by increasing manpower and deploying new technology. We need to enforce the law against employers who are hiring millions of undocumented workers. We need a realistic approach to the 12 million undocumented workers who live and work in our country. I commend our majority leader, Senator Reid of Nevada. He is not afraid of tackling tough issues, including immigration reform. He knows it is an important national priority. Last week, Senator Reid introduced immigration reform legislation that the Senate will begin debating this week. Senator Reid did a reasonable thing. He said we should begin the debate where it ended last year, with the bipartisan Kennedy-McCain, Hagel-Martinez bill. This bill, sponsored by Republican Senators CHUCK HAGEL, MEL MARTINEZ, ARLEN SPECTER, JOHN MCCAIN, SAM BROWNBACK, and LINDSEY GRAHAM, and many Democrats, passed the Senate last year on a bipartisan vote of 62 to 36. Of course, that Hagel-Martinez bill was only the starting point for the Senate's debate. Senator Reid has set aside 2 full weeks to complete that debate. Members will have ample opportunity to offer amendments. This is the right place to start. This is not a perfect bill. I voted for it, realizing there were real imperfections, but it reflects the culmination of months of work last year, including hearings and marathon markups in the Judiciary Committee, on which I serve, and over 30 rollcall votes on the floor of the Senate. The bill is flawed, but it is comprehensive. It includes provisions to secure our borders, strengthen enforcement of our immigration laws, and addresses undocumented immigrants living in our country. I am confident that over the next 2 weeks, through the amendment process, we can improve this bill and pass legislation that will be an important step in fixing our broken immigration system.
• Unfortunately, there has been a hue and cry from the other side of the aisle. Some object to debating this bill. It is ironic, to say the least, that those on the other side who don't want to debate bipartisan legislation are objecting to a bill written, in large part, by their own side of the aisle--a bill that was passed when the Republican side of the aisle controlled the Senate last year. It is hard to understand how 21 Members of the Senate who voted for this bill last year now object to even proceeding to it now as the base bill for our debate. They understand, as we do, that this bill is going to change once it comes to the floor. If they object to even bringing the measure to the floor--the same bill they voted for last year--one has to question whether they are committed to comprehensive immigration reform. Some on the Republican side argue that backroom negotiations between the White House and Republican and Democratic Senators are close to a deal and that starting debate on immigration before that deal is reached is premature. I don't think that is a legitimate argument. I have been in many of these negotiations, and I will say a great amount of effort has been expended to move this bill forward. Some parts of it are very positive. An agreement between the White House and the Senate is a step forward. There are some parts that are very controversial.
• Human nature and political nature are interesting. People will not move toward a goal unless they face a deadline. How many people wait until the last minute to file their tax returns or wait too long for the checkup at the dentist? When we know we are facing a deadline and time is running out, we make important decisions. The same will be true for the immigration debate. Bringing last year's bill to the floor, which passed with an overwhelming bipartisan rollcall vote, as the base bill is going to move those negotiators in that room to a conclusion more quickly. To leave this open-ended and say that at some time in the future we will get back to it is an invitation for talks to break down and for the participants to disappear. We don't want that to happen. We cannot afford to wait. The Senate's calendar is full this year. There are so many things we need to do to make sure this congressional session is much more productive than those in the past, not the least of which is passing important appropriation bills, which now must be accomplished in order to fund the Government. We don't want to fall into the same circumstance as the previous Republican Congress, when they failed to pass appropriation bills and tried to play catchup and failed, leaving it to the new Congress, the Democratic Congress--an awesome responsibility--to fund the Government for the remainder of this fiscal year.
• There are some who feel it is now or never for immigration. What the majority leader has done is to tell the negotiators this is the time to wrap things up. This is the time to reach an agreement. This is the time to decide who at that table is there in good faith and who is there to stop the process. If they reach an agreement, it can be considered on the floor of the Senate as an amendment to the bipartisan Kennedy-McCain, Hagel-Martinez bill, which is being offered as the starting point of this debate. If there is no agreement, these differences can be debated and voted on over the next 2 weeks. I understand negotiations continue as I speak. I hope they reach an agreement that is comprehensive, tough but fair, and one every Member can seriously consider supporting. But these negotiations are no excuse for avoiding public debate. At some point, you have to move beyond the closed doors of the rooms in the Capitol and into the bright lights of the Senate Chamber and let Members speak to their wishes and their intentions on this important legislation. I disagree with some of the ideas being proposed by those on the other side of the aisle. I am sure they disagree with some of my approaches. I respect their views, and I hope they will look at this as a constructive opportunity. Should the Senate tomorrow fail to invoke cloture and to move forward on the immigration bill, it will be a lost opportunity. If the 21 Senators who voted for comprehensive immigration reform will not even allow us to bring the matter to the floor at this moment, it will be difficult to explain. They will have their chance to amend. They will have their chance to make changes they think are important. They will have their chance to act as Senators considering important measures.
• There has been a lot of criticism of Congress for good reason. When we look at the list of issues the American people think are important, very seldom do we find those issues being debated on the floor of the Senate. We need to change that situation. One of the issues on which most Americans agree is that our immigration system cannot be sustained. There are too many undocumented workers in this country living in fear, being exploited in the workplace, uncertain of their future. There are too many still streaming across our borders, borders that are too porous. There are ways to deal with those issues and ways this bill will address them. The Senate can offer, debate, and vote on amendments on all these issues. That is how the Senate is supposed to work. Some of my colleagues have suggested they will block this debate from taking place by filibustering this bipartisan bill which passed over the past year. I hope they don't. It reaches the point where we need to be held accountable. I hope that point will be this week and next, as Senator Reid, the majority leader, has set aside a reasonable amount of time to debate it. The American people deserve more than closed-door, backdoor negotiations. The time has come for Congress to fix our broken immigration system.
  

05/16/2007: Nine Giant Indian Firms Under Congressional Investigation and Fire as Part of H-1B Legislation

• Report indicates that the Senators send inquiry mails not only to the two giant Wipro and Infosys, but also other seven giant Indian firms. Reportedly the Congressional inquiry letters were sent to the following firms for apparent investigation of potential abuse of H-1B by these firms:
  • Infosys
  • Wipro
  • Tata Consultancy Services
  • Patni Computer Systems
  • I-Flex Solutions Inc.
  • Satyam Computers Services Ltd.
  • Larsen & Toubro Infotech Ltd.
  • Tech Mahindra Americas Inc.
  • Mphasis Corp.
• Obviously, the Congress is under sufficient pressure to increase the H-1B annual quota but they are not going to pass legislation to add more numbers without strings for assurance of prevention from abuses and frauds and reinforced investigation authorities to the agencies. Accordingly, the U.S. employers are expected to get the gift of increased H-1B annual visa numbers of sour taste strings of grapes. Such move is not limited to the Durbin bill, but also Lieberman and Hagel bill also intend to add similar features to the H-1B increase bills.
  

05/16/2007: SPECIAL ALERT! Labor Certification Substitution Elimination Final Rule Scheduled to be Published Tomorrow, 05/17/2007

• AILA has just obtained advanced copy of this final rule. The followings are the changes to the proposed rule:
  • Validity:
  • (1) An approved permanent labor certification granted on or after July 16, 2007 expires if not filed in support of a Form 1-140 petition with the Department of Homeland Security within 180 calendar days of the date the Department of Labor granted the certification.
    (2) An approved permanent labor certification granted before July 16, 2007 expires if not filed in support of a Form 1-140 petition with the Department of Homeland Security within 180 calendar days of July 16, 2007.
    (3) A permanent labor certification for a Schedule A occupation or sheepherders is valid only for the occupation set forth on the Application for Alien Employment Certification (Form ETA 750) or the Application for Permanent Employment Certification (Form ETA 9089) and only for the alien named on the original application, unless a substitution was approved prior to July 16, 2007. The certification is valid throughout the United States unless the certification contains a geographic limitation.
    (4) A permanent labor certification involving a specific job offer is valid only for the particular job opportunity, the alien named on the original application (unless a substitution was approved prior to July 16, 2007), and the area of intended employment stated on the Application for Alien Employment Certification (Form ETA 750) or the Application for Permanent Employment Certification (Form ETA 9089).
  • Substitution or Amendment:
  • (a) Substitution or change to the identity of an alien beneficiary on any application for permanent labor certification, whether filed under this part or 20 CFR part 656 in effect prior to March 28, 2005, and on any resulting certification, is prohibited for any request to substitute submitted after July 16, 2007.
    (b) Requests for modifications to an application will not be accepted for applications submitted after July 16, 2007.
    
• In summary, the regulation publication date will be tomorrow, but the cut-off date for the most of the provisions relating the substitution elimination and certified labor certification application validity period appears to be July 16, 2007.
  • LC Validity Period: 180 days (changed from 45 days) from the effective date of the final rule (for the already certified cases) or from the date of certification (for the cases certified after the effective date of the final rule). Any certified applications filed with DHS for I-140 petition within the 180-day window will not be affected by the rule.
  • Unaffected Substitutions: (1) DOL or DHS has approved the substitution or (2) substitution request has been filed and pending, effective date of the final rule.
  • Amendment to Change Beneficiary: (a) Substitution or change to the identity of an alien beneficiary onany application for permanent labor certification, whether filed under this part or 20 CFR part 656 in effect prior to March 28, 2005,
    and on any resulting certification, is prohibited for any request tosubstitute submitted after July 16, 2007.
    (b) Requests for modifications to an application will not be accepted for applications submitted after July 16, 2007.
• It thus appears, even though it is not clear from the advanced copy, that the Final Rule which will be published tomorrow may have the effective date of 07/26/2007 in most provisions relating to the substitution, amendment, and validity. The effective date of the final rule will have to wait and see tomorrow. Please stay tuned to this website for the release of this final rule in the federal register tomorrow.

Please stay tuned to this website for the additional updates.

05/16/2007: Senate CIR Delayed Again to Next Week

• Report indicates that the Senate has decided to delay the CIR debate at the request of Senator Kennedy and the Republican negotiators. Reportedly, the chance of reaching a compromise bill is 80:20 by Republicans accepting the legalization of illegan aliens. The 20% includes the overhaul of the legal immigration system adopting the point system.

05/16/2007: Motion to Cloture for S. 1348, CIR, Scheduled Today

• As we reportecd earlier, this bill was introduced by Sen. Reid on 05/14/2007 with a motion to proceed. The Senator then withdrew the motion to proceed and with the floor consent moved to schedule the debate and the motion to cloture on 05/16/2007. Accordingly, unless a compromise is presented by the bi-partisan group of Senators, the Senate floor is poised to debate S. 1948 and act on the motion to cloture to block out any amendments and quickly move onto the vote. Please stay tuned.

05/16/2007: Status of Liberman Bill, S. 1397

• This bill which was introduced in the Seante has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee per the Senate rule and will not be debated on the Senate floor today when the floor debates the CIR bill, S. 1948. For the summary of this bill, please click here.

05/15/2007: Senate CIR Schedule Tomorrow

• According to the Senate schedules of the Secretary, the Senate's schedule include on Wednesday, May 16, 2007: At a time to be determined by the Majority Leader, following consultation with the Republican Leader, the Senate proceed to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 1348, a bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform, and for other purposes. Hmm.....................................................
  

05/15/2007: Senators Joe Lieberman and Chuck Hagel Introduced a H-1B Relief Legislation "Skilled Worker Immigration and Fairness Act of 2007"

• These two Senators reportedly introduced this bill in the Senate with a strong support from the business community and their lobbysts. It is unclear how this bill will play out in the comprehensive immigration reform debate tomorrow and how it will be reconciled with the Senator Durbin's H-1B restrictive bill. Indian media reported that Senator Durbin and Senator Grassley demanded the two giant Indian consulting firms, Infosys and Wipro, to divurge their H-1B hiring practices. Reportedly these firms hired about 20,000 H-1Bs. This bill adds confusion to the immigration reform compromise process, which appears to go nowhere at this time. For this new bill, please click here.

05/15/2007: June Immigrant Visa Opportunity During Vacation Season

• Visa Bulletin for June 2007 gives an opportunity for a large number of immigrants to file either concurrent I-485 or stand-alone I-485 applications while the visa number is available in June. The State Department predicted that except "Other Worker" category which would move back to "Unavailable" in July, other categories in EB-preference cases might move forward even further in July. However, it is not a guarantee. Best policy is to file I-485 applications within the month when the visa number comes available.
• I-485 can be filed only when the applicant is physically present in the U.S. at the time of filing. Once it is filed, however, the applicant will remain free to travel outside of the U.S. without an Advance Parole or EAD inasmuch as the alien has a valid H-visa or L-visa. All others in other nonimmigrant visa status or out of status who depart from the U.S. without the AP and EAD will be considered abandonment of I-485 application. I-485 applicants usually submit AP and EAD applications concurrently with the I-485 application, in which case since AP and EAD takes at least two months or longer, they will not travel outside of the U.S. What about the H or L visa holders? Theoretically, they are free to travel immediately after filing I-485/EAD/AP, but such trip may not be completely free from any risk. Currently, it is the Service Center policy to mail out the biometric appointment notices soon after the data-entries are completed and file is opened. Additionally, the agency sends out such notice on a very short notice from one-week to ten days. Theoretically, the applicants are allowed to request rescheduling of the biometric session inasmuch as it is timely filed before the date of appointment and the applicant gives a good reason. When the applicant is traveling outside of the U.S., they may either miss it or not be able to file such request timely. The agency adopted not too long ago so-called stricter policy in enforcing the regulation that provides that failure to take biometric session is considered abandonment of I-485 applications. In old days, they were lenient, but nowadays, they are less accomodating the needs of the applicants. It is thus advised that people may want to take a trip after taking biometric collection session for the safe side. Otherwise, the applicants may experience an emotional trauma abroad.

05/14/2007: Senate Majority Leader Reid Reintroduced Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill on the Senate Floor on 05/09/2007

• Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid introduced S. 1348 Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 on May 9, 2007 with four co-sponsors of Senator Edward Kennedy (MA), Senator Robert Menendez (NJ), Senator Patrick Leahy (VT), and Senator Ken Salazar (CO). This is reintroduction of S. 2611, Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 which the Senate passed last year. This bill was not referred to the Judiciary Committee. There is an unconfirmed information that the full Senate floor may vote on the bill on Wednesday, May 16, 2007. Apparently, the two party leaders are still negotiating behind the door, but the Republicans reportedly demand that tabled CIR on Wednesday be delayed. For instance, the strongest opponent of the CIR is Senator Jeff Sessions from Alabama, but reportedly he has substantially backed down from his previous hardline position. The only problem is that he would not even negotiate and compromise unless the Senate Democrats agree to delay the debate. Please stay tuned to this website for the development.

05/14/2007: June 2007 Immigrant Visa Numbers and Advisory for I-485 Applicants

• Those whose priority date will become current in June are eligible to file I-485 applications on June 1, 2007, Friday. "File" means that the application and initial required evience must be delivered not earlier than June 1, 2007. Any delivery before June 1 are likely to be rejected and returned. There are a few things they should take care of now. Collection of certain documents takes time. For instance, birth certificate and marriage certificate from the home country will take time. More importantly, medical examination and sealed report by the physicians take time depending on the USCIS designated civil surgeons in the area. The medical examination can be taken now even before June 1, 2007.
• Those who have already filed I-485 and are waiting for the visa number availability after the retrogression must check their biometric collection record. If the biometric record was taken more than 15 months back, the USCIS will schedule a biometric session fairly quickly such that the I-485 applications are adjudicated and approved while the visa numbers are current for them. If the biometric collection turns close to 15 months, the agency usually accelerates the adjudication such that they approve the cases without adding the biometric collection and delays. Medical examination is valid even if it is more than one year old and people do not have to worry about the medical examination reports.
• When people file concurrently on or after June 1, 2007, they should make it sure that I-140 is approved or denied while the visa number is current so that they can "refile" while the visa number is available. Accordingly, those with clean-cut cases may want to file I-140 petition on Premiuum Processing basis to see the result within 15 days of filing.
• USCIS may acclerate the launch of Phase III Bi-Specialization Program as affected by the upcoming massive I-485 filings in June such that they will not have to ship around files en masse into one of the two jurisdictions, NSC or TSC under the Phase III program. Currently, one has to file I-485 where I-140 file is located. However, the concurrent filing can be done either with NSC or TSC regardless of the job location or residence. This will change soon. Under the Phase III program, the cases can be filed only with one of the two Service Centers that has jurisdiction over their job sites or residence. There are some chances that those cases which have been filed with a different Service Center pursuant to the current policy may have to be shipped to the right jurisdiction once the Phase III is launched. Keep eye on the USCIS announcement of launch of Phase III program.

05/14/2007: Congressional Research Service Updates on 05/11/2007 the Report on U.S. Immigration policy on Permanent Admission

• This report is a very thorough review of the U.S. immigration policy and analysis of funding and management issues by the CRS. Extremely informative material to read. Read on.

05/14/2007: June 2007 Visa Bulletin

• India: EB-2: From 01/08/03 to 04/01/2004, EB-3: From 08/01/2002 to 06/01/2003, Other Worker: From Unavailable to 10/01/2001
• China: EB-2: From 04/22/2005 to 01/01/2006, EB-3: From 08/01/2002 to 06/01/2003, Other Worker: From Unavailable to 10/01/2001
• Mexico: EB-3: From 05/15/2001 to 06/01/2003, Other Workers: From Unavailable to 10/01/2001
• Philippines: EB-3: From 08/01/2003 to 06/01/2005, Other Workers: From Unavailable to 10/01/2001
• Other Countries: EB-3: From 08/01/2003 to 06/01/2005
• Wow!
• Predictions:
  • D. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE “OTHER WORKER” CATEGORY FOR JUNE
  • A few “Other Worker” numbers which had been allocated for April were returned unused at the end of the month. As a result, a very small June allocation has been possible, for applicants with priority dates before October 1, 2001. The category will become “Unavailable” once again beginning in July and will remain so for the remainder of FY-2007.
  • E. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY DURING THE COMING MONTHS
  • The current level of demand in many of the Employment-based categories has been much lower than anticipated. As a result, the June cut-off dates have been advanced significantly in an effort to maximize number use under the annual numerical limits. At this time it appears likely that there will be additional advances during the coming months.
  • All readers should be aware that such cut-off date movements should allow for action to be finalized on a significant number of Citizenship and Immigration Services adjustment of status cases. Once that level of demand begins to exceed the supply of available numbers it will be necessary to make “adjustments” to the cut-off dates. At this time is in not possible to estimate when this is likely to occur, but it is expected.

05/14/2007: USCIS Service Centers Petitions/Applications Front Log Problem

• USCIS has announced that due to the H-1B massive filings, the Service Centers are experiencing receipting front log problem temporarily and the projected receipting dates are as follows:
  • Except the Premium Processing or I-129 H-1B (cap or non-cap) cases, the timeframes are as follows:
    California Service Center- USCIS expects to provide in time-compliance for receipting of all form types by June 15, 2007.
    Nebraska Service Center: USCIS is currently providing in time-compliance for receipting of all form types as of May 10, 2007
    Texas Service Center: USCIS is currently providing in time-compliance for receipting of all form types as of May 10, 2007.
    Vermont Service Center: USCIS expects to provide in time-compliance for receipting of all form types by June 2, 2007.
• For the full text of announcement, please click here.

05/13/2007: CIR Showdown in the Senate

• The leaders of the two parties are supposed to reach an agreement before Wednesday. Otherwise, there will be a huge showdown between a few restrictionist Republican Senators and the majority Democrats in the Senate. Report indicates that the Democrats will keep the door open for the compromise and additionally allow amendments introduced on the floor. At the same time, the Democratic leaders in the Senate appear to be ready to move very quickly, should things go wrong, and pass the CIR which they had already passed last year. Please stay tuned to this website to experience an excitement involving this drama which will be unfolded during the next two weeks.
• Once the Senate passes the CIR, the showdown is expected to move to the stage of the House where the House version of the compromise bill, STRIVE Act of 2007 is pending. There is likely that the Chairwoman of the Immigration Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee may introduce her immigration bill based on a series of the immigration oversight hearings during the last two weeks. If things move along without a big showdown in the House, the Senate bill and the House bill go to the Conference Committee of the Senate-House. Should the CIR reach such stage, there will be a good chance to see a CIR passed in the Congress this year. Otherwise, the immigration reform legislation will totally fail for the next two years and the country will continue to suffer from the ailment in the current broken immigration system. No matter what, we urge the Congress to pass a CIR in one form or another. We do not want to see another crippled and incapacitated Congress for their failure to exercise their skills of negotiation and compromise. They are supposed to be masters of negotiation and compromise. The critical failure of the 109th Congress in this country which turned out to be "Do-Nothing-Congress" was everybody in the Congress having a deaf-ear and refusing to do their mandated mission to use their negotiation and compromise skills and produce legislations.

05/12/2007: Senate CIR Mark-Up Moved from Monday 05/14/2007 to Wednesday 05/16/2007

• The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, was scheduled to reintroduced S. 2611, the CIR which was passed in the Senate last year and take up the CIR debate on Monday, May 14, 2007. However, at the last minute, Senator Reid decided late yesterday to move the CIR mark-up to Thursday, May 16, 2007 to give a last chance for the ten bi-partisan negotiators to reach a compromise. Reportedly, Senator Ken Salazar from Colorado is playing an active role to mediate the differences to iron out a compromise between the two party leaders. If the bi-partisan group fails to come up with a compromise, the Senate will be ready to take up the CIR debate based on the 2006 version. Please stay tuned to this website for the latest development of CIR negotiation.

05/11/2007: One Mystery on CIR Compromise Failure

• There is a concensus that the Republican leaders have moved father right this year than last year in the issue of comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Accordingly, they have moved farther and father away from any previous or current compromise bills such as the bi-partisan CIR of 2006 or the bi-partisan STRIVE bill. As time goes by, they are taking harder and harder lines rather than compromising. On the other hand, it was one of the shocking but welcoming big news that the Christian evangelical coalition stepped forward a few days ago with a declaration that they fully support the comprehensive immigration reform and would engage in a masstive ad campaign beginning from next week. Considering the fact that the political base for the conservative Republicans lies with the Christian and evangelical forces, particularly at a time when primary for the next year election is growingly heating up, it appears that something does not add up in that these party leaders are moving farther and farther away from the comprehensive immigration reform, while the Christian evangelical coalition is moving toward the center when it comes to the immigration reform issues. The truth will eventually come out, but to this reporter, it just remains a mystery. It is particularly true because these two events of moving two different and opposite directions between these groups only recently surfaced at about the same time. Hmmmm....................................................Isn't that interesting?

05/11/2007: FY 2008 H-1B Lotteries and Frontlog in Receipt Notices Issuances

• The AILA-USCIS Liaison minutes indicates that the winners have been data-entried and issued Receipt Notices but this will not be completed until the end of today, 05/11/2007. There are still a number of winners in the lotteries who have yet to receive the Receipt Notices. It is thus expected that they will receive the Receipt Notices next week or so.

05/11/2007: Likely Schedule of Termination of I-140/485 Concurrent Filing Procedure

• The USCIS may change the schedule, but according to the rule-making agenda, they were considering release of this rule in the form of "proposed" rule with the 60-day comment period ending in October 2007. Since it is a proposed rule making process, it is anticipated that the USCIS will take quite some time before it enacts the proposed rule into a "final" rule, which is legally binding. It thus appears that the termination of I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing procedure may not come into reality for the rest of this calendar year. However, people should be prepared for the eventual enactment of this rule in the early next year.

05/11/2007: USCIS Fee Increase Final Rule and Likely Publishing Date

• This rule is considered "Economically Significant" in the rule-making guidelines, meaning that the OMB review is required to be completed in a limited period of time, usually 30 days or less. Since the rule was submitted to the OMB for its review on 04/17/2007, there is a chance that the review may be completed by 05/17/2007, next Thursday. The fact that the AILA was notified of the imminent release of this rule more or less coincide with our prediction here.
• When user fees are imposed by a legislation with the preset effective date, the agency's fee regulation is enacted with effective date matching the legislation. However, when the filing fees are adjusted to reflect the inflation rate, it has been the INS or USCIS practice to stipulate an effective date separate from the release date. It is uncertain whether the soon-to-be published fee increase rule will adopt a similar policy. We hope they do, but the rule of prudence should always prevail over the guesswork when it comes to the people's action. Pleast stay tuned to this web site for the development of this news.

05/11/2007: BEWARE Employers: USICE to Accelerate Final Rule on Safe-Harbor Procedures for Employers Who Receive a No-Match Letter

• USICE requested the OMB to review this final rule yesterday. This final rule is considered "significant" and it is anticipated that it will give only one month to take effect.
• The USICE amends the regulations relating to the unlawful hiring or continued employment of unauthorized aliens. The rule adds two more examples of situations that may lead to a finding that an employer has constructive knowledge that an employee is an unauthorized alien. These additional two examples involve an employers failing to take reasonable steps in response to one or the other of two events: (1) The employer receives written notice from the Social Security Administration (SSA) that the name and social security account number submitted for an employee do not match SSA records; or (2) the employer receives written notice from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that the immigration-status or employment-authorization documentation presented or referenced by the employee in completing Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, was not assigned to the employee according to DHS records. The rule also describes steps that DHS considers to be a reasonable response, and clarifies that whether DHS will find that an employer had constructive knowledge that an employee was an unauthorized alien will depend on the totality of relevant circumstances. The rule describes "Safe Harbor" procedures an employer can follow in response to such a letter to be certain that DHS will not use the letter as part of an allegation that the employer had constructive knowledge that the employee referred to in the letter was an alien not authorized to work in the United States. The purpose of this rule is to clarify an employer's obligations and options when it receives a no-match letter, either from SSA or DHS.

05/11/2007: Full Text of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill to be Reintroduced on the Senate Floor Monday, 05/14/2007

• Reportedly, the two-party negotiation for compromised bill has totally collapsed and the full Senate floor will debate the comprehensive immigration reform on the CIR which the Senate passed last year. This bill will face a substantial amount of resistance from the hardline Republican Senators that demand removal of the family immigration system. Please stay tuned.

05/10/2007: PERM FAQ Round 10 Released Today

• Notice of Filing:
  (Q)Does the language on the electronic in-house media Notice of Filing need to be exactly the same as the language on the physical in-house Notice of Filing?
  (A)The regulations require that the employer publish the notice internally using in-house media--whether electronic or print--in accordance with the normal internal procedures used by the employer to notify its employees of employment opportunities in the occupation in question. The language should give sufficient notice to interested persons of the employer’s having filed an application for permanent alien labor certification for the relevant job opportunity. It is not required to mirror, word for word, the physical posting. In most cases, the physical posting language will be the most efficient way to electronically post the Notice of Filing; in others, the software program used to create the electronic in-house posting may be unable to accept all of the language used in the physical Notice of Filing. In every case, the Notice of Filing that is posted to the employer’s in-house media must state the rate of pay and apprise the reader that any person may provide documentary evidence bearing on the application to the Certifying Officer. If there is insufficient space to include the Certifying Officer’s address, then information as to where the address can be found must be provided.
• Advertisement Content:
  (Q)Does the advertisement have to contain the so-called “Kellogg” language where the application requires it to be used on the application?
  (A)Where the “Kellogg” language is required by regulation to appear on the application, it is not required to appear in the advertisements used to notify potential applications of the employment opportunity. However, the placement of the language on the application is simply a mechanism to reflect compliance with a substantive, underlying requirement of the program. Therefore, if during an audit or at another point in the review of the application it becomes apparent that one or more U.S. workers with a suitable combination of education, training or experience were rejected, the application will be denied, whether or not the Kellogg language appears in the application.
• Can jobs requiring experience be advertised through an on-campus placement office?
  For professional positions, the regulations at 20 CFR 656.17(e)(1)(ii)(D) permit, as an additional recruitment step, optional pre-filing recruitment at or through a college or university placement office. The preamble to the regulation (69 Fed. Reg. 77325, 77345 (Dec. 27, 2004)) assumed that this option would be used only if the employment opportunity requires a degree but no experience. The Department has examined this policy in light of the fact that many college and university placement offices maintain job listings that are used by alumni with experience as well as recent college or university graduates. Consequently, the job opportunities requiring experience are included in the listings making campus placement offices a viable recruitment source for professional job requiring experience as well as not requiring experience. As a result, the Department is clarifying its position and permitting this option to be used for employment opportunities even if the job requires experience in addition to the degree.
• Is the employer required to include the statement, “any suitable combination of experience of education, training, or experience is acceptable” on the application when the employer requires experience in an alternate occupation and not in the job offered?
  No, the employer is not required to include the statement on the application if the employer has indicated it requires experience in an alternate occupation and not in the job offered. The “any suitable combination of experience of education, training, or experience is acceptable” statement is only required where there are primary as well as alternative requirements and then only if the alien is already employed by the employer and the alien does not meet the primary job requirements and only potentially qualifies for the job by virtue of the employer’s “alternative” as opposed to its “primary” requirements.
  Audit
• Can the employer submit alternative evidence in the absence of primary evidence in response to an audit request?
  Under the procedures outlined in 20 CFR 656.20, in response to an audit, employers must present the required documentation. The documentary evidence the regulations require the employer to maintain in its compliance file is what is sought in an audit request. For example, the use of an employer’s web site is to be documented by dated copies of pages from that site advertising the occupation involved in the application. However, if the employer does not have the primary evidence suggested by the regulation, it may attempt to satisfy the request through the use of alternative evidence not specifically listed in 656.17. In the case of the employer’s web site, in the absence of a copy of the posting, the employer may provide an affidavit from the official within the employer’s organization responsible for the posting of such occupations on the web site attesting, under penalty of perjury, to the posting of the job. Whether such evidence will be accepted depends upon the nature of the submission and the presence of other primary documentation. The more primary evidence is not provided, the more likely the audit response will be found to be non-responsive.
• The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has posted a sample of a Notice of Filing for a Schedule A permanent labor certification on their website. Will the Department of Labor accept/honor such a posting as sufficient proof of the Notice of Filing for a non-Schedule A permanent labor certification?
  An employer may use the posting sample of a Notice of Filing issued by the USCIS and such a posting will be honored by the Department of Labor (DOL) provided that the Notice of Filing includes the employer’s name when filing under the basic labor certification process. DOL will honor the use of the sample form, but is not endorsing or requiring its use. Employers may use other forms, as long as they comply with the PERM regulation. Please note that, while the USCIS sample does not include an employer name field, the Notice must contain the name of the employer if the application is filed under 20 CFR 656.17.
• From previous “approved” FAQ drafts:
  Advertisement Content
  After completing our recruitment, but before filing the ETA Form 9089, our company’s name was changed after it was wholly acquired by another company. Does the company name used in the advertisements used for recruitment have to match the company name used on the ETA Form 9089?
  The employer must conduct recruitment using its legal name at the time of the recruitment. However, an Application for Permanent Employment Certification (ETA Form 9089) must be filed in the name of the employer’s legal name at the time of submission. If a merger, acquisition, or any other corporate change in ownership occurs between the time of recruitment and the time of submission, resulting in a disparity between the employer’s name shown on the advertising used to recruit for a job opportunity and the employer’s name on the submitted ETA Form 9089, the employer must be prepared to provide documentation -- in the event of an audit -- proving that it is the successor in interest, a determination made based on the totality of the circumstances, including whether the current employer has assumed the assets and liabilities of the former entity with respect to the job opportunity

05/10/2007: USCIS Monthly Newsletter - May 2007

05/10/2007: USCIS Fee Increase in the Very Near Future

• AILA has just reported that the USCIS is expected to release this rule in the very near future. We have no information about how soon and what will be the effective date of this rule. Please stay tuned.

05/10/2007: CIR Update

• Thank God! The Senate has decided to start CIR debate beginning from Monday. What bill? The CIR bill which the Senate passed last year which was killed by the Republican House last year. The opponents demanded more time to reach a compromise, but wasn't five months enough to work out a bill? We fully agree that the Senate should proceed and let the public decide whether the legislators are doing right thing and no more behind the door and outside the public plain views among legislators. Let the public be the judge. The opponents will have sufficient opportunity to address their views and proposals in the form of amendments. No more delay tactics.
• This decision of the Senate majority leader is reasonable particularly considering the fact that the Senate floor will be willing to replace the CIR bill, should the leaders of both parties be successful in producing compromising bill during the next week.

05/10/2007: Important Dates to Remember

• 05/14/2007, Monday: U.S. postal rate goes up to 41 cents. When you file any papers with the agencies, please make it sure that you affix a right amount of stamps. Otherwise, the filing will be returned by the USPS.
• 06/16/2007: The new rule that removes 12-week RFE/NOID response time will take effect. Watch your mails carefully.

05/10/2007: Confusion of the Law on "Effective Date" of a Final Rule

• It appears that there is a rumor going around that under the law, agencies can not release a final rule which takes effect on the date of release in the federal register. That is not true. The agencies can stipulate in the rule any date as the effective date of the new rule. In fact, most of the rules are published with the effective date of release of the rule in the federal register.
• In the upcoming final rule that eliminates substitution of labor certification beneficiary, stipulates a 45-day cap on the validity of the certified labor certification, and other provisions, no one knows at this time what effective date the final rule will provide. Under the circumstances, it will be prudent for the people to act on the assumption that it may take effect on the date of release of the final rule.

05/09/2007: OFLC Guidance on H-2B

• The Office of Foreign Labor Certification has just released the following information for H-2B program.
  • On May 1, 2007 and May 4, 2007 , the Department of Labor held two national briefing sessions in Chicago and Atlanta, respectively, to discuss recently updated guidance for State Workforce Agencies and ETA National Processing Centers (NPCs) to process H-2B labor condition applications in non-agricultural occupations. The purpose of the briefing sessions was to inform the user community of the processing protocols implemented at the NPCs in Chicago and Atlanta. Click here (pdf version here) to view the presentation for the employers filing H-2B applications. To ensure that all employers/stakeholders are fully aware of the filing requirements, and to ensure that applications for H-2B visas are processed in the most time efficient manner, the Department of Labor has released filing tips for employers submitting H-2B applications. Click here to download a copy of the H-2B Stakeholder Filing Tips. Additionally, the Department of Labor delivered presentations on the procedures for processing H-2B applications for occupations involved in entertaining and tree planting and forestry related activities. Click here (pdf version here) to view the presentation for the employers in the Entertainment industry filing H-2B applications. Click here (pdf version here) to view the presentation for the employers in the Forestry industry filing H-2B applications.
  • H-2B Program Guidance: The Department of Labor has released updated guidance for State Workforce Agencies and ETA National Processing Centers to process H-2B labor condition applications in non-agricultural occupations. Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) 21-06: Procedures for H-2B Temporary Labor Certification in Non-Agricultural Occupations replaces and supersedes prior operating procedures issued under General Administrative Letter (GAL) 01-95, GAL 01-95, Change 1, and Field Memorandum (FM) 25-98. This guidance was also published in the Federal Register on April 20, 2007. It works in concert with the new centralized filing process at the NPCs to ensure greater consistency in the processing of H-2B applications. Special handling procedures for certain non-agricultural occupations, such as forestry workers and boilermakers, will be issued through separate guidance letters by the National Office of Foreign Labor Certification.
    
• For access to the links in the text and other full details, please click here for the announcement.

05/09/2007: CIR Compromise Status

05/09/2007: Series of House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee Hearings on CIR

• For the list of witnesses and full text of their testimonies, please click here.
  • 05/08/2007: The Role of Family-Based Immigration in the U.S. Immigration System
  • 05/15/2007: Becoming Americans - U.S. Immigrant Integration
  • 05/15/2007: The Future of Undocumengted Immigrant Students
  • 05/17/2007: Impact of Immigration on States and Localities

05/09/2007: Diverse Interest Groups in the Immigration Support Community and Challenges Ahead for Immigration Reform

• It is no secret that there has been a conflict or even hostility between the so-called legal immigration supporters and the so-called illegal immigration supporters. This hostility has been developed from the sense that the legal immigration reform has remained a hostage to the illegal immigration reform in the form of Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation process. Until this year, there were two groups within the legal immigration reform supporters: One was a softline group that had accepted a "comprehensive" immigration reform solution. This group did not necessarily accepted the "comprehensive" approach because they supported it but at least because they accepted the political reality that any piecemeal solution for the legal immigration reform was not workable. One another group is a hardline group that opposed illegal immigration reform and consequently opposed the "comprehensive" approach. The second group thus tended to take side with the hardline Republicans more or less in the past in opposing the comprehensive approach in the immigration reform. The anti-immigrationists and CIR opponents were thus able to penetrate this group with the piecemeal proposals in favor of the so-called "legal" immigrants. Before the 110th Congress, these hardline immigration opponents in the Congress and the political community approached them with the so-called employment-based immigration reform issue alone to penetrate into this second group and the employment-based immigration reform stakeholders such as the business community and academic institutions. In the current 110th Congress, the hardline legislators in the Congress are approaching this group with additional sugar-coated chip in the name of so-called "point system" or "merit system" in the immigration system. They appaently approach this group with the two sugar-coated persuasions: One is that by terminating the family-based immigration system and adopting a new immigration system based on workforce merits, the employment-based immigrants will have more opportunity to immigrate into this country, which is totally false. The second sugar-coated persuasion appears to be that by rejecting the comprehensive immigration reform legislation, the piecemeal employment-based immigration legislations will have better chances to pass the Congress. For these reasons, this hardline legal immigration group faced only one opponent in the legal immigration community, but now face another opponent in the legal immigration community, to wit, family-based immigration supporters.
• Well, it is unfortunate that the immigrants have never been able to get along among diverse interest groups historically.

05/09/2007: CIR Compromise Failure and Senate Floor Schedule Monday, 05/14/2007

• Unconfirmed sources indicate that the White House effort to induce a compromised Senate CIR bill between the Republicans and the Democrats has reportedly failed on the two issues, among others: Republicans' hardline position against the legalization of illegal aliens and their issistance on overhaul of the legal immigration system by scraping the current family-based immigration system and turning it into the so-called point system. The second issue was never brought up in the past CIR debates in the Senate and House prior to the current 110th Congress. This second issue obvisously adds another tough teeth in the compromise negotiation. Obviously these drastic and hardline position of the Republicans were not acceptable to the Democrats and reportedly the negotiation between the leaders of the two parties collapsed as of now. This development raises two questions. Firstly, how it will affect the Senate majority leader's agenda to take up the CIR debate on the Senate floor Monday. Unless there develops a new negotiation between the two parties, the