Category: Immigration

Draft Form I-765V, EAD Application for Abused Nonimmigrant Spouse: Comments Open

nonimmigrant spouseOn May 27, USCIS posted for comment on the Federal Register draft versions of Form I-765V, Application for Employment Authorization for Abused Nonimmigrant Spouse and its instructions. Under section 106 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, abused spouses of certain nonimmigrants are eligible for employment authorization: i.e., the spouses of foreign nationals in the following nonimmigrant categories:

  • A-1, A-2, and A-3 (foreign government diplomats and officials and their immediate family members, attendants, servants, and personal employees);

  • E-3 (Australian specialty occupation workers);

  • G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, and G-5 (employees of foreign governments and international organizations and their immediate family members, attendants, servants, and personal employees);

  • and H-1B, H-1B1, H-2A, H-2B, H-3, and H-4 (specialty occupation workers, Free Trade Agreement professionals from Chile and Singapore, temporary agricultural and non-agricultural workers, trainees and special education exchange visitors, and immediate family members of specialty occupation workers).

Earlier this year, March 8, 2016, USCIS released a Policy Memorandum regarding the eligibility of such applicants. Pursuant to the memo, along with the Form I-765V EAD application, credible evidence should be presented to prove various eligibility factors, including that the applicant resides in the United States, that the applicant is or was (under specific circumstances) married to the qualifying principal nonimmigrant spouse, that the applicant was last admitted to the United States in nonimmigrant status, and that the applicant or the applicant’s child was abused or subject to extreme cruelty by the principal nonimmigrant spouse. If approved, the EAD should be granted for two years. Supporting documentation should include copies of the marriage certificate, evidence of the abuse, and I-94 records and biographical identification documents of both the applicant and the principal spouse.

The draft EAD application Form for abused nonimmigrant spouses is six pages, while the regular Form I-765 used by applicants eligible for employment authorization under other bases is only one page. Form I-765V requests information not only on the applicant’s immigration status, but also on biographical physical features including ethnicity, race, height, weight, and eye and hair color. Form I-765V also allows for information to be completed regarding a safe mailing address and an interpreter. Further, the draft Form requests an Applicant’s Certification regarding the authenticity of documents and release of information. USCIS estimates that completing the application Form and preparing the documentation will take three hours per response.

USCIS encourages comments on the draft Form I-765V. Specifically, USCIS seeks feedback regarding whether the proposed collection of information on the form is necessary, the burden on the applicants to compete the form, the accuracy of USCIS’ estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, and the clarity, quality, and utility of the information to be collected. Comments will be accepted for 60 days, until July 26, 2016. All comments should reference OMB Control number 1615-NEW and Docket ID USCIS-2016-0004. Comments can be made online, by email, or by mail.

Article By Lauren A. Tetenbaum of Greenberg Traurig, LLP

©2016 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

USCIS Proposes Immigration Increase . . . in Immigration Fees that is

On May 4, 2016, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services published a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding changes to the USCIS filing fee schedule. USCIS is proposing to raise immigration benefit application filing fees by an average of over 20%. USCIS is primarily funded by immigration benefit request fees charged to the applicants, and these filing fees comprise 94% of USCIS’s annual budget of $3 billion. USCIS last raised immigration filing fees in 2010, and the agency has justified the increase as necessary to fully recover the costs of services, to maintain an adequate service level, and to allow for processing and technological improvements.

Over the last six years, USCIS has seen a significant increase in the number of benefits applications filed. While applications filed by employers have remained steady, applications filed by individuals for naturalization have increased 25%, applications for permanent residence by 15%, and applications to replace expiring permanent resident cards by almost 50%.

USCIS’s proposal would raise the base filing fees on employers sponsoring work visas between 20-40%. Foreign nationals filing for permanent residence will see the application fee rise to $1,140 from its current $985, a 16% increase. Those seeking US citizenship will pay an additional 8%, from $595 to $640. At the other end of the spectrum, high net worth investors seeking permanent residence through the EB-5 visa program will see the filing fee increase from $1,500 to $3,675, while the fee for entities seeking designation as EB-5 Regional Centers will skyrocket from $6,230 to $17,795, a raise of 186%!

The rule increasing the fees is expected to become final later this summer. In this case, time really is money, and we strongly suggest employers and foreign nationals file their benefits applications quickly to avoid the coming price hikes.

June 2016 Visa Bulletin Update

The Department of State (DOS) has released the June 2016 Visa Bulletin that includes the “Application Final Action Dates” and “Dates for Filing Applications.”

For both family-sponsored and employment-based filings, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) website indicates that the Application Final Action Dates chart must be used for May 2016.

Please see below for the Application Final Action Dates for both family-sponsored and employment-based preference filings:

Application Final Action Dates for Family-Sponsored Visa Applications

June Visa Bulletin

Movement from the May 2016 Visa Bulletin shows gradual but insignificant jumps in processing dates for this category, with the exception of China, F4 dates retrogressing from July 22, 2003 to January 1, 2003.

Application Final Action Dates for Employment-Based Preference Cases

IBI blog june 2016

Of particular note is that China EB-2 and EB-3 preference categories saw a retrogression from September 1, 2012 to January 1, 2010; and August 15, 2013 to January 1, 2010, respectively; and India EB-2 preference category also experienced a four-year retrogression from November 22, 2008 to October 1, 2004.

©2016 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.
  • See more at: http://www.natlawreview.com/article/june-2016-visa-bulletin-update#sthash.svy3O7QO.dpuf

Department of State Releases May 2016 Visa Bulletin

The US Department of State (DOS) has released its May 2016 Visa Bulletin. The Visa Bulletin sets out per-country priority date cutoffs that regulate immigrant visa availability and the flow of adjustment of status and consular immigrant visa application filings and approvals. A new geographic sector encompassing El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras has been added to the employment-based (EB) charts.  A new geographic sector that includes El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras has been added.

What Does the May 2016 Visa Bulletin Say?

The May 2016 Visa Bulletin includes both a Dates for Filing Visa Applications and Application Final Action Dates chart. The former indicates when intending immigrants may file their applications for adjustment of status or immigrant visa, and the latter indicates when an adjustment of status application or immigrant visa application may be approved and permanent residence granted.

If the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) determines that there are more immigrant visas available for a fiscal year than there are known applicants for such visas, it will state on its website that applicants may use the Dates for Filing Visa Applications chart. Otherwise, applicants should use the Application Final Action Dates chart to determine when they may file their adjustment of status applications. For May 2016, USCIS announced that EB applicants must use the Application Final Action Dates chart.

Application Final Action Dates

To be eligible to file an EB adjustment application in May 2016, foreign nationals must have a priority date that is earlier than the date listed below for their preference category and country (changes from last month’s Visa Bulletin dates are shown in yellow):

EB

All Charge-
ability
Areas Except
Those Listed

China
(mainland
born)

El Salvador,
Guatemala,
and Honduras

India

Mexico

Philippines

1st

C

C

C

C

C

C

2nd

C

01SEP12

C

22NOV08
(was 08NOV08)

C

C

3rd

15FEB16

15AUG13

15FEB16

01SEP04
(was 08AUG04)

15FEB16

08AUG08
(was 01May08)

Other Workers

15FEB16

22APR07
(was 01MAR07)

15FEB16

01SEP04
(was 08AUG04)

15FEB16

08AUG08
(was 01May08)

4th

C

C

01JAN10

C

C

C

Certain Religious Workers

C

C

01JAN10

C

C

C

5th
Nonregional
Center
(C5 and T5)

C

08FEB14
(was 01FEB14)

C

C

C

C

5th
Regional
Center
(I5 and R5)

C

08FEB14
(was 01FEB14)

C

C

C

C

How This Affects You

Most countries saw a relatively minor advancement in priority cutoff dates, generally three weeks at most. The largest changes in the Application Final Action Dates chart are in the EB-3 and Other Workers Philippines category, which advanced by three and a half months to August 8, 2008.

The Third Preference final action date for EB-3 China has been “held” for the month of May, with no change in priority date cutoff. The DOS indicated that continued heavy demand for numbers will require a retrogression of this date for June to hold number use within the FY2016 annual limit. It is extremely likely that the India and Mexico Employment Fourth Preference categories will also become oversubscribed at some point during the summer months.

The addition of the El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras category is a result of extremely high demand in the E4 and SR categories for applicants from these areas. A determination about whether these countries will remain subject to E4 and SR final application dates under the FY2017 annual numerical limitation will be made in early September. Read the entire May 2016 Visa Bulletin.

Article By Eleanor Pelta & Eric S. Bord

Copyright © 2016 by Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. All Rights Reserved.

Supreme Court’s Decision on Future of DACA and DAPA

Supreme Court argument has taken place in United States v. Texas, a high-stakes, hotly contested case on the Administration’s executive programs that deferred possible deportation of millions of undocumented individuals. The Court’s expected June decision is likely to have far-reaching implications for employers.

In 2012, the Obama Administration introduced through executive action Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a program which deferred deportation of certain individuals who arrived to the United States unlawfully as minors. DACA allowed these individuals access to employment authorization. In late-2014, the Administration, again through executive action, expanded DACA, in part, by increasing the available periods of employment authorization for DACA beneficiaries from two years to three years, and introduced Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). DAPA is a program which deferred deportation of and created a basis for employment authorization for parents who, as of November 20, 2014, had a child who was a U.S. citizen or green card holder.

In February 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas concluded the 2014 DACA expansion and DAPA creation were unconstitutional and enjoined the 2014 executive action. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the lower court’s injunction later that year. The Administration appealed that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case raises the threshold issue as to whether states have the right to bring such an action and carries with it broad implications for the limits on and use of executive power. The case is important for employers because hundreds of thousands of individuals have obtained employment authorization through DACA’s 2012 guidelines and more than 100,000 more received three-year employment authorization approvals through the 2014 expansion before the district court’s injunction.  It was expected that many individuals would continue to apply for three-year employment authorization under the DACA expansion and DAPA creation.  Since February 2015 and until the Supreme Court renders a decision, only individuals qualifying under the original 2012 DACA guidelines may obtain employment authorization, limited to two-year increments.  If the Supreme Court agrees with the Fifth Circuit, then the DACA expansion and DAPA program will be nullified.  Whether the pre-2014 DACA program and guidelines would survive a Supreme Court decision affirming the Fifth Circuit’s ruling is unclear.

Contributing to the interest in and speculation about this case is the vacancy on the Supreme Court created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s recent death. Should the Supreme Court’s deliberations end in a 4-4 tie, the lower court’s ruling  would remain intact and undisturbed, thus foreclosing the ability of individuals who would otherwise be qualified for employment authorization under DACA expansion and DAPA to receive employment authorization as the 2014 executive action intended.  However, because an affirmance by an equally divided 4-4 Court would be non-precedential, the issues could be raised again in another case, after a ninth justice was seated on the Court.

There will be great interest in the outcome of this case as the end of the current term approaches.

H-1B Cap: The Receipts Are Trickling In!

The July 2015 Visa Bulletin Brings Little ChangeOn April 7, 2016, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it received more H-1B petitions than available under the statutory cap of 65,000 general-category visas and 20,000 U.S. Master’s visas for the fiscal year. Another record-breaking year: USCIS received over 236,000 H-1B petitions during the filing period.

This is the fourth consecutive year that the H-1B quota has been reached during the first five business days of April. Before that, the last time the cap had been reached during the first week was in April 2008 for FY 2009. The decreased demand after FY 2009 was due to the effects of the financial crises. H-1B petition submissions have increased each year, as outlined below:

FY 2017

236,000

FY 2016

233,000

FY 2015

172,500

FY 2014

124,000

On April 9, USCIS ran the computer-generated lottery to select enough petitions to meet the 65,000 general-category cap and the 20,000 Master’s cap. As such, USCIS began issuing Receipt Notices for those cases that “won” the lottery this week. They are slowly “trickling” in. Once the case is “receipted” it still must undergo review and adjudication by USCIS. USCIS will begin premium processing for H-1B cap cases no later than May 16, 2016.

Any cases not selected in the lottery will be returned with their filing fees.

We appreciate that, during this period, employers and foreign national employees will be anxious while awaiting the lottery results. Proskauer will continue to update its clients directly and through alerts as to H-1B cap developments.

Article By David Grunblatt, Hallie A Cohen, Erica Loomba, Valarie H McPherson, Praveena N Swanson & Jennifer Wexler of Proskauer Rose LLP

© 2016 Proskauer Rose LLP.

Department of State Issues May 2016 Visa Bulletin

The Department of State (DOS) has released the May 2016 Visa Bulletin with the Application Final Action Date chart for employment-based applications which reflects some modest movement for some applicants.

The second and third preference categories for China-mainland born applicants had no movement. The second and third preference categories for India move ahead a few weeks to Nov. 22, 2008, and Sept. 1, 2004.  There was no movement in the third preference for all chargeability areas except those listed, and no movement for Mexico. The third preference and other workers categories for the Philippines move ahead a few months to Aug. 8, 2008.

There was no movement in the Dates for Filing chart for employment-based categories with the exception of the other workers category for China-mainland born applicants, which moved up several months to April 1, 2008.

The May 2016 Visa Bulletin states that “during the past month, there have been extremely high levels of Employment-based demand in most categories for cases filed with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for adjustment of status. If this sudden and unanticipated change in the demand pattern continues, it could impact final action dates in the coming months and possibly require corrective action in some.” The DOS also notes an oversubscription of applicants from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.

As previously reported, last month prospective adjustment of status applicants have been advised to use the Application Final Action Date chart to determine their eligibility to file applications, despite previous guidance that the Dates for Filing chart could be used. Greenberg Traurig will continue to monitor the movement of Visa Bulletins and consequences on eligibility for filing.

APPLICATION FINAL ACTION DATES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCE CASES

IBI May 2015 1

DATES FOR FILING OF EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA APPLICATIONS

IBI May 2015 2

Article By Kristen T. Burke of Greenberg Traurig, LLP
©2016 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

April 2016 Visa Bulletin Release

visaThe Department of State (DOS) has released the April 2016 Visa Bulletin, with the Application Final Action Date chart for employment-based applications reflecting some substantial movement. The 2nd preference category for China-mainland born applicants has moved ahead one month to Sept. 1, 2012, and for India born applicants it has moved ahead a few weeks to Nov. 8, 2008. The 3rd preference and Other Workers categories have moved ahead at least one month for all applicants. The Final Action Date cut-off for China-mainland born applicants is now Feb. 1, 2014, for all 5th preference category applicants. There was no movement in the Dates for Filing chart for employment-based categories.

The family-based categories also showed slight movement in the Application Final Action Date chart, but there was no movement in the Dates for Filing chart.

As reported, last month prospective adjustment of status applicants were advised to use the Application Final Action Date chart to determine their eligibility to file applications, despite previous guidance that the Dates for Filing chart could be used. USCIS has not yet advised which April 2016 charts should be referred to in filing adjustment of status applications for family- or employment-based petitions, but anticipates that this information will be released within the week.

Article By Lauren A. Tetenbaum of Greenberg Traurig, LLP

©2016 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

DHS Announces Final Rule on STEM OPT Employment Authorization

The final rule adds employer obligations to the STEM OPT program.

The US Department of Homeland Security has released an advance version of its long-anticipated final rule that expands employment authorization for foreign students with science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) degrees. The rule, which will be published in the Federal Register on March 11 and take effect on May 10, 2016, will allow such students to extend their period of optional practical training (OPT) by an extra 24 months, for a total of 36 months of OPT employment authorization. Previously, students in STEM fields were allowed a total of 29 months of OPT. Foreign students with degrees in non-STEM fields will continue to be limited to 12 months of OPT.

The rule also improves and increases oversight over STEM OPT extensions by, among other things, requiring that employers implement formal training plans, adding wage and other protections for STEM OPT students and US workers, and allowing extensions only to students with degrees from accredited schools. The rule also allows US Immigration and Customs Enforcement to conduct site visits to employers of STEM OPT holders to ensure that the rule’s requirements are being complied with.

Previous 17-month STEM OPT employment authorizations issued before May 10 will remain valid until their expirations. Starting May 10, STEM students will have a chance to apply for an additional seven months of OPT.

Article By Eleanor Pelta, Eric S. Bord, A. James Vázquez-Azpiri, Lisa Stephanian Burton & Tracy Evlogidis of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Copyright © 2016 by Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. All Rights Reserved.

Can USCIS Raise EB-5 investment Amount Without Congressional Intervention?

The July 2015 Visa Bulletin Brings Little ChangeSince its inception as part of the Immigration Act of 1990, the EB-5 program has had a $1,000,000 threshold capital investment requirement, with that minimum decreased to $500,000 for projects in targeted employment areas. Last year, legislation was introduced and circulated on Capitol Hill that would raise this investment amount in varying proposals and conditions.

Some have argued that raising the amounts is necessary given inflation: $1 million in 1990 has the same buying power as $1,813,443 in 2015. Others argue the investment amounts should remain at their present level to compete with other countries’ investment programs and maximize EB-5 visa usage –which has been quite low for most of the program’s history, spiking to fulfill the ~10,000 annual quota allocation only relatively recently.

Suppose, though, that USCIS wanted to change the investment amount without waiting for Congress to agree on a new bill. Could it do so?

The answer is clearly yes, and there are several ways of so doing. INA § 203(b)(5)(C) provides:

Amount of capital required.–

(i) In general.–Except as otherwise provided in this subparagraph, the amount of capital required […] shall be $1,000,000. The Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of State, may from time to time prescribe regulations increasing the dollar amount specified under the previous sentence.

(ii) Adjustment for targeted employment areas.–The Attorney General may, in the case of investment made in a targeted employment area, specify an amount of capital required […] that is less than (but not less than 1/2 of) the amount specified in clause (i).

(iii) Adjustment for high employment areas.–In the case of an investment made in a part of a metropolitan statistical area that at the time of the investment–

(I) is not a targeted employment area, and

(II) is an area with an unemployment rate significantly below the national average unemployment rate, the Attorney General may specify an amount of capital required under […] that is greater than (but not greater than 3 times) the amount specified in clause (i).

The statute, written in 1990, utilizes the antiquated term “Attorney General;” however, immigration regulatory functions now fall under the purview of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security following the dissolution of the INS. Nevertheless, it is clear that Congress has delegated the power to increase the minimum investment amounts in several ways that would not require a statutory amendment:

  1. USCIS, in conjunction with Labor and State, could increase the default $1,000,000 capital amount. Since $500,000 would be less than the increase, the TEA minimum would also need to be increased;

  2. USCIS could change the TEA amount, provided that it remains at least 1/2 of the non-TEA investment amount; and/or

  3. USCIS could increase the investment amount to $3,000,000 presently for projects which are:

a. In metropolitan statistical areas;
b. Not in TEAs;
c. Have unemployment rates which are “significantly below” the national average.

It is worth noting that Form I-526 already takes into consideration investments made in such “upward employment areas” even though they do not presently exist – see Part 2.b.

It is difficult to predict the likelihood of any of these events occurring. Any increase would likely create significant market disruption unless adequately anticipated and planned. Stakeholders would also need to understand and have input on the terms of grandfathering for pending filings, securities offerings, and initial investments so that the transition does not shutter the program.

Finally, it is worth noting that while Congress has delegated the ability to raise the EB-5 investment amount to DHS (through consultation with other agencies were required), its ability to do so is tempered somewhat. The Supreme Court’s Chevron test requires that regulations be “permissible construction(s)” of the statute. Could USCIS legally raise the minimum investment amount to $10,000,000 overnight, or change the TEA minimum investment so that it is only $1.00 less than the base amount? Potentially, but such actions would likely draw a federal court challenge to the limits of USCIS authority on the matter given the underlying legislative intent of the EB-5 program.

Article By Matthew T. Galati of Greenberg Traurig, LLP

©2016 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.