USCIS Denials up 37% under the Trump Administration

UnknownA new study from the CATO Institute, a think tank in Washington DC, shows that the denials are up about 37% under the new administration. The CATO institute did NOT include naturalization applications, TPS and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals applications in its statistics, as these are programs under fire right now by the administration.

Looking at some individual applications:

– I-129 denials went up from 16.8 percent to 22.6 percent
– Not surprisingly because of the previously discussed rule to deny I-131s if foreigners travel on their H-1B before it is approved, I-131 denials went up from 7.2% to 18.1%
– I-765 employment authorization denials increased from 6% to 9.6%
– Employment-based I-485s saw an increase in denials from 5.9% to 7.9%
– Fiance petitions were rejected at a more than a 50% higher rate, rising from a 13.6% denial rate to a 21% denial rate

To see the full article, please click here.

Personally, we have seen USCIS adjudicates cases in a more strict manner, which is tied to their changing how they interpret regulations, especially in the H-1B context. They are more stringent regarding what a specialty occupation is, over what constitutes the correct employer-employee relationship, as well as other critical issues in the H-1B context.  While our office has not seen a rise in the denial rates of applications we submit, we definitely do see the increased scrutiny that USCIS is paying to particular applications.   It certainly pays to be extra careful in drafting and filing these applications to ensure a smooth process with USCIS and to avoid getting caught up in their increased scrutiny.

Please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.

 

Use of Electronic Devices at Field Offices Banned

USCIS has always disallowed those using their services from using computers, tablets and phones in their field offices. Apparently, they are concerned about the ability of these devices to take pictures and record audio and video (of course, they record everything but that is another story). However, as attorneys are officers of the Court, they have generally allowed attorneys to use their electronic devices to take notes and refer to client documents, especially as things are moving towards electronic files these days. However, the current administration felt that this was to much leeway, so as of last week, attorney’s are also no longer allowed to use such devices at field offices, and if they try to, USCIS may end the the interview and dismiss the attorney from the office.

It is important for clients to realize as well, that when USCIS means you cannot use such devices during the interview, what they ultimately mean is to turn off all electronic devices. It is equally important to realize that the list of devices is actually quite large. It includes: cell phones, computers, tablets, smart watches, fitness devices, personal GPS devices, bluetooth devices, mobile hotspots, music players, or other wearable electronics. If your cell phone rings during the interview, they could actually stop the interview at that point and re-schedule the interview. How draconian they will be in the enforcement of this policy has yet to be seen as the change is just occurring. We will certainly update you with any new information as soon as we get it.

Please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.

Want an appointment at a local office? Soon you may not be able to make one.

USCIS announced that it is phasing out InfoPass appointments at local offices (self-scheduled appointments) except on a limited basis. Basically they will allow appointments on an emergency basis and to deliver documents to the local office only. USCIS stated that their research showed that for the vast majority of people who make appointments at local offices, the questions they asked could be answered using the on-line resources at USCIS.com or calling the 1-800 number. In addition to the limited on-line appointments, if you call the 1-800 number and they determine that an appointment at the local office is needed, they will schedule it directly for you. There are certainly pluses and minuses to this new policy.

In the plus category, this should allow officers to spend more time interviewing people and adjudicating cases, thus bringing timelines for family and employment based green cards down.

In the minus category, it will make it much harder to find out exactly what is going on with a case once it is at the local office. Most local offices use to have special emails that immigration attorney’s could contact if there were issues. In addition, attorney’s (as well as immigrants themselves) could make appointments with the local office to find out what was happening with a case. Now, all that is available is calling the 1-800 number to try and find out what is going on. The only result of this is that it will be much harder to actually get the status of a case.

Currently the new policy is only in place in a limited number of states. However it should be rolled out nationwide by the new year. We will keep you updated as more information becomes available.

Please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.

Charlie Oppenheim Updates his Predications for Movement of Immigration Visa Numbers

Charlie Oppenheim updated his predictions on the movement of immigrant visa numbers for the foreseeable future. I will detail some of the highlights below, however, please do remember that these are just predictions from Mr. Oppenheim and they can change depending on what the actual demand in any given category actually materializes.

EB-1

 

While Charlie previously thought there would not be movement forward until next year, it now appears that next month (December) should see forward movement on the Worldwide numbers as well as for India and China. Charlie is still not sure how far forward they will move, so we will need to wait for next month to see what happens. He does caution, however, that Worldwide numbers will not become current in the foreseeable future, and this will probably be the norm for at least the first half of the fiscal year.

EB-2 + EB-3

 

Based upon current demand, China numbers will continue to move forward as they did for the November bulletin. On the other hand, EB-3 for China is seeing high demand right now. At the moment EB-2 China is only about 2 weeks ahead of EB-3 China. It is possible that the EB-2 date will pass the EB-3 date soon. However, Charlie is not sure if the current EB-3 demand is based upon downgraded EB-2s. If this is the case, then the forward movement of EB-2 dates could be affected by this phenomena.

For India, the EB-2 numbers and EB-3 numbers held steady in November, and it is projected that there will be little , if any, advancement in December for the EB-2 numbers. However the EB-3 usage is lighter, and there should be forward movement of a few weeks (or even months) in December.

 

<

p dir=”auto”>If you have any questions, please call or email me. Please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.

USCIS Suspending Premium Processing for Cap Subject H-1B applications

images-1Yesterday, USCIS announced that they would be suspending premium processing for 2019 Cap-subject applications until September 10, 2018.  This means you can only file cap-subject applications via regular processing.  Those applications that are cap-exempt, including those filed by universities and those for extensions of H-1B status, can continue to use premium processing.  Below is a section of the press release from USCIS:

Starting April 2, 2018, USCIS will begin accepting H-1B petitions subject to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 cap. We will temporarily suspend premium processing for all FY 2019 cap-subject petitions, including petitions seeking an exemption for individuals with a U.S. master’s degree or higher. This suspension is expected to last until Sept. 10, 2018. During this time, we will continue to accept premium processing requests for H-1B petitions that are not subject to the FY 2019 cap. We will notify the public before resuming premium processing for cap-subject H-1B petitions or making any other premium processing updates.
During this temporary suspension, we will reject any Form I-907, Request for Premium Processing Service, filed with an FY 2019 cap-subject H-1B petition. If a petitioner submits one combined check for the fees for Form I-907 and Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, we will reject both forms. When we resume premium processing, petitioners may file a Form I-907 for FY 2019 cap-subject H-1B petitions that remain pending.

Please call our office with any questions you may have.  And, please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.

Updates: Signatures and Credit Card Acceptance at USCIS

3EB2E8ED-35F7-451D-B3AF-96539B02C187USCIS Now Accepting Credit Cards for Most Filings

USCIS has issued a new form G-1450 that will allow people to pay for form filing fees via credit card directly with USCIS.  This form is available for all applications filed at lockbox facilities.  It cannot be used for filings at local offices.  You should read all the information at the USCIS website here to make sure that you complete the form correctly according to what applications you are filing.

Please do call us with any questions about this new policy.

USCIS No Longer Accepting Power of Attorney for Signatures

USCIS has always required original signatures on all forms.  However, USCIS did accept the signature of someone other than the applicant if there was a duly authorized power of attorney.  This is the case no longer.  USCIS will no longer accept such arrangements.  Now the applicant must sign all forms being filed with USCIS.  Parents are still allowed to sign for minors, however.  USCIS also made clear that any deficiency in the signature (whether for an employer, employee, applicant, etc.) could also result in a rejection or denial of the application.

Please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.

H1B Recent Trends: The Wage Level 1 Conundrum

unknownIn the last year, USCIS has certainly increased its scrutiny on all cases, especially on H-1B cases.One tact that USICS has taken is to insist that, if an employer has used a Level 1 wage, then, without any further review of the position, USCIS can assume that it is an entry level position and is NOT a specialty occupation.  While to most people, this simply makes no sense, USCIS used this rationale (or lack there of) to deny many H-1B applications.  Finally, the Administrative Appeals Office, which overseas appeals of all H-1B denials, has ruled on one such case and overturned the denial.  The AAO stated;

Before we do so, a few more general observations are in order about the relevance of wage levels in the context o f H-1 B adjudications. A position’s wage level designation certainly is relevant, but is not a substitute for a determination of whether a proffered position meets the requirements of section 214(i)(l) of the Act. We assess each case on its merits. There is no inherent inconsistency between an entry-level position and a specialty occupation. For some occupations, the “basic understanding” that warrants a Level I wage may require years of study, duly recognized upon the attainment of a bachelor’s degree in a specific specialty. Most professionals start their careers in what are deemed entry-level positions. That doesn’t preclude us from identifying a specialty occupation. And likewise, at the other end of the spectrum, a Level IV wage would not necessarily reflect that an occupation qualifies as a specialty occupation if that higher-level position does not have an entry requirement of at least a bachelor’s degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. Wage levels are relevant, and we will assess them to ensure the LCA “corresponds with” the H-1B petition. But wage is only one factor and does not by itself define or change the character of the occupation.

We are very hopeful that this means that USCIS will take a more holistic approach and review all relevant documents in all such cases instead of denying a majority of such cases without really reviewing the relevant documentation.   Despite the above, it is still very important to include sufficient evidence with the initial application showing the specialty nature of the occupation.  Such evidence can include other job postings for similar positions, letters from other employers, CVs of other employees in the same position, etc.   Please do note, that each case is different and the type and amount of evidence needed will vary by case.  Please call our office with any specific questions.

Please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.

Want to Make an Infopass Appointment? New Process is Coming Soon.

3EB2E8ED-35F7-451D-B3AF-96539B02C187According to the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association, USCIS is changing the process for making InfoPass Appointments.  According to their press release:

 

 

AILA has received reports that as part of a new pilot program, select USCIS field offices are anticipated to roll out a new scheduling process for InfoPass appointments that will eliminate self-scheduling of InfoPass appointments online. Under the new pilot program, the scheduling of InfoPass appointments for select USCIS local field offices will instead be coordinated by the USCIS National Customer Service Center. The stated purpose for this new program is to avoid InfoPass appointments being utilized for routine inquiries that can be resolved via the Customer Service Hotline. According to reports, USCIS plans to implement this new pilot program at five local USCIS field offices: Hartford, CT; El Paso, TX; Jacksonville, FL; Sacramento, CA; and San Francisco, CA.

Once the new pilot program is implemented, in order to schedule an InfoPass appointment at one of the above listed USCIS field offices, stakeholders will first need to contact the NCSC by phone (1-800-375-5283), speak to a Tier 1 officer, and request to schedule an InfoPass appointment. The call will then be escalated to a Tier 2 USCIS representative who will confirm that the issue is appropriate for an InfoPass appointment before scheduling the appointment.

USCIS has not yet publicly released information about this new pilot program on the USCIS website and the implementation date of the program at all five of the selected USCIS field offices is not yet confirmed. AILA will continue to monitor the rollout of this new initiative and has reached out to USCIS for additional information on its implementation.

As stated above, USCIS is trying to prevent routine inquiries that it feels can be handled by its customer service call center from going to the local offices.  Thankfully AILA will be monitoring the roll out of the program as it is very clear that USCIS could start to abuse this system by routinely denying appointments and requiring people to go through the customer service call center (which, in many cases, is less than adequate).

We will update you when more information is available.

January 2018 Visa Bulletin and Update from Charlie Oppenheim

UnknownThere have been some movements on the immigrant visa front, and some setbacks.  Below is an update on where things are and where they may be going.

Employment Based Immigration Visas:

EB-1:  Current across the Board for now, however according to Charlie, India and China may backlog by summer.

EB-2:  Current for Wordwide.  China progressed more than 1 month to August 8, 2013 and India progressed less than 1 month to November 22, 2008.  According to Charlie, China should continue to progress, but India will not move forward significantly in the near future, not even progressing into 2009 before the summer of 2018.

EB-3:  Current for Worldwide.  China moved forward more than 1 month to April 15, 2014.  India moved forward a couple of weeks to November 1, 2006.  The large demand in EB-3 for India has lessened somewhat so Charlie is hopeful that this category will continue to progress at the same rate over the upcoming months.  The Philippines moved forward about 1 month to February 15, 2016.  The large demand that had surfaced last month for the Philippines has lessened so, as with India, Charlie is hopeful of continued movement but will be monitoring demand closely.

Family Based Immigration Visas:

FB-1:  Most countries moved forward about 1 month to March 15, 2011.  The exceptions are Mexico (in 1996) and the Philippines (which is in 2005).  According to Charlie the Philippines, which recently had a large retrogression, will not be moving forward anytime soon.  Apparently already 40% of their immigration visas in this category are gone, whereas by the end of March they are usually at 54%.  Because they are already so close to that number, Charlie has had to slow down visa usage for them in this category (and the FB-2B category as well).  Because of movement forward in this category for worldwide number, Charlie is monitoring increased usage very closely.

FB-2A: Most Countries moved forward just over 1 month to February 1, 2016.  The only exception was Mexico which is at January 1, 2016.

FB-2B:  Most Countries moved forward just a couple weeks to December 1, 2010.  The only exceptions are the Philippines, which is in 2006 (see FB-1 for explanation) and Mexico which is in 1996.

FB-3:  Most Countries moved forward about 1 month to October 8, 2005. The only exceptions were Mexico and the Philippines, both of which are in 1995.

FB-4:  Most Countries moved forward a couple weeks to June 22, 2004.  India also moved forward a couple weeks to December 15, 2003.  Mexico is in 1997 and the Philippines is in 1994.  As India is moving forward in this category, Charlie is monitoring usage very closely in case increased demand surfaces.

USCIS Changes Adjudication Standard for I-129 Renewals

B61D08D2-1849-4FCD-9897-F0AC03874CFFMany of you may know that USCIS has had a policy in place that allowed those filing an application to renew their status (H-1B, L-1, E-1, etc.) to file a ‘bare bones’ application – an application with just new information and none of the initial documentation sent in with the first application to show that the person qualified for the status.  This policy stated that, assuming the underlying conditions were the same for the renewal (i.e. same employer, same position, etc.) then there was no real reason to totally re-adjudicate a case unless the officer felt that the initial approval was done in error.  Just this week, USCIS changed this policy.

Before going into the new policy, you maybe asking yourself “But when I filed a renewal, I filed it with substantial documentation, did I not need to do that?”.  The answer is technically no, but realistically yes.  While the above policy was in place, especially over the last year (but even before that) most officers did not follow this policy to the letter.  In most cases, we found that if we did not include substantial documentation, even for an H-1B renewal, showing that ALL the requirements were met, USCIS would issue a Request for Evidence.  So in practice, the above policy was more of a slight leaning in favor of approving the renewal rather than the intent of the policy, which was to lighten the load of officers and those filing the cases.

So what does the new policy say?  It rescinds the old policy and states that each application should be adjudicated according to its own merits regardless if it is an initial application or a renewal.  In practice, it simply means that there is no longer a slight bias in favor of approving a renewal, and, instead, you will need to be more careful and ensure that you provide documentation with the renewal to show that ALL qualifications are met, even if the documentation was given with the original application.  It also means that the fact that a case was approved in the past, does not mean that, if you file the same documentation, the case will be approved in the future, or that USCIS will not request additional evidence the second time around.

So while this may not change the rules as much as one may have thought on first glance, it still does change them to a certain degree.  That degree will depend on the strength of the underlying case.

Please remember, as always, this blog does not offer legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult with a lawyer instead of a blog. Thank you.