Arthur Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on August 13, 2023 1. Applying for NIW must show you can advance the national interest 2. The filing of an I-140 petition may impact F-1 visa approval 3. USCIS may apply previously captured fingerprints to many new cases

1. Applying for NIW must show you can advance the national interest

A reader asks:
I am in China, and I consulted an American lawyer by email, and the reply was I met the requirements of NIW and can sign a contract.  However, I was told that I must work in the relevant field for at least half a year after getting the green card, otherwise the green card could be revoked. It is difficult for me to do that because my major is education and I have been in China, so I apply for NIW which an employer is not required. If I really must find a job in the same field after entering the US, I will have to reconsider whether to apply for NIW. What should I do?

Arthur Lee answers:
Assuming that you get your EB-2 NIW is approved and you go for your visa interview, you should demonstrate how you plan to utilize your knowledge and skills to advance the national interest per your EB-2 application, for which an employer was not required. You may independently perform research, for instance, if your EB-2 NIW was research-related, or try your best to find an employer in the field of endeavor. While every NIW case is different, your ability to advance the national interest through your work as well as your intent to do so must be made clear to a consular officer.

There is a possibility that if you do not enter the position or endeavor promised on your EB-2 NIW application, your green card will be revoked. One way in which revocation would occur is in the naturalization (citizenship) process. At that stage, you would be expected to produce 5 years of tax returns and employment information. Also, an officer may ask you how you petitioned for your green card, and what job you performed upon entering the United States. While many adjudicating officers may not thoroughly ask about this, the few that do could find that you obtained your green card on false pretenses and begin proceedings to revoke it. I also note that in such a case, USCIS would issue a notice to appear (NTA) to initiate removal proceedings, and you would remain a permanent resident until the immigration judge issues a final decision. 

If you are not confident in your ability to advance the national interest as proposed in your EB-2 NIW application (whether through self-employment or through employment with another company), then you may decide to seek a different route to getting a green card, such as a PERM labor certification.

2. The filing of an I-140 petition may impact F-1 visa approval

A reader asks:
I am currently working in China. Last year, I filed I-140 immigrant petition, the priority date is already current in the second half of last year. Due to my personal reasons, I want to apply for a PhD to return to the United States for further study. Since F-1 is a non-immigrant visa, and the time for a doctorate is relatively long, will the approval of the application have a relatively serious impact on the application for F-1?

Arthur Lee answers:
The filing of an I-140 petition may impact F-1 visa approval, which requires non-immigrant intent. That being said, you may be able to secure an F-1 visa if you bring clear evidence to the consular interview that you intend to return to China after your studies. You should bring evidence that you have ties to China that you do not intend to abandon including but not limited to property ownership or unexpired residential lease; family ties such as spouse, children, or parents; investments and financial assets in China; and demonstration of social relationships and involvement in your local community. You may also explain to the consular officer that your desire to take a nonimmigrant visa despite your possession of an approved I-140 with a current priority date with which you are eligible to enter the US with a green card is evidence itself of your intent to return to China. 

If you desire to maximize your likelihood of obtaining an F-1 visa, you may request a withdrawal of your I-140 petition. Of course, this would likely eliminate your chances of coming into the United States as a lawful permanent resident for the foreseeable future.

Alternately, you can continue your green card case and enter the U.S. with an immigrant visa assuming that you pass the consular interview. Once you have a green card, you are eligible to attend school for PhD study without getting an F-1 visa. By the same token, you must engage in employment as promised on your I-140 petition for a reasonable time period. During your initial months in the United States, you may attend school as long as you can fulfill your job responsibilities on a full-time basis as stated in your I-140.

3. USCIS may apply previously captured fingerprints to many new cases

I submitted my I-485 application at the beginning of November last year and it was sent to SRC, but I haven’t received the fingerprint notice yet. It has been a long time, and I checked the case status extensively. The cases with same middle two numbers had rarely been fingerprinted, but the latter numbers’ cases had all been fingerprinted. What’s happening here?

Arthur Lee answers:
As a rule, all I-485 applicants between the ages of 14 to 79 are required to be fingerprinted for the purpose of conducting security clearance and criminal background checks. To increase efficiency, USCIS has in the past few years applied previously captured fingerprints to many new cases, but if USCIS is applying your old fingerprints to your I-485 application, it would have sent you a notice stating so. If you have not received a fingerprinting notice yet, you may file an e-request through the USCIS website to inquire about why you have not received your biometrics appointment yet.

Article: Requests for Further Evidence for Submitted “Missing” Documents Relating To Current Guidance for Paper Filed Applications by Arthur Lee, Esq.

As published in the Immigration Daily on August 7, 2023

While it is good that USCIS is digitizing and modernizing its adjudication processes to increase efficiency and accuracy, the ongoing shift from paper-filed applications to e-filing has some growing pains. The example discussed here is the (relatively) new guidance by USCIS in assembling paper-filed applications to maximize ease of scanning documents. (https://www.uscis.gov/forms/filing-guidance/tips-for-filing-forms-by-mail) In a reversal from traditional policy, USCIS now discourages applicants from using fasteners, hole punch, staple, paper clip, binder clip, or any other tool for attaching documents to one another when filing directly with a USCIS service center “as that may cause delays in scanning the documents into the electronic database systems.” As an unintended result of this new guidance, it appears that USCIS has been misplacing submitted application documents and issuing requests for further evidence (RFEs) asking for documents that had already been submitted. Our law firm has encountered a few of these types of RFEs. One recent example is an I-539 application to extend nonimmigrant status for an O-3 dependent which was filed concurrently with an I-129 petition for the O-1 principal where the I-129 was initially approved, then USCIS issued an RFE on the I-539 asking for copies of the applicant’s marriage certificate, the principal’s most recent I-797 approval notice, and the dependent’s passport, visa, and I-94. Needless to say, these were all submitted in the original submission.

In this case, we numbered all of the exhibits and provided an exhibit list after the attorney cover letter; separated all exhibits with colored “exhibit pages” clearly labeling each exhibit; and rubber banded together the entire concurrent I-129/I-539 filing with all enclosed evidence. Despite these concerted efforts to ensure that USCIS would see all of the evidence, we received the RFE for documents that were submitted in this application.

While it is understood that USCIS is digitizing and moving away from paper, and that this problem will be resolved once USCIS reaches its goal of allowing all forms to be filed online, USCIS’ mishandling of paper documents in the interim resulting from the guidance discouraging adhesion of documents is a problem that must be addressed. It is less than ideal for a supposedly reliable agency, and not a good first impression of America for many noncitizens, to lose documents in transfer from the mailroom to the scanner. Perhaps in the transitory period to e-filing, USCIS should continue to encourage applicants to fasten their applications with ACCO fasteners. In any case, it should enact workable policies in the interim to prevent loss of documents to minimize time and resource waste and counter completely avoidable and unnecessary RFEs and rejections.

Arthur Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on August 6, 2023 1. Laid off H-1B employee, where the employer did not withdraw the approved H-1B, may be able to have a successful H-1B transfer 2. When the H-1B was not approved, the H-1B lottery spot could not be preserved

1. Laid off H-1B employee, where the employer did not withdraw the approved H-1B, may be able to have a successful H-1B transfer

A reader asks:
This year is my last year of OPT, I finally won the H-1B lottery, but was laid off. My question is if I find a new job now, is there any way I can transfer this H-1B? I understand that the best H1B situation is after 10/01, I need to take two paychecks before leaving, but now I was laid off. What to do?

Arthur Lee answers:
Technically, since a cap H-1B petition is only valid starting on 10/01, you are not in valid H-1B status yet. By rule, you are not eligible for an H-1B transfer. This is USCIS’ official position. However, we have heard of a successful H-1B transfer where the party did it before his 60 day grace period was up, and his employer who laid him off did not withdraw the H-1B approval prior to 10/01. Other than that, your best options are probably to return to school for another year of study, or find another nonimmigrant employment pathway with another company willing and able to hire you such as but not limited to O-1, L-1, or E-1/E-2/E-3 if you qualify.

2. When the H-1B was not approved, the H-1B lottery spot could not be preserved 

A reader asks:
In 2016, I won the H-1B lottery but was requested RFE for additional materials. Later, at the end of June, the company suddenly terminated my work contract and cancelled my H-1B application. At the beginning of July, I returned to China immediately.  Now I have just returned to the United States after the epidemic. Can my H-1B be saved? Does it mean that I don’t need to draw the lottery again but only find a company that is willing to sponsor me? 

Arthur Lee answers:
Unfortunately, as your H-1B was not approved, you have never been in H-1B status. As such, your H-1B lottery spot has not been preserved. You cannot transfer an H-1B status which was not initially approved. Therefore, you will be subject to the lottery unless you apply for an organization that is cap exempt such as a higher educational institution, nonprofit organization affiliated with an institute of higher education, nonprofit research organization, or government research organization.

Q&A’s published on the World Journal Weekly on July 30, 2023: Article: 1. Where are all the I-601A cases going? 2. Watch out for distance learning. Q&As: 1. After receiving your permanent residence card, you do not need I-131 or I-765 2. It is a common situation that combo cards are not adjudicated together for all members of the family

Article:
1. Where are all the I-601A cases going?

We have had a number of I-601A provisional unlawful presence waiver cases transferred lately, and wonder whether they are headed to the location provided in the transfer notice, the Potomac Service Center, or if they will be headed ultimately to the new virtual remote HART (Humanitarian, Adjustments, Removing Conditions, and Travel Documents) Service Center that is opening at this time in order to speed up processing as a result of pending litigation. Of special interest to us is that the remote center will concentrate on I-601A’s as well as “bona fide determinations” for U visa applicants (I-918), VAWA petitions (I-360), and asylum reunification petitions (I-730). In an article written by a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, Dara Lind, “New USCIS Center Is Good News For Some Of Its Worst Backlog Victims”, Immigration Daily, 4/19/23, she said that the Council documented in a recent class-action lawsuit that processing times for I-601A grew sixfold from 2017 to 2022, and that of the two service centers handling the waivers, it is taking three years at one center and 3 ½ in another one to decide 80% of the waivers. Attorneys in the lawsuit estimate that the class of people who have waivers pending for more than 12 months would include at least 70,000 people. In favor of the ultimate destination being HART, it otherwise makes little sense to transfer from the Nebraska Service Center to the Potomac Service Center since both have a current published processing time of 44 months for 80% of the cases.

2. Watch out for distance learning.

During the pandemic, USCIS was operating under Covid flexibilities under which distance-learning had been allowed in excess of the regulations under 8 CFR 214.2(f)(6)(i)(G) which states:

(G) For F-1 students enrolled in classes for credit or classroom hours, no more than the equivalent of one class or three credits per session, term, semester, trimester, or quarter may be counted toward the full course of study requirement if the class is taken on-line or through distance education and does not require the student’s physical attendance for classes, examination or other purposes integral to completion of the class. An on-line or distance education course is a course that is offered principally through the use of television, audio, or computer transmission including open broadcast, closed circuit, cable, microwave, or satellite, audio conferencing, or computer conferencing. If the F-1 student’s course of study is in a language study program, no on-line or distance education classes may be considered to count toward a student’s full course of study requirement.

In an ICE SEVP Broadcast Message on 5/11/23: “Termination of SEVP COVID-19 Flexibilities”, ICE said that because of the termination of the Covid public emergency on 5/11/23, the SEVP Covid-19 guidance terminated on that day. Active F and M nonimmigrant students are able to complete the 2022-23 academic year under Covid-19 flexibilities through the 2023 summer semester. But active F and M nonimmigrant students will not be permitted to count online classes toward a full course of study in excess of the regulatory limits for the 2023-24 academic year. Initial or reentering students must enroll in programs complying with the regulatory limits for distance learning. This must give pause now to those students wishing to enroll in schools offering a tenuous connection to physical classroom instruction as USCIS may now be looking harder at these schools’ arrangements for instruction following the ending of the pandemic emergency.

Q&As:
1. After receiving your permanent residence card, you do not need I-131 or I-765

A reader asks:

Eb-1A and I-485 show that new card is being produced, but I-131 and I-765 show that case was received and fingerprints taken respectively. In this case, is there anything I need to do? Will I-131 and I-765 petitions be canceled automatically?

Mr. Lee answers,
It appears as if you received an email or emails from USCIS that your green card is being produced which although unofficial can usually be relied upon. It also appears that you have checked the USCIS online status system and the ancillary applications of I-131 advance parole and I-765 employment authorization application, which shows that the applications have been received and fingerprints taken. The online status system is only as current as the person inputting the data, and it would appear that no action has been taken although the information may not be current. You do not have to do anything at this point. USCIS should at this juncture close or deny both of the ancillary applications as it is granting your permanent residence. We have seen that sometimes when the agency personnel are working on the green card application and ancillary applications at the same time, the ancillary applications are approved as they are being worked on by other officers. Please note that if you receive approvals of advance parole and employment authorization after receiving your permanent residence card, they cannot be used as you are now in another status.

2. It is a common situation that combo cards are not adjudicated together for all members of the family

A reader asks:

I applied for EB-1B, and the principal and dependent had fingerprinted at the end of January. The main applicant’s combo card was approved at the end of February, but we have not heard anything on the dependent’s case yet. Is it normal? Is there a way to solve the situation?

Mr. Lee answers,
It is unfortunately a common situation that combo cards are not adjudicated together for all members of the family who apply for them. The solution is either to wait until the published processing times for 80% of adjudications in the categories of EAD and advance parole have been reached to trace the case through the USCIS Contact Center (1-800-375-5283 or one of the other ways to contact the Contact Center), or prove that the dependent meets the expedite criteria of the agency. The current expedite guidelines are:

  • Severe financial loss to a company or person, provided that the need for urgent action is not the result of the petitioner’s or applicant’s failure: (1) to timely file the benefit request; or (2) to timely respond to any requests for additional evidence;
  • Emergencies and urgent humanitarian reasons;
  • Nonprofit organization (as designated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)) whose request is in furtherance of the cultural or social interests of the United States;
  • S. government interests (including cases identified as urgent by federal agencies such as the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the U.S. Department of State (DOS), DHS, or other public safety or national security interests); or
  • Clear USCIS error.

I note that we had a recent case in which the dependent received the combo card prior to the principal applicant, who had a more pressing need for it, but did not meet the expedite criteria. The principal did finally receive the card, just in time to keep working for the company without a break.

Article: CAN THE SCOTUS CASE, US V. HANSEN, HELP TO PROTECT ALIENS WHO MAY BE DEEMED INADMISSIBLE FOR ALIEN SMUGGLING?

As published in the Immigration Daily on July 25, 2023

The Supreme Court on June 23, 2023 by 7 to 2 vote, Amy Coney Barrett writing for the majority in United States v. Hansen, No. 22-179 (US 2023) said that his acts of encouraging noncitizens to come to, enter or reside in the US illegally through a fraudulent adult adoption program were not protected by the First Amendment right of free speech. The Ninth Circuit had ruled favorably for Hansen saying that the statute criminalized even commonplace speech such as telling immigrants who are in the country illegally that “I encourage you to reside in the US” or advising them about available social services. But in a narrow ruling, Justice Barrett said that the provision “forbids only the intentional solicitation or facilitation of certain unlawful acts,” not including protected speech. In looking back on statutory history, she pointed out that then, as now, “encourage” had a specialized meaning that channeled accomplice liability, and when Congress later amended the provision, it added “induce”, which also carried solicitation and facilitation overtones. The question is what effect this ruling may have upon cases in which applicants for immigration such as parents of those who entered the US illegally in the past are now accused of alien smuggling –that they encouraged their children to illegally come to this country and are thus inadmissible to immigrate. The inadmissibility statute, 8 USC § 1182 (a)(6)(E)(i), INA § 212(a)(6)(E)(i), defines an alien smuggler as “[a]ny person who knowingly has encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted, or aided any other alien to enter or to try to enter the United States in violation of law.” It tracks closely with the Hansen punishment statute 8 USC § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv), INA § 274(a)(1)(A)(iv) imposing criminal penalties for any person who “encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.” We have seen cases in the recent past in which parents have been denied immigrant visas and been required to seek waivers based upon consular officers’ suspicions that they encouraged or helped their child to illegally come to the States. This has even occurred in situations in which a widow explained that the assistance came from her dead husband only and where both parents vehemently denied ever assisting the son or daughter. Is there a Hansen argument here that USCIS and consular officers are precluded from using the alien smuggling provision for encouragement or inducement unless they have well-founded suspicions based on accomplice liability or solicitation and facilitation? In other words, that the people did more than verbally encourage individuals to enter the US illegally. The Hansen case was of interest to the Supreme Court because of its intersection with First Amendment rights, but that case involved a US citizen and not an alien. The Court earlier ruled in Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 US 753 (1972) that noncitizens are not entitled to First Amendment protections. However, Justice Barrett made a clear ruling not based upon the First Amendment, but upon statutory interpretation, which should be just as applicable overseas to an alien as to a citizen of this country.

Q&A’s published on the World Journal Weekly on July 9, 2023 – 1. Get Your Green Card Faster with Cross-Chargeability 2. O-1 Visas Does not Have a Dual Intent Provision 3. PERM now Takes Approximately 9-10 Months for Analyst Reviews 4. Applying for EB-1B, Job Opportunities and I-140 Employers are Indispensable

1. Get Your Green Card Faster with Cross-Chargeability

The situation in Silicon Valley this year is so bad, that I, without green card, am afraid of being layoff. I want to know if there is any way to get my green card quickly. My current background is: I graduated from a master program in the summer of 2019, and I got selected for H-1B before graduation. I started to apply for a green card on the first day I joined Amazon, but I didn’t get the I-140 approval until August 2021. I don’t know when I can get my green card.

A colleague pointed out two ways for me: 1. Marry a boyfriend who is not born in mainland China, and use cross-chargeability to jump in the queue to avoid waiting in priority date to be current. The advantage is that I don’t need to spend extra money and time. The disadvantage is that we are all a bit perfectionist. We want to experience the beautiful moments of life such as engagement and wedding, and we don’t want to rush just to get a marriage license. I don’t have a PhD degree and only have three papers, which with less than 100 citations. Is there any hope for me to apply for EB-1? 2. Per my current priority, when will I get my green card? 3. If I can do cross-chargeability, when can I get the green card?

Mr. Lee answers,
Cross-chargeability is used to assign the country chargeability of one spouse to the other where the dependent spouse is from a country with a more favorable immigrant visa availability in the petition category. For example, an applicant with EB-2 or EB-3 category approval from China is facing immigrant visa backlogs of 6/8/19 under EB-2 and 4/1/19 under EB-3 (June 2023 visa bulletin). If married to a spouse from a country like Japan or Taiwan, the backlog for EB-2 is much lesser with visa availability open to those who began EB-2 cases before 2/15/22 and EB-3 before 6/1/22. This presupposes a bona fide marriage of course, and not a marriage done as a favor, or as part of the conspiracy for the other party to gain immigration while the principal gains faster immigration. With cross-chargeability and your current priority date, the time to obtain permanent residence in a normal situation would depend upon the speed of the USCIS service center handling the I-485 applications and whether it has questions concerning your applications. The two service centers handling the bulk of the cases for employment-based adjustment have posted times to discourage persons from inquiring – the Nebraska Service Center has a posted time of 27 months, and the Texas Service Center 42.5 months. These timelines hardly seem realistic at this point and should be taken with a large grain of salt. To your other questions, there does not seem to be that much hope for you to apply for EB-1 given your described qualifications. I cannot estimate how long it would take for you to process your case without cross-chargeability as you did not give your priority date nor petition category in your fact situation – however, your priority date would have to become current for filing under your petition category before you could file for an adjustment of status application. At that point, you would look at the current processing time of USCIS for an estimate of how long your case would take to be processed to finality.

2. O-1 Visas Does not Have a Dual Intent Provision

My EB-1A was approved, and it may take more than a year to wait for the interview at the Guangzhou Consulate. Is there any way to go to the United States ahead of time? I heard it would be okay if it was an O-1 visa? In addition, if I land in advance, do I still have to go back to China for a Consulate interview after I receive the interview notice?

Mr. Lee answers,
If you qualify under a nonimmigrant working visa, you may be able to go to the US ahead of the time that you would have to wait for the interview in Guangzhou. As an EB-1A, your qualifications are most likely enough to qualify you for the O-1 visa. I do not know whether your EB-1A was petitioned for by an organization or whether you self-sponsored yourself, but kindly note that O-1 visa sponsorship requires a petitioning organization or agency. If you have a petitioning organization or agent, then you may be petitioned and able to come into the US under the O-1 visa. One other note is that an O-1 visa unlike H-1B specialized occupation and L-1 intracompany transferee visas does not have a dual intent provision under which an individual’s intent to immigrate is not relevant to the adjudication. Even if O’s are in a gray area of intent, most American consulates will issue O-1 visas even where the I-140 petition has already been approved assuming that there are no ineligibilities. If you are in the US pursuant to an O-1 visa, it would perhaps be more courteous and correct for you to return for the interview in Guangzhou instead of attempting to adjust status in the States.

3. PERM now Takes Approximately 9-10 Months for Analyst Reviews

I have filed a PERM, but it hasn’t yet been approved, and my I-140 is not yet approved. For family reasons, I need to relocate to an office in another state. My questions are: will this have any impact on my pending PERM? Some lawyers said that the current PERM would continue to go on, the priority date is locked as the I-140 was filed, and then PERM needs to be done again at the new address. My PERM has filed almost 9 months, why I have not heard back anything? Is the company cheating on me? what do I do?

Mr. Lee answers,
PERM labor certification applications test whether there is availability of US workers in a certain area. It is clear from your questions that the recruitment has already been conducted, the application filed, and the move in question a future move. When a job relocates to a state other than what was put down as the work location in the PERM application, the application usually needs to be done all over again. An exception may be where the job is the same, the employer is the same, and the new position is within commuting distance of the worksite address in the application. Assuming that the labor certification application is approved and the new worksite within commuting distance, your company’s attorney would make the argument for the validity of the labor certification to USCIS in the I-140 petition. To your query as to why there is no news although your PERM application is almost 9 months old, it appears that the Department of Labor is currently taking approximately 9-10 months to reach labor certification applications for analyst reviews.

4. Applying for EB-1B, Job Opportunities and I-140 Employers are Indispensable

I have a doctor degree in Phys from the West Coast. I have been working in New York after graduating at the end of 2020. My citations are 900+, had some news reports, and 2 review papers. After graduation, I did not write any articles. Recently, I have been asking for magazines’ editors to get some review opportunities. In the past two years, I didn’t think about the green card, and I just wanted to apply for EB-1A recently. The lawyer said that my articles are relatively old and asked me to apply after I have had new articles published. However, because I changed my field, it is more difficult for me to publish articles again. Is there any chance for me to get my NIW approved? How about EB-1B?

Mr. Lee answers,
It is impressive that you have 900+ citations with news reports, and two review papers. It is understandable that the lawyer would be concerned and taking on an EB-1A application for you if your article is relatively old. One of the criteria for EB-1A is that you have sustained national or international acclaim. Insofar as NIW is concerned, having the PhD is certainly helpful, but you must also be able to convince USCIS that whatever endeavor you will be working on is substantial and in the national interest; that you are well-positioned to advance the endeavor; and that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer and thus the labor certification requirement. For EB-1B, you need to fulfill at least two criteria of which your articles, news reports, and review papers may be able to satisfy – however, EB-1B is not a self -sponsored petition, and you must not only be able to prove that you are an outstanding researcher, but also that the petitioning organization has a research component in which you will be performing research.  Although a labor certification is not required in EB-1B cases, a job offer and petitioning I-140 employer are necessities.

Q&A’s published on the World Journal Weekly on June 25, 2023 – 1. The time to begin a labor certification is 2 years prior to the 6-year expiration of H-1B 2. PERM application related skills depends on the employer’s requirement 3. PWD can be used for the same position and multiple people 4. EB-2 and EB-3 can apply at the same time 5. The old and new companies overlap for 1 month, you should answer truthfully

1. The time to begin a labor certification is 2 years prior to the 6-year expiration of H-1B

I am a PhD in Tiankeng major (which is the collective name of Chinese netizens for the four majors of biology, chemistry , environment , and materials ( biochemical and environmental materials ), and I switched to computer field in 2019. In 2019, I won the H-1B lottery and went through several companies. Unfortunately, every time when my PERM was about to be approved or ready to file PERM, I was laid off (twice), and never filed PERM. My current situation is that my company successfully filed the PERM for me in March of this year, but I am not sure whether I will be laid off before the I-140 is approval. Now I want to apply for NIW-EB-2, and my articles were cited 23 times at the journal/conference and had 160 reviews1. My questions are: How do I apply for NIW which can extend my H-1B? My H-1B will be in the fifth year in October 2024. When do I need to get my PERM’s I-140 approval to renew my H-1B? Will it be before October 2024 or October 2025? When I got the approved I-140, I would want to leave the company, but will the company withdraw the I-140 application if I leave? At present, the PERM of all companies, large and small, has basically stopped. what do I do?

Mr. Lee answers,
Whether USCIS will approve your NIW EB-2 application depends upon the officer’s judgment of your qualifications in light of the precedent decision, Matter of Dhanasar, with factors whether your endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; whether you are well-positioned to advance the endeavor; and if on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer and thus the permanent labor certification requirement. In order to renew your H-1B past the standard six year limitation, you would either have to have 365 days pass since filing the NIW or labor certification application, or if you are from a country with backlogged quota, have an approved I-140 petition. The time to begin a labor certification if everything goes well is approximately two years prior to the six-year expiration due to the time required to obtain the prevailing wage determination and for the labor certification to pass through the Department of Labor. If you obtain an I- 140 approval, the petitioning organization generally has 180 days to revoke the petition. If such is done within 180 days, the priority date is usually preserved, but the petition is not valid for extending H-1B status past the six-year limit.

2. PERM application related skills depends on the employer’s requirement

I graduated this year, and I am lucky to get an offer as a junior front engineer at the beginning of the year. The company is willing to immediately to get started with PERM EB-2 for me. A few days ago, the lawyer contacted me and gave me a verification of skill. The letter template only lists a few points and says it cannot be changed. However, I feel it is very unreliable. I worry more about it will attract a large number of local people to apply when the job is advertised. Have you tried using this small amount of simple skills, people have successfully passed the PERM labor certification in the end? Would it be better to write more skills?

Mr. Lee answers,
It appears from your fact situation that you have already gone over all of your skills with the attorney and he or she has given you a template of an experience letter based upon what he or she believes are the relevant skills to be required in the labor certification application. Please note that the education, experience, and other skills in an application are based upon what the employer requires and not necessarily what the applicant possesses. For example, an applicant may have 20 different kinds of skills, but the employer only requires three or four of them as relevant to the offered job. The Department of Labor requires the employer to list its minimal requirements for the position. If you believe that the attorney is failing to recognize relevant skills for the position taking the employer’s needs into account, you should contact him or her to explain their relevance and why they should be included as requirements in the PERM application.

3. PWD can be used for the same position and multiple people

I am applying for employment green card under EB-2. My lawyer told me that my job description and background were very similar to another colleague in the company, and suggested to use his prevailing wage determination (PWD) directly, saying that way, I could skip my job posting and could start 9089 form directly. Is it possible to do like this? That means the PWD follows the job instead of the person. If I meet the same job requirement, I can skip the job posting process?

Mr. Lee answers,
Labor certification applications are for individual applicants –that being said, a prevailing wage determination (PWD) can be used for multiple individuals having the same position with the same requirements. In such case, the attorney or other preparer of the application must ensure that the job is the same, the offered wage to the alien is at least at the prevailing wage level, and that the alien’s education, work experience, and any special requirements of the ETA-9141 prevailing wage form are met by all applicants using the prevailing wage determination. If any parts of recruitment pursuant to the prevailing wage determination have been completed, they can usually be used in connection with the ETA 9089 PERM application forms of other individuals. Recruitment is only good for 180 days from the date of PWD issuance where the recruitment was begun prior to the date of issuance, or 180 days from the date of first recruitment if recruitment was begun after the PWD was issued. So you should ensure that your case fits within the parameters of the ETA 9141 and that it is submitted on time in the event that you and the attorney choose to use the already issued PWD for your case.

4. EB-2 and EB-3 can apply at the same time

Currently, I have the I-140 employment-based immigration approval under EB-2, but the priority date is still many years away, and it could take three to five years. Recently EB-3 category’s priority date has moved forward. Is it possible to file an EB-3 I-140, to keep EB-3 and EB-2 at the same time, instead of downgrading? In this case, whichever comes first can be submitted first.  Are there any risks in doing so?

Mr. Lee answers,
It is entirely possible to file another I-140 under EB-3 even if you already have an approved I-140 under the EB-2 preference category. What you are asking is commonly done, and we have done so many times for our Chinese and Indian clients. When the priority date becomes current for one of the categories, you could file for adjustment of status under the petition that has visa availability. We do not see the risk in doing another petition unless the petitioning organization can no longer support the prevailing wage of the labor certification (we assume that this is a labor certification based case).

5. The old and new companies overlap for 1 month, you should answer truthfully

After being laid off, I continued to stay on payroll for three months. During that period, I found a job, and there was a one-month overlap between the last day of the previous employer’s payroll and the first day of the new company. In this case, what date should I put down on the form as the last day of my former employer when the new company applies a green card for me?

Mr. Lee answers,
There is no easy answer to your question. The issue you are likely attempting to address is how to handle the 60 day grace period that H-1B holders are allowed to find another organization and have that organization file a H-1B transfer petition. Did your old company consider the layoff to take effect at the beginning of the 90 days or sometime later? Did your old company send a letter of termination immediately to USCIS or did it do so later? If you are relying upon a statement of prior experience from the old company, what dates will it attest to as your time of employment? Generally, the best policy is honesty taking the above or any other factors into account.

IMMIGRATION NEWS YOU CAN USE –TO PHOTO OR NOT FOR N-400 FILINGS? WHERE ARE ALL THE I-601A CASES GOING? NEW VETTING CENTER FOR SPECIFIC AFFIRMATIVE ASYLUM CASES.

As published in the Immigration Daily on June 21, 2023

  1. To photo or not for applications like N-400 filings not requiring them?

Do you submit photographs to USCIS for applications that do not require them, such as N-400 naturalization applications (only those residing overseas are asked to submit two passport photos with the application)? The answer is not as easy as it seems, as there are pros and cons. Why submit photos which are not asked for? For a lawyer, it may make him/her look less competent in the eyes of a client who reads the form instructions if he/she asks for photographs? It may also slow down processing time in the attorney’s office, as the rest of the materials can be scanned and emailed over. And what of N-400 situations previously when the agency required photos, and then the officer requested another set at the time of interview? In that case, a client would be taking two sets of photos. We recently had a case in which the applicant brought photos to the naturalization interview (not on submission); they were not requested; and yet requested at the swearing-in ceremony at which time the applicant had left the photos at home! USCIS is generally re-using as many of the old biometrics as it can in the interest of reducing the time that its personnel have to spend on biometrics appointments. It is a good stratagem as fingerprints do not change, and has been universally applauded. (It should be remarked that persons not encountered previously by USCIS still have to attend biometrics appointments such as those entering on immigrant visas unless they were subsequently fingerprinted and photographed by USCIS). For waived biometrics appointments, the agency has also been using photographs that it has in the file. In a case last week, the interviewing officer requested photos saying that the ones in the system were too old. Luckily the client had brought photos and did not have to go outside the building, take photos, and then return. USCIS special instructions to form N-400 simply say that based on processing needs, an applicant may need to submit photographs after filing the N-400, and if so, USCIS will send a request along with instructions on how to submit the physical photographs. So do you submit unasked for photos for the filing, or do you carry photos to the interview, or do you not worry about photos at all since they are not requested? We have had other interviews in which the client offered photos which were rejected by the officer as not needed.

  1. Where are all the I-601A cases going?

We have had a number of I-601A provisional unlawful presence waiver cases transferred lately, and wonder whether they are headed to the location provided in the transfer notice, the Potomac Service Center, or if they will be headed ultimately to the new virtual remote HART (Humanitarian, Adjustments, Removing Conditions, and Travel Documents) Service Center that is opening at this time in order to speed up processing as a result of pending litigation. Of special interest to us is that the remote center will concentrate on I-601A’s as well as “bona fide determinations” for U visa applicants (I-918), VAWA petitions (I-360), and asylum reunification petitions (I-730). In an article written by a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, Dara Lind, “New USCIS Center Is Good News For Some Of Its Worst Backlog Victims”, Immigration Daily, 4/19/23, she said that the Council documented in a recent class-action lawsuit that processing times for I-601A grew sixfold from 2017 to 2022, and that of the two service centers handling the waivers, it is taking three years at one center and 3 ½ in another one to decide 80% of the waivers. Attorneys in the lawsuit estimate that the class of people who have waivers pending for more than 12 months would include at least 70,000 people. In favor of the ultimate destination being HART, it otherwise makes little sense to transfer from the Nebraska Service Center to the Potomac Service Center since both have a current published processing time of 44 months for 80% of the cases.

  1. New vetting center for specific affirmative asylum cases.

In the past, asymmetrical affirmative asylum cases have been filed at service centers and then later at local asylum offices. Now USCIS has created a new vetting center in Atlanta, Georgia, to have one clear address at which these atypical cases can be filed. They are the following cases with USCIS instructions:

  • Loss of Derivative Status After Asylum Approval but Before Adjustment of Status (Nunc Pro Tunc):If you are currently a derivative asylee, but you are unable to adjust status to lawful permanent resident due to a loss of derivative relationship, then you may submit a new Form I-589 and request a grant of asylum nunc pro tunc. In your letter, please provide information about your previous Form I-589 and explain that you are now filing independently as a principal applicant.
  • Loss of Derivative Status After Initial Filing but Before Final Decision:If you withdrew from a principal’s Form I-589 as a dependent, or if you lost derivative status by marriage, divorce, or death of the principal applicant, then you may submit a Form I-589 as a principal applicant. In your letter, please provide information about your previous Form I-589 and explain that you are now filing independently as a principal applicant.
  • Simultaneous Filing as a Principal Applicant and a Derivative Applicant:If you are already listed as a derivative applicant on another pending Form I-589, you may file a Form I-589 as a principal applicant. Also, you and your spouse may file separate Forms I-589 at the same time as principal applicants and list each other as derivative applicants. In your letter, please provide information about any previous Form I-589 and explain that you are now filing independently as a principal applicant.
  • Previously Issued a Final Action by USCIS on a Form I-589:If you previously filed Form I-589 with USCIS, you may be eligible to file a new Form I-589 with USCIS if you have not been placed into immigration court proceedings after USCIS denied or dismissed your Form I-589, including if we dismissed it after you withdrew your Form I-589.
  • Previously in Immigration Court Proceedings: If you have reason to believe we have jurisdiction over your Form I-589 and you were previously in immigration court proceedings, then you may submit a Form I-589.
  • The address of the vetting center is:

Mailing by U.S. Postal Service (USPS):

USCIS Asylum Vetting Center
P.O. Box 57100
Atlanta, GA 30308-0506

Mailing by FedEx, UPS or DHL:

DHS-USCIS Asylum Vetting Center
401 W. Peachtree St. NW, Suite 1000
Atlanta, GA 30308

IMMIGRATION NEWS YOU CAN USE – JULY VISA BULLETIN AND USCIS CHART ACCEPTANCE QUICK SUMMARY; WATCH OUT FOR DISTANCE LEARNING; DOS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING TIME BEING SHORTENED.

As published in the Immigration Daily on June 14, 2023

  1. July 2023 visa bulletin and USCIS chart acceptance quick summary.

The number of changes without counting diversity visa distribution is minimal in advances, and features a 3 ½ year retrogression to the India EB-3 final action date. A quick summary of family-based (FB) and employment based (EB) changes from June reveals the following: FB dates for filing – F-1 moved up nine months to 9/1/17 for all countries except Mexico and the Philippines; F-2A stays current; F-3 moves up three weeks to 3/1/10; and F-4 one month to 3/1/08. FB final action dates – only Mexico moved. EB filing dates – No movement at all. EB final action dates – EB-3 worldwide (except for China and India) moved back four months to 2/1/22 and India went backwards 3 years 6 ½ months to 1/1/09 in both EB-3 and EB-3W categories – ouch! A big warning was given in the notes that there is a strong likelihood that it will be necessary to retrogress the F-2A final action date next month, that the F-2B category final action dates will be continually monitored and that it may become necessary to retrogress the category to keep it within FY-2023 annual limitations. The July adjustment chart put out by USCIS is the same as in previous months – acceptance of dates for filing chart for FB and final action date chart for EB cases.

  1. Watch out for distance learning.

During the pandemic, USCIS was operating under Covid flexibilities under which distance-learning had been allowed in excess of the regulations under 8 CFR 214.2(f)(6)(i)(G) which states:

(G) For F-1 students enrolled in classes for credit or classroom hours, no more than the equivalent of one class or three credits per session, term, semester, trimester, or quarter may be counted toward the full course of study requirement if the class is taken on-line or through distance education and does not require the student’s physical attendance for classes, examination or other purposes integral to completion of the class. An on-line or distance education course is a course that is offered principally through the use of television, audio, or computer transmission including open broadcast, closed circuit, cable, microwave, or satellite, audio conferencing, or computer conferencing. If the F-1 student’s course of study is in a language study program, no on-line or distance education classes may be considered to count toward a student’s full course of study requirement.

In an ICE SEVP Broadcast Message on 5/11/23: “Termination of SEVP COVID-19 Flexibilities”, ICE said that because of the termination of the Covid public emergency on 5/11/23, the SEVP Covid-19 guidance terminated on that day. Active F and M nonimmigrant students are able to complete the 2022-23 academic year under Covid-19 flexibilities through the 2023 summer semester. But active F and M nonimmigrant students will not be permitted to count online classes toward a full course of study in excess of the regulatory limits for the 2023-24 academic year. Initial or reentering students must enroll in programs complying with the regulatory limits for distance learning. This must give pause now to those students wishing to enroll in schools offering a tenuous connection to physical classroom instruction as USCIS may now be looking harder at these schools’ arrangements for instruction following the ending of the pandemic emergency.

3. DOS administrative processing time being shortened.

The Department of State has good news for everyone. It sent out a message on 5/19/23 and reiterated it in the June 8, 2023 advice, “Facilitating Travel and Safeguarding National Security”, that the Department is processing visas more efficiently than ever and is continuously reducing the time required for administrative processing; that it has recently adopted new technology and enhanced coordination to reduce the number of these applications requiring administrative processing on security grounds, while upholding strict national security protections. It adds that since October 2022, most cases that would have previously required additional administrative processing were resolved immediately without additional, time-consuming handling.

Q&A’s published on the World Journal Weekly on June 11, 2023 – 1. Receiving the immigration letter does not mean that the I-485 will be approved 2. The status of the case does not reflect the processing status 3. Engineers worked in a China state owned enterprise usually do not affect immigration 4. Different immigration categories have different processing times

 

1. Receiving the immigration letter does not mean that the I-485 will be approved

I am now in OPT status. I submitted my immigration application and the priority date is September 2022. At the end of last year, I sent my I-485 to USCIS, and I went for fingerprinting in March this year. I recently received a letter from the Immigration Bureau asking me to submit some additional materials. Does this mean that my case is being handled? I don’t think my priority date is current yet, and my I-131 and I-765 application are still pending. I just want to know when can I get my combo card? That way I can go back home.

Mr. Lee answers,
Receiving a request for information from USCIS in an I-485 application means that someone at the agency is looking at your case, but that does not mean that your case will be approved since the priority date is not current. Cases cannot be approved before immigrant visas are available. It is difficult to say when your employment authorization and advance parole applications will be approved. Your fact situation does not say when you applied for the benefits, but I will assume for purposes of the question that you applied for them also in September 2022. At that time, USCIS had decoupled applications and was no longer issuing combo cards. (We have recently seen the resurrection of such in a few recent I-485 cases requesting both benefits, which is a good sign). Current USCIS published processing projections for the vast majority of its cases by service center are the following:

Advance Parole: Texas Service Center – 17.5 months; Nebraska Service Center – 11 months; California Service Center 18 months; National Benefits Center – 11.5 months; Vermont Service Center – 8 months.

Employment authorization: Texas 17 months; Nebraska 17 months; California 18.5 months; NBC 11.5 months; Vermont 15 months.

It may unfortunately take some time for USCIS to issue you these benefits. I note that we have had some recent I-485 filings in which advance parole/employment authorizations came quickly and even in the form of combo cards. While grateful for these cases, we believe that USCIS should seriously work on its backlogs.

2. The status of the case does not reflect the processing status

Yesterday I received an update from USCIS that my I-765 card was issued. But the strange thing is that I-131 on myUSCIS shows case closed, but the status on I-485 and I-130 are still under review. Is this normal? This morning I received 5 more emails from the USCIS, saying that they are going to process my case, but the online case status is still the same as yesterday. Is my I-485 going to be approved? Or is there a combo card first?

Mr. Lee answers,
USCIS does not generally close out an I-131 advance parole request when related to an I-485 adjustment of status to permanent residence filing unless the I-485 is being approved. We have had situations in which I-765 employment authorization requests have been approved when the I-485’s have been on the cusp of being approved. (We recently had such situation about a month ago). It may very well happen that you will receive unofficial and later the official notice of the I-485 approval. The online case status system does not always reflect current conditions in a case’s processing. Whatever is placed on the online case status system is only as current as the individual officer or clerk inputting information into the system.

3. Engineers worked in a China state owned enterprise usually do not affect immigration

My I-140 petition has been approved and I can now file the I-485 form. I looked at the form and found that I had to fill in my previous overseas work experience, even if it was 5 years ago. I used to work in a state-owned enterprise. Does this work experience affect the I-485 application?

Mr. Lee answers,
Form I-485, Page 5, Part 3 requests employment history for the last five years whether inside or outside the US. Page 6 of Part 3 requests that you provide your most recent employment outside of the US if not already listed. So an applicant is obligated to provide the information of most recent non-US employment even if not within the past five years. The information can be used to check back on representations made by applicants when they filled out visa applications to the US in the past. Depending upon the level of the position, work experience in a state-owned enterprise in China may raise questions of whether the applicant was or is a member of the Communist Party. While an engineer in such an enterprise may not raise eyebrows, a director in the enterprise could cause questions to be asked.

4. Different immigration categories have different processing times

I would like to know how the Immigration Bureau will give the number? Is it the date according to Priority Date? Or the date the I-485 was filed? For example, many of the I-485s in front of and behind the number MSC2390198XXX show card making or approval. Shouldn’t the I-485 be processed according to the smoothness of the number? Can you still jump in line?

Mr. Lee answers,
A USCIS case number is assigned at the time that an application or petition is receipted by the agency. Case numbers are chronological by service center, e.g. Vermont Service Center (VSC), California Service Center (WAC), National Benefit Center (MSC). The first two numbers indicate the year and the rest the chronological number of the application receipted during the year. The priority date of cases for family-based petitions is the date of receipt while priority date for employment based cases is either the labor certification receipt date (where a labor certification is involved) or receipt date where there is no labor certification, e.g. EB-1, NIW. Cases are generally processed chronologically, but they are processed chronologically according to the type of case. There are different processing times for the different categories of family-based and employment-based cases. Expediting a case out of line can be done where USCIS offers premium processing for a certain fee. Without such, it is very difficult to expedite an application or petition. Under USCIS guidelines, it may expedite a benefit request if it falls under one or more of the following criteria or circumstance:

  • Severe financial loss to a company or person, provided that the need for urgent action is not the result of the petitioner’s or applicant’s failure: (1) to timely file the benefit request; or (2) to timely respond to any requests for additional evidence;
  • Emergencies and urgent humanitarian reasons;
  • Nonprofit organization (as designated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)) whose request is in furtherance of the cultural or social interests of the United States;
  • S. government interests (including cases identified as urgent by federal agencies such as the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the U.S. Department of State (DOS), DHS, or other public safety or national security interests); or
  • Clear USCIS error.