USCIS issued a policy memo with definitions of “affiliate” and “subsidiary” to be used for determining the appropriate ACWIA fee. Memo states that H-1B employees of the parent company should not be counted toward the total number of full-time equivalent employees when determining the ACWIA fee.
On August 25, 2017, Politico reported that USCIS is planning a change in policy to require interviews for all employment-based adjustment of status applicants and will be expanding the interview requirement to other categories. On August 28, 2017, the same reporter tweeted what appears to be the first page of a USCIS press release confirming that, effective October 1, interviews will be phased in for all employment-based adjustment applicants and for all I-730 refugee/asylee petitions. The press release also states that this is part of an “incremental expansion of interviews for benefits that lead to permanent residence,” thus signaling that the interview requirement could be expanded to other categories. An August 25 NBC News article provides some additional context as to what the future might hold.
[contentblock id=5 img=gcb.png]
As recently announced, the employment-based fourth preference (EB-4) visa limits have been reached for fiscal year 2016 for special immigrants from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The May 2016 Department of State Visa Bulletin reflects this situation, so starting May 1, USCIS can no longer accept Form I-485 from applicants from these countries who filed Form I-360 on or after January 1, 2010, because visas will no longer be immediately available. When the Department of State determines that visas are once again available for this category, the visa bulletin will be updated and USCIS will accept new Form I-485s accordingly.
To accommodate filings that meet the April 2016 Visa Bulletin, the Chicago Lockbox facility, where these applications are filed, will extend its hours and continue to accept these filings until 3:30 p.m. Central time on Saturday, April 30.
Quite a few people are confused as to the differences in rights and responsibilities between U.S. citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs). As a legal matter, LPRs, although allowed to stay and work in the United States permanently, are still ‘‘aliens’’ and subject to immigration law. Unlike United States citizens, below are some of the additional requirements on “Green Card” holders.
• The status of LPRs can be rescinded under section 246 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1256) and LPRs can be removed from the United States under section 237 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1227);
• LPRs are required to acquire and carry evidence of their status (Form I–551) and replace it when it is lost or expires under section 264 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1304) and 8 CFR 264.5(b);
• LPRs must present specific documentation as a condition for admission and re-admission to the United States under section 211 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1181) and 8 CFR 211.1(a);
• LPRs must notify DHS of each change of address and new address within ten days of the date of the change of address under section 265(a) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1305(a)) and 8 CFR 265.1;
• LPRs may be deemed to have abandoned their status when outside of the United States for more than one year, unless they obtain a re-entry permit, in line with the documentary requirements at 8 CFR 211.1(a) and (b)(3); and
• LPRs must apply for naturalization to obtain citizenship, demonstrating good moral character and at least five years of continuous residence under section 316 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1427), as well as an understanding of the English language and a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history and of the principles and form of government of the United States under section 312 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1423).
If you are interested in becoming a U.S. citizen we have created a new page with a short video, please click here.
[contentblock id=1 img=html.png]
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted DHS’s motion for limited relief from the court’s August 12, 2015, order, and ordered that vacatur of the 17-month STEM OPT extension be further stayed from its original deadline of February 12, 2016, until May 10, 2016. In its opinion, the court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that it did not have jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. The court also found that, in light of the “unexpected and unprecedented” 50,500 public comments received in response to DHS’s October 19, 2015, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, “extraordinary circumstances” existed that warranted modifying the court’s previous order
[contentblock id=1 img=html.png]