07
Aug 2017
100_0307

Not every immigrant athlete has Senator Chuck Schumer on their side such as Japanese pitcher Masahiro Tanaka.

In 2014 the New York Senator pulled strings within the USCIS expediting the pitcher’s P Visa application for a prompt arrival at the New York Yankees training camp in February of that year.[i]

More recently, Jung Ho Kang, a South Korean baseball player and recently signed Pittsburgh Pirate, was denied entry to the United States this year because three DUI’s. Now, the Korean ball-player will be missing the 2017 season.[ii]

Ever since the 1990 Immigration Act passed by Congress, the United States has opened its doors to greater numbers of immigrants through various channels of acceptance. One aspect of the Immigration Act of 1990 was the categorization of professional athletes under the “O” and “P” visas.

Flashforward to today’s heightened political climate with a new administration, and old legislation. However, closed off the Trump administration has attempted to be in regard to new immigrants, the number of visa acceptances seems to be on a general upward trend. Just on July 17th, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security has augmented the allotment of H-2B visas by 15,000 workers.[iii]

Despite there being an increase in immigrants to the US, regulations have not changed and processing times are still slow, especially for P-1 Athlete Visas.

The main obstacle agents and employers face is the slow bureaucratic mechanisms through which they must pass to successfully obtain a P-1A visa.

Processing delays can cost up to 6 months which can be devastating for teams and individuals. Timely arrival of players is essential for the success of sports clubs. Requests for information could be the biggest challenge for agents and players. One trigger for a request of information, is a happenstance with the law.

According to The New York Times, [iv]  encounters with law enforcement are a primary causal for visa delays for MLB players. If the player does have a history of run-ins with the law, a further explanation will be necessary. USCIS will then request further evidence which will slow down your visa processing time.

Other requests for evidence can be incurred by the USCIS to clarify “international” notoriety of the athlete or team, as well as insurance that the nonimmigrant athlete will be going home after the allotted period of stay. Petitions can also be sent back through mail if forms are not properly completed.

Requests for evidence are one of the primary sources of time delays for P-1 athletes. If MLB prospects, for instance, do not make it on time to camp, they are in danger of losing their chance at making the major leagues.

MLB immigrant athletes are not the only victims plagued by the slow workings of the USCIS. NHL as well as MLS players face these similar constraints, causing unnecessary hardships for teams and rising stars alike.

In other related news, Manchester United player Serge Aurier’s visa was revoked by British border control agents due to encounters with French authorities while playing for PSG.[v] According to the Bleacher Report, Aurier missed a Champions Game at Arsenal as a result. This just shows how navigating through the halls of the visa regulations can be tricky within and without the United States.

Avoiding wait times of up to 6 months is crucial for the success of clients and their agents. The most that can be done by agents filing for petitions is to provide as much evidence as possible to USCIS in their client’s petitions.

Need a P visa in a timely manner? Brian Kenneth Johnson Law Practice will be on your side.

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

 

[i] http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/sen-schumer-speeds-up-visa-process-for-masahiro-tanaka-yankees/

[ii] http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/pirates/2017/07/11/Jung-Ho-Kang-visa-update-mlb-restricted-list-mlbpa-rob-manfred-tony-clark/stories/201707110141

[iii] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-visas-idUSKBN1A21PA

[iv] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/sports/baseball/24visas.html

[v] http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2725210-manchester-united-reportedly-agree-27m-serge-aurier-transfer-amid-visa-issues

21
Jul 2017
9bf40d27-11b4-498e-9b53-82e80fdca6eb

On July 11, 2017, the Trump Administration announced that it would delay implementation of the “International Entrepreneur Rule,” a final rule that was set to go into effect on July 17, 2017. The International Entrepreneur Rule would have provided temporary parole status to entrepreneurs who could demonstrate that their parole would provide a significant public benefit in the form of economic growth and the creation of U.S. jobs.

Contact Us

AILA is seeking examples of individuals who have taken steps to set up a business or obtain investor funding in reliance of the availability of the rule. If you have a client that would have benefited from this rule, please complete the fields below. If you have questions or technical issues, please email reports@aila.org, subject line “Entrepreneur Rule Delay.”

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

 

21
Jul 2017
1511330_728228153876005_1818344485_n

The MAVNI program was established in 2009 to allow immigrants with certain skills to become naturalized U.S. citizens after completing basic training and enlisting in the armed forces. According to the Department of Homeland Security’s Annual Report in June of 2017, as of 2016, USCIS completed 9,822 MAVNI naturalizations with an average processing time of 147 days. Now, lengthy processing times and delays are creating major problems in the program. Recently, the Pentagon began considering cancelling the program, which is currently on halt. On September 30, 2016, the Department of Defense issued a controversial memorandum regarding the program.

 

The September 30th Memo

 

The September 30, 2016, memorandum regarding the MAVNI program made four major changes to the program. First, it extends MAVNI program through September 30, 2017. Second, it requires MAVNI enlistees maintain an immigration status or obtain deferred action, and clarifies DACA beneficiaries may enroll in the program. Third, it requires all MAVNI applicants complete all security screening before shipping to basic training or serving active duty. And fourth, provides that MAVNI enlistees are not eligible for interim security clearance until completion of their first enlistment and receiving a positive national security eligibility determination. The biggest problem is that individuals accepted to the program cannot enter basic training until they complete their security clearance, but they cannot get a security clearance until after finishing their first enlistment term, which means no one can get into basic, and no one who has completed basic can promote.

 

Existing and Potential Problems

 

One of the obvious problems comes from the lack of troops the military will be receiving by denying those individuals in the MAVNI program the ability to naturalize through service. The program was created to fill a gap, and that gap has not yet necessarily been filled.

 

Another obvious problem arises for those who are going to or already have lost their status. The potential for deportation or future problems due to being in the US out of status could have both immediate and long term effects on those who were accepted to the program and now are experiencing problems.

 

One specific area of the military that would be affected by removal of the program is the Special Operations Command of the Army, which has recruited heavily and supported the program since its inception. Individuals with foreign language skills and cultural knowledge who have resided in the US and can bridge the gap between the military and the countries they find themselves in is highly valuable. Which is likely why on July 11, 2017, MAVNI individuals began receiving emails, informing them they were now qualified for security clearances and to move forward with their application process. Others, however, have not been as fortunate and still wait in limbo.

 

Another specific area that recruits highly from the MAVNI program are dentist, more specifically the Army reserve. For an individual to receive clearance to enter combat, they must receive a dental exam. With less dentists, the time it would take to process troops pre-deployment could begin taking longer.

 

Money is always a problem, and there are concerns that by not recruiting translators and doctors to be in the armed forces, the U.S. will have to resort to hiring third parties through contractors, which is always more expensive. Further, hiring a U.S. born citizen with the specialties that MAVNIs are required to possess is generally more expensive, as the military is competing with the private job market to bring them into the ranks.

 

Responses in DC

 

Congress is no longer sitting silently while MAVNI recruits wonder what will happen to them. A number of representatives and senators have been filing amendments that would address the situation in a number of different ways, while others are writing letters to encourage officials not to cancel the program and instead help those recruits stuck in limbo.

 

Among those writing letters are Representative Bill Pascrell who wrote to DHS, and Senator Mark Warner who wrote to the DOD.

 

Representatives Don Beyer, Gwen Moore, Bill Pascrell, and Grace Meng are among those who have proposed varying amendments to prevent any negative action toward the program or the recruits. Solutions range from preventing the DOD from canceling contracts to preventing the Pentagon from sharing MAVNI recruits personal information with ICE unless they are deemed a dangerous person.

 

Still, others, like Representatives Steve King and Paul Gosar, have filed amendments that would deny DACA beneficiaries eligibility to the program, and only allow those who are not a present counter intelligence threat to enlist in the program.

 

What Happens Next

 

The various amendments have been filed and will be heard before a number of different committees before any action can be taken on the matter. Alternatively, several lawsuits have been filed against the DOD and Defense Secretary Mattis, challenging the constitutionality of the September 30, 2016 memorandum.

 

While the writing on the wall seems to suggest that the program has significant support and the actions took by the DOD were possibly illegal, it doesn’t seem clear yet what solutions the court or the DOD will deem fit to resolve the matter.

 

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

 

20
Jul 2017
file0001653459894

Graham, Durbin to Hold Press Conference on Bipartisan Dream Act

 

WASHINGTON –U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) will hold a press conference on their bill, The Dream Act of 2017, that would allow a select group of young immigrant students– more commonly known as Dreamers – to earn lawful permanent residence and to have access to a path towards citizenship.

 

WHEN:

Thursday, July 20

12:30 p.m.

 

WHERE:

Senate Radio-Television Gallery

S-325

 

WHO:

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)

U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois)

 

###

 

BACKGROUND ON BIPARTISAN DREAM ACT

 

The bipartisan Dream Act would allow a select group of young immigrant students who grew up in the United States to contribute more fully to the country they love. 

 

These young people, known as Dreamers, have lived in America since they were children and built their lives here.

 

They grew up pledging allegiance to the American flag and singing the Star Spangled Banner. They are American in every way except for their immigration status. 

 

Under current law they live in fear of deportation and cannot fully realize their potential or utilize their talents in service to the communities, cities, and nation they call home. 

 

The Dream Act would allow these young people to earn lawful permanent residence and eventually American citizenship if they: 

 

·        Are longtime residents who came to the U.S. as children;

 

·        Graduate from high school or obtain a GED;

 

·        Pursue higher education, work lawfully for at least 3 years, or serve in the military;

 

·        Pass security and law enforcement background checks and pay a reasonable application fee;

 

·        Demonstrate proficiency in the English language and a knowledge of United States history; and

 

·        Have not committed a felony or other serious crimes and do not pose a threat to our country.

 

#####

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

19
Jul 2017
columbo

USCIS announced on July 19, that it has returned all fiscal year 2018 H-1B cap-subject petitions that were not selected in our computer-generated random selection process.  USCIS previously announced on May 3, that it completed data entry of all selected cap-subject petitions.

Contact Us

If you submitted an H-1B cap-subject petition between April 3 and April 7, 2017 and have not received a receipt notice or a returned petition by July 31, you may contact USCIS for assistance.

 

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

 

17
Jul 2017
make america immigrate again

WASHINGTON — U.S. businesses in danger of suffering irreparable harm due to a lack of available temporary nonagricultural workers will be able to hire up to 15,000 additional temporary nonagricultural workers under the H-2B program under a final rule that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor submitted to the Federal Register today. To qualify for the additional visas, petitioners must attest, under penalty of perjury, that their business is likely to suffer irreparable harm if it cannot employ H-2B nonimmigrant workers during fiscal year (FY) 2017.

After consulting with Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta, Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly determined there are not enough qualified and willing U.S. workers available to perform temporary nonagricultural labor to satisfy the needs of some American businesses in FY 2017.

“Congress gave me the discretionary authority to provide temporary relief to American businesses in danger of suffering irreparable harm due to a lack of available temporary workers,” said DHS Secretary John Kelly. “As a demonstration of the Administration’s commitment to supporting American businesses, DHS is providing this one-time increase to the congressionally set annual cap.”

The H-2B Temporary Nonagricultural Worker program was designed to serve U.S. businesses unable to find a sufficient number of qualified U.S. workers to perform nonagricultural work of a temporary nature. Congress set the annual H-2B cap at 66,000. A maximum of 33,000 H-2B visas are available during the first half of the fiscal year, and the remainder, including any unused H-2B visas, is available starting April 1 through September 30. On March 13, 2017, USCIS received sufficient H-2B petitions to meet the full FY 2017 statutory cap of 66,000. In May, Congress delegated its authority to the Secretary to increase the number of temporary nonagricultural work visas available to U.S. employers through September 30. The Secretary took the intervening time to consult with the Secretary of Labor on the issue and to properly develop this rule in accordance with Congressional requirements.

Starting this week, eligible petitioners for H-2B visas can file Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker and must submit a supplemental attestation on Form ETA 9142-B-CAA with their petition. A new tip line to report general H-2B abuse and employer violations has also been established.

Details on eligibility and filing requirements are available in the final rule and on the One-Time Increase in H-2B Nonimmigrant Visas for FY 2017. This page also includes information on how individuals can report abuse in the program.

If members of the public have information that a participating employer may be abusing this program, DHS invites them to submit information to ReportH2BAbuse@uscis.dhs.gov.

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

 

14
Jul 2017
file0001118013068

“Internationally Recognized” Athletes

The P-1A Athlete Visa required for foreign aliens to enter the United States and participate in sports has been crucial to the development of major leagues as well as minor leagues since the 2006 COMPETE Act ratification. The qualifications for the athlete visa has been somewhat contentious and in 2011, USCIS clarified the qualifying definition of an “internationally recognized” athlete.

According to PM-602, revising chapter 33.5 (a) in the AFM, “The P-1A athlete may be either an individual athlete or a member of an athletic group or team coming to perform at an internationally recognized level of performance. A member of an internationally recognized athletic team may be granted P-1A classification based on that relationship, but may not perform services separate and apart from the athletic team.”[i]

It is often the case that athletes are denied petitions of entry because of insufficient evidence proving that he/she is “extraordinary” within their field. In Muni v Ins 1995, the USCIS denied the petition, citing “while Muni appears to enjoy a noteworthy career as a professional hockey player, there is no evidence that he has been selected to all stars teams or received official recognitions as an extraordinary hockey player. The evidence submitted does not establish that he is one of the few who have risen to the very top of his field of endeavor.”[ii] Alien athletes that fail to gain entry to the U.S. frequently encounter roadblocks in their application in regard to their individual significance within their field which can be avoided if the agent properly demonstrates the client’s importance and success.

Another issue encountered by agents filing for P-1A visas has to do with the categorization of coaches or supporting staff individual athletes or teams. Agents and clients face challenges regarding the admission of former players who have been hired as coaches. Lee v. Ziglar (2002) is no exception. The applicant, Man Soo Lee, was denied a visa by the INS because although he was one of the best Korean baseball players, he had not demonstrated extraordinary ability as a coach.[iii] Even though Lee may have of been qualified in his knowledge of the sport and abilities within the field of a player,  the INS agent denied his petition, believing that an experienced player’s skills did not directly translate to an ability to coach or manage.

In the P-1A visa petition, the notion of “international” recognition is vague and has been contested over the years. Denials and the re-opening of cases can be costly and time consuming, potentially negatively affecting upcoming seasons for athletes, teams, and coaches. Avoiding these intermediating steps is key for a successful visa petition and athletic event or season. The two cases in this article demonstrate that specificity of roles and achievements is of utmost importance.

In order to demonstrate such “international” recognition, the agent filing the required I-129 present a minimum of two of the following:

  • Evidence of having participated to a significant extent in a prior season with a major United States sports league
  • Evidence of having participated to a significant extent in international competition with a national team
  • Evidence of having participated to a significant extent in a prior season for a U.S. college or university in intercollegiate competition
  • A written statement from an official of a major U.S. sports league or an official of the governing body of the sport which details how you or your team is internationally recognized
  • A written statement from a member of the sports media or a recognized expert in the sport which details how you or your team is internationally recognized
  • Evidence that you or your team is ranked, if the sport has international rankings
  • Evidence that you or your team has received a significant honor or award in the sport[iv]

 

 

[i] USCIS Draft Memo on the Definition of Internationally Recognized for the P-1 Classification:  http://www.aila.org/infonet/uscis-draft-definition-internationally-recognized?utm_source=aila.org&utm_medium=InfoNet%20Search

[ii] https://apps.fastcase.com/Research/Pages/Document.aspx?LTID=nOsEp7Tg3s%2bPwU84W8LUT9yWEowKwvdFKGj64NqYH1QNiP%2fRwPu0GRNwGyujteC1ViL7Rd%2fwEe8be9FegLcKP1nCR%2fvbuKgeBaBSdEOzwxD1itxz7e3YDDUlToPGeYcbOSPo3uABgghJn4%2bYwDuS3QpnsoyyVP8j0zNWREoLjv8%3d

[iii] https://apps.fastcase.com/Research/Pages/Document.aspx?LTID=nOsEp7Tg3s%2bPwU84W8LUT9yWEowKwvdFKGj64NqYH1QNiP%2fRwPu0GRNwGyujteC1ViL7Rd%2fwEe8be9FegLcKP7vg5xgF4seoTerZd3yLjavdJirTvl6RtbpihgD1h6rIcdSwsfBpry3rM0Qezsh5F9lzc%2bEQKLB7r%2fQhlgUktPo%3d

[iv] https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-workers/p-1a-internationally-recognized-athlete

 

 

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

 

14
Jul 2017
file000665280508

 

WORLDWIDE, EL SALVADOR, GUATEMALA, HONDURAS, MEXICO, AND PHILIPPINES Employment-based Second (E2) Preference category:  Readers were advised in item D of the May Visa Bulletin number 6, that it was likely that a date would be imposed at some point. High demand for numbers for USCIS adjustment of status applicants has required the establishment of a date for August. This action will allow number use to be held within the Worldwide E2 annual limit.

The E2 date for these countries will once again become CURRENT for October, the first month of fiscal year 2018.

 

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

13
Jul 2017
GeneralShermanTrunkToTreetop

Visa Bulletin For August 2017

Number 8
Volume X
Washington, D.C

View as Printer Friendly PDF

 

A. STATUTORY NUMBERS

This bulletin summarizes the availability of immigrant numbers during August for: “Final Action Dates” and “Dates for Filing Applications,” indicating when immigrant visa applicants should be notified to assemble and submit required documentation to the National Visa Center.

Unless otherwise indicated on the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) website at www.uscis.gov/visabulletininfo, individuals seeking to file applications for adjustment of status with USCIS in the Department of Homeland Security must use the “Final Action Dates” charts below for determining when they can file such applications. When USCIS determines that there are more immigrant visas available for the fiscal year than there are known applicants for such visas, USCIS will state on its website that applicants may instead use the “Dates for Filing Visa Applications” charts in this Bulletin.

1.  Procedures for determining dates. Consular officers are required to report to the Department of State documentarily qualified applicants for numerically limited visas; USCIS reports applicants for adjustment of status. Allocations in the charts below were made, to the extent possible, in chronological order of reported priority dates, for demand received by July 11th. If not all demand could be satisfied, the category or foreign state in which demand was excessive was deemed oversubscribed. The final action date for an oversubscribed category is the priority date of the first applicant who could not be reached within the numerical limits. If it becomes necessary during the monthly allocation process to retrogress a final action date, supplemental requests for numbers will be honored only if the priority date falls within the new final action date announced in this bulletin. If at any time an annual limit were reached, it would be necessary to immediately make the preference category “unavailable”, and no further requests for numbers would be honored.

2.  Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320.

3.  INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of each has been filed. Section 203(d) provides that spouses and children of preference immigrants are entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration, if accompanying or following to join the principal. The visa prorating provisions of Section 202(e) apply to allocations for a foreign state or dependent area when visa demand exceeds the per-country limit. These provisions apply at present to the following oversubscribed chargeability areas:  CHINA-mainland born, EL SALVADOR, GUATEMALA, HONDURAS, INDIA, MEXICO, and PHILIPPINES.

4.  Section 203(a) of the INA prescribes preference classes for allotment of Family-sponsored immigrant visas as follows:

FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES

First: (F1) Unmarried Sons and Daughters of U.S. Citizens:  23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.

Second: Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents:  114,200, plus the number (if any) by which the worldwide family preference level exceeds 226,000, plus any unused first preference numbers:

A. (F2A) Spouses and Children of Permanent Residents:  77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;

B. (F2B) Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older) of Permanent Residents:  23% of the overall second preference limitation.

Third: (F3) Married Sons and Daughters of U.S. Citizens:  23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.

Fourth: (F4) Brothers and Sisters of Adult U.S. Citizens:  65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.

A.  FINAL ACTION DATES FOR FAMILY-SPONSORED
PREFERENCE CASES

On the chart below, the listing of a date for any class indicates that the class is oversubscribed (see paragraph 1); “C” means current, i.e., numbers are authorized for issuance to all qualified applicants; and “U” means unauthorized, i.e., numbers are not authorized for issuance. (NOTE: Numbers are authorized for issuance only for applicants whose priority date is earlierthan the final action date listed below.)

Family-
Sponsored 
All Chargeability
Areas Except
Those Listed
CHINA-mainland
born
INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES 
F1 22DEC10 22DEC10 22DEC10 01FEB96 15OCT06
F2A 22SEP15 22SEP15 22SEP15 01SEP15 22SEP15
F2B 01NOV10 01NOV10 01NOV10 01JUL96 08DEC06
F3 08JUL05 08JUL05 08JUL05 08APR95 22JAN95
F4 08MAY04 08MAY04 22SEP03 15SEP97 08APR94
22MAR05
22MAR05

*NOTE: For August, F2A numbers EXEMPT from per-country limit are authorized for issuance to applicants from all countries with priority dates earlier than 01SEP15. F2A numbers SUBJECT to per-country limit are authorized for issuance to applicants chargeable to all countries EXCEPT MEXICO with priority dates beginning 01SEP15 and earlier than 22SEP15. All F2A numbers provided for MEXICO are exempt from the per-country limit.

B.  DATES FOR FILING FAMILY-SPONSORED
VISA APPLICATIONS

The chart below reflects dates for filing visa applications within a timeframe justifying immediate action in the application process. Applicants for immigrant visas who have a priority date earlier than the application date in the chart below may assemble and submit required documents to the Department of State’s National Visa Center, following receipt of notification from the National Visa Center containing detailed instructions. The application date for an oversubscribed category is the priority date of the first applicant who cannot submit documentation to the National Visa Center for an immigrant visa. If a category is designated “current,” all applicants in the relevant category may file applications, regardless of priority date.

The “C” listing indicates that the category is current, and that applications may be filed regardless of the applicant’s priority date. The listing of a date for any category indicates that only applicants with a priority date which is earlier than the listed date may file their application.

Visit www.uscis.gov/visabulletininfo for information on whether USCIS has determined that this chart can be used (in lieu of the chart in paragraph 4.A.) this month for filing applications for adjustment of status with USCIS.

Family-
Sponsored 
All Chargeability
Areas Except
Those Listed
CHINA-
mainland
born
INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES 
F1 22JUL11 22JUL11 22JUL11 01APR96 08SEP07
F2A 08APR16 08APR16 08APR16 08APR16 08APR16
F2B 01SEP11 01SEP11 01SEP11 08AUG96 22JUL07
F3 01DEC05 01DEC05 01DEC05 01MAY95 01FEB95
F4 15NOV04 15NOV04 22JUN04 08JAN98 08FEB95

5.  Section 203(b) of the INA prescribes preference classes for allotment of Employment-based immigrant visas as follows:

EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCES

First:  Priority Workers:  28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth and fifth preferences.

Second:  Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability:  28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required by first preference.

Third:  Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers:  28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to “*Other Workers”.

Fourth:  Certain Special Immigrants:  7.1% of the worldwide level.

Fifth:  Employment Creation:  7.1% of the worldwide level, not less than 3,000 of which reserved for investors in a targeted rural or high-unemployment area, and 3,000 set aside for investors in regional centers by Sec. 610 of Pub. L. 102-395.

A.  FINAL ACTION DATES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED
PREFERENCE CASES

On the chart below, the listing of a date for any class indicates that the class is oversubscribed (see paragraph 1); “C” means current, i.e., numbers are authorized for issuance to all qualified applicants; and “U” means unauthorized, i.e., numbers are not authorized for issuance. (NOTE: Numbers are authorized for issuance only for applicants whose priority date is earlierthan the final action date listed below.)

Employ-
ment
based
All Charge-
ability
Areas Except
Those Listed
CHINA-
mainland
born
EL SALVADOR
GUATEMALA
HONDURAS
INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
1st C 01JAN12 C 01JAN12 C C
2nd 01APR15 22APR13 01APR15 22JUL08 01APR15 01APR15
3rd C 01JAN12 C 15JUL06 C 01JUN15
Other Workers C 01JAN04 C 15JUL06 C 01JUN15
4th C C 15SEP15 15SEP15 15SEP15 C
Certain Religious Workers C C 15SEP15 15SEP15 15SEP15 C
5th
Non-Regional
Center
(C5 and T5)
C 15JUN14 C C C C
5th
Regional
Center
(I5 and R5)
C 15JUN14 C C C C

*Employment Third Preference Other Workers Category:  Section 203(e) of the Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) passed by Congress in November 1997, as amended by Section 1(e) of Pub. L. 105-139, provides that once the Employment Third Preference Other Worker (EW) cut-off date has reached the priority date of the latest EW petition approved prior to November 19, 1997, the 10,000 EW numbers available for a fiscal year are to be reduced by up to 5,000 annually beginning in the following fiscal year. This reduction is to be made for as long as necessary to offset adjustments under the NACARA program. Since the EW cut-off date reached November 19, 1997 during Fiscal Year 2001, the reduction in the EW annual limit to 5,000 began in Fiscal Year 2002.

B.  DATES FOR FILING OF EMPLOYMENT-BASED
VISA APPLICATIONS

The chart below reflects dates for filing visa applications within a timeframe justifying immediate action in the application process. Applicants for immigrant visas who have a priority date earlier than the application date in the chart may assemble and submit required documents to the Department of State’s National Visa Center, following receipt of notification from the National Visa Center containing detailed instructions. The application date for an oversubscribed category is the priority date of the first applicant who cannot submit documentation to the National Visa Center for an immigrant visa. If a category is designated “current,” all applicants in the relevant category may file, regardless of priority date.

The “C” listing indicates that the category is current, and that applications may be filed regardless of the applicant’s priority date. The listing of a date for any category indicates that only applicants with a priority date which is earlier than the listed date may file their application.

Visit www.uscis.gov/visabulletininfo for information on whether USCIS has determined that this chart can be used (in lieu of the chart in paragraph 5.A.) this month for filing applications for adjustment of status with USCIS.

Employment-
based
All Chargeability
Areas Except
Those Listed
CHINA-
mainland
born
INDIA MEXICO  PHILIPPINES 
1st C C C C C
2nd C 01OCT13 01FEB09 C C
3rd C 01SEP15 01JAN07 C 01JAN16
Other Workers C 01JUN08 01JAN07 C 01JAN16
4th C C C C C
Certain Religious Workers C C C C C
5th
Non-Regional
Center
(C5 and T5)
C 01SEP14 C C C
5th
Regional
Center
(I5 and R5)
C 01SEP14 C C C

6.  The Department of State has a recorded message with the cut-off date information for Final Application Action which can be heard at:  (202) 485-7699.  This recording is updated on or about the tenth of each month with information on final action dates for the following month.

 

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.

10
Jul 2017
San Fran

DHS is expected to solicit comments from the public regarding the proposal to rescind the entrepreneur rule.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is temporarily delaying the effective date of the International Entrepreneur Final Rule (82 FR 5238). This delay will provide DHS with an opportunity to obtain comments from the public regarding a proposal to rescind the rule pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13767, “Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements.”

Background

On August 31, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS or Department), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) published the International Entrepreneur Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register. See 81 FR 60129. On January 17, 2017, DHS published the International Entrepreneur Final Rule (the IE Final Rule) in the Federal Register. The effective date is July 17, 2017. See 82 FR 5238. The IE Final Rule amended DHS regulations to include criteria that would guide the implementation of the Secretary of Homeland Security’s discretionary case-by-case parole authority as applied to international entrepreneurs. Specifically, it applied to international entrepreneurs who can demonstrate that their parole into the United States under section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) would provide a significant public benefit to the United States. In accordance with the final rule’s criteria, such potential would be indicated by, among other things, the receipt of significant capital investment from U.S. investors with established records of successful investments, or obtaining significant awards or grants from certain Federal, State or local government entities. In addition to defining criteria for the favorable exercise of the Secretary’s discretionary parole authority, the IE Final Rule established a period of initial parole stay of up to 30 months (which may be extended by up to an additional 30 months) to facilitate the applicant’s ability to oversee and grow his or her start-up entity in the United States.

The original effective date of the rule was 7/17/17. DHS will also issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking soliciting comments on a proposal to rescind the rule pursuant to Executive Order 13767.

BrianJohnson_Logo_Black-01 tbls1-immigrationandnationalitylaw location-san-diego

We serve the following localities: San Diego County including San Diego, Carlsbad, and Escondido; Los Angeles County including Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Van Nuys, Whittier, Woodland Hills, and Long Beach; Santa Clara County including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale; Alameda County including Oakland, San Leandro, and Berkeley; Sacramento County including Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Folsom; and Orange County including Santa Ana and Anaheim.