USCIS to Conduct Lottery for CNMI-Only Transitional Worker (CW1) Petitions Subject to FY-2019 Cap

On April 11, 2018, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it has received more petitions for visas under the Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands (CNMI)-Only Transitional Worker (CW1) program than the number of available CW1 visas for fiscal year 2019 [PDF version]. The CW1 cap for fiscal year 2019 is set at 4,999. Accordingly, the USCIS will conduct a CW1 lottery, as it stated it would do in the event that it received more CW1 petitions than there were available CW1 visas for the fiscal year [see blog].

During the CW1 lottery, the USCIS will randomly select CW1 petitions received between April 2, 2018 and April 13, 2018. The USCIS will reject any CW1 petitions received after April 13, 2018.

The CW1 program is a special nonimmigrant work visa program for individuals in the Northern Mariana Islands who are ineligible for other nonimmigrant work visa categories. The CW1 visa program is slated to expire on December 31, 2019 [see blog]. Individuals in the Northern Mariana Islands who are currently on CW1 status should begin preparing for the eventual termination of the CW1 program. Such CW1 workers may consult with an experienced immigration attorney for guidance on whether there may be other options under the U.S. immigration laws available to them once the CW1 program expires.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS Completes H1B Lottery Process for FY-2019

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it completed the H1B lottery for H1B petitions subject to the fiscal year 2019 H1B cap on April 11, 2018, through a “computer-generated random selection process…” [PDF version]. The H1B lottery was conducted to select a sufficient number of petitions to reach the general cap of 65,000 H1B visas and the special “master's cap” of 20,000 H1B visas.

During the H1B filing period, which began on April 2, 2019, the USCIS received 190,098 H1B petitions. This includes petitions that were filed for the advanced degree exception. The USCIS received enough H1B petitions to reach the statutory cap for fiscal year 2019 on April 6, 2019 [see blog]. The USCIS stated then that it would reject and return all H1B petitions not selected, with filing fees, unless such petitions were subject to the multiple filing bar [see article].

Despite having completed the H1B lottery, USCIS will continue to accept and process H1B petitions that are not subject to the fiscal year 2019 H1B cap. This includes “[p]etitions filed for current H1B workers who have been counted previously against the cap, and who still retain their cap number…” The USCIS will continue to accept and process extension of stay petitions, amended petitions to change the terms of an H1B workers' employment, H1B portability petitions, and petitions to allow current H1B workers to engage in concurrent employment for a second employer.

Please note that premium processing remains suspended for H1B petitions subject to the fiscal year 2019 H1B cap [see article].

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Nicaragua Becomes Partner in ICE's eTD System

On April 10, 2018, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) published a news release titled “Nicaragua becomes the latest partner in ICE's eTD system” [PDF version]. The news release states that “[r]epresentatives of ICE and the government of Nicaragua recently signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) which establishes the Nicaraguan government as a participating partner in ICE/ERO's Travel Document (eTD) system.”

The news release explains that the eTD system is intended to streamline the process of determining citizenship and obtaining travel documents for individuals subject to immigration detention in the United States. It electronically provides “biographic and biometric information used to determine citizenship and/or nationality for individuals.” Furthermore, consular officials may review and edit travel documents through use of the eTD system. Partners in the eTD system “are asked to confirm the citizenship of aliens suspected to be their nationals through interview and the review of records and documents.” Where an alien is determined to be the national of the partners in the eTD system, that country is “expected to issue travel documents in a timely manner and accept the physical return of [its] nationals.” The news release states that Nicaragua is one of the first countries to become partners in the eTD system.

The eTD system promises to expedite the process of identifying the identity and nationality of individuals in immigration detention. ICE stated that by joining, Nicaragua showed its commitment to “meeting its international obligation to accept the return of [its] nationals ordered removed from the U.S.”

An individual who is in immigration detention and facing removal should consult with an experienced immigration attorney immediately for a full assessment of his or her immigration situation.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Supreme Court Strikes Down One Clause of Aggravated Felony Crime of Violence Definition

On April 17, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its much anticipated decision in Sessions v. Dimaya, 584 U.S. __ (2018) [PDF version].

Under section 101(a)(43)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), a “crime of violence” is an immigration aggravated felony. Section 101(a)(43)(F) incorporates the Federal criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. 16, for the definition of an “aggravated felony.” 18 U.S.C. 16 contains two clauses, 16(a) and (b). 18 U.S.C. 16(b) is the “residual clause” of the crime of violence statute, sweeping up “any … offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.”

The question before the Supreme Court was whether 18 U.S.C. 16(b), as incorporated into the INA, is unconstitutionally “void for vagueness.” The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that it was, in a decision that we analyzed in detail on site. The Supreme Court took the case on appeal in 2016 [see article] and heard oral arguments [see article] before rescheduling the case for a second round of oral arguments in January 2018 [see article].

In Sessions v. Dimaya, the Supreme Court held by a 5-4 margin that 18 U.S.C. 16(b) is void for vagueness, affirming the Ninth Circuit. The opinion of the Court was authored by Justice Elena Kagan, and joined in full regarding the vagueness analysis by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Neil Gorsuch. Justice Gorsuch's vote was likely decisive in light of the fact that the Supreme Court had rescheduled the case after not reaching a decision when it had only eight justices, suggesting that the Court had been deadlocked. However, Justice Gorsuch, who filled the vacant seat on the Court, did not join in part of Justice Kagan's opinion, which distinguished cases involving deportation from other civil cases. Justice Gorsuch wrote his own opinion concurring in part and concurring in judgment.

Two separate dissenting opinions were authored. The first was by Chief Justice John Roberts, which was joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito. The second was authored by Justice Thomas, which was joined in part by Justices Kennedy and Alito. Interestingly, Justices Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito were the three dissenters in Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015) [PDF version], wherein the Court held that a similar residual clause provision was unconstitutional in the criminal sentence enhancement context [see article]. In that case, Chief Justice Roberts joined a majority opinion authored by former Justice Antonin Scalia, who was of course replaced by Justice Neil Gorsuch.

In effect, the decision effectively writes 18 U.S.C. 16(b) out of the INA, meaning that a “crime of violence” under section 101(a)(43)(F) encompasses only those offenses defined in 18 U.S.C. 16(a). For examples of such offenses, please see our BIA decisions on section 101(a)(43)(F) [see section] and our article on the Supreme Court decision in Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 [see article].

In the coming days, we will post a series of articles on Dimaya along with a topic index containing these articles and past articles we have published on the issue. Please continue to follow our site for these articles and other important updates on immigration law.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

DOJ Brings Two Civil Denaturalization Complaints Against Convicted War Criminals

On April 4, 2018, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it had filed civil denaturalization lawsuits against two convicted war criminals of the former Yugoslavia [PDF version].

The two individuals who were charged — Edin Dezko, 46, and Rasema Yetisen, 45 — are alleged to have been “part of an elite unit of the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina that attacked the village of Trusina on April 16, 1993, in what is known as the Trusina massacre.” The unit that they are alleged to have been a part of “targeted Bosnian Croats who resided in the village because of their Christian religion and Croat ethnicity, killing 22 unarmed individuals including women and the elderly.” A Bosnian court had previously found that both Dezko and Yetisen were part of a firing squad during the massacre that executed six unarmed prisoners of war and civilians. Furthermore, the Bosnian court found that Yetisen was charged with ensuring that the six unarmed prisoners of war and civilians were dead by shooting them again. The Bosnian court found that Dezko “also killed a crippled elderly man, and then shot the man's wife in the back, killing her because she would not stop crying.”

Before their crimes were revealed, Dezko and Yetisen sought refugee status in the United States claiming that they were victims of persecution. According to the complaints, both Dezko and Yetisen “concealed and affirmatively misrepresented their criminal history, military service, and persecutory acts throughout their immigration proceedings.” The complaints alleged that these concealments and misrepresentations were material to their applications, meaning that they would not have been admitted as refugees but for the concealments and misrepresentations. Dezko and Yetisen eventually procured naturalization.

The United States Government discovered the alleged omissions and outright misrepresentations by Dezko and Yetisen when the Government of Bosnian and Herzegovina made a treaty-based extradition request for both individuals to stand trial for their crimes during the Bosnian War. The extradition request was granted. In 2012, Yetisen pled guilty in Bosnian court to war crimes against prisoners of war and crimes against civilians based on his role in the firing squad executions. As a result of his plea and conviction, Yetisen was sentenced to five years and six months in prison. After being released from prison, Yetisen returned to the United States and currently resides in Oregon. In 2014, Dezko was convicted in Bosnian court of war crimes against prisoners of war and war crimes against civilians, based “in part on Yetisen's testimony against him.” Dezko was held responsible for eight killings. Dezko remains in Bosnia and Herzegovina while serving his prison sentence.

The civil denaturalization complaints against Dezko and Yetisen charge both under the civil denaturalization provision in 8 U.S.C. 1451(a), which is the same as section 341(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). We have posted the civil denaturalization complaints against Dezko [PDF version] and Yetisen [PDF version]. If denaturalized, their status would be returned to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, and they would then be subject to removal proceedings. However, until any determinations of liability are be made, it is important to remember, as the DOJ news release makes clear, that “[t]he claims made in these complaints are allegations only…”

To learn more about denaturalization, please see our growing collection of articles on the subject [see category].

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

AG Sessions Delivers Remarks on Immigration Enforcement and Border Security

On April 11, 2018, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions delivered remarks on immigration enforcement in Las Cruces, New Mexico [PDF version]. In his remarks, Sessions commented on the recent uptick in illegal border crossings, on some of the new initiatives being undertaken by his own Department of Justice (DOJ), and on the broader Trump Administration to curtail illegal immigration. We will review some of the interesting points in his remarks with reference to relevant articles on our site.

Attorney General Sessions commented on the “significant increase in border crossings” in recent months. He noted that, early in the term of President Donald Trump, the number of aliens encountered at the Southwest Border was dramatically lower than in previous years. As we discussed on site, fiscal year 2018 initially saw the lowest number of illegal border crossings in several decades [see blog]. However, in March of 2018, 50,308 aliens were either apprehended at the Southwest Border or found to be inadmissible, more than triple the 16,588 in the same month in 2017. Sessions listed several factors contributing to the rise in apprehensions and inadmissibility findings near the Southwest Border:

• The “booming” U.S. economy, which is a magnet for illegal immigration;
• The lack of a wall on the southern border;
• The failure of Congress to fund the wall and other key border security measures, which sends “a message of irresolution and uncertainty”;
• The existence of “loopholes” in the immigration laws that are exploited “by illegal aliens and open border radicals”;
• The policy of releasing aliens who establish a “credible fear of persecution,” when many then fail to appear for immigration hearings; and
• Laws and policies precluding the expeditious return of “unaccompanied alien children” (statutory term) arriving from Central America (Sessions noted that unaccompanied alien children from Canada and Mexico are returned quickly).

Despite the problems leading to the recent uptick in illegal crossings of the Southwest border, Sessions praised the leadership of President Trump on immigration enforcement issues. Sessions listed several initiatives being undertaken to “take[] criminals off the streets and … restor[e] the rule of law to our immigration system”:

1. President Trump directed the Department of Defense to work with the Department of Homeland Security in securing the border. Please see our article on President Trump's decision to request National Guard members to patrol the Southwest border [see blog].
2. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has undertaken measures to reduce the backlog of more than 680,000 cases in immigration courts. This includes the surge in assignments of more than 100 immigration judges to the border [see blog], the increase in video-teleconference hearings [see blog], and a new expectation for the next fiscal year that immigration judges will complete at least 700 cases annually. The last point is notable in that the new immigration judge quotas have been leaked to several news outlets, but the DOJ has thus far not published them or issued many official statements on the new guidelines.
3. The DOJ has appointed a Border Security Coordinator for each U.S. Attorney's Office.
4. The DOJ is suing California for its new law turning the state into a “sanctuary state.”

In criticizing “sanctuary jurisdictions,” Sessions told state law enforcement personnel that he was not asking them to enforce the immigration laws on behalf of the Federal government. However, he encouraged interested local jurisdictions to consider joining the 287(g) program, referring to section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which allows local authorities to enter into agreements with the Federal government to assist in the enforcement of the immigration laws. Please see our recent post on jurisdictions joining the section 287(g) program [see article].

Sessions noted that President Trump is determined to end “catch and release” policies. To that effect, the President has directed the DOJ, in addition to other relevant agencies, to brief him on progress made to this effect [see article].

Finally, Sessions noted that he had issued a DOJ memorandum directing U.S. Attorney's Offices along the Southwest border to adopt a zero-tolerance policy with regard to illegal entry and re-entry and to criminally prosecute illegal entry and illegal reentry cases referred by the Department of Homeland Security . We wrote about this new policy in a full article [see article]. In support of the rule, Sessions stated that, in the past year, illegal entry prosecutions increased sevenfold in New Mexico, and that this had proven to be effective in reducing the number of illegal entry offenses. He stated that his policy made clear that “if you break into this country, we will prosecute you.”

Attorney General Sessions' remarks highlight some of the recent policies adopted by the Trump Administration on immigration enforcement. The Administration is clearly looking to deterring illegal border crossings in the first instance and increasing the pace of processing removal cases . The policies adapted to this effect are generally designed to favor the Government in seeking to remove aliens. An alien facing removal or immigration detention for any reason should consult with an experienced immigration attorney for a case-specific consultation.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS to Destroy Certain Documents Returned as Undeliverable After 60 Business Days

On April 2, 2018, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began implementing a new policy for cases wherein certain forms are returned as undeliverable by the United States Postal Service (USPS) after 60 business days [PDF version].

Under the new policy, the USCIS will destroy Permanent Resident Cards (“Green Cards”), Employment Authorization Cards, and Travel Documents that are returned as undeliverable by the USPS after 60 business days, unless the USCIS is in that time contacted by the intended recipient of the document to provide correct address information.

Most noncitizens in the United States are required to report any change of address within 10 days of moving within the United States or its territories. In addition to being required by law, USCIS must have an individual's correct address information to send him or her important forms (such as those listed above) and communications. Please see the following document for information about reporting a change of address with the USCIS: [PDF version].

An individual with case-specific questions is well advised to consult with an experienced immigration attorney.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS Receives Enough H1B Petitions to Reach FY 2019 Cap

On April 6, 2018, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it reached the congressionally mandated H1B cap of 65,000 H1B visas for fiscal year 2019 [PDF version]. Furthermore, the USCIS also received enough H1B petitions to meet the H1B “master's cap” of 20,000 for fiscal year 2019.

Because the fiscal year 2019 H1B cap has been met, the USCIS will reject and return filing fees for all unselected cap-subject H1B petitions that are not prohibited multiple filings. To learn about prohibited H1B cap-subject multiple filings, please see our article on Matter of S- Inc., Adopted Decision 2018-02 (AAO Mar. 23, 2018) [see article].

The USCIS will continue to accept and process H1B petitions that are not subject to the H1B cap.

Furthermore, the USCIS will accept and process H1B petitions filed for current H1B workers “who have been counted previously against the cap, and who still retain their cap number…” To this effect, the USCIS will accept H1B extension of stay petitions, amended H1B petitions to change the terms of employment for current H1B workers, petitions to change employers for H1B workers [see article on H1B portability], and petitions to allow current H1B workers to work concurrently in a second H1B position.

Please continue to follow our site for more updates on the H1B category and related nonimmigrant work visa categories.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Closure of U.S. Consulate General in St. Petersburg

On March 31, 2018, the Russian government ordered the closure of the U.S. Consulate in St. Petersburg [PDF version]. Accordingly, the U.S. Government will no longer be able to conduct visa services from the former U.S. Consulate General in St. Petersburg.

Because of this development, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) cancelled all interview and waiver appointments scheduled for the U.S. Consulate in St. Petersburg starting on March 30, 2018. In a news release, the DOS provided instructions for affected nonimmigrant visa applicants to reschedule their interviews [PDF version]. Please see the instructions here. 

The DOS also announced that U.S. citizens who need consular services and who reside in consular district of the U.S. Consulate in St. Petersburg are advised to contact the U.S. Embassy in Moscow for all emergency assistance and routine services matters. We will update this page with more information as such information becomes available.

Please see our full article on recent developments regarding visa processing in Russia for more information [see article].

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Visa Bulletin for April 2018

Introduction

On March 9, 2018, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) published the Visa Bulletin for April 2018 [PDF version]. The April 2018 Visa Bulletin contains filing dates and final action dates for the family-sponsored and employment-based preference categories in April 2018. On March 13, 2018, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) determined that those seeking adjustment of status in the family-sponsored preference categories must use the filing dates, whereas those seeking adjustment of status in the employment-based preference categories must use the final action dates [PDF version].

In this article, we will examine the relevant charts and news found in the April 2018 Visa Bulletin.

To learn more about the subject, please see our articles on how to use the visa bulletin as an applicant for adjustment of status [see article] and the difference between the filing dates and the final action dates [see article].

Please also see our index of articles on the immigrant visa bulletin from the current fiscal year and earlier [see article].

Family-Sponsored Cases in April 2018 Visa Bulletin

Eligible applicants for adjustment of status based on an approved family-sponsored immigrant visa petition must use the filing dates from the April 2018 Visa Bulletin. The filing dates are more favorable to adjustment of status applicants than are the final action dates.

In order for the beneficiary of an approved family-sponsored immigrant visa petition to file for adjustment of status in April 2018 (provided that he or she is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status), the applicant's priority date must be earlier than the filing date for his or her preference category and chargeability area. For family-sponsored cases, the priority date is generally the date on which the visa petition was properly filed with the USCIS.

The following chart contains the filing dates for family-sponsored cases for April 2018 [see here].

For your reference, the following chart contains the final action dates for family-sponsored cases in April 2018 (note that adjustment applicants must use the filing dates) [see here].

Employment-Based Cases in April 2018 Visa Bulletin

Beneficiaries of approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions must use the final action date charts from the April 2018 Visa Bulletin to determine whether they are eligible to apply for adjustment of status in that month. In order for the beneficiary of an approved employment-based immigrant visa petition to file for adjustment of status in April 2018 (provided that he or she is otherwise eligible to apply for adjustment), his or her priority date must be earlier than the filing date for his or her preference category and chargeability area. In employment-based cases where labor certification was required, the priority date will generally be the date on which the labor certification was approved by the U.S. Department of Labor. In cases where labor certification was not required, the priority date will generally be the date on which the petition was properly filed with the USCIS.

The following chart lists the final action dates for employment-based cases in April 2018 [see here].

News and Notes from the April 2018 Visa Bulletin

First, the DOS imposed E1 final action dates for China-mainland born and India. This was necessitated by the high demand for E1 visas from nationals of China and India, which caused the countries to reach their per-country limits under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The DOS stated that there may be future movement during the current fiscal year in the E1 final action dates for China and India if there is a decline in worldwide demand for E1 numbers.

The DOS had expected to impose a final action date in the Vietnam EB5 category. However, this move has been delayed until May. Please see our companion blog post for more information [see blog].

Finally, the DOS continues to expect to reach the annual fiscal year 2018 limit of 50 Special Immigrant Visas in the SI category early this year. For this reason, the DOS is maintaining an April final action date of April 22, 2012 in the SI category. The SQ Special Immigrant Visa category for certain Iraqi and Afghan nationals employed by or on behalf of the U.S. government in Iraq and Afghanistan remains current and is unaffected by the limited availability of the SI category.

Conclusion

Those waiting to apply for immigrant visas based on approved preference petitions should monitor the monthly visa bulletins in order to have an idea of when they may be able to apply for a visa. This is especially important for those who intend to seek an immigrant visa through the adjustment of status process. Immigrant visa applicants are well-advised to consult with an experienced immigration attorney for case-specific guidance.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com