Thursday, February 28, 2019

Politico Reports that Michael McCaul is No Longer Being Considered for DHS Secretary

myattorneyusa.com
On September 28, 2017, Andrew Restuccia and Eliana Johnson published a report at Politico on the White House's search for a new Secretary of Homeland Security [link][1]. Elaine C. Duke has been serving as acting Secretary of Homeland Security since the former Secretary, John F. Kelly, left his post to become the White House Chief of Staff at the beginning of July.

The new Politico story states that Texas U.S. Representative Michael McCaul is no longer in contention for the post. McCaul, the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, was believed to be a leading candidate for the post, as we discussed in our last update on the search [see blog]. According to the story, Kelly, who is playing a leading role in the search, “privately raised red flags about McCaul's stance on immigration, which has at times diverged from that of President Donald Trump.” The story noted that in one key disagreement, McCaul was critical of President Trump's travel restrictions on nationals of certain countries and refugees.

The story does not name any specific candidates who are under consideration. However, on September 1, 2017, Restuccia and Johnson reported that Thomas Homan, Rick Perry, James Loy, and Peter King were under consideration in addition to Michael McCaul. At the moment, it seems like the White House is taking a deliberative approach to determine who will be the nominee for Secretary of Homeland Security. We will update the blog with more information as it becomes available.

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.

  1. Johnson, Eliana and Andrew Restuccia. “White House 'back to square one' in search for DHS secretary.” Politico. Sep. 28, 2017. Politico.com

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Wednesday, February 27, 2019

ICE Press Release on "Operation Safe City" Arrests

myattorneyusa.com
On September 28, 2017, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued a press release on the result of its “Operation Safe City” [PDF version].

The ICE explains that Operation Safe City was a four-day operation that “focused on cities and regions where ICE deportation officers are denied access to jails and prisons to interview suspected immigration violators or jurisdictions where ICE detainers are not honored.” The four-day operation resulted in 498 arrests of individuals in 42 counties for violations of the Federal immigration laws. The ICE stated that it prioritized aliens with criminal convictions. It added that individuals with active Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) were not targeted for arrest.

The acting Director of ICE, Thomas Homan, stated that “sanctuary jurisdictions,” which he defined as those jurisdictions that “do not honor detainers or allow [ICE] access to jails and prisons,” create “a magnet for illegal immigration.” He added that this was the reason that “ICE is forced to dedicate more resources to conduct at-large arrests in these communities.”

ICE summarized the number of arrests by jurisdiction:
  • Baltimore (28)
  • Cook County, Illinois (30)
  • Denver (63)
  • Los Angeles (101)
  • New York (45)
  • Philadelphia (107)
  • Seattle (33)
  • Santa Clara County, California (27)
  • Washington DC (14)
  • Massachusetts (50)

Of the 498 aliens arrested by ICE during Operation Safe City, 317 had criminal convictions. 68 of the aliens were immigration fugitives. 104 of the aliens had been previously deported on criminal grounds. The press release notes that some of the aliens who were previously deported will face criminal prosecution for illegal entry and illegal re-entry after removal. 18 of the aliens were gang members or affiliates. ICE included the following chart breaking down the criminal convictions of the aliens arrested, reproduced for your convenience [see here].

Interestingly, ICE issued a separate press release dedicated solely to summarizing the 45 arrests in New York [PDF version].

First, of the 45 aliens arrested in New York, 30 had criminal convictions. Several of these aliens had been released from criminal custody on active detainer requests before ICE could assume custody of them. 18 of the aliens were known fugitives. Four of the aliens were previously deported from the United States. Finally, 23 of the 45 aliens had outstanding final orders of removal. The following are the details of the criminal histories of eight of the 45 individuals, clipped from the ICE press release for your convenience [see here].

ICE periodically launches substantial operations to arrest aliens for immigration violations or aliens who may be removable due to criminal convictions. Operation Safe City focused on jurisdictions that ICE has determined to be uncooperative with Federal immigration enforcement. Aliens with criminal charges, convictions, or status issues should seek the counsel of an experienced immigration attorney expeditiously. It is always best to be proactive about any issues that may result in adverse immigration consequences. Furthermore, an attorney can advise an individual of his or her rights if he or she comes into contact with Federal immigration enforcement officers. An alien who is detained and is facing immigration charges should consult with an experienced immigration attorney immediately.

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

President Trump Nominates Kristjen Nielsen as the New Secretary of Homeland Security

myattorneyusa.com
On October 11, 2017, President Donald Trump announced his intent to nominate Kristjen Nielsen as the next Secretary of Homeland Security [PDF version]. If confirmed, Nielsen will replace the current White House Chief of Staff, John Kelly, who left the post at the beginning of August. The position has been filled, since August, in an acting capacity by the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, Elaine C. Duke.

Kristjen Nielsen is currently the White House principal deputy chief of staff, where she has served since Kelly became the Chief of Staff. She had previously served as Kelly's Chief of Staff at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the first half of 2017. Before serving in the Trump Administration, Nielsen served in several important positions during the administration of former President George W. Bush. During the Bush Administration, she served as senior legislative policy director for the Transportation and Security Administration and subsequently as Special Assistant to the President and senior director for prevention, preparedness, and response on the White House Homeland Security Council. The press release notes that, if confirmed, Nielsen will be the first Secretary of Homeland Security to have previous experience in the Department.

Nielsen represents an interesting pick to head the DHS. As indicated above, her background is primarily in national security and cyber security rather than immigration policy. However, it is important to remember that, while we focus almost exclusively on the immigration functions of DHS, the DHS has many functions that do not involve immigration. The selection of Kelly's top deputy at both DHS and in the White House would seem to confirm previous reports that suggested he was playing a leading role in the search for a new Secretary of Homeland Security [see blog]. Assuming Nielsen is confirmed, which is highly likely, her selection will mean that the new Secretary of Homeland Security will have a preexisting working relationship with both President Trump and the White House Chief of Staff.

We will update the site with more information as her nomination begins to work its way through the Senate. While the confirmation hearings may be contentious due to the myriad debates over immigration policy and politics, it seems all but assured that Kristjen Nielsen will eventually be confirmed barring dramatic and unforeseen circumstances. If confirmed, we hope that she proves to be an adroit manager of the vast bureaucracy encompassing both national security and immigration policy at the DHS.

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

Tuesday, February 26, 2019

DOS Prepares to Merge Consulate-General in Jerusalem With Embassy

myattorneyusa.com
On January 8, 2019, President Donald Trump issued a memorandum for the Secretary of State authorizing him to close the United States Consulate General in Jerusalem and merge its functions into the United States Embassy for Israel. The President's memorandum was published at 84 FR 3961 (Feb. 13, 2019) [PDF version].

President Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel on December 6, 2017 [see blog]. That decision reversed the U.S. policy of not recognizing Israel's capital for seven decades. President Trump also provided that the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv would be moved to Jerusalem. The Embassy was formally relocated in Jerusalem in May 2018. The President's decision to allow for the closure of the Consulate General in Jerusalem is the next step in centralizing the U.S. Mission to Israel in its new Embassy.

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

Monday, February 25, 2019

List of H2A and H2B Eligible Countries Updated for 2016

myattorneyusa.com
The Director of Homeland Security, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, has updated the list of countries whose nationals are eligible to participate in the H2A and H2B Visa programs. The list must be updated annually. It was published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 72079 on November 18, 2015.

New Countries for the H2A and H2B Visa Programs


The following countries have been added to the list of countries whose nationals are eligible to participate in the H2A and H2B Visa programs:

  • Andorra
  • Belgium
  • Brunei
  • Colombia
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Greece
  • Liechtenstein
  • Luxembourg
  • Malta
  • Monaco
  • San Marino
  • Singapore
  • Taiwan[1]
  • Timor-Leste

Moldova No Longer Eligible to Participate in the H2B Program


The Director of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State have decided that Moldova will no longer be designated as an eligible country for the H2B Visa program. However, nationals of Moldova will still be eligible to participate in the H2A Visa program.

Nationals of Moldova who are currently in the United States on H2B status will not lose status on account of this change. However, the change will render nationals Moldova ineligible to extend H2B status or to change from a different nonimmigrant status to H2B status.

The New List of H2A and H2B Countries


There were no other changes made to the list of H2A and H2B eligible countries. Effective on January 18, 2016, there will be 83 countries whose nationals are eligible to participate in both the H2A and H2B Visa programs, and 84 countries whose nationals are eligible to participate in the H2A Visa program (Moldova will be the only country eligible to participate in one but not the other). The following is the list of countries eligible to participate in the H2A and H2B Visa programs for 2016 [see article].

Source: http://www.uscis.gov/news/uscis-announces-addition-16-countries-eligible-participate-h-2a-and-h-2b-visa-programs [PDF version].

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.
  1. Ftn 1 from 80 FR 72079: With respect to all references to “country'' or “countries'' in this document, it should be noted that the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, Public Law 96-8, Section 4(b)(1), provides that “[w]henever the laws of the United States refer or relate to foreign countries, nations, states, governments, or similar entities, such terms shall include and such laws shall apply with respect to Taiwan.'' 22 U.S.C. Sec. 3303(b)(1). Accordingly, all references to “country'' or “countries'' in the regulations governing whether nationals of a country are eligible for H-2 program participation, 8 CFR 214.2(h)(5)(i)(F)(1)(i) and 8 CFR 214.2(h)(6)(i)(E)(1), are read to include Taiwan. This is consistent with the United States' one-China policy, under which the United States has maintained unofficial relations with Taiwan since 1979.
Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Updated List of H2A and H2B Eligible Countries For FY-2017

myattorneyusa.com
October 26, 2016, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated its list of countries eligible to participate in the H2A and H2B visa programs for the next fiscal year. The list saw one addition to the list of countries in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, whose nationals are eligible to participate in the H2A and H2B visa programs in FY-2017 [see news release]. There were no other changes to the list from the previous fiscal year. This update was published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 74468 (Oct. 26, 2016) [link].

This new update will take effect on January 18, 2017. The designations will be valid for one year from January 18, 2017. Also effective date, nationals from all of the following countries will be eligible to participate in the H2A and H2B visa programs. Please note that nationals of Moldova are eligible to participate in the H2A program, but ineligible to participate in the H2B program. In total, nationals of 85 countries will be allowed to participate in the H2A program and nationals of 84 countries will be allowed to participate in the H2B program [see here].

With respect to all references to “country” or “countries” in this document, it should be noted that the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, Pub. L. No. 96-8, Section 4(b)(1), provides that “[w]henever the laws of the United States refer or relate to foreign countries, nations, states, governments, or similar entities, such terms shall include and such laws shall apply with respect to Taiwan.” 22 U.S.C. § 3303(b)(1). Accordingly, all references to “country” or “countries” in the regulations governing whether nationals of a country are eligible for H-2 program participation, 8 CFR 214.2(h)(5)(i)(F)(1)(i) and 8 CFR 214.2(h)(6)(i)(E)(1), are read to include Taiwan. This is consistent with the United States' one-China policy, under which the United States has maintained unofficial relations with Taiwan since 1979.

To see our article on the list published for the previous fiscal year on November 18, 2015 to read about the additions made to the last for the previous year, and the decision to find that Moldova was ineligible to participate in the H2B program [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

Friday, February 22, 2019

AILA Reports USCIS Denying Form I-131 Advance Parole Applications When Applicant Travels While Application is Pending

myattorneyusa.com
On August 18, 2017, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) issued a Practice Alert titled “USCIS Is Denying Pending Forms I-131 for Abandonment Due to International Travel” (see AILA Doc. No. 17081867).

Members of AILA have reported that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has been denying Form I-131, Application for Travel Document applications for advance parole for applicants who traveled abroad while their applications were pending. The Forms I-131 are even being denied for abandonment even in circumstances where:

  • The applicant has a separate valid advance parole document; or
  • The applicant has a valid H, K, L, or V visa to return to the United States.

AILA explains that the denial notification letters refer applicants to page 6 of the Form I-131 instructions, which state that departure with a pending Form I-131 will result in the advance parole application being considered abandoned. AILA explains that USCIS had previously not considered such applications abandoned when filed by individuals who had either a separate advance parole document or a valid H, K, L, or V visa to return to the United States.

AILA states that it contacted the USCIS for information on the policy. The USCIS Service Center Operations Directorate (SCOPS) informed AILA that the denials were proper and in accord with current USCIS policy.

Individuals applying for advance parole to travel abroad are well-advised to consult with an experienced immigration attorney for case-specific guidance on how travel may affect their status. In light of the reported denials of Form I-131 on ground of abandonment, it appears that traveling abroad with a pending Form I-131 will now lead to the denial of the pending Form I-131, notwithstanding any other factors such as having a valid advance parole document or a valid H, K, L, or V visa to return to the United States. Individuals who may be affected should consult with an experienced attorney for up-to-date information on the current policies.

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

Thursday, February 21, 2019

USCIS Notes Guilty Plea in Large Immigration Fraud Scheme Involving Marriage Fraud

myattorneyusa.com
On July 26, 2017, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a press release regarding a conviction involving an immigration fraud scheme that USCIS had participated in investigating [PDF version].

According to court documents and statements, David Nikolashvili, a 52-year old citizen of the Republic of Georgia, operated an immigration fraud scheme “through which he obtained false immigration status from [USCIS] for approximately 50 to 60 citizens of European countries.” Specifically, Nikolashvili was paid between $12,000 and $16,000 by foreign nationals for arranging sham marriages with U.S. citizens who were paid for entering into the sham marriages.

The U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut, Deiredre M. Daly, announced that Nikolashvili pled guilty to one count of making a false swearing in an immigration matter. He faces a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years. He will be sentenced on October 27, 2017, by United States District Judge Robert N. Chatigny. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Douglas P. Morabito.

In our website's overview of marriage fraud, we explain why entering into a sham marriage is often fatal to one's immigration prospects [see article]. Furthermore, for those who are tempted to circumvent the immigration laws, it is important to remember that immigration authorities and prosecutors are experts at detecting and prosecuting marriage fraud cases.

In April of 2017, the USCIS highlighted its role in another marriage fraud investigation that led to convictions [see blog]. Please also see our recent article on a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision finding that a section 237(a)(1)(H) waiver of deportability is not available for an alien who is charged with having committed a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) stemming from false statements made regarding his or her entering into a sham marriage [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

New Legislation Increases CW1 Cap for FY-2017 and Makes Other Changes to CW1 Program

myattorneyusa.com
On August 28, 2017, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released a news update titled “New Legislation Increases Availability of Visas for CNMI Workers for Fiscal Year 2017” [PDF version].

On August 22, 2017, President Donald Trump signed the Northern Mariana Islands Economic Expansion Act. H.R. 339 [PDF version] into law. The legislation modifies provisions relating to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) Transitional Worker classification, more commonly known as “CW1.” The CW1 transitional worker category is a limited nonimmigrant work visa applying only to individuals in the Northern Mariana Islands who would be ineligible to work under other nonimmigrant work visa categories [see work visa category].

The new legislation adds 350 CW1 visas to the fiscal year 2017 CW1 cap. This raises the CW1 cap from 12,998 to 13,348. The 350 additional CW1 visas are available only to those who are currently in CW1 status, who are seeking to extend CW1 status, and whose CW1 petition validity period expires between August 23, 2017 and September 30, 2017.

60 of the 350 CW1 visas are reserved for “healthcare practitioners and technical operations.” Ten of the 350 CW1 visas are reserved for “plant and system operators.” Both of these terms are defined in the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system.

However, effective August 22, 2017, CW1 visas will generally not be available to workers performing jobs classified in the SOC system as “construction and extraction operations.” The only exception to this new restriction applies to workers performing such a job who have maintained continuous CW1 status for the same employer since before October 1, 2015. For all other cases, the restriction applies both to CW1 petitions pending with the USCIS as of August 22, 2017, and to CW1 petitions filed in the future.

Finally, the mandatory CNMI education fee for all CW1 employees has increased to $200 from $150 for each CW1 worker per year. The USCIS will reject any petitions received after August 22, 2017, that either omit the fee payment entirely or include an incorrect or insufficient fee payment. However, the new fee does not apply to CW1 petitions filed and pending with the USCIS before August 22, 2017.

On May 25, 2017, we posted an article on the USCIS reaching the initial 12,998 CW1 cap for fiscal year 2017 [see article]. We have updated that article with the new information, but please see it for more general points about recent developments with the CW1 transitional worker 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

Wednesday, February 20, 2019

President Trump Fires Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State and Will Nominate Mike Pompeo as Replacement

myattorneyusa.com
On March 13, 2018, President Donald Trump removed Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. In an announcement on Twitter, President Trump stated that he will nominate Mike Pompeo, who has been serving as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), as the 70th U.S. Secretary of State. In explaining his decision, President Trump stated that he and former Secretary Tillerson “disagreed on things, like the Iran deal.”[1]

President Trump will nominate Gina Haspel as the next CIA Director.

In order to take office as Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo will have to be confirmed by the United States Senate. In January 2017, he was confirmed as CIA Director by a vote of 66-32. It seems highly likely that he will be confirmed as Secretary of State just over one year later.

The Department of State plays a major role in the U.S. immigration system in a variety of areas, including consular processing and a leading role in administering the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP).

Mike Pompeo had previously staked out many positions on immigration while he was a member of Congress. Furthermore, although he did not have much direct influence over immigration policy as CIA Director, it has been reported that President Trump regularly consulted Pompeo on a variety of domestic issues. We will post a comprehensive look at Pompeo's record of statements and votes on immigration and what it may mean if and when he becomes Secretary of State in the near future.

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.

  1. Boyer, Dave and Guy Taylor. “Trump ousts Tillerson, taps CIA Director Pompeo for State Dept.” The Washington Times. Mar. 13, 2018. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/13/donald-trump-fires-rex-tillerson-tap-cia-director-/?1

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Tuesday, February 19, 2019

New Louisville Immigration Court to Open on April 2, 2018

myattorneyusa.com
On February 23, 2018, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) announced the opening of the Louisville Immigration Court. The Louisville Immigration Court will open in Louisville, Kentucky, on April 2, 2018.

We have embedded the news release on the opening of the new Louisville Immigration Court for your convenience [see here].

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

William P. Barr Sworn in as U.S. Attorney General

myattorneyusa.com
On February 14, 2019, the United States Senate confirmed William P. Barr as the 85th Attorney General of the United States by a vote of 54-45. Attorney General Barr was sworn in on the same day. He previously led the Department of Justice as the 77th Attorney General during the administration of former President George H.W. Bush from November 26, 1991, to January 20, 1993.

Attorney General Barr takes over leadership of the Department of Justice from Matthew Whitaker, who had been serving in an acting capacity subsequent to the resignation of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

As head of the Department of Justice, Attorney General Barr will oversee many functions having to do with the U.S. immigration system. These include oversight of the immigration courts and Board of Immigration Appeals, criminal prosecution for certain offenses related to immigration, and defending the positions of the Trump Administration in court.

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

Monday, February 18, 2019

Visa Sanctions Triggered Against Four Countries Deemed Deficient in Accepting Return of Nationals

myattorneyusa.com
On August 22, 2017, Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times reported that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had exercised its authority under section 243(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to trigger visa sanctions against four countries found to be recalcitrant in accepting the return of their nationals [link][1]. In accord with the statute, the DHS notified the U.S. Department of State (DOS), which will have responsibility for imposing the visa sanctions.

Although both the DHS and DOS declined to name the four countries, Dinan reported that the countries affected are Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. Prior to the instant use of section 243(d), the authority had only been used twice: first by the Bush administration against Guyana in 2001 and second by the Obama administration last year against Gambia. In both cases, the visa sanctions were narrowly targeted against government officials and family members thereof. However, it is important to note that section 243(d) provides authority to issue far-reaching sanctions.

President Donald Trump made this an issue during his presidential campaign [see blog] and addressed it in his January 25, 2017 Executive Order on interior enforcement [see article]. At the end of 2016, over twenty countries were listed as being recalcitrant in accepting the return of their nationals. However, as of May 2017, the only twelve were determined to still be problematic. In addition to the Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea, and Sierra Leone, the following nine (counting Hong Kong) were also listed as being non-compliant as of May 2017:

  • Burma
  • China
  • Cuba
  • Hong Kong
  • Iran
  • Laos
  • Morocco
  • South Sudan
  • Vietnam

It is worth noting that Iran is subject to separate visa restrictions under President Trump's Executive Order 13780 [see article].

It remains to be seen what are the extent of the sanctions imposed on Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea, and Sierra Leone and whether they will bring the four countries into compliance. In general, anyone facing removal from the United States should consult with an experienced immigration attorney for case-specific guidance. We will update the website with more information on these developments as they become available.

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.

  1. Dinan, Stephen. “Trump to stop travel from countries that refuse to help Homeland Security.” The Washington Times. Aug. 22, 2017. Washingtontimes.com

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Friday, February 15, 2019

Internationally Renowned Director Kirill Serebrennikov Charged in Russia

myattorneyusa.com
In what appears to be a new instance of politically motivated prosecution in Russia, the Associated Press reported that Russian investigators have detained internationally renowned director Kirill Serebrennikov on charges of embezzling government funds provided for his productions [link][1]. Despite his productions having garnered state funding, Serebrennikov has been a target of many Russian politicians for his social views and activism. The article notes that a new ballet about dancer Rudolf Nureyev produced by Serebrennikov that was slated to debut last month was cancelled. Although the reason was ostensibly unclear, the ballet's depiction of Nureyev's gay relationships was controversial among many in power in Russia and likely led to the cancelation.

As always, it is important to shine light on instances of political oppression in Russia. Fortunately, the eyes of the international art world will be on the Serebrennikov proceedings. We will follow major developments in the case going forward. For more posts on similar issues, please see a couple of our past blogs on political oppression and the plight of LGBT individuals in Russia:

  • Russian Opposition Figure Vladimir Kara-Murza Gives Interview After Surviving Poisoning for the Second Time [see blog]
  • No Love From Russia — If You're Gay [see blog]

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.

  1. Isachenkov, Vladimir. Nataliya Vasilyeva. “Detention of Famous Director Upsets Russia's Artistic World.” Associated Press. Aug. 22, 2017. Apnewsarchive.com

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Thursday, February 14, 2019

Reports Indicate Trump Administration Considering Cuts to Exchange Programs, Including Au Pair

myattorneyusa.com
Citing to a recent Wall Street Journal report, The Hill reported that the Trump Administration is considering curtailing certain foreign work exchange programs [link][1]. The report specifically notes that the review includes some exchange programs that fall under the J1 exchange visitor program, including the summer work travel and au pair [see article] programs. The review was prompted by President Trump's “Buy American and Hire American” Executive Order [see article].

It is unclear what changes, if any, will be made to specific work exchange programs. The Hill states that the review could lead to the elimination of programs such as the au pair program or the imposition of new requirements. However, it is important to note that for the time being, no changes have been made or recommended to exchange programs.

We will update the site with more information in the event that changes are announced.

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.

  1. Manchester, Julia. “Trump considering cuts to au pair work visas: report.” The Hill. Aug. 27, 2017. Thehill.com

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS Releases New Memo on H1B ACWIA Fee

myattorneyusa.com
On August 9, 2017, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a new Policy Memorandum on the definitions of “affiliate” and “subsidiary” in the H1B ACWIA fee context. The Memorandum is titled Definition of 'Affiliate' or “Subsidiary' for Purposes of Determining the H-1B ACWIA Fee” [see PM-602-0147].

The issue is significant because an H1B petitioner that has 26 or more full-time equivalent employees is subject to a $1,500 fee per H1B beneficiary. However, an employee with 25 or fewer such employees based in the United States is subject only to a $750 fee per H1B beneficiary. In counting the fee, employees of the petitioner's affiliates and subsidiaries must be counted, provided that such employees are not working for affiliates and subsidiaries abroad. While the procedures for counting full-time equivalent U.S. employees are well established in U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regulations, the terms “affiliate” and “subsidiary” have not been similarly developed in the H1B ACWIA fee context.

Ultimately, the USCIS decided to apply existing definitions of “affiliate” and “subsidiary” purposed for L1 intracompany transferee petitions to the H1B ACWIA fee context. To learn more about the USCIS's reasoning and the effect of this policy, please read our full article on the subject [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

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Possible Changes Coming to EB5 Program

myattorneyusa.com
On January 13, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled “EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program Modernization” in the Federal Register (FR) at 82 FR 4738 [PDF version]. The rule had been open for public comment until April 11, 2017.

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking includes many proposed changes to the EB5 immigrant investor program, including, but not limited to:

  • Priority date retention;
  • Increasing the minimum investment amount; and
  • Designating targeted employment areas.

We can expect further news from the DHS on this issue, including the possible publication of a final rule, in the near future. For the time being, please read the full analysis we wrote on the contents of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to learn about the changes that may be in store for the EB5 immigrant investor program [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

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

USCIS to Require In-Person Interviews for Employment-Based AOS Applicants and Asylee/Refugee Relative Petitions

myattorneyusa.com
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced its plans to expand the in-person interview requirement for certain benefit applicants whose benefits, if granted, would allow them to reside permanently in the United States [PDF version]. We recently posted a blog on the news that the announcement was impending [see blog].

The changes come as part of the USCIS's efforts to implement President Donald Trump's March 6, 2017 Executive Order 13780, titled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States,” which called for the implementation of a uniform baseline of screening for visa applicants [see blog].

Effective October 1, 2017, the USCIS will require interviews in the following circumstances:
  • Adjustment of status applications based on employment (filed on the Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status); and
  • Refugee/asylee relative petitions for beneficiaries who are in the United States and who are petitioning to join a principal asylee/refugee applicant (filed on the Form I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition).
The applicants did not previously require in-person interviews in order for their applications for permanent residency to be adjudicated. The USCIS statement indicates that it is “planning an incremental expansion of in-person interviews to other benefit types” in the future.

Those seeking adjustment of status or any benefit that may lead to permanent residency should always consult with an experienced immigration attorney for case-specific guidance and assistance. An experienced immigration attorney will be abreast of the most up-to-date rules and procedures regarding the application in question, including the expansion of the in-person interview requirement for employment-based adjustment of status applications and for certain beneficiaries of refugee/asylee relative petitions.

We will update the website with information regarding new USCIS interview policies as it becomes available.

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

Analysis of AG Sessions' Legal Justification for Ending DACA

myattorneyusa.com

Introduction


On September 5, 2017, the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security, Elaine C. Duke, issued a memorandum rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Please see our full article for an in-depth look at the reasoning and the practical immigration effects of the decision [see article]. In this article, we will examine the legal justification for the decision espoused in the recommendation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions that DACA is illegal. We will also examine an interesting note in Acting Secretary Duke's memorandum rescinding DACA that appears to concede one of the points made by Texas in the litigation against the erstwhile Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) program.

The Sessions Letter


Attorney General Jeff Sessions wrote a letter to Acting Secretary Duke advising her that the DACA program was illegal and that DACA should be rescinded. You may see the full letter here [PDF version].

Attorney General Sessions stated that “DACA was effectuated by the previous administration through executive action, without proper statutory authority and with no established end-date, after Congress' repeated rejection of proposed legislation that would have accomplished a similar result.” He described it as “an open-ended circumvention of immigration laws and an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the Executive Branch.”

Attorney General Sessions noted that the similar — albeit more far-reaching — DAPA program had been enjoined on a nationwide basis by a Federal district court. The injunction was subsequently affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and then by the Supreme Court of the United States by a divided 4-4 vote. See Texas v. United States, 86 F.Supp 3d 591, 699-70 (S.D. Tex.) [PDF version], aff'd, 809 F.3d 134, 171-186 (5th Cir. 2015) [PDF version], aff'd by equally divided Court, 136 S.Ct. 2271 (2016) [PDF version]. Subsequently, the former Secretary of Homeland Security, John Kelly, rescinded DAPA in June, citing to the adverse court decisions [see article]. Attorney General Sessions determined that, because DACA “has the same legal and constitutional defects that the court recognized as to DAPA, it is likely that potentially imminent litigation would yield similar results with respect to DACA.”

As we will discuss, both the District Court for Southern District of Texas and the Fifth Circuit analyzed the implementation of DACA in order to ascertain how DAPA would be implemented, before ultimately finding that DAPA should be enjoined because Texas was ultimately likely to succeed on the merits of its claims.

Attorney General Sessions concluded that in his capacity as U.S. Attorney General, “I have a duty to the Constitution and to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress.” He cited to President Donald Trump in stating that the proper enforcement of the immigration laws is “critical to the national interest and to the restoration of the rule of law in our country.”

Analysis of Attorney General Session's Note on Role of Attorney General


Before examining specific legal issues regarding DACA, it is worth noting the following passage of Attorney General Sessions' letter:

"I have a duty to the Constitution and to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress".

The majority of Republican politicians have generally expressed the opinion that DACA was an unlawful exercise of executive authority. However, many of these same Republicans support the policy goals of DACA when viewed separately from the manner of its implementation. Many Republicans in the latter camp urged President Trump to defend DACA in court while Congress works on a legislative solution through the proper legal channels. To cite to just one of many examples, one of President Trump's primary opponents, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, issued the following statement on his Facebook page prior to the final decision [see here].

Here, Bush argued that:

  1. DACA is unconstitutional; but
  2. DACA should remain in place as long as Congress does not provide a legislative solution.

To be clear, there are many arguments on both sides of the question of DACA's legality. For the purpose of this section, we are examining the issue from the starting point of assuming that DACA was illegal.

Bush articulated a policy-oriented approach. Although he believes that DACA was illegal, he nevertheless believed that policy and, perhaps, moral, considerations outweighed ending the program without legislation enshrining its goals in law. Many others, such as Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, advanced similar positions. A similar variant of this position adopted by many Democrats and Republicans is that the ultimate constitutionality of DACA should have been left to the courts to resolve through the judicial process.

In his letter, Attorney General Sessions implicitly addressed this policy-oriented approach. In arguing why DACA should be rescinded immediately, he cited to the oath he took to become Attorney General. He noted that he had a duty to the constitution and to execute the laws actually passed by Congress. Essentially, his position is premised on the idea that the Attorney General has an obligation to determine the legality of a law and act accordingly. For him, it was not an issue to be left to the courts after he determined that the law was illegal. By the same logic, Attorney General Sessions could not countenance leaving the DACA policy in effect pending a legislative solution (however, he did approve the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS's) six-month wind-down process, although it is impossible to know if this was his preferred solution).

The positions of Jeb Bush and Attorney General Sessions highlight how different priorities and views of the roles of oath-taking government officials can lead to different resolutions despite starting from the same premise (here, that DACA was illegal). These sorts of debates come up in all sorts of issues facing our country and are well worth carefully considering.

Tying the Decision to the Fifth Circuit DAPA Injunction


In asserting that DACA was illegal, Attorney General Sessions cited to the grounds on which the Fifth Circuit based its decision to enjoin DAPA. The applicability of the DAPA injunction to DACA rests not only on the similarities between the two programs, but also on the fact that both the district court and the Fifth Circuit carefully studied the manner in which DACA had been implemented in order to adjudicate the lawsuit against DAPA. This was necessitated by the fact that DAPA had not taken effect at the time that the decisions were rendered.

The Fifth Circuit upheld the DAPA injunction on two grounds, both of which were referenced in Attorney General Sessions' letter:

  1. DAPA violated the procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA); and
  2. The DHS lacked legal authority to implement DAPA even if it had undergone the notice and comment procedures required by the APA.

In reaching his decision, Attorney General Sessions determined that the Fifth Circuit's reasoning applied to DACA as well.

There is one interesting point I will examine that comes not from the Sessions letter but from the DHS memorandum rescinding DACA [PDF version].

First, please refer to the “Similarities to DACA” section of my 2015 opinion blog on the Fifth Circuit decision [see blog].

As I explained, the district court looked to the implementation of DACA to determine whether the DAPA memo would afford adjudicators with genuine discretion in granting benefits. In the district court decision, Judge Andrew Hanen found that while the DACA memo instructed adjudicators to review applications on a case-by-case basis, this instruction was “merely pretext.” To this effect, he noted that only about 5-percent of the 723,000 applications that had been evaluated had been denied as of the time of his decision. Furthermore, he suggested that the instances of mandatory language in the DACA memo suggested that adjudicators were not afforded genuine discretion. This issue was important in determining whether DACA was, as the Obama Administration claimed, merely an exercise of prosecutorial discretion, or whether it was in fact an immigration benefit created without congressional authorization. The Fifth Circuit majority agreed with Judge Hanen's analysis in upholding the injunction.

In Acting Secretary Duke's memorandum, she stated that DACA “purported to use deferred action-an act of prosecutorial discretion meant to be applied only on an individualized case-by-case basis…” In footnote 1 of her memorandum, Secretary Duke stated that “[United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)] has not been able to identify specific denial cases where an applicant appeared to satisfy the programmatic categorical criteria as outlined in the [DACA] memorandum, but still had his or her application denied solely upon discretion.” In short, she stated that the DHS determined that provided individuals were not barred from DACA benefits, it could not identify any cases of such individuals being denied as an act of discretion. This finding appears to concede Texas' legal arguments and that Judge Hanen was correct in his finding on this specific issue.

Conclusion


Most of the debate over DACA focuses on its policy goals. However, regardless of which side of the debate one falls, both DACA and DAPA presented interesting legal questions that will surely come up in other contexts (e.g., several of the decisions on President Trump's so-called “travel ban” actually cited to the Fifth Circuit decision on DAPA with regard to the question of standing). These legal questions apply not only to immigration, but also to the powers of the different branches of government in general.

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

Monday, February 11, 2019

Annual U Visa Limit Reached for Fiscal Year 2017

myattorneyusa.com
On August 30, 2017, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it has approved the congressionally mandated annual limit of 10,000 U visa petitions for fiscal year 2017 [PDF version]. While the USCIS cannot grant any more U visa petitions in September, the final month of fiscal year 2017, it stated that it will continue reviewing pending petitions for eligibility when more U visas become available starting on October 1, 2017 (the first month of fiscal year 2018). The USCIS cautioned that both U visa petitioners and family members must continue to meet the eligibility requirements in order to ultimately be granted U visas.

We have a wide selection of articles and materials on U nonimmigrant status on our website. Please see our selection of articles on U visas [see category] to learn more about the issues. Furthermore, please see our “Victims of Violence” section for other immigration benefits that may be available to certain crime victims [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

Noel Francisco Confirmed as Solicitor General of the United States

myattorneyusa.com
On September 19, 2017, Noel Francisco was confirmed by the United States Senate by a vote of 50-47 to serve as the Solicitor General of the United States [link][1]. As Solicitor General, Noel Francisco will be the government's lead lawyer in arguments before the Supreme Court of the United States. We discussed the Francisco nomination and his resume in a previous blog [see blog]. To learn about upcoming immigration cases in which Noel Francisco will be representing the government, please see our blog on the subject [see blog].

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.

  1. Howe, Amy. “Francisco confirmed as solicitor general.” SCOTUSblog. Sep. 19, 2017. Scotusblog.com.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Friday, February 8, 2019

Decision on Nominee for Secretary of DHS Not Imminent

myattorneyusa.com
On July 31, 2017, the former Secretary of Homeland Security, John F. Kelly, left his position to become the White House Chief of Staff. Since then, Elaine C. Duke, who was serving as the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, has been serving as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security.

On September 1, 2017, Andrew Restuccia and Eliana Johnson of Politico reported that President Donald Trump has not yet interviewed candidates for the position of Secretary of Homeland Security [link].[1] They report that, although the White House has a shortlist for the position, “it could be weeks before Trump finally makes his choice…”

The report suggests that President Trump's preference initially was to choose Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who also heads the President's election integrity commission. Kobach had been rumored to be a candidate for the position during the Trump transition as well. However, it reports that Kelly has dissuaded the President from nominating Kobach.

According to the story, the following five individuals are on the White House shortlist:

  • Thomas Homan, Acting Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
  • Rick Perry, Secretary of Energy
  • James Loy (served in DHS during the Bush Administration)
  • Michael McCaul, U.S. Representative for Texas' 10th Congressional District and Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee
  • Peter King, U.S. Representative for New York's 2nd Congressional District and former Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee

Notably absent from the list is Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke. However, Restuccia and Johnson report that President Trump has been satisfied with Duke's performance thus far, and that he may consider her for the permanent position if that continues.

Furthermore, it appears that the reported shortlist is not final, and more candidates could be added who have experience in homeland security. It appears that Kelly is playing a leading role in the search.

Secretary of Homeland Security is the most consequential cabinet position for immigration policy. Accordingly, we will continue to follow the issue closely and update the site when more is known.

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.

  1. Restuccia, Andrew. Eliana Johnson. “Trump not rushing to find a permanent head for DHS.” Politico. Sep. 1, 2017. Politico.com

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Monday, February 4, 2019

USCIS Releases Two Charts on Rescission of DACA

myattorneyusa.com
On September 5, 2017, we published a comprehensive article explaining the rescission of the memorandum authorizing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and what the rescission of DACA will mean for current DACA beneficiaries. Interested readers should consult our full article for detailed information [see article].

On September 13, 2017, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a simple chart explaining what the rescission of DACA means for those who have DACA and those who were considering applying or in the process of applying on September 5, 2017. We have posted the chart below for your convenience [see here].

As of September 18, 2017, it remains unclear whether Congress will pass legislation offering benefits to those who were previously eligible for DACA or what President Donald Trump would do in the event that Congress does not agree to such legislation prior to March 5, 2017. In the meantime, it is crucial for DACA beneficiaries to consult with an experienced immigration attorney for case-specific guidance. This is especially important for DACA beneficiaries who are eligible to apply for renewal of DACA before October 5, 2017. We will continue to update the website as more information on the aftermath of the rescission of DACA becomes available.

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

Archived Article on Eligibility Requirements for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)

myattorneyusa.com

Update: September 5, 2017


On September 5, 2017, acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine C. Duke rescinded the 2012 memorandum authorizing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). We explain the reasoning behind the decision and its implementation in a full article [see article]. This is an archived article on the eligibility requirements for DACA prior to the rescission of the DACA memo. Please continue to follow our website for updates on the immigration situation for DACA beneficiaries.

Overview


From June 15, 2012, the Obama Administration's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program ( DACA ), instructs the USCIS, ICE and CBP to exercise Prosecutorial Discretion towards certain undocumented aliens, who came to the USA as children. On August 15, 2012, the USCIS made available the application form I-821D for DACA. The application fee is $465 ($380 for the processing and $85 biometrics fee).

This Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ( DACA ), if granted through the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, does not confer on the alien any lawful immigration status, and neither does it entitle such alien to apply for a green card or Naturalization in the USA. The main relief offered by DACA is the two year deferral of removal or deportation such aliens will receive.

Eligibility


To be eligible for DACA, illegal aliens must show that they have:

  • been under the age of 31 on June 15, 2012;
  • arrived to the United States before reaching the 16th birthday;
  • continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007 up to the present time;
  • been physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012,
  • been physically present at the time of requesting deferred action from USCIS;
  • entered without inspection before June 15, 2012 or had any lawful immigration status expired on or before this deadline;
  • been in school at the time of application, or have already graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, or have obtained a general educational development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. Coast Guard or the U.S. Armed Forces;
  • not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

The prosecutorial discretion will be exercised on a case-by-case basis. The applicants, who should be at least 15 years old at the time of filing, except as described below, will be granted a renewable employment authorization, valid for a period of two years. Due to the recent changes in the Regulations, the DACA beneficiaries are now allowed to travel outside of the USA by applying for an Advance Parole Travel document. The Advance Parole allows a DACA beneficiary to seek authorization to re-enter, or be paroled, into the United States prior to his or her departure from the United States. An additional application form with filing fees should be filed with the USCIS to obtain such an Advance Parole Travel document. The Advance Parole Travel Document will then be incorporated within the Employment Authorization Card.

DACA applicants will not be placed in Removal Proceedings, or removed or deported from the USA. Persons, who already have cases, pending with the Executive Office for Immigration Review will also be identified, and offered Deferred action. Persons, who are currently in Removal Proceedings or have been ordered removed, or were granted Voluntary Departure are still eligible for deferred action under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ( DACA ). Such aliens do not have to have reached the age of 15 to be eligible.

Documentation


The following Supporting Documents must be presented with the application, to establish physical presence and continuous residence in the USA:

Identity documents

  • proof of Identity from the Alien's country of origin, with photo identification. Any number of various official documents can be used;
  • birth certificate;
  • a U.S. visa, bearing the alien's name and photo.

Proof of entry prior to the 16th birthday:

  • official records of arrival into the USA (stamped passport, I-94 form, any paperwork, issued by the INS or the US CIS or other);
  • U. S. School records;
  • hospital or medical records (such as immunization records).

Proof of immigration status:

  • form I-94, or I-95, or I-94W with place, date and manner of entry and authorized stay expiration date;
  • final immigration Court Order of exclusion, deportation, or removal issued on or before June 15, 2012;
  • a charging document (Notice to Appear, Order to Show Cause) placing the alien into removal proceedings.

Proof of continuous residence in the u.s. since June 15, 2007:

  • employment records or letters from employer;
  • official school records (report cards, etc.);
  • military records;
  • official Religious Institution records of participation in religious observances;
  • birth Certificate of U.S.-born children;
  • deeds, mortgages, rental agreements, Bank and Credit Card statements;
  • income tax returns.

Proof of completed education or valid student status when filing for daca:

  • school records, showing the dates of attendance in the United States, on the school official stationery, and the up-to date level of education;
  • U.S. High School Diploma;
  • U.S. GED Certificate.

The goal of the DACA initiative was to encourage young undocumented immigrants to come forth and join their peers on the road to less restrictive and more productive and freer lives.

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