Visa Lawyer Blog

There is no doubt that there is a clear connection between our Immigration policy and how well our economy is doing.

Immigration increases the overall size of the U.S. economy. Of this there is no question. In 2009 immigrants accounted for 15 percent of all workers. More workers and more people mean a bigger GDP. Immigrants are 15 percent of U.S. workers. They likely account for about 10 percent of GDP or more than a trillion dollars annually. However, this does not mean that the native-born population benefits from immigration.

Basic economic theory shows that the overwhelming majority of this increase in economic activity goes to the immigrants themselves in the form of wages and other compensation. It is important to understand that the increase in the size of the economy is not, by itself, a benefit to the existing population. Moreover, immigrants who arrived in the last 10, 20, or 50 years are without question earning and living better on average then they would be had they remained in their home countries.

The effects of restrictive immigration laws in several U.S. regions affect employers and immigrants themselves, official sources said today.

The problem that concerns many states in the country, where local governments passed laws to prosecute undocumented workers, is addressed in a report by the Agriculture Department of Georgia, a region that passed the HB 87 state immigration law.

According to the report, the farmers lost about 10 million USD because of the lack of workers for the growing and harvesting of crops.

The fact is that companies with more than 10 employees were required to use the E-Verify system, a program to check the immigration status of workers in an on-line database, which frightened away thousands of undocumented workers.

The fear of facing criminal penalties for using false documents to gain employment also triggered the exodus of immigrants to other regions.

The Georgia document says 26 percent of producers surveyed lost income due to lack of workers to meet the needs of the fruit and vegetable industry, which faced major losses.

The absence of comprehensive immigration reforms and the adoption of local regulations create serious problems in states like Alabama, South Carolina, Utah and Arizona, among other regions, where immigrant labor is a decisive factor in agriculture. There is no doubt that immigration reform is crucial not only because the system is broken, but also to support economic growth in the future.

As we return to work on this Jan 2, 2012, one can only wonder what will 2012 be like for Immigration. 2011 will be remembered as the year Alabama enacted HB56, the most unreasonable immigration law in U.S. history. The bill was passed to go into effect Sept. 1 before a series of legal challenges from civil rights organizations, churches and the federal government delayed implementation for weeks. A federal judge put portions of the law on hold to consider the challenge, while allowing some aspects of the law to move forward.

The National Conference of State Legislatures reported recently that in 2011, there were 1,607 bills and resolutions relating to immigrants and refugees introduced in all 50 states and Puerto Rico, significantly up from a little more than 1,400 in 2010. Bolstered by the relative success of SB 1070, even as parts of the law remain hung up in court, immigration restriction-minded legislators in many states banded together, working with the same legal teams to help them draft immigration crackdown bills.

Interestingly, in spite of the bill-filing fury, 11 percent fewer of these state immigration bills became in 2011 than in 2010. Among those that didn’t get anywhere were a series of bills intended to end birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born babies of undocumented immigrants, written with the aid of the same legal counsel behind SB 1070 and introduced in states like Arizona, Indiana and Iowa. Also voted down was an Arizona “omnibus” bill that would have denied public services to undocumented immigrants, similarly to California’s ill-fated Proposition 187 in 1994, and an Arizona bill requiring that hospitals check for patients’ immigration status.

Arizona’s SB1070 will be sure to dominate in 2012. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the Obama Administration’s constitutional challenge to Arizona’s immigration law. Should the Court strike down SB1070 it will reaffirm, in a loud and clear voice, that immigration policy is exclusively a federal matter, inextricably tied to the idea of the United States as a sovereign nation. However, should the Court uphold SB1070 other states will certainly follow Arizona’s and Alabama’s lead, resulting in a disparate patchwork of state immigration laws throughout America. How the Supreme Court rules on SB 1070 could either encourage or put the brakes on state immigration bills.

In fiscal year 2011, the Obama administration broke its own deportation record for the second straight year, deporting close to 400,000 people.

It wouldn’t be a stretch to say that news of another record-breaking year for removals was pretty much expected, with the continued expansion of federal immigration enforcement programs like Secure Communities and 287(g), both of which have fed the deportation pipeline in recent years with a steady flow of cases stemming from local law enforcement. So we expect more removals and enforcement in 2012.

The biggest question for 2012, will Congress overhaul America’s broken immigration system; or even pass the DREAM Act, which would help promising undocumented youth earn their way to lawful status. 2012 is an election year, and the reality is that the politicians in Washington will not touch an issue as explosive as immigration reform, or will they? Whatever will happen in immigration in 2012 will sure keep us all interested and we will keep you posted!

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the powerful ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee and a longstanding advocate of reform of the H-1B temporary visa and other aspects of U.S. high-skill immigration policy, has placed a hold on the "Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants" bill.

H.R. 3012, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, introduced on September 22, 2011 by Rep. Chaffetz (R-UT), eliminates the employment-based per-country cap entirely by fiscal year 2015 and raises the family-sponsored per-country cap from 7% to 15%.

On 10/27/11, the House Judiciary Committee held a markup and H.R. 3012 was reported favorably out of committee by a voice vote. An amendment from Rep. Lofgren (D-CA) that would make adjustments to the three year phase-in period was accepted. H.R. 3012 must next be scheduled for House floor debate which may occur in the next few weeks. Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2011 House Report 112-292

On 11/29/11 the House passed H.R. 3012, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act by a vote of 389-15 with no additional amendments. The measure now moves on to the Senate for consideration.

Senate procedures allow any member of the Senate to place a "hold" on legislation or nominations in order to delay consideration of the measure or nominee. At this time it is unclear how long Senator Grassley intends to maintain his hold on H.R.3012. We will update as soon as more information becomes available.

On 12/15/11, in order to release his hold on hold on H.R. 3012, Senator Grassley offered an amendment that would make dramatic changes to the bill including elimination of the family per county limit increase and reducing the employment based per country limit to 15%. Furthermore, his amendment would eliminate the diversity visa program and adds in provisions that would increase enforcement and U.S. worker protections to the H-1B and L-1 visa programs.

Senator Grassley’s amendment was objected to, therefore his hold on the bill remains. While other senators may try to negotiate a compromise amendment with Senator Grassley, at this time it appears unlikely that such an agreement is likely.

Grassley's action makes it highly unlikely that the bill can advance toward a Senate vote, at least for now. He opposes it because it does not "better protect Americans who seek high-skill jobs during this time of record unemployment," he stated in the Senate, according to Computerworld. Grassley and his committee colleague Dick Durban (D-Illinois) have long fought to improve protections for high-skilled American workers. We will keep you posted of course.

How much do you know about the 10 plus Million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States? How long have they lived among us, who are their parents and more? The Pew Hispanic Research Center released some interesting stats and we are sharing below.

Nearly two-thirds of the 10.2 million unauthorized adult immigrants in the United States have lived in this country for at least 10 years and nearly half are parents of minor children, according to new estimates by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

The characteristics of this population have become a source of renewed interest in the wake of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s recent endorsement of a proposal to create a path for unauthorized immigrants to gain legal status if they have lived in the country for a long period of time, have children in the U.S., pay taxes and belong to a church. Several of Gingrich’s opponents for the Republican presidential nomination have criticized the proposal as a form of amnesty that would encourage more immigrants to come to the U.S. illegally.

The Pew Hispanic analysis finds that 35% of unauthorized adult immigrants have resided in the U.S. for 15 years or more; 28% for 10 to 14 years; 22% for 5 to 9 years; and 15% for less than five years.

The share that has been in the country at least 15 years has more than doubled since 2000, when about one-in-six (16%) unauthorized adult immigrants had lived here for that duration. By the same token, the share of unauthorized adult immigrants who have lived in the country for less than five years has fallen by half during this period—from 32% in 2000 to 15% in 2010.

The rising share of unauthorized immigrants who have been in the U.S. for a long duration reflects the fact that the sharpest growth in this population occurred during the late 1990s and early 2000s—and that the inflow has slowed down significantly in recent years, as the U.S. economy has sputtered and border enforcement has tightened. It also reflects the fact that relatively few long-duration unauthorized immigrants have returned to their countries of origin. America is no longer the promised land!!!

Read the report here

Immigration services scams are getting so sophisticated that fraudsters now advertise online with websites that perfectly mimic those of official government agencies, federal officials said Thursday as they rolled out a nationwide awareness campaign meant to combat such practices. Officials from several federal, state and local agencies, as well as immigration lawyers and advocates, met in Newark on Thursday to expand nationwide a campaign that started in seven pilot cities. It focuses on enforcement, education and inter-agency collaboration.

"They are not just high-tech scams, they are people in the neighborhoods: people who know people, people who are out there shaking hands," said Kelvin Chen, an attorney with the Federal Trade Commission, as he spoke about the need to increase awareness among immigrants who are often preyed upon by members of their own communities.

The campaign is aimed at educating legal and illegal immigrants to avoid everything from unlicensed service providers to websites that mimic those of government agencies. Most scams involve people who pretend to be able to provide legal aid or other services for immigrants, take victims' money and fail to deliver.

The initiative is also intended to inform immigrants about how to get legitimate legal help and how to report fraud. It began in Atlanta, Baltimore, Detroit, Los Angeles, New York City, San Antonio, and Fresno, Calif.

The campaign, spearheaded by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, features ads, posters and leaflets published in English and Spanish, and a website with information available in 12 additional languages. USCIS officials say they are working to strengthen partnerships at the federal, state and local levels to improve coordination, information sharing and enforcement.

By the time they reach the offices of attorney Lloyd Bennett of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, immigrants have often been steered wrong elsewhere. Bennett said an acute and ongoing problem in the northern New Jersey communities where he works is with "'notarios," or storefront offices that offer an array of immigration services and are prevalent in Spanish-speaking communities. Bennett said the word "'notario'" or "notary" is actually translated as "attorney" in many Spanish-speaking countries, so those seeking services assume they are legitimate.

"My clients have absolutely no idea what's going on, they see a sign for a 'notario,' they walk in, they get scammed," Bennett said. "They're given forms or applications for programs that don't exist, or they steal their money, or sometimes applications are filed, but incorrectly, and when it comes to their attention, it's often too late." Preying on this language distinction has allowed the fraud to be easily perpetrated in many communities. Hopefully the efforts by this campaign will have an impact in preventing further fraud from occurring.

Great News for our Russian clients and Blog Readers. Secretary of State Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov exchanged diplomatic notes during their November 19, 2011, meeting in Bali on the new agreement on visas announced on July 13, 2011. This exchange of notes advances the visa agreement one step closer to entry into force. Under Russian law, the Duma must next ratify the agreement and, following ratification, the parties will exchange a second set of notes confirming that their internal procedures for entry into force have been completed. The agreement will come into force 30 days after that exchange.

This visa agreement is historic, and it will allow tourists and business travelers from both the United States and Russia to receive visas with longer validity periods of 36 months, valid for multiple entries. This agreement will facilitate travel between our two countries and establish stronger ties between our people. The agreement benefits the largest segments of our traveling Americans and Russians – business travelers and tourists, traveling both as individuals and in groups.

The agreement also streamlines the visa issuance process by reducing the documentation required. These new visa validity periods will allow for expanded contacts and promote greater mutual understanding between our societies.

Currently, clients report sever delays for visa issuance in Moscow, as well as lengthy background checks on Business visas like L1A and H1B Visas. We hope the new measure will facilitate a new era in movement of people between the two countries.

Heading into Veterans Day, the Senate unanimously passed a bill to help unemployed veterans seeking jobs as well as federal contractors facing a new tax burden in 2013.

As we observe Veterans day, We wanted to send warm wards of support to our Veterans and the active duty men and women fighting for our country day and night.

Three alleged members of an international alien smuggling scheme were charged Tuesday with smuggling hundreds of aliens from China into the United States. The charges stem from an investigation conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).

HSI agents arrested Hak Tung Lam, 44, of Flushing, N.Y., Wen Wo Lam, 43, of Staten Island, N.Y., and Ying Yang, 30, of Flushing, for allegedly participating in smuggling more than 450 aliens into the United States. Hak Tung Lam, an immigration attorney who practiced in Manhattan, Wen Wo Lam, and Ying Yang allegedly served as legal advisors to alien smugglers by recommending ports of entry, advising on methods of avoiding detection, filing false immigration documents, and obtaining the release of detained aliens through fraud.

"As an officer of the court, Hak Tung Lam swore to uphold the laws and constitution of the United States. Instead, he used his training and education to allegedly perpetrate one of the most wide-ranging criminal fraud schemes that this office has ever investigated solely for his personal financial gain," said James T. Hayes, Jr., special agent in charge of HSI in New York. "HSI will continue to pursue those individuals who seek to take advantage of this country's legal immigration system for their own benefit and at the expense of others."

"For Hak Tung Lam, zealous representation of his clients - a group of international alien smugglers - allegedly meant assisting them in breaking the law," said Preet Bharara, U.S. attorney, Southern District of New York. "He and his co-defendants were allegedly responsible for facilitating a smuggling operation that brought hundreds of illegal aliens into this country and for preserving their phony legal status once they arrived. The profits were big, but the price they will now pay, if convicted, is much higher."

According to court documents, from October 2006 to February 2009, Hak Tung Lam worked with others to smuggle approximately 468 Chinese nationals into the United States. During that time, Lam provided legal and logistical advice to alien smugglers and made false immigration filings on behalf of the smuggled aliens. He earned close to $1 million for his participation in this smuggling ring. Earlier this summer, Lam was caught in an HSI undercover operation, providing advice and making false filings for an individual working for HSI whom Lam believed was in the business of alien smuggling. Wen Wo Lam and Ying Yang assisted Lam by, among other things, providing advice, collecting money, and coaching the aliens on what lies to include in their immigration filings.

Hak Tung Lam, Wen Wo Lam, and Ying Yang, are each charged with one count of conspiracy to commit alien smuggling. Hak Tung Lam is also charged with one count of alien smuggling. On the conspiracy count, each defendant faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. On the substantive count, Hak Tung Lam faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.

While many gay couples in New York tie the knot on Sunday, when same-sex marriage becomes legal in the state, Ashley Abraham-Hughes and her wife, Corinne, will be watching the festivities from the other side of the Atlantic.

That’s because since U.S. federal law still does not recognize same-sex marriage, and since Corinne is British, the couple was forced to move to Britain, where their union — they wed in Connecticut in 2009 — is legal.

“While I do still love the U.S. and I always will, I am very resentful of the fact that I was effectively forced to become an expat,” said Abraham-Hughes, a 27-year-old who grew up in Pittsford in western New York and now lives in Manchester. “It’s absolutely ridiculous, and I just think the thinking on this whole issue is completely wrong.”

The couple’s plight is one likely facing many of the estimated 36,000 binational gay couples in the U.S., where the foreign partner in the relationship can face deportation and a 10-year ban from returning to America if they don’t already have or find a legal way to stay in the country.

Continue reading "New York Same-Sex Marriage Law is Bittersweet for Binational Couples" »

Beginning March 15, 2011 all Change of Address, (Form AR-11) and Alien's Change of Address, (Form AR-11 SR) will change filing locations. Now, you must file all change of address forms at the following address:

DHS/USCIS
Harrisonburg File Storage Facility
Attn: AR-11
1344 Pleasants Drive
Harrisonburg, VA 22801

Change of address forms mailed to the old location will be forwarded to the new filing location for 45 days beginning March 15, 2011 until April 28, 2011.
You also have the option of notifying USCIS of a change of address online. To change your address online or for more information about USCIS and our programs, visit www.uscis.gov.

This article by Attorney Habib Hasbini will shed the light on some of the most recent developments regarding California interpretation of employer’s duty to provide employees mandated meal and rest breaks under California Labor Code section 512 and Title 8, California Code of Regulations section 11010 et seq.

An issue that potentially could shift the balance of powers in favor of the employers in California is currently pending before California Supreme Court in Brinker Restaurant Corporation v. Hohnbaum (2008) 85 Cal. Rptr. 3d 688.

The crux issue is how California employers could satisfy their meal and rest periods obligations. The underlying controversy is whether employers need only “authorize” their employees to take meal and rest periods or employers must “ensure” their employees take their meal and rest periods. Interpreting the law one way or the other will have significant implications on the vast wage and hour litigation and class action lawsuits in California.

The Appellate Court, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, issued an opinion in Brinker v. Hohnbaum (2008) 80 Cal. Rptr. 3d 781. Brinker is one of the first California State Appellate Court cases to rule on the parameters of employers’ duties under the California Labor Code regarding meal and rest breaks for non-exempt employees. The decision was overwhelmingly in favor of California employers. The Appellate Court held that an employer does not have to “ensure” that meal and rest breaks are taken. The court’s holding made these types of cases very difficult to certify as a class action. Specifically, the Appellate Court held that employers are not required to “ensure” that employees take the meal or rest breaks properly authorized to them under the provisions of IWC Wage Orders.

The significance of the court’s holding lies in denying class certification with respect to meal and rest break claims. The court reasoned that individual questions arose as to whether class members missed rest breaks as a result of supervisor’s coercion or the employee’s free choice to waive such breaks. Further, individual questions predominate as to whether employees received a full 10-minute rest period, or whether the period was interrupted. The issue of whether rest periods are prohibited or voluntarily declined is an individual inquiry and would result in thousands of mini-trials to determine whether each employee was denied a rest period or the employee waived it.

Further, the Court of Appeal held that under California law, employers need only provide and not ensure meal periods. As a result, as with the rest period claims, meal period claims are not amenable to class treatment. The court reasoned that forcing employers to ensure meal breaks are taken would force employers to police their employees and force them to take meal breaks. This would be an impossible task especially when thousands of employees work multiple shifts. If employers were unable to do so, employers would have to pay an extra hour of pay any time an employee voluntarily chooses not to take a meal period or takes a shortened one.
Importantly, like rest periods, the Court of Appeal held that because meal breaks need only be made available, not ensured, individual issues predominate and the meal break claim is not amenable to class treatment. It will require an individual inquiry as to all the class members to determine if the employer failed to make the breaks available, or employees chose not to take them.
Brinker is fully briefed and awaits a hearing date for oral argument before the California Supreme Court. Will the Supreme Court confirm the Appellate Court ruling and shield California employers from class action lawsuits involving meal and rest periods violations?

We shall wait and see! If it does, it is a big victory for employers in California

Immigration law is important and that is all that we cover most of the time. But our immigrant readers, may be facing other legal challenges from time to time. So we rely on our lawyer friends from across the country, to provide guest articles and reports. This week we are proud to feature Attorney Habib Hasbini's Employment Law expertise.

Many of our clients and Blog readers are immigrants on work visas. Employment Law and Immigration often go side by side, so the info presented in this article should be very useful to our readers. We often hear the term overtime as it relates to employment practices, but what is Overtime?

An employer may dictate the employee's work schedule and hours and legally require the employee work overtime. The employer may discipline an employee, up to and including termination, if the employee refuses to work scheduled overtime.

The general overtime provisions in California are that a nonexempt employee 18 years of age or older, or any minor employee 16 or 17 years of age who is not required by law to attend school and is not otherwise prohibited by law from engaging in the subject work, shall not be employed more than eight hours in any workday or more than 40 hours in any workweek unless he or she receives one and one-half times his or her regular rate of pay for all hours worked over eight hours in any workday and over 40 hours in the workweek.

Eight hours of labor constitutes a day's work, and employment beyond eight hours in any workday or more than six days in any workweek is permissible provided the employee is compensated for the overtime at not less than:

One and one-half times the employee's regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of eight hours up to and including 12 hours in any workday, and for the first eight hours worked on the seventh consecutive day of work in a workweek; and
Double the employee's regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 12 hours in any workday and for all hours worked in excess of eight on the seventh consecutive day of work in a workweek.

There are, however, a number of exemptions from the overtime law. An "exemption" means that the overtime law does not apply to a particular classification of employees. There are also a number of exceptions to the general overtime law stated above. An "exception" means that overtime is paid to a certain classification of employees on a basis that differs from that stated above.

Actions taken by Employee When Denied Overtime – DLSE Procedures

An employee can either file a wage claim with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”) or file a lawsuit in court against the employer to recover the lost wages. Additionally, if the employee no longer works for the employer, she can make a claim for the waiting time penalty pursuant to Labor Code Section 203.

If the employee files a wage claim with the DLSE, the claim will be assigned to a Deputy Labor Commissioner who will determine, based upon the circumstances of the claim and information presented, how best to proceed. Initial action taken regarding the claim can be (i) referral to a conference, (ii) referral to a hearing, or (iii) dismissal of the claim.

If the decision is to hold a conference, the parties will be notified by mail of the date, time and place of the conference. The purpose of the conference is to determine the validity of the claim, and to see if the claim can be resolved without a hearing. If the claim is not resolved at the conference, the next step usually is to refer the matter to a hearing or dismiss it for lack of evidence.

At the hearing the parties and witnesses testify under oath, and the proceeding is recorded. After the hearing, an Order, Decision, or Award (“ODA”) of the Labor Commissioner will be served on the parties.

Either party may appeal the ODA to a civil court of competent jurisdiction. The court will set the matter for trial, with each party having the opportunity to present evidence and witnesses. The evidence and testimony presented at the Labor Commissioner's hearing will not be the basis for the court's decision. In the case of an appeal by the employer, DLSE may represent an employee who is financially unable to afford counsel in the court proceeding.

When the ODA is in the employee’s favor and there is no appeal, and the employer does not pay the ODA, the DLSE will have the court to enter the ODA as a judgment against the employer. This judgment has the same force and effect as any other money judgment entered by the court. Consequently, the employee may either try to collect the judgment herself or assign it to DLSE.

If the employer discriminates or retaliates against an employee in any manner whatsoever, for example, he discharges the employee because she filed a wage claim or threaten to file a wage claim, the employee can file a discrimination/retaliation complaint with the Labor Commissioner’s Office. In the alternative, the employee can file a lawsuit in court against the employer.

For more information, feel free to email us to consult an employment attorney.

The US National Weather Service has issued a blizzard warning for parts of New York, New Jersey and other states along the east coast of the United States as a major winter storm bears down on the area on Sunday.

A band of frigid weather was snaking up the East Coast on Sunday, promising blizzards and a foot of snow for New York City and New England, while several states made emergency declarations as the storm caused crashes on slick roads.Heavy snow and blizzards in parts of North Carolina were making driving conditions difficult, and there were dozens of traffic accidents.

North Carolina authorities reported a fatal traffic accident near Charlotte.The North Carolina Highway Patrol said late on Saturday that most of the roads in and around Asheville were either covered or partially covered with snow and ice.

The storm is the result of a low pressure system off the North Carolina coast that will strengthen into a major storm as it moves northeast, according to the National Weather Service.The snow brought a rare white Christmas to the South.Columbia, in South Carolina, had its first significant Christmas snow since weather records were first kept in 1887.

Airlines grounded hundreds of flights on Sunday along the Northeast corridor in anticipation of the storm, affecting major airports including New York's John F Kennedy Airport and Newark.New York City-area airports alone canceled close to 1,000 flights.

The National Weather Service is expecting heavy snow and strong winds with considerable blowing and drifting of snow with almost no visibility at times.The snow estimates are 11 to 16 inches (28 to 41 centimeters) with locally higher amounts possible.In Secaucus, New Jersey, road clearing crews were out early and pre-positioned to start treating roadway surfaces as the snow started to fall.

Residents of Secaucus in New Jersey have been buying shovels and sacks of sand in local supermarkets, preparing to fight severe weather conditions.The Northeast is expected to get the brunt of the storm.

Forecasters issued a blizzard warning for New York City for Sunday and Monday, with a forecast of 11 to 16 inches (28 to 41 centimeters) of snow and strong winds that will reduce visibility to near zero at times.

A blizzard warning was also in effect for Rhode Island and most of eastern Massachusetts including Boston, with forecasters predicting 15 to 20 inches (38 to 51 centimeters) of snow.A blizzard warning is issued when snow is accompanied by sustained winds or gusts over 35 miles-per-hour (56 kilometers-per-hour). As much as 18 inches (46 centimeters) could fall on the New Jersey shore with wind gusts over 40 miles-per-hour (64 kilometers-per-hour).Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter declared a snow emergency as of 2 p.m. (1900 GMT) on Sunday, and he urged residents to stay off the roads.

In Washington DC, transportation officials treated roads with salt and readied 200 salt trucks and ploughs in preparation for the six inches (15 centimeters) of snow to fall in the Mid-Atlantic region.In Boston, Mayor Thomas Menino declared a snow emergency that bans parking on all major streets. By early Sunday, Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina had also declared states of emergency.Amtrak canceled several of its trains in Virginia

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released a revised Form N-648, Medical Certification for Disability Exceptions, for individuals with disabilities who are seeking exceptions from the English and civics requirements for naturalization. USCIS will shortly be offering public information sessions on the revised form for medical professionals and other stakeholders.

The law requires naturalization applicants to demonstrate proficiency of U.S. civics and the English language. Individuals with certain disabilities or impairments may request exceptions from either or both of these statutory requirements. Form N-648 was revised following extensive dialogue among USCIS subject-matter experts, customers, medical professionals, community-based organizations and legal practitioners. The revisions are intended to clarify the requirements and instructions and to standardize the process. The form enables medical professionals to provide information that is necessary for USCIS to understand the medical professional’s diagnosis and its relationship to the naturalization requirements. The Form N-648 and the accompanying guidance will assist USCIS adjudicators as they review each form.

In January, USCIS will begin hosting public information sessions to help medical professionals and other stakeholders understand the changes to Form N-648. Online videos will be available to explain how best to use the form. The interim guidance on the revised Form N-648 for USCIS personnel is currently available for public comment at http://www.uscis.gov/outreach.

USCIS will accept the previous version of the Form N-648 for 90 days, from Dec. 22, 2010, until March 21, 2011. Beginning March 22, 2011, USCIS will only accept the current version of Form N-648, dated 9/24/2010.

In the spirit of the holidays, wanted to share this great post by Eleanor Pelta from AILA

A client of mine is in a real quandary. The client has a major project with an urgent deliverable that requires a key employee to travel to the U.S. urgently. Because the company has a crack operations staff, they were on this issue early on, and we filed an L-1B petition months before the travel was necessary. However, current processing times being what they are, we had to upgrade the case to Premium Processing recently in order to have any chance of obtaining an approval before the start date. Notwithstanding our extensive documentation, we recently received a massive Request for Evidence and I must confess, our office has been struggling with a response. In the interest of getting something in on a timely basis, the client has authorized me to share details about the petition with the AILA membership for the purpose of tapping into the collective brilliance of the immigration bar to put together a winning response. Here are select portions of the RFE. Any comments or suggestions are most welcome.

Petitioner: Clausiseverywhere.com

Beneficiary: Nicholas LNU

“It has not been demonstrated that the beneficiary has knowledge of your company or the industry as a whole which can be considered “specialized.” Most individuals working in the marketplace are specialists and have been administered a certain amount of training from which they have gleaned special knowledge. It cannot be concluded, however, that all workers who hold specialized knowledge or perform highly technical duties qualify as “specialized knowledge” nonimmigrants.

The petitioner states that the beneficiary will enter the U.S. on an intermittent basis to perform similar duties in the U.S. as those performed abroad and describes them as follows:

* Continuously maintain and update “Naughtynice.net,” a proprietary system to manage database containing behavioral information for the world’s population, with an integrated input process for storing personal interests, hobbies, sleep/awake patterns and other information and inputs received, as well as a sophisticated order fulfillment program.
* Business analysis and operational planning for wide-scale international yearly order-fulfillment and distribution project
* Manage sophisticated geographical information program using satellite images of earth to determine locations where orders must be distributed. The petitioner claims that this program is akin to Google Earth, with certain added proprietary features, such as the ability to locate homes with extra-wide chimneys, homes with very small chimneys, homes with no chimney, and even homes where cookies and milk are regularly left on the fireplace mantle
* Ensure that business requirements are translated into accurate orders that can be produced and fulfilled by staff at company’s factories
* Utilize highly specialized tools to drive and care for a fleet of unique delivery vehicles with obsolete technology.

It appears that the use of the company’s proprietary tools may be incidental to the duties of the U.S. position, as it appears that the beneficiary may be coming to the United States merely to provide support for the company’s services. Moreover, there is no indication of how much time is spent performing the duties that require processes specific to benefiting your company, besides its economic viability. Please provide detailed list of each specific duty requiring specialized knowledge and a breakdown of time spent on each duty.

Specialized knowledge generally comes as a by-product of the projects and activities employees are assigned, not commonly held by significant portions of employees of a company. Identify the percentage of others within the company who hold the level of knowledge you claim that the beneficiary possesses. Identify how long it takes to train an employee to use the specific tools, procedures and/or methods utilized. Explain exactly how the beneficiary’s training differs from the core training provided to your other employees. Submit a record from your human resources department detailing the manner in which the beneficiary has gained his/her specialized knowledge.

The petitioner claims that without the services of the beneficiary, the petitioner’s business would suffer economic decline. Moreover, the petitioner claims that thousands of its customers internationally may suffer grave disappointment and even loss of faith. The value of the beneficiary’s skills to the petitioner is not in question. The petition must be examined to determine if the beneficiary’s duties involve knowledge that is significantly beyond the average in a given field or occupation. Merely limiting an employee’s knowledge to specific tools, procedures, methodologies, and or programs, proprietary or otherwise, does not necessarily create specialized knowledge.

It appears from other information provided in the petition that the beneficiary has some management duties. Specifically, the petitioner claims that the beneficiary manages all factory staff engaged in the manufacture of products for order fulfillment, mainly playthings. In addition, the petitioner states that the beneficiary oversees the care and feeding of flock of roughly 8 rare miniature “Rangifer Tarandus,” plus one with a unique nasal condition. However, without more information this would not in and of itself establish eligibility for the L-1A category as an alternative. From the promotional material submitted, it would appear that the factory staff are individuals of extremely small stature who wear uniforms including pointy hats and colorful leggings. They appear to be lesser skilled workers. Thus the duties with respect to these workers would be those of a first-line supervisor. Moreover, management of livestock does not create eligibility for L-1A purposes.

Your response must be received in this office by December 24, 2010.”

P.S. The writer does not opine on whether or not Santa is make-believe. The excerpts above showing the evolving, and ever-narrowing definition of specialized knowledge, alas, are not.

People applying for tourist visas for the United States in Qatar have greater chance of accessing them than in any other GCC country. Figures released by the US Administration suggest that only 3.2 percent requests for US tourist visas made to the US embassy in Doha were turned down in the FY 2010.

A US government website citing tourist visa (B-Visas) refusal details country-wise said the data were preliminary through September 30, 2010. As for Qatar, the data show this was the lowest percentage of tourist visa refusal in the entire GCC region. The next Gulf state with a lower percentage of rejection was Kuwait (3.6 percent). Bahrain ranked third with a 4.1 percent rejection rate while the percentage for the largest GCC state Saudi Arabia was six.

As for Oman and the UAE, the percentages were higher-8.7 and 9.7, respectively. The GCC states ranked much above their peers in the Arab world like Egypt, Yemen, Sudan and even Iraq. The rate of B-visa rejection in these countries was more than 30 percent.

Somalia topped the list with a rejection rate of almost 70 percent followed by Djibouti (60.2 percent), Yemen (54.3 percent), Mauritania (49.7 percent) and Iraq (42.2 percent). It is interesting to note that the next Arab country after the GCC states with lower refusal percentage was Libya (14.3 percent). Morocco with a refusal rate of 15.5 percent and Tunisia with 15.6 percent rejection ranked next.

Among non-Arab Asian countries, China with a 13.3 percent rejection rate and India with double that percentage fared better than Pakistan (41.6 percent) and the Philippines (38 percent). Sri Lanka (28.6 percent) and Bangladesh (36.4 percent) were much better off as compared to Pakistan and the Philippines. US embassy officials were not immediately available for comment but it is understood that after Qatar Airways introduced flights to major US cities beginning June 2007, tourist visa requests from Qatari nationals as well as expatriates here have multiplied.

In view of Mr. President Barack Obama visit to South Asian giant 'India', here are some updates on Indo-US bilateral relationship. The basic purpose of Mr. Obama's visit is to strengthen the bilateral relationship. U.S. President Barack Obama began his maiden visit to India on last Saturday by promising to remove restrictions on sensitive high-tech exports, a nagging irritant in the evolution of bilateral ties, even as he declared deals worth $15 billion that would support some 54,000 American jobs and seek to answer critics back home. This visit and the expected outcome of more employment generation is considered to be greatest achievement of Mr. Obama after the recent debacle in US Polls.

The White House will, of course, stay in Washington but the heart of the famous building will move to India when President Barack Obama landed in Mumbai on Saturday. Communications set-up and nuclear button and majority of the White House staff will be in India accompanying the President on this three-day visit that will cover Mumbai and Delhi, India. He will also be protected by a fleet of 34 warships, including an aircraft carrier, which will patrol the sea lanes off the Mumbai coast during his two-day stay there beginning Saturday. The measure has been taken as Mumbai attack in 2008 took place from the sea. Mr. Obama visit to Mumbai went considerably good.

The United States is the world’s largest recipient of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). India is among the fastest growing investors in the United States. As the U.S.-India economic relationship deepens, investment from India contributes to the growth and vibrancy of the American economy and in the creation of jobs in the United States. Over the last decade, investment capital from India grew at an annualized rate of 53% reaching an estimated $4.4 billion in 2009. This growing flow of capital from India reflects the increased integration of the two economies and has brought many benefits to the United States, increasing U.S. exports and supporting tens of thousands of jobs in the last six years alone.

An increasing number of Indian-owned firms contribute to U.S. jobs, exports, and growth:

• Goods exports to India reached approximately $17 billion in 2009, in part due to increased FDI from India.

• Indian companies have aided the turnaround of struggling U.S. firms, saving jobs and improving company performance. They have also made important new investments, stimulating innovation and production in the American economy.

Just a few examples include:

* The Essar Group invested over $1.6 billion in the declining Minnesota Steel Industries and now employs over 7,200 people in almost a dozen states.
* The Tata Group has invested more than $3 billion in the U.S. and now employs nearly 19,000 throughout the country.
* Jubliant Organsys Total Capital invested $246 million in the U.S. and now employs nearly 900 employees throughout the country.
* Wockhardt, a pharmaceutical company, acquired Morton Grove for $37 million. The deal preserved the jobs of all 200 original Morton Grove employees.
* Crompton Greaves, an entity of the Indian conglomerate Avantha Group, has invested and partnered on a $20 million project to launch a Center for Intelligent Power with the University of Albany. The deal will create 100 high-tech jobs in upstate New York.

Indian FDI in the U.S. is on the rise:

• Indian investment capital is spread throughout the United States; it has reached states on both coasts and in the American Midwest. Geographically diversified investment by Indian firms has helped to support employment, particularly in towns reliant on industry and manufacturing that faced difficulties during the recent economic downturn.

• According to a report by Ernst & Young and the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), the largest share of investment capital from India has been allocated to industries associated with the knowledge economy. This capital is helping the U.S. increase employment in high value-added industries, such as IT and pharmaceuticals.

• FDI from India is expected to continue to grow in the future. There is strong interest from Indian investors in the power, steel, and extractive industries. The pharmaceuticals and health care industries are also expected to receive major investments. This inflow of capital will expand the U.S. economy across a wide variety of fields, creating jobs and keeping the U.S. competitive in global markets.

The US Embassy in Slovakia stated in an announcement that its country’s visa regime works according to the principle of reciprocity and noted that after several years of negotiations, the Slovak government has failed to modify the visa validity for Americans working in Slovakia beyond the current limit of two years.

Currently, Slovaks working temporarily in the United States in the H, L, O, P, and R categories receive visas valid for five years. Based on this lack of reciprocity, the US government has reduced the validity of the H, L, O, P, and R non-immigrant visa categories for Slovaks from the current 60 months with multiple entries, to 24 months with multiple entries, effective immediately.

A $60 reciprocity fee, payable at the US Embassy at the time of the interview for a US visa, will also be added, the embassy wrote, in order to bring the two countries’ fees into a more reciprocal relationship.

Congressmen Chris Lee and Brian Higgins plan to announce plans for a grand opening of a new State Department passport office on Genesee Street in downtown Buffalo.

The full-service passport issuance agency in Western New York provides greater convenience and service for communities, and it will be able to issue required travel documents within hours in the case of emergencies.

The closest passport agency right now is located in downtown Manhattan. The official announcement of the new passport center will be made next week.

US plans to maintain a strong presence in the eastern part of the capital, despite moving bulk of services to Arnona neighborhood. After six years of construction, the American Consulate in Jerusalem will open its new facility for consular services on Rehov David Flusser in the southern Arnona neighborhood next Tuesday.

The office that previously dealt with consular services, located on Nablus Road in east Jerusalem, will remain open for consulate programs, along with the facility in west Jerusalem on Rehov Agron, and America House, a cultural outreach center in east Jerusalem.

“The [new] facility was designed to enhance the provision of consular services to American citizens and local residents,” a US Consulate representative said. Consular services include issuing passports and visas, and reporting deaths and births abroad. There are 80,000 registered American citizens living in Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which makes the Jerusalem consulate one of the US’s busiest in the world. It maintains an “e-consulate” for Gaza residents, offering most services online.

In accordance with the US Department of State’s dedication to environmentally friendly buildings for its consulates, the new building features “green rooftops,” with plants on the roof that minimize storm water run-off and reduce the need for air conditioning and heating by providing additional insulation. Despite moving the bulk of services for citizens and noncitizens away from east Jerusalem, the consulate plans to maintain a strong presence in the eastern part of the capital.