Visa Lawyer Blog

by

This is a very important Change effective today. Be aware that this change applies to nonimmigrants only. It has no bearing on U.S. Citizens and U.S. Lawful Permanent Residents.

Beginning April 30, 2013, U.S Customs and Border Protection will begin automating the I-94 process. Form I-94 provides nonimmigrants with proof that they have been lawfully admitted to the U.S. As part of the automation process, individuals traveling to the U.S. by air or sea will no longer complete or receive a paper I-94 document.

Despite this change, USCIS will continue to require applicants to submit a paper copy of Form I-94 when requesting certain benefits. In addition, other government agencies such as State Departments of Motor Vehicles and the Social Security Administration offices will still require a paper I-94. The paper I-94 may also be useful for work-authorized nonimmigrants to present to their employers during the employment eligibility verification (Form I-9) process, and to demonstrate lawful presence in the U.S. to other U.S. authorities.

Continue reading

by

A recent case from the 11th Circuit affirmed a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) regarding departures from the U.S. and what is not considered a “departure” under the regulations. In 2012, the BIA decided Matter of Arrabally where they held “that an alien who has left and returned to the United States under a grant of advance parole has not made a ‘departure . . . from the United States’ within the meaning of [§ 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II)].”
In this recent decision by the 11 Circuit, the issue before them was whether the alien was inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). Under this statute, an immigrant who is not a lawful permanent resident, has been unlawfully present in the United States for one year or more, and seeks admission to the United States within ten years of the immigrant’s departure or removal from the United States is inadmissible. In this case, The Immigration Judge found that Malpica was removable under § 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) because she had left the United States on July 18, 2003. However, she left pursuant to a grant of advance parole, and was paroled back into the United States on July 31, 2003. Under Matter of Arrabally, her exit pursuant to a grant of advance parole does not qualify as a “departure” within the meaning of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) and Malpica is, thus, not inadmissible under this section. Thus, this charge of removability cannot be sustained.

This decision by the 11th Circuit conforms with the BIA decision regarding the removability of an individual when they were admitted back to the U.S. pursuant to a grant of advanced parole. Before Matter of Arrabally had been decided, individuals who left the U.S. when they were removable under this provision were always at risk of being denied entry and removable from the U.S. Now, the BIA’s decision regarding this issue has been affirmed by one of the circuit courts. So long as the other circuit courts continue to decide the issue in this fashion, individuals who have been granted advanced parole, despite being removable under 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II), will not have to worry about being denied reentry or being removed under that statute once they have been admitted.

by

As a lot of our readers inquired about the detailed provisions of the Immigration Reform bill, we have prepared summaries of the key provisions of the 844 page bill introduced on April 16, 2013 “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” (S. 744).

We would like to remind our readers that the bill is not yet the law. It will become the law only if it passes the Senate and the House of Representatives and is signed by the President.

Please note that this summary is not intended as a comprehensive overview of all the provisions of the bill. Please consult the full text of the bill to review the proposed Act. Click Here for the Full Text of the Bill.

Continue reading

by

Federal immigration law prohibits the attorney general from letting a noncitizen stay in the United States for any reason if he is convicted of an aggravated felony. The immigration system has held that every conviction for marijuana distribution is such a felony.

In a victory for common sense and fairness, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday, 7 to 2, that a conviction for marijuana distribution under state law should not in all cases result in automatic deportation.

Adrian Moncrieffe, a Jamaican citizen who arrived legally in the United States in 1984 when he was 3 years old, was ordered deported by an immigration judge because he pleaded guilty in 2008 to possession of 1.3 grams of marijuana with intent to distribute under a Georgia law; that amount is enough to make about three marijuana cigarettes.

Continue reading

by

We are very happy to announce that our office has successfully assisted another client in obtaining her O-1 visa status. The petition was approved less than 30 days after its submission and without any request for additional evidence. This article will address our experience in handling this case.

The O-1 visa is a non-immigrant employment-based visa classification for foreign nationals who can demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim and recognition for extraordinary abilities and achievements in the field of sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics.

Our client, Ms. L, a citizen of Taiwan, is a talented young artist with exceptional abilities and numerous achievements in the field of theatrical lighting design. She recently graduated from a highly selective university in the U.S. where she received a Master’s degree of Fine Arts in Lighting Design. With her F-1 visa expiring soon, she came to our office inquiring about her options of employment-based visas.

Continue reading

by

The first significant steps in the process that may lead to a comprehensive overhaul of the United States immigration system have been made by a bipartisan group of eight U.S. Senators.

Some ten weeks after this group announced broad goals and an outline for compromise legislation in the U.S., they revealed a more detailed plan on April 16, 2013.

Of course, this proposed deal must first win approval by a highly divided and partisan Congress. Even this fairly moderate compromise may not survive intact.

Continue reading

by

As the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act introduced by “Gang of Eight”, details emerge about the full content of this legislation. The American Immigration Lawyers Association released the summary below. We encourage the public to only deal with AILA members Lawyers when seeking advice on this new Law.

Below are eight initial points of interest pulled from the bill’s provisions.

Just to barely scratch the surface, here are but a few things S.744 would do:

Continue reading

by

The bill proposed by the “Gang of Eight” in the Senate brings remarkable news to Dreamers seeking a chance to stay in the U.S. and become lawful permanent residents sooner. Under the bill being proposed in the Senate, there is no age cap for those who entered the U.S. as children. While the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy implemented under the Obama administration has a cap of 30 years old, this bill makes no mention of age.

The new gang of eight bill would allow undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. as children to attain lawful permanent resident status more quickly, with a wait time of five years rather than ten years required of others. Dreamers would be eligible if they entered the country under the age of 16, earned a high school diploma or GED here, and attended college for at least two years or served in the military for at least four years.

Under the legislation, Dreamers who have been deported could also apply to reenter the United States, so long as they were in the country prior to 2012 and were not deported for criminal reasons.

Continue reading

by

This just came out, Several news outlets have publicized this 17 page outline of the Senate’s Gang of Eight immigration bill titled: “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013.”

by

Applicants that are waiting abroad to obtain permanent residency, will need to go through Consular Processing in order to obtain the Immigrant Visas at the end of the process. How does it really work?

During the interview, the consular official will confirm the information contained in the DS-260 application, screen for any applicable ground of inadmissibility, review the supporting documents, confirm that the medical exam does not reveal any health-related problem that could prevent approval or require a waiver, and determine whether the applicant is likely to become a public charge.

If the applicant is inadmissible for a ground that is waivable, the applicant will submit the waiver form and supporting documentation to the LockBox in the United States that process such waivers. Typically 6 months or so for processing time. The consular officer has the right to inquire into the validity of the marriage or the relationship that forms the basis of the immigrant petition.

Continue reading