In general, any person holding a B1 or B1/B2 visa may be eligible to perform H-1B work in the United States as long as they fulfill the following criteria:
-Hold the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor’s degree
– Plan to perform H-1B-caliber work or training
A recent new Bill S. 823 would permit aliens who lawfully enter the United States on valid visas as nonimmigrant elementary and secondary school students to attend public schools in the United States for longer than 1 year if such aliens reimburse the local educational agency that administers the school for the full, unsubsidized per capita cost of providing education at such school for the period of the alien’s attendance.
Under current laws, there are limitations and requirements related to foreign (F-1) students attending public secondary/high schools (grades nine through twelve), under U.S. law. Student F-1 visas cannot be issued to persons seeking to enter the United States in order to attend a public primary/elementary school or a publicly funded adult education program.
Dependents of a nonimmigrant visa holder of any type, including F-1, are not prohibited from attendance at either a public primary school, an adult education program, or another public educational institution, as appropriate.
Where is this taking us? An Arizona-style immigration bill cleared the Georgia legislature last week and needs only the governor’s signature to become law.
The legislation would give police authority to question suspects about their immigration status. It would also require many private employers to check the immigration status of newly hired workers on a federal database called E-Verify.
After extended debate, both the state Senate and House of Representatives passed the legislation in the final hours of their 40-day session.
American Immigration Council (AIC) and the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) argued recently in an amicus brief—the government may not arrest H-1B employees for whom timely-filed extension applications remain pending.
The decision in El Badrawi v. United States, by U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall, correctly recognized that a federal regulation allows H-1B employees to continue working for 240 days pending the adjudication of their extension applications, and that “work authorization is part and parcel of their authorization to be in the country, not a separate matter.” Permitting the initiation of removal proceedings during this period would thus be unfair to employees and employers alike, according to the decision.
The plaintiff, a Lebanese national, was gainfully employed as a medical researcher when his employer requested an H-1B extension in early 2004, more than a month before his H-1B status expired. Though his employer paid a $1,000 fee for premium processing of the application, the government never adjudicated it and refused to respond to requests for information. Nearly seven months after the request was filed, immigration agents arrested the plaintiff for allegedly “overstaying” his initial period of admission. He was placed in removal proceedings and detained for nearly two months.
Whenever you hear about H-1B visa, you hear the term “specialty occupation”.
So, what does “specialty occupation” mean? Why is it important to prove that the proposed position is a “specialty occupation” in order to qualify for the H-1B? What role does the Occupational Outlook Handbook (OOH) published by the Department of Labor play in USCIS’ interpretation of “specialty occupation”?
This article will address these questions and other common issues that H-1B candidates and practicing immigration attorneys face in context of H-1B filings.
In an effort to fight fraud and abuse in the L1 and H1B programs, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is implementing a program known as Validation Instrument for Business Enterprises (VIBE). VIBE is a web-based tool that will allow the USCIS to corroborate certain basic information about a company during adjudication of employment-based visa petitions. Use of this program is becoming evident in the content of requests for evidence (RFEs). See example below from one of our cases.
USCIS procedures allow for the employer to explain or clarify any concerns regarding information contained in VIBE. If information collected through the VIBE program reveals inconsistencies with the employer’s petition, or raises other concerns regarding the case, the USCIS should issue an RFE or notice of intent to deny (NOID) to allow for a response, rather than directly denying the case. The RFE or NOID will clearly note that that the VIBE program has found missing or contradictory information and provide a description of this information. The petitioning employer will then have the ability to address these issues.
Major defeat for Anti Immigration supporters. The Ninth Circuit upheld today a lower court’s block of much of Arizona’s controversial SB 1070 law aimed at illegal immigration. A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the lower court “did not abuse its discretion” in blocking parts of the law from taking effect last year.
The decision, a victory for the Obama administration and immigration activists who filed suit to block the law, means the SB 1070 case will likely find its way to the Supreme Court. The judges agreed with U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton, who issued a preliminary injunction in July preventing sections of SB 1070 from being enforced.
From the ruling:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced it continues to accept H-1B nonimmigrant petitions that are subject to the fiscal year (FY) 2012 cap. The agency began accepting these petitions on April 1, 2011.
USCIS is monitoring the number of petitions received that count toward the congressionally mandated annual H-1B cap of 65,000 and the 20,000 U.S. master’s degree or higher cap exemption. USCIS has received approximately 5,900 H-1B petitions counting toward the 65,000 cap, and approximately 4,500 petitions toward the 20,000 cap exemption for individuals with advanced degrees.
With all the hype, hysteria and hot air generated around the H1-B visa program issue during the past several years, one fundamental truism remains: the current annual level of H-1B visas being utilized in the United States is about the same level as in 1990.
Many readers were emailing us for an update on the Visa Waiver overstay saga. Here is the latest: Our Lawyer’s Association and all fellow attorneys are concerned that USCIS has not yet provided guidance to the field with respect to the eligibility of an alien who was admitted under the Visa Waiver Program (“VWP”) to adjust status as an immediate relative under INA § 245 at any time prior to the removal of the alien under INA § 217.
Several USCIS District Offices are holding in abeyance immediate relative adjustment of status applications by applicants who entered under the Visa Waiver Program and whose VWP 90-day admission expired prior to the filing of the Form I-485, and at least one district here in San Diego continues to deny such cases.
The Solicitor General has acknowledged the adjustment eligibility of an alien admitted under the VWP in a brief in opposition to certiorari filed in Bradley v. Holder, Case No. 10-397
It has been 5 days now since the H1B season started and there is no indication whether the H1B Cap was reached on the first day or not. The stakes are higher this year as the economy rebounds.
According to computer world, some law makers think that the cap should be increased to certain industries and keep other out of the game.
A top Republican lawmaker, U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Thursday said the H-1B visa plays a “vital role” in the economy and thus its cap should be increased.
Visa Lawyer Blog