For the past few months, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Citizenship and Immigration Services (”CIS”) has conducted an investigation program aimed at visiting H-1B petitioner worksites throughout the U.S. These site visits began as part of the CIS’ goal to decrease the number of H-1B violations and instances of fraud reported by the H-1B Benefit Fraud & Compliance Assessment from CIS’ Office of Fraud Detection and National Security (“FDNS”), published this past September.

Why should employers care?

Any employer who sponsored a foreign national worker for an H-1B visa can be subject to an unannounced site visit. What this means is that an investigator can randomly show up at a worksite and demand to see a copy of the H-1B petition, interview the person who represented the company in connection with the H-1B as well as the H-1B employee. Any inconsistencies found can mean big trouble for employers.
Presently CIS has turned over the names of close to 40,000 companies across the US for investigative action via unannounced site visits.

For more information about these H-1B site visits, as well as helpful tips to prepare employers for these visits, please click on our Firm’s website at www.visaserve.com.

Article:

For the past few months, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Citizenship and Immigration Services (”CIS”) has conducted an investigation program aimed at visiting H-1B petitioner worksites throughout the U.S. These site visits began as part of the CIS’ goal to decrease the number of H-1B violations and instances of fraud reported by the H-1B Benefit Fraud & Compliance Assessment from CIS’ Office of Fraud Detection and National Security (“FDNS”), published this past September. According to the FDNS’ findings, as many as one in five H-1B applications were affected by either fraud or “technical violations” of the H-1B program.

Why should employers care?

Any employer who sponsored a foreign national worker for an H-1B visa can be subject to an unannounced site visit. What this means is that an investigator can randomly show up at a worksite and demand to see a copy of the H-1B petition, interview the person who represented the company in connection with the H-1B as well as the H-1B employee or other employees presently on site.

Any inconsistencies found can mean big trouble for employers. FDNS has indicated that it does not need a subpoena in order to complete the site visit because USCIS regulations governing the filing of immigration petitions allow the government to take testimony and conduct broad investigations relating to the petitions.

However other sources say that employers are not required to give in to the investigators’ demands without a subpoena.

What to do?

Our office recommends that you always comply as much as possible with any investigative agency that shows up at your door. CIS has indicated that attorneys can be present during an inspection, but the investigator is not likely going to come back another day if the attorney is not available on the day of the unscheduled visit.

Attorneys may be present via telephone in these circumstances.

Some common questions that have been raised by employers include: “how are companies selected to be investigated,” “if I am visited, should I be concerned,” “what type of violations are the investigators looking for,” and “how can I prepare for a site visit from a CIS/FDNS investigator?”
To address these issues in order, firstly any employer who has filed an H-1B petition can be subject to a site visit. While CIS claims the employers are chosen at random, close to 40,000 employers’ names have been selected for site visits.

Some factors that may have been taken into consideration when selecting these 40,000 employers include: companies with less than 15 employees; companies with less than $10 million in sales; companies less than 10 years old; accounting, HR, business analyst, sales and advertising positions; and petitions where the beneficiary merely had a bachelor’s degree, not an advanced degree.

If your company is visited and your records are in order, you have nothing to worry about. Generally speaking employers are aware of inconsistencies before any investigative agency may catch wind of it. That being said, if the investigators uncover any inconsistencies or instances of fraud, the case may be referred to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), or the Department of Labor (DOL) for further investigation depending on the offense.

This could mean there will be monetary, and if egregious offenses, possible criminal penalties for the employer.
The objective of the unannounced on-site visits is clear: to detect fraud and abuses of the visa program. According to USCIS, the offenses range from technical violations to outright fraud, with the most common violation being the non-payment of a prevailing wage to the H-1B beneficiary.

More specifically, the investigators may be looking for the following types of violations: job location not listed on the H-1B petition and/or LCA; H-1B worker not receiving the required wage; fraudulent H-1B documents or H-1B worker credentials; non-existent business or office location; job duties significantly different from those listed on H-1B petition/LCA; misrepresentation of H-1B status by the H-1B worker (e.g., had been terminated from previous H-1B position prior to new employer H-1B being filed); and H-1B worker paid the $1500 ACWIA fee.

How can you prepare yourself and your company for a possible site visit?

Step one is to ensure that you have Public Access Files (PAF) for each H-1B worker, and that the PAF documents are accurate and up to date. In general, it is a good idea to review and audit your H-1B/LCA records to make sure everything is in order and all information is readily available. Designate a specific individual at each H-1B worker location to meet the investigator should he/she arrive.

Prepare a quick list of facts about the company and also a listing of H-1B workers, work locations, title and salary information so you don’t need to search frantically for this information while the investigator is there. If you are not sure what a PAF is, or if you’d like to have your documents reviewed by legal counsel, you may contact our office at the number or e-mail below.

About Nachman & Associates, P.C.

The Business and Corporate Immigration Attorneys at our Firm have focused their practice, for over a decade and a half, on assisting companies that employ highly-skilled foreign nationals in visa applications. We serve our clients’ business objectives. A natural extension of that service is counsel that helps the client to avoid the disruption and expense of ICE audits, recent CIS actions and the consequences of being found to be out of compliance with any number of regulations related to immigration and employment.

Our Business Immigration Attorneys can organize and conduct a review of records, assist in establishing procedures to reduce exposure to liability, and participate in training of managers to comply with the numerous requirements imposed by the US Department of Homeland Security.

Contact us for more information: Website: http://www.visaserve.com
Phone: 201-670-0006

E-mail: info@visaserve.com

For more information about Business and Family-based immigration law check out our website at http://www.visaserve.com

SEVERAL IMPORTANT IMMIGRATION PROGRAMS EXTENDED:

Obama Signs FY10 DHS Spending Bill; Four Immigration-Related Programs Extended through 2012.

On October 28th, 2009, President Obama signed into law the FY10 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill (P.L.111-83).

The new Law extends the non-minister religious worker (section 568), the “Conrad 30″ (section 568), the EB-5 visa (section 548), and the E-Verify (section 547) programs through September 30, 2012.

The Law also includes statutory authority for CIS to complete the processing of permanent residence applications for surviving spouses and other relatives of immigration sponsors who die during the adjudication process (section 568).

The Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman, established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002, provides independent analysis of problems encountered by individuals and employers interacting with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and proposes changes to mitigate those problems.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In August and September 2009, the Ombudsman received complaints concerning H-1B cases with incorrectly denied Labor Condition Applications (LCA/ETA-9035) filed with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). LCA processing delays and errors at DOL, when coupled with USCIS’ current
H-1B petition initial filing requirements, are prejudicing employers and individuals who are unable to timely file original or extension H-1B visa petitions. Untimely H-1B petition filings lead to problems, including: (1) the potential loss of employees’ legal status; (2) business operation disruptions due to the loss of continuity in the employment of key employees; and (3) economic loss to employees in the form of lost wages and costs of travel overseas due to loss of status. USCIS has the authority to mitigate the impact upon these customers.

To mitigate the impact of LCA processing difficulties, the Ombudsman recommends that USCIS:

(1) Reinstate USCIS’ previous practice of temporarily accepting an H-1B petition (Form I-129) supported by proof of timely filing of an LCA application with DOL, and issue a Request for Evidence (RFE) whereby the H-1B petitioner later provides the certified LCA; and

(2) Establish a temporary policy under which USCIS would excuse late H-1B filings where the petitioner has documented an LCA submission to DOL that was improperly rejected.

BACKGROUND

Pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 212(n)(1), USCIS may not approve an
H-1B petition without a supporting certified LCA. However, the INA does not prohibit acceptance of the petition filing without the certified LCA. The applicable regulation,

Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman Recommendation from the CIS Ombudsman to the Director, USCIS
October 23, 2009, Page 2 of 2

8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(i)(B) (2008), states that “[b]efore filing a petition for H-1B classification …, the petitioner shall obtain a certification from the Department of Labor that it has filed a [L]abor [C]ondition [A]pplication …” [emphasis added]. Further, the June 12, 2009, revision to the “Instructions for Form I-129” state, in relevant part (see p. 3), that “[t]he petition must be filed by the U.S. employer and must be filed with: 1. Evidence that a [L]abor [C]ondition [A]pplication has been filed with the U.S. Department of Labor …” [emphasis added]. However, USCIS currently requires that petitioners include a certified LCA with their H-1B petition.

Stakeholders have detailed to the Ombudsman errors stemming from the new DOL LCA certification process, iCERT, launched on April 15, 2009.

For example, DOL is denying LCAs based on false FEIN (Federal Employer Identification Number) mismatches with DOL’s database. Both DOL and USCIS indicated to the Ombudsman that cases involving LCA certification problems represent up to seven percent of total iCERT filings from April 15, 2009 through the beginning of August 2009 (approximately 2,900 denials out of approximately 41,700 LCAs submitted). The Ombudsman understands that neither DOL nor USCIS can specify the exact number of incorrect LCA denials.

In 1992, the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) responded to LCA processing problems occurring at DOL at that time by accepting H-1B filings accompanied by evidence of an LCA filing, and subsequently issuing an RFE to obtain the later-approved LCA. This approach permitted customers to meet filing requirements, preserve legal status, and avoid employment disruptions until DOL was able to address its underlying LCA processing problems.

ANALYSIS

Despite DOL’s jurisdictional ownership of H-1B-related LCA processing problems, these difficulties extend to USCIS through the agency’s requirement that petition filings include certified LCAs. Any costs to USCIS such as issuing RFEs or temporarily lowering production levels, are outweighed by the burden that incorrect denials have on employers and individuals. USCIS currently has the capacity to make what amounts to a minor processing modification to address a temporary situation.
Given that Form I-129 instructions say a petitioner must provide evidence that an LCA has been filed with DOL, and that USCIS has previously accommodated petitioners in nearly the same circumstances, implementing these recommendations as a temporary solution is warranted.

====================

1 Under 20 C.F.R. § 655.740(a)(1) (2009), DOL allows itself up to seven working days to certify LCAs.

2 A March 5, 1992, memo from INS Assistant Commissioner Lawrence Weinig stated “petitions for H-1B nonimmigrants do not have to be accompanied by an approved [L]abor [C]ondition [A]pplication. Instead, petitions for H-1B nonimmigrants must now be accompanied by a certification from the Secretary of Labor that the petitioner has filed a [L]abor [C]ondition [A]pplication with the Department of Labor …. The certification will be a copy of the original ETA 9035 filed by the petitioner with the Department of Labor with the Department of Labor’s stamp affixed to the form.” The Ombudsman understands that USCIS reaffirmed this approach as recently as 2001.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has a media initiative to inform the public about the horrors and the prevalence of human trafficking, which is modern-day slavery. As part of ICE’s continued efforts, the agency has unveiled an outdoor public service announcement campaign, “Hidden in Plain Sight,” to draw the American public’s attention to the plight of human-trafficking victims in the United States. The campaign message explains that human trafficking includes those who are sexually exploited or forced to work against their will. Posters, billboards and transit shelter signs were rolled out last month bearing the slogan “Hidden in Plan Sight.” They are displayed in Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Detroit, Los Angeles, Miami, Philadelphia, Newark, New Orleans, New York, St Paul, San Antonio, San Francisco and Tampa. The campaign’s goal is to raise public awareness about the existence of human trafficking in communities nationwide, and asks mem bers of the public to take action if they encounter possible victims.” ICE, Nov. 2, 2009.