Questions & Answers: USCIS Issues Guidance Memorandum on Establishing the “Employee-Employer Relationship” in H-1B Petitions.

Introduction

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued updated guidance to adjudication officers to clarify what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship to qualify for the H-1B ‘specialty occupation’ classification. The memorandum clarifies such relationships, particularly as it pertains to independent contractors, self-employed beneficiaries, and beneficiaries placed at third-party worksites. The memorandum is titled: “Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements: Additions to Officer’s Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 31.3(g)(15)(AFM Update AD 10-24).” In addition to clarifying the requirements for a valid employer-employee relationship, the memorandum also discusses the types of evidence petitioners may provide to establish that an employer-employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period.

Questions & Answers

Q: Does this memorandum change any of the requirements to establish eligibility for an H-1B petition?

A: No. This memorandum does not change any of the requirements for an H-1B petition. The H-1B regulations currently require that a United States employer establish that it has an employer-employee relations with respect to the beneficiary, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise or otherwise control the work of any such employee. In addition to demonstrating that a valid employer-employee relationship will exist between the petitioner and the beneficiary, the petitioner must continue to comply with all of the requirements for an H-1B petition including:

establishing that the beneficiary is coming to the United States temporarily to work in a specialty occupation;
demonstrating that the beneficiary is qualified to perform services in the specialty occupation; and filing of a Labor Condition Application (LCA) specific to each location where the beneficiary will perform services.

Q: What factors does USCIS consider when evaluating the employer-employee relationship?

A: As stated in the memorandum, USCIS will evaluate whether the petitioner has the “right to control” the beneficiary’s employment, such as when, where and how the beneficiary performs the job. Please see the memorandum in the links in the upper right hand of this page for a list of factors that USCIS will review when determining whether the petitioner has the right to control the beneficiary. Please note that no one factor is decisive and adjudicators will review the totality of the circumstances when making a determination as to whether the employer-employee relationship exists.

Q: What types of evidence can I provide to demonstrate that I have a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary?

A: You may demonstrate that you have a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary by submitting the types of evidence outlined in the memorandum or similar probative types of evidence.

Q: What if I cannot submit the evidence listed in the memorandum?

A: The documents listed in the memorandum are only examples of evidence that establish the petitioner’s right to control the beneficiary’s employment. Unless a document is required by the regulations, i.e. an itinerary, you may provide similarly probative documents. You may submit a combination of any documents that sufficiently establish that the required relationship between you and the beneficiary exists. You should explain how the documents you are providing establish the relationship. Adjudicators will review and weigh all the evidence submitted to determine whether a qualifying employer-employee relationship has been established.

Q: What if I receive or have received an RFE requesting that I submit a particular type of evidence and I do not have the exact type of document listed in the RFE?

A: If the type of evidence requested in the RFE is not a document that is required by regulations, you may submit other similar probative evidence that addresses the issue(s) raised in the RFE. You should explain how the documents you are providing address the deficiency(ies) raised in the RFE. Adjudicators will review and weigh all evidence based on the totality of the circumstances. Please note that you cannot submit similar evidence in place of documents required by regulation.

Q: Will my petition be denied if I cannot establish that the qualifying employer-employee relationship will exist?

A: If you do not initially provide sufficient evidence of an employer-employee relationship for the duration of the requested validity period, you may be given an opportunity to correct the deficiency in response to a request for evidence (RFE). Your petition will be denied if you do not provide sufficiently probative evidence that the qualifying employer-employee relationship will exist for any time period.

Q: What if I can only establish that the qualifying employer-employee relationship will exist for a portion of the requested validity period?

A: If you do not initially provide sufficient evidence of an employer-employee relationship for the duration of the requested validity period, you may be given an opportunity to correct the deficiency in response to a request for evidence (RFE). Your petition may still be approved if you provide evidence that a qualifying employer-employee relationship will exist for a portion of the requested validity period (as long as all other requirements are met), however, USCIS will limit a petition’s validity to the time period of qualifying employment established by the evidence.

Q: What happens if I am filing a petition requesting a “Continuation of previously approved employment without change” or “Change in previously approved employment” and an extension of stay for the beneficiary in H-1B classification, but I did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary during the validity of the previous petition?

A: Your extension petition will be denied if USCIS determines that you did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary throughout the validity period of the previous petition. The only exception is if there is a compelling reason to approve the new petition (e.g. you are able to demonstrate that you did not meet all of the terms and conditions through no fault of your own). Such exceptions would be limited and made on a case-by-case basis.

Q: What if I am filing a petition requesting a “Change of Employer” and an extension of stay for the beneficiary’s H-1B classification? Would my petition be adjudicated under the section of the memorandum that deals with extension petitions?

A: No. The section of the memorandum that covers extension petitions applies solely to petitions filed by the same employer to extend H-1B status without a material change in the original terms of employment. All other petitions will be adjudicated in accordance with the section of the memorandum that covers initial petitions.

Q: I am a petitioner who will be employing the beneficiary to perform services in more than one work location. Do I need to submit an itinerary in support of my petition?

A: Yes. You will need to submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements, as described in the memo, in order to comply with 8 CFR 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) if you are employing the beneficiary to perform services in more than one work location. Furthermore, you must comply with Department of Labor regulations requiring that you file an LCA specific to each work location for the beneficiary.

Q: The memorandum provides an example of when a beneficiary, who is the sole owner of the petitioner, would not establish a valid employer-employee relationship. Are there any examples of when a beneficiary, who is the sole owner of the petitioner, may be able to establish a valid employer-employee relationship?

A. Yes. In footnotes 9 and 10 of the memorandum, USCIS indicates that while a corporation may be a separate legal entity from its stockholders or sole owner, it may be difficult for that corporation to establish the requisite employer-employee relationship for purposes of an H-1B petition. However, if the facts show that there is a right to control by the petitioner over the employment of the beneficiary, then a valid employer-employee relationship may be established. For example, if the petitioner provides evidence that there is a separate Board of Directors which has the ability to hire, fire, pay, supervise or otherwise control the beneficiary, the petitioner may be able to establish an employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary.

Q: What happens if I do not submit evidence of the employer-employee relationship with my initial petition?

A: If you do not initially provide sufficient evidence of an employer-employee relationship for the duration of the requested validity period, you will be given an opportunity to correct the deficiency in response to a request for evidence (RFE). However, failure to provide this information with the initial submission will delay processing of your petition.

For more information on USCIS and its programs, call 1-800-375-5283.

Update: Foreign Worker Slots Remaining for FY 2012.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) still has slots available in fiscal year 2012 for foreign workers in specialty occupations under the H-1B program.

Thus, employers who seek an employment start date on or after October 1, 2011 (the start of the 2012 fiscal year) for foreign workers in specialty occupations can still file visa petitions on behalf of those workers. By rule, the specialty occupations include, but are not limited to: scientists, engineers and computer programmers.

Petitions should be filed as soon as possible in order to avoid being shut down by the annual cap limitation for the H-1B program (cap amount of 65,000 for FY 2012).

Some petitions will be exempt from the cap if they are made on behalf of certain individuals who have obtained an advanced U.S.degree, but USCIS grants the exemption only to the first 20,000 applications.

The current H-1B counts for petitions filed to date are as follows through July 1, 2011:

• H-1B Regular Cap: 18,400 cap-eligible petitions

• H-1B Advanced Degree Exemption: 11,900 petitions

Up to 6,800 visas may also be set aside for workers from Chile and Singapore, pursuant to the H-1B1 program arising out of the U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreements.

H-1B petitions, in order to be properly filed, must be complete and accurate. Necessary documents include, but are not limited to the following:

• A Form I-129 petition with appropriate supplements;

• Labor condition applications on Form ETA 9035;

• Required evidence of a beneficiary’s educational background;

• Duplicate copies of certain documents; and

• Consulate-specific forms required by the Department of State where appropriate.

If you are in need of more information about business immigration, please check the pertinent section of our Website at www.visaserve.com or call our offices at (201) 670-0006.

J Waivers – J Waivers of Section 212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act Types of J Waivers.

There are five statutory bases for a waiver of the two-year foreign residence requirement:

1. a no objection statement from the home government,
2. a request from an interested U.S. Government agency on the alien’s behalf,
3. a claim that the alien will be persecuted if he or she returns to his or her country of residence,
4. a claim of exceptional hardship to a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse or child if the alien is required to return to his or her home country, and
5. a request from a state public health department, or its equivalent, on the alien’s behalf (this only applies to foreign medical graduates who obtained J-1 status for graduate medical training or education).

No Objection Statements

• The consular section of the alien’s embassy in Washington, D.C., can forward a “no objection” statement to the Department of State on the alien’s behalf. The Embassy forwards the “no objection” statement directly to the Waiver Review Division at the Department of State.
• Foreign medical graduates sponsored by the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG) to do their clinical training cannot apply for a waiver based on a “no objection” statement.
• It is the policy of the Waiver Review Division not to reconsider “no objection” statement applications once a final determination has been made. The alien may, however, reapply using another statutory basis for waiver should another one apply to the alien’s situation.
Interested U.S. Government Agencies
• A waiver may also be based on an Interested U.S. Government agency (IGA) application.
• A letter from a U.S. Federal Government agency, signed by the head of that agency or a designated official, explaining why granting such a waiver is in the public interest of the U.S. and why it would be detrimental to the agency if the exchange visitor returns home to fulfill the two-year requirement. The IGA request letter is sent directly by the agency to the Waiver Review Division.
• An exchange visitor physician, who plans to provide medical service in an underserved area in the U.S. on behalf of an interested U.S. Government Agency, may obtain a waiver based on an interested U.S. Government agency application for a physician. This is different waiver basis than the Conrad program, which allows individual states to nominate up to 30 foreign medical graduate J-1 physicians for a waiver.
• The Interested U.S. Government Agency is responsible for gathering and sending to the Waiver Review Division the documents for the application package.
• The Department of Veterans Affairs requests on behalf of J-1 physicians to serve in VA hospitals: VA hospitals do not have to be in an underserved area and the VA applications must include a signed memorandum of agreement between a physician and a hospital in lieu of a three-year contract.
• The following U.S. Government agencies may apply for the waiver on behalf of foreign medical graduates to practice medicine: Appalachian and Delta Regional Commissions, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Interior for Indian Reservations. J-1 foreign medical graduates may also apply through an individual state’s department of health Conrad program.

Persecution

J waivers based on persecution must be filed with both U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Department of State. The Department of States J waiver application is submitted prior to the filing of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services form I-612. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services then makes a determination of probable persecution and sends it to the Waiver Review Division.

• Persecution claims should not be mixed with claims of exceptional hardship.
• Requests to reopen persecution applications are made through the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Exceptional Hardship
A waiver may be based on exceptional hardship to an alien’s American citizen or permanent resident spouse or child.
• The exceptional hardship J waiver must be filed with both U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Department of State.
• The application to the Department of State should be filed prior to submitting the I-612 to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services or after U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has acted favorably on an I-612.
• Requests to reopen an exceptional hardship application are made through the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
State Department of Public Health, CONRAD Waivers
A waiver based on a request from a state department of public health may be requested.
• The state public health department, if it has agreed to sponsor the exchange visitor for a waiver, must send directly to the Waiver Review Division the documents required for the waiver.
J-2s
• The J-2 spouse and/or child of a J-1 who is subject to the two-year home residence requirement is subject to the same requirements as a J-1.
• If the J-1 receives a favorable recommendation from the Department of State, which is forwarded to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services grants the waiver, then the J-2s will also benefit from the waiver.
• J-2 cannot independently apply for a waiver. However, in cases of death or divorce from the J-1, or when a J-2 child reaches age 21, the Waiver Review Division may consider requests for waivers on behalf of the J-2 on a limited case-by-case basis. If the J-2 feels that his or her case merits special consideration by the Waiver Review Division, he or she should submit the appropriate statements of reason. The Division will also need the J-1’s DS-2019/IAP-66 forms and divorce decree or death certificate, whichever is applicable. For a dependent J-2 son or daughter who has turned 21 the Division will also need a copy of his/her birth certificate.
Exchange Visitors who do not return to their home but move to another country.
• The country which was the alien’s country of legal permanent residence at the time he or she received his or her J-1 status is the country to which he or she must return to fulfill the two-year foreign residence requirement.
• The Waiver Review Division considers the J waiver application complete and ready for review when all the required documents have been received, which usually includes completed DS-3035, payment of the processing fee, required documents from third parties such as a No Objection Statement, Request from an Interested Government Agency Waiver (IGA), a request from a state department of public health, or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services findings of exceptional hardship or persecution on I-613, and copies of all DS-2019/IAP-66 forms. And, if there has been U.S. Government funding, input from the U.S. Government funding source.

Recommendations

• When a favorable recommendation for a waiver is made and transmitted by the Waiver Review Division to the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services will make the final decision regarding the waiver and will contact the exchange visitor directly. The most common reason J waiver applications are denied is because the reasons given for requesting the waiver do not outweigh the program and foreign policy considerations of the exchange visitor program. For this reason waiver applications from exchange visitors who received U.S. Government funding are generally denied.
• There is no appeal process for denials/unfavorable recommendations for a waiver by the Waiver Review Division. However, the alien subject to Section 212 (e) may be eligible to reapply for a waiver under another basis.
• If a J waiver applicant has new information that may affect his or her eligibility for a waiver recommendation the following applies: If the applicant has already received an unfavorable recommendation from the Waiver Review Division, that decision cannot be appealed. However, in exceptional hardship and persecution cases, if the J waiver applicant believes he or she has new relevant information which may result in a different finding, he or she may consider applying again to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, but needs to start the process anew. If the J waiver applicant’s application is still pending with the Waiver Review Division and the J waiver applicant has new relevant information, he or she may forward that information on to the Waiver Review Division.

Advisory Opinions

• An advisory opinion is a request for the Waiver Review Division’s opinion on whether the Exchange Visitor is subject to the INA 212(e) two-year foreign residence requirement.
• Advisory opinions should be sought when it is unclear whether an exchange visitor is subject to the INA 212(e) two-year foreign residence requirement.

Skills List Questions

• The exchange visitor’s skills list is a list of fields of specialized knowledge and skills that are needed in the exchange visitor’s home country for its development.
• The current skills list is published in the Federal Register, Volume 62, No. 11, January 16, 1997 (pages 2448 to 2516). The 1972 skills list appeared in Vol. 37, No. 80, April 25, 1972, 8099-8117. The 1984 skills list appeared in Vol. 49, No. 114, June 12, 1984, 24194-24249. Amendments to the skills lists were published in the following Federal Registers: Vol. 43, No. 29, February 10, 1978, 5910-5912; Vol. 51, No. 189, September 30, 1986, 34701; Volume 52, No. 24, February 5, 1987, 37444; Volume 52, No. 53, March 19, 1987, 8700; Volume 53, No. 242, December 16, 1988, 50619; Volume 58, No. 143, July 28, 1993, 40466.
• The skills list from the country of the exchange visitor’s last permanent residence at the time he or she obtained J status will apply. If both are the same, then the skills list from his or her country of nationality would apply. Some countries do not have a skills list.
• The exchange visitor should consult with the responsible program officer for the J program for assistance in making a determination of whether or not government funding was received.
• Funding provided by an international organization makes an exchange visitor subject to the two-year home residence requirement.
• The period of time a former exchange visitor spends in the U.S. or a third country may count towards fulfillment of the two-year home residence requirement if the person is employed by his or her government in its military service or career foreign service and that person is serving in a country other than the home country at the behest of his or her government. Before the Department can determine that the individual has satisfied the foreign residence requirement, it requires a written statement from an official of the home government (through the home-country’s embassy in Washington, D.C.) that the individual was or will be serving in the U.S. or third country in the service of his or her home country and at that government’s request.

Let us assist you with your waiver questions. E-mail to us at info@visaserve.com.

ICE announces employment authorization eligibility for certain Libyan students

WASHINGTON – U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has announced special relief for certain F-1 Libyan students who have suffered severe economic hardship as a direct result of the civil unrest in Libya since February 2011. This relief applies only to students who were lawfully present in the United States in F-1 status on Feb. 1, 2011, and enrolled in an institution that is certified by ICE’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program.

ICE has published a notice in the Federal Register suspending certain regulatory requirements in order to allow eligible Libyan F-1 students to obtain employment authorization, work an increased number of hours during the school term, and, if necessary, reduce their course load while continuing to maintain their F-1 student status.

“We want to ensure that students from Libya, who were here when civil unrest began, are able to continue their studies without the worry of financial burdens due to the armed conflict,” said Louis Farrell, director for the Student and Exchange Visitor Program. “The changes announced in this notice will allow eligible students from Libya to obtain employment authorization so that they can meet their basic living expenses while continuing to pursue their education in the United States.”

There has been an ongoing armed conflict in Libya since February. Approximately 2,000 Libyan F-1 students are currently enrolled in schools in the United States. The armed conflict in Libya has increased the financial burden on many of these students, who previously relied on assistance from the Libyan government or family members in Libya to meet basic living expenses. In addition, the situation in Libya has made it unfeasible for these students to safely return to Libya in the foreseeable future.

ICE manages the Student and Exchange Visitor Program and the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, which automates the process for collecting, maintaining, and managing information about international foreign students, exchange visitors and their dependents during their stay in the United States.

The Department of State has also announced special relief for certain Libyan J-1 exchange visitors who have suffered severe economic hardship as a direct result of the civil unrest in Libya since February 2011. More information about this relief is available in the Federal Register.

To learn more about the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, visit www.ice.gov.

A fact sheet regarding employment authorization eligibility for certain Libyan students is available on the website.

CBP Reminds Travelers about Requirements for Admission into U.S. and I-94 Permit Process.

(Tuesday, May 24, 2011)

San Diego — U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials are reminding foreign travelers and Mexican border crossing card (or “laser visa”) holders about requirements to enter the United States, how to obtain an I-94 permit, and when an I-94 permit is required in time for the busy summer travel season.

Under U.S. immigration law, an applicant for admission into the U.S. as a temporary visitor for business or pleasure must prove to a CBP officer that their projected stay in the U.S. will be temporary.

Unless otherwise exempted, each foreign traveler admitted into the United States is issued an I-94 permit (arrival/departure record), as evidence of the terms of their admission.

Mexican citizens entering the country through the southern land border with a border crossing card (“laser visa”) are exempted from the requirement for an I-94 permit unless they are intending to remain in the U.S. for more than 30-days and/or will travel more than 25 miles from the border. Applicants who present a border crossing card (or laser visa) are not eligible to work in the United States.

Those applicants requiring an I-94 permit must demonstrate that they are financially solvent and have sufficiently strong ties to their country of origin, including a home abroad they do not intend to abandon.

“Ties” are the various aspects of a person’s life that bind him or her to his or her country or residence. Some examples of ways to document these ties can be pay stubs for a person’s employment/income, a house or apartment mortgage or rental receipt, bank account records, utility bills, etc.

It is not possible to specify the documents applicants for admission should carry, since each applicant’s circumstances vary greatly. Applicants should carry with them whatever documents they think demonstrate their individual circumstances.

All traveling family members need to be present during the I-94 application process.

The I-94 permit, which costs $6, allows visitors to travel further than 25 miles from the border and remain in the U.S. for more than 30 days.

By U.S. law, a foreign traveler must posses his or her entry documents, and if required, the

I-94 permit, with them at all times while in the United States.

In addition, at checkpoints, U.S. Border Patrol agents check foreign travelers for entry documents and the I-94 permit. Travelers not in possession of their entry documents and an I-94 permit may have their visa cancelled and be deported from the United States.

For more information about the CBP form for an I-94 permit, please visit the CBP Web site.

(Filling Out Arrival-Departure Record, CBP Form I-94, for Nonimmigrant Visitors with a Visa for the U.S. )

(Entering the U.S. – Documents required for Foreign Nationals (International Travelers)

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the unified border agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the management, control and protection of our nation’s borders at and between the official ports of entry. CBP is charged with keeping terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country while enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws.

Contact For This News Release is:

Jacqueline Wasiluk
CBP Public Affairs San Diego
Phone: (619) 744-5245

USCIS Launches I-9 Central on USCIS.gov – May 13, 2011 – New Online Resource Provides Enhanced, Easy-to-Access Guidance for Employers and Employees.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today launched I-9 Central, a new online resource center dedicated to the most frequently accessed form on USCIS.gov: Form I-9, Employee Eligibility Verification. This free, easy-to-use website builds on recent employment-related enhancements by providing employers and employees simple one-click access to resources, tips and guidance to properly complete Form I-9 and better understand the Form I-9 process.

“I-9 Central is the latest in our ongoing efforts to better serve the 7.5 million employers who use Form I-9 every time they hire an employee,” said USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas. “It provides critical information for all employers – whether they hire a single employee or hundreds – in an accessible, intuitive and comprehensive online format.” The launch of I-9 Central follows the introduction of other important USCIS employment-related resources. These resources include E-Verify Self Check, a service launched in March that allows workers and job seekers in the United States to check their own employment eligibility status online, and an updated “Handbook for Employers: Instructions for Completing Form I-9 (M-274)” published earlier this year.

I-9 Central includes sections about employer and employee rights and responsibilities, step-by-step instructions for completing the form, and information on acceptable documents for establishing identity and employment authorization. I-9 Central also includes a discussion of common mistakes to avoid when completing the form, guidance on how to correct errors, and answers to employers’ recent questions about the Form I-9 process. I-9 Central complements existing Form I-9 resources including the current Form I-9 Web page, the form instructions, and the above-referenced “Handbook for Employers.” USCIS also offers free webinars on completing Form I-9.

By law, U.S. employers must verify the identity and employment authorization for every worker they hire after Nov. 6, 1986, regardless of the employee’s immigration status. To comply with the law, employers must complete Form I-9. Visit or link to I-9 Central at www.uscis.gov/I-9central.

For more information on USCIS and its programs, please visit www.uscis.gov or follow us on Twitter (@uscis), YouTube (/uscis) and the USCIS blog The Beacon.

ICE announces expanded list of science, technology, engineering, and math degree programs – Qualifies eligible graduates to extend their post-graduate training.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) today published an expanded list of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) degree programs that qualify eligible graduates on student visas for an Optional Practical Training (OPT) extension-an important step forward in the Obama administration’s continued commitment to fixing our broken immigration system and expanding access to the nation’s pool of talented high skilled graduates in the science and technology fields. The announcement follows President Obama’s recent remarks in El Paso, Texas, where he reiterated his strong support for new policies that embrace talented students from other countries, who enrich the nation by working in science and technology jobs and fueling innovation in their chosen fields here in the United States, as a part of comprehensive reform.

By expanding the list of STEM degrees to include such fields as Neuroscience, Medical Informatics, Pharmaceutics and Drug Design, Mathematics and Computer Science, the Obama administration is helping to address shortages in certain high tech sectors of talented scientists and technology experts-permitting highly skilled foreign graduates who wish to work in their field of study upon graduation and extend their post-graduate training in the United States. Under the OPT program, foreign students who graduate from U.S. colleges and universities are able to remain in the U.S. and receive training through work experience for up to 12 months. Students who graduate with one of the newly-expanded STEM degrees can remain for an additional 17 months on an OPT STEM extension.

Creative Solutions to Complex Problems – When traditional immigration approaches do not work, we analyze a candidate’s resume and determine if they may qualify for various nonimmigrant or temporary work permits or permanent immigrant visa transfer options such as outstanding researcher classification, TN under NAFTA or E-3 classification for Australia. Now that the H-1B nonimmigrant visa has become more difficult to obtain, we work closely with our clients who are seeking to transfer highly-skilled foreign national workers to the U.S. to determine if there are other nonimmigrant options for such transfers. No matter what the situation, our attorneys work hard to provide a variety of visa options to support their needs.

Contact Us – Our staff of immigration law professionals are sensitive to the needs of our clients and the members of their families. Many members of our staff are themselves foreign born and have family and/or friends who have gone through the immigration process. As a result, our staff of business immigration law professionals have a personal and unique approach to processing visas and for dealing with our foreign national clientele. Our legal team can clearly explain how to process temporary and permanent work permits in the U.S. The PERM Labor Certification Process is time-consuming and complex and our staff of business immigration law professionals can clearly explain the process in Spanish, French, Japanese, Korean, Tamil, Hindi, Slovak, Czech, Russian, Chinese, German and English. To schedule a consultation, please feel free to contact Nachman & Associates by e-mail or call 201-670-0006 (x100).

The country they built is a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws, a legacy that shapes the Administration’s vision for a 21st century immigration system.

“The United States reaps numerous and significant economic rewards because we remain a magnet for the best, brightest, and most hardworking from across the globe. Many travel here in the hopes of being a part of an American culture of entrepreneurship and ingenuity, and by doing so strengthen and enrich that culture and in turn create jobs for American workers. From U.S. Steel to Google, Inc., immigrants have long helped America lead the world.

Nearly every American family has their own immigration story. Generations of immigrants braved hardship and great risk to reach our shores in search of a better life for themselves and their families. Their names and actions may not have made it into history books, but they were essential to building this country. Indeed, this constant flow of immigrants has helped make America what it is today. The country they built is a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws, a legacy that shapes the Administration’s vision for a 21st century immigration system.”

The Obama Administration has now released a new plan for Comprehensive Immigration Reform in the United States.

Click below to learn more about it.

http://www.visaserveblog.com/tp-090109083643/post-110511131423.shtml

http://www.visaserveblog.com/tp-090109083643/post-110511131423/immigration_blueprint.pdf

Creative Solutions to Complex Problems – When traditional immigration approaches do not work, we analyze a candidate’s resume and determine if they may qualify for various nonimmigrant or temporary work permits or permanent immigrant visa transfer options such as outstanding researcher classification, TN under NAFTA or E-3 classification for Australia. Now that the H-1B nonimmigrant visa has become more difficult to obtain, we work closely with our clients who are seeking to transfer highly-skilled foreign national workers to the U.S. to determine if there are other nonimmigrant options for such transfers. No matter what the situation, our attorneys work hard to provide a variety of visa options to support their needs.

Contact Us – Our staff of immigration law professionals are sensitive to the needs of our clients and the members of their families. Many members of our staff are themselves foreign born and have family and/or friends who have gone through the immigration process. As a result, our staff of business immigration law professionals have a personal and unique approach to processing visas and for dealing with our foreign national clientele. Our legal team can clearly explain how to process temporary and permanent work permits in the U.S. The PERM Labor Certification Process is time-consuming and complex and our staff of business immigration law professionals can clearly explain the process in Spanish, French, Japanese, Korean, Tamil, Hindi, Slovak, Czech, Russian, Chinese, German and English. To schedule a consultation, please feel free to contact Nachman & Associates by e-mail at info@visaserve.com or please feel free to call 201-670-0006 (x100).

The White House provided this transcript of President Obama’s remarks in El Paso on Tuesday, May 10th.

Hello, El Paso! It’s great to be back here with all of you, and to be back in the Lone Star State. I love coming to Texas. Even the welcomes are bigger down here. So, to show my appreciation, I wanted to give a big policy speech… outdoors… right in the middle of a hot, sunny day.

I hope everyone is wearing sunscreen.

Now, about a week ago, I delivered the commencement address at Miami Dade Community College, one of the most diverse schools in the nation. The graduates were proud that their class could claim heritage from 181 countries around the world. Many of the students were immigrants themselves, coming to America with little more than the dreams of their parents and the clothes on their backs. A handful had discovered only in adolescence or adulthood that they were undocumented. But they worked hard and gave it their all, and they earned those diplomas.

At the ceremony, 181 flags – one for every nation represented – was marched across the stage. Each was applauded by the graduates and relatives with ties to those countries. But then, the last flag – the American flag – came into view. And the room erupted. Every person in the auditorium cheered. Yes, their parents or grandparents – or the graduates themselves – had come from every corner of the globe. But it was here that they had found opportunity, and had a chance to contribute to the nation that is their home.

It was a reminder of a simple idea, as old as America itself. E pluribus, unum. Out of many, one. We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants – a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America’s precepts. That’s why millions of people, ancestors to most of us, braved hardship and great risk to come here – so they could be free to work and worship and live their lives in peace. The Asian immigrants who made their way to California’s Angel Island. The Germans and Scandinavians who settled across the Midwest. The waves of the Irish, Italian, Polish, Russian, and Jewish immigrants who leaned against the railing to catch that first glimpse of the Statue of Liberty.

This flow of immigrants has helped make this country stronger and more prosperous. We can point to the genius of Einstein and the designs of I. M. Pei, the stories of Isaac Asimov and whole industries forged by Andrew Carnegie.

And I think of the naturalization ceremonies we’ve held at the White House for members of the military, which have been so inspiring. Even though they were not yet citizens, these men and women had signed up to serve. One was a young man named Granger Michael from Papua New Guinea, a Marine who deployed to Iraq three times. Here’s what he said about becoming an American citizen. “I might as well. I love this country already.” Marines aren’t big on speeches. Another was a woman named Perla Ramos. She was born and raised in Mexico, came to the United States shortly after 9/11, and joined the Navy. She said, “I take pride in our flag … and the history we write day by day.”

That’s the promise of this country – that anyone can write the next chapter of our story. It doesn’t matter where you come from; what matters is that you believe in the ideals on which we were founded; that you believe all of us are equal and deserve the freedom to pursue happiness. In embracing America, you can become American. And that enriches all of us.

Yet at the same time, we are standing at the border today because we also recognize that being a nation of laws goes hand in hand with being a nation of immigrants. This, too, is our heritage. This, too, is important. And the truth is, we’ve often wrestled with the politics of who is and who isn’t allowed to enter this country. At times, there has been fear and resentment directed toward newcomers, particularly in periods of economic hardship. And because these issues touch on deeply held convictions – about who we are as a people, about what it means to be an American – these debates often elicit strong emotions.

That’s one reason it’s been so difficult to reform our broken immigration system. When an issue is this complex and raises such strong feelings, it’s easier for politicians to defer the problem until after the next election. And there’s always a next election. So we’ve seen a lot blame and politics and ugly rhetoric. We’ve seen good faith efforts – from leaders of both parties – fall prey to the usual Washington games. And all the while, we’ve seen the mounting consequences of decades of inaction.

Today, there are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. Some crossed the border illegally. Others avoid immigration laws by overstaying their visas. Regardless of how they came, the overwhelming majority of these folks are just trying to earn a living and provide for their families. But they’ve broken the rules, and have cut in front of the line. And the truth is, the presence of so many illegal immigrants makes a mockery of all those who are trying to immigrate legally.

Also, because undocumented immigrants live in the shadows, they’re vulnerable to unscrupulous businesses that skirt taxes, pay workers less than the minimum wage, or cut corners with health and safety. This puts companies who follow those rules, and Americans who rightly demand the minimum wage or overtime or just a safe place to work, at an unfair disadvantage.

Think about it. Over the past decade, even before the recession, middle class families were struggling to get by as costs went up but incomes didn’t. We’re seeing this again with gas prices. Well, one way to strengthen the middle class is to reform our immigration system, so that there is no longer a massive underground economy that exploits a cheap source of labor while depressing wages for everyone else. I want incomes for middle class families to rise again. I want prosperity in this country to be widely shared. That’s why immigration reform is an economic imperative.

And reform will also help make America more competitive in the global economy. Today, we provide students from around the world with visas to get engineering and computer science degrees at our top universities. But our laws discourage them from using those skills to start a business or power a new industry right here in the United States. So instead of training entrepreneurs to create jobs in America, we train them to create jobs for our competition. That makes no sense. In a global marketplace, we need all the talent we can get – not just to benefit those individuals, but because their contributions will benefit all Americans.

Look at Intel and Google and Yahoo and eBay – these are great American companies that have created countless jobs and helped us lead the world in high-tech industries. Every one was founded by an immigrant. We don’t want the next Intel or Google to be created in China or India. We want those companies and jobs to take root in America. Bill Gates gets this. “The United States will find it far more difficult to maintain its competitive edge,” he’s said, “if it excludes those who are able and willing to help us compete.”

It’s for this reason that businesses all across America are demanding that Washington finally meet its responsibility to solve the immigration problem. Everyone recognizes the system is broken. The question is, will we summon the political will to do something about it? And that’s why we’re here at the border today.

In recent years, among the greatest impediments to reform were questions about border security. These were legitimate concerns; it’s true that a lack of manpower and resources at the border, combined with the pull of jobs and ill-considered enforcement once folks were in the country, contributed to a growing number of undocumented people living in the United States. And these concerns helped unravel a bipartisan coalition we forged back when I was a United States Senator. In the years since, “borders first” has been a common refrain, even among those who previously supported comprehensive immigration reform.

Well, over the past two years we have answered those concerns. Under Secretary Napolitano’s leadership, we have strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible. They wanted more agents on the border. Well, we now have more boots on the ground on the southwest border than at any time in our history. The Border Patrol has 20,000 agents – more than twice as many as there were in 2004, a build up that began under President Bush and that we have continued.

They wanted a fence. Well, that fence is now basically complete.

And we’ve gone further. We tripled the number of intelligence analysts working the border. I’ve deployed unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol the skies from Texas to California. We’ve forged a partnership with Mexico to fight the transnational criminal organizations that have affected both of our countries. And for the first time we are screening 100 percent of southbound rail shipments – to seize guns and money going south even as we go after drugs coming north.

So, we have gone above and beyond what was requested by the very Republicans who said they supported broader reform as long as we got serious about enforcement. But even though we’ve answered these concerns, I suspect there will be those who will try to move the goal posts one more time. They’ll say we need to triple the border patrol. Or quadruple the border patrol. They’ll say we need a higher fence to support reform.

Maybe they’ll say we need a moat. Or alligators in the moat.

They’ll never be satisfied. And I understand that. That’s politics.

But the truth is, the measures we’ve put in place are getting results. Over the past two and a half years, we’ve seized 31 percent more drugs, 75 percent more currency, and 64 percent more weapons than before. Even as we’ve stepped up patrols, apprehensions along the border have been cut by nearly 40 percent from two years ago – that means far fewer people are attempting to cross the border illegally.

Also, despite a lot of breathless reports that have tagged places like El Paso as dangerous, violent crime in southwest border counties has dropped by a third. El Paso and other cities and towns along the border are consistently rated among the safest in the nation. Of course, we shouldn’t accept any violence or crime, and we have more work to do. But this progress is important.

Beyond the border, we’re also going after employers who knowingly exploit people and break the law. And we are deporting those who are here illegally. Now, I know that the increase in deportations has been a source of controversy. But I want to emphasize: we are not doing this haphazardly; we are focusing our limited resources on violent offenders and people convicted of crimes; not families, not folks who are just looking to scrape together an income. As a result, we increased the removal of criminals by 70 percent.

That is not to ignore the real human toll. Even as we recognize that enforcing the law is necessary, we don’t relish the pain it causes in the lives of people just trying to get by. And as long as the current laws are on the books, it’s not just hardened felons who are subject to removal; but also families just trying to earn a living, bright and eager students; decent people with the best of intentions. I know some here wish that I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that’s not how a democracy works. What we really need to do is keep up the fight to pass reform. That’s the ultimate solution to this problem.

And I’d point out, the most significant step we can take now to secure the borders is to fix the system as a whole – so that fewer people have incentive to enter illegally in search of work in the first place. This would allow agents to focus on the worst threats on both of our borders – from drug traffickers to those who would come here to commit acts of violence or terror.

So, the question is whether those in Congress who previously walked away in the name of enforcement are now ready to come back to the table and finish the work we’ve started. We have to put the politics aside. And if we do, I’m confident we can find common ground. Washington is behind the country on this. Already, there is a growing coalition of leaders across America who don’t always see eye-to-eye, but who are coming together on this issue. They see the harmful consequences of this broken system for their businesses and communities. They understand why we need to act.

There are Democrats and Republicans, including former-Republican Senator Mel Martinez and former-Bush administration Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff; leaders like Mayor Michael Bloomberg; evangelical ministers like Leith Anderson and Bill Hybels; police chiefs from across the nation; educators and advocates; labor unions and chambers of commerce; small business owners and Fortune 500 CEOs. One CEO had this to say about reform. “American ingenuity is a product of the openness and diversity of this society… Immigrants have made America great as the world leader in business, science, higher education and innovation.” That’s Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox News, and an immigrant himself. I don’t know if you’re familiar with his views, but let’s just say he doesn’t have an Obama bumper sticker on his car.

So there is a consensus around fixing what’s broken. Now we need Congress to catch up to a train that’s leaving the station. Now we need to come together around reform that reflects our values as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants; that demands everyone take responsibility.

So what would comprehensive reform look like?

First, we know that government has a threshold responsibility to secure the borders and enforce the law. Second, businesses have to be held accountable if they exploit undocumented workers. Third, those who are here illegally have a responsibility as well. They have to admit that they broke the law, pay their taxes, pay a fine, and learn English. And they have to undergo background checks and a lengthy process before they can get in line for legalization.

And fourth, stopping illegal immigration also depends on reforming our outdated system of legal immigration. We should make it easier for the best and the brightest to not only study here, but also to start businesses and create jobs here. In recent years, a full 25 percent of high-tech startups in the U.S. were founded by immigrants, leading to more than 200,000 jobs in America. I’m glad those jobs are here. And I want to see more of them created in this country.

We need to provide farms a legal way to hire the workers they rely on, and a path for those workers to earn legal status.

Our laws should respect families following the rules – reuniting them more quickly instead of splitting them apart. Today, the immigration system not only tolerates those who break the rules, it punishes the folks who follow the rules. While applicants wait for approval, for example, they’re often forbidden from visiting the United States. Even husbands and wives may have to spend years apart. Parents can’t see their children. I don’t believe the United States of America should be in the business of separating families. That’s not right. That’s not who we are.

And we should stop punishing innocent young people for the actions of their parents – by denying them the chance to earn an education or serve in the military. That’s why we need to pass the Dream Act. Now, we passed the Dream Act through the House last year. But even though it received a majority of votes in the Senate, it was blocked when several Republicans who had previously supported the Dream Act voted no.

It was a tremendous disappointment to get so close and then see politics get in the way. And as I gave the commencement at Miami Dade, it broke my heart knowing that a number of those promising, bright students – young people who worked so hard and who speak to what’s best about America – are at risk of facing the agony of deportation. These are kids who grew up in this country, love this country, and know no other place as home. The idea that we would punish them is cruel and it makes no sense. We are a better nation than that.

So we’re going to keep up the fight for the Dream Act. We’re going to keep up the fight for reform. And that’s where you come in. I will do my part to lead a constructive and civil debate on these issues. We’ve already held a series of meetings about this at the White House in recent weeks. And we’ve got leaders here and around the country helping to move the debate forward. But this change has to be driven by you – to help us push for comprehensive reform, and to identify what steps we can take right now – like the Dream Act and visa reform – areas where we can find common ground among Democrats and Republicans to begin fixing what’s broken.

I am asking you to add your voices to this debate – and you can sign up to help at whitehouse.gov. We need Washington to know that there is a movement for reform gathering strength from coast to coast. That’s how we’ll get this done. That’s how we can ensure that in the years ahead we are welcoming the talents of all who can contribute to this country; and that we are living up to that basic American idea: you can make it if you try.

That idea is what gave hope to José Hernández, who is here today. José’s parents were migrant farm workers. And so, growing up, he was too. He was born in California, though he could have just as easily been born on the other side of the border, had it been a different time of year, because his family moved with the seasons. Two of his siblings were actually born in Mexico.

They traveled a lot and José joined his parents picking cucumbers and strawberries. He missed part of the school year when they returned to Mexico each winter. He didn’t learn English until he was 12. But José was good at math, and he liked it. The great thing about math was that it’s the same in every school, and it’s the same in Spanish.

So he studied hard. And one day, standing in the fields, collecting sugar beets, he heard on a transistor radio that a man named Franklin Chang-Diaz – a man with a name like his – was going to be an astronaut for NASA.

José decided that he could be an astronaut, too.

So he kept studying, and graduated high school. He kept studying, earning an engineering degree and a graduate degree. He kept working hard, ending up at a national laboratory, helping to develop a new kind of digital medical imaging system.

And a few years later, he found himself more than 100 miles above the surface of the earth, staring out the window of the Shuttle Discovery, remembering the boy in the California fields with a crazy dream and an unshakable belief that everything was possible in America.

That is what we are fighting for. We are fighting for every boy and girl like José with a dream and potential just waiting to be tapped. We are fighting to unlock that promise, and all that it holds not just for their futures, but for the future of this great country.

Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.

Nachman & Associates, P.C.’s Managing Attorney, David H. Nachman, Esq. Named to New Jersey Super Lawyers 2011.

April 2011 (Ridgewood, NJ) – David H. Nachman, Esq., the Managing Attorney at Nachman & Associates, P.C., has been selected for inclusion in New Jersey Super Lawyers 2011, an exclusive list of the top five percent of the state’s legal practitioners. Mr. Nachman is the Managing Attorney of the Firm which focuses its practice on Immigration & Nationality in the U.S. and Canada. Mr. Nachman has extensive experience counseling clients regarding all types of business immigration law issues, and guides corporations in numerous industries about their policies and programs to facilitate hiring and transferring of foreign nationals and international personnel, using the full array of non-immigrant and immigrant visa categories.

Mr. Nachman is an Adjunct Professor of Paralegal Studies at Fairleigh Dickinson University and he serves on the Advisory Board at Bergen Community College. With offices in New York, New Jersey and Canada, the Firm’s immigration law staff provides visas and green cards and work permits for highly-skilled foreign national workers who are seeking to enter the U.S. from countries all over the world. Nachman & Associates, P.C. has several Canadian Attorneys on their staff who assist with transfers of foreign nationals to Canada.

The full list of New Jersey Super Lawyers appears in the April 2011 issue of New Jersey Monthly Magazine. Nominations for New Jersey Super Lawyers are submitted by those with first-hand knowledge of the top lawyers within the state. Each lawyer selected for inclusion is evaluated on 12 indicators of peer recognition and professional achievement, combined with third-party research.

The staff at the immigration law offices at Nachman & Associates, P.C. are sensitive to the needs of our clients and the members of their families. Many members of our staff are themselves foreign born and have family and/or friends who have gone through the immigration process. As a result, the Nachman & Associates, P.C. staff of business immigration law professionals have a personal and unique approach to processing visas and for dealing with our foreign national clientele. The VISASERVE legal team can clearly explain how to process temporary and permanent work permits in the U.S. The PERM Labor Certification Process is time-consuming and complex and our staff of business immigration law professionals can clearly explain the process in Spanish, French, Japanese, Korean, Tamil, Hindi, Slovak, Czech, Russian, Chinese, German and English. To schedule a consultation, please feel free to contact Nachman & Associates by e-mail at info@visaserve.com or call 201-670-0006 (x100).