E-VERIFY: Prospects for Nationalization.

20th Annual Garden State Council — SHRM Conference and Expo for HR Professionals Sunday, October 23- Tuesday, October 25, 2011 Atlantic City Convention Center and Expo

David H. Nachman, Esq. TO SPEAK AT GARDEN STATE COUNCIL SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (SHRM) 20th ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND EXPO ON TUESDAY IN ATLANTIC CITY, NEW JERSEY

David H. Nachman, Esq., the Managing Attorney at the NPZ Law Group (f/k/a Nachman & Associates, P.C.) (VISASERVE), a prominent National Immigration and Nationality Law Office located in Ridgewood, New Jersey, will deliver a session entitled “E-VERIFY: Prospects for Nationalization” at the 20th Annual Garden State Council Society for Human Resource Management (GSC SHRM) Conference and Expo scheduled for October 23rd through October 25th, 2011 at the Atlantic City Convention Center. Mr. Nachman is the Vice Chair of the New Jersey Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association (AILA) and an Adjunct Professor of Immigration Law at FDU.

This year’s Conference theme “HR 20/20: Evolve, Educate, Execute” is a three day educational conference geared to Human Resource and business practitioners that offers knowledge-filled concurrent sessions, dynamic keynote addresses, pre-conference activities and learning sessions on Sunday, evening networking opportunities with New Jersey’s leading HR vendors and outsourcing partners, knowledge center and job board, and HRCI certification hours. For additional conference information and registration visit http://www.gscshrmconference.org

16 August 2011 – A Nation of Laws and a Nation of Immigrants

Posted by Alejandro Mayorkas, Director, U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services.

This is part of a series of blog posts exploring the progress we have made in implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations.

Respecting and celebrating our tradition as a nation of immigrants strengthens our communities and helps ensure that people of diverse backgrounds share in the rights and freedoms guaranteed under our Constitution.

Every day, the dedicated men and women of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) ensure that deserving immigrants receive the benefits for which they are eligible under our nation’s laws. This same dedicated workforce protects the integrity of our nation’s immigration system and helps ensure the system is not abused by those who wish to do our nation harm.

After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, USCIS was created as part of a new national homeland security enterprise to confront and defend against the evolving threats we face and to make America more resilient when a crisis occurs. Its creation was premised upon the basic tenet that for our immigration system to work, we must be able to protect our national security.

Through USCIS’s enhanced efforts to protect national security, USCIS can more effectively screen for security threats while efficiently processing legitimate benefits for people rightfully coming to the United States. To that end, USCIS has taken and continues to take steps responsive to the 9/11 Commission Report’s recommendations. In our efforts, for example, to combat immigration fraud:

1. We redesigned the Permanent Resident Card, commonly known as the Green Card, to include a radio frequency identification tag that allows Customs and Border Protection to quickly access the electronic records of travelers seeking to enter the United States and includes new security features that reduce the risks of counterfeiting, tampering, and fraud.

2. We redesigned the Certificate of Naturalization, utilizing a tamper-proof printing process and embedding digitized photos and signatures.

3. We added a machine-readable zone to the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) to make it easier for border control officers to more efficiently identify people who have already been approved for immigration benefits and who have been reviewed previously by USCIS officers.

4. We have enhanced our partnership with the Forensic Document Laboratory which is dedicated exclusively to detecting fraudulent documents. As a result, we can better identify fake documents used to seek immigration benefits.

We also have enhanced our sharing of information with key federal partners:

1. Dozens of our Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) officers are aligned with local FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTFFs) to coordinate resources and provide immigration expertise to federal government agencies in support of terrorism investigations.

2. Our FDNS officers furnish support to the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), the FBI’s National Joint Terrorism Task Force, the Terrorist Screening Center, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s National Security Unit.

3. We regularly exchange information with US-VISIT related to refugee claimants under existing data-sharing agreements with foreign-government partners.

Our efforts reflect our commitment to oversee lawful immigration to the United States by strengthening the security and integrity of our nation’s immigration system while providing effective customer-oriented immigration benefit and information services.

You can read more about the Department’s efforts to implement the 9/11 Commission report’s recommendations here.

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.

Secretary Napolitano Announces Initiatives to Promote Startup Enterprises and Spur Job Creation.

Release Date: August 2, 2011

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

WASHINGTON—Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Alejandro Mayorkas today outlined a series of policy, operational, and outreach efforts to fuel the nation’s economy and stimulate investment by attracting foreign entrepreneurial talent of exceptional ability or who otherwise can create jobs, form startup companies, and invest capital in areas of high unemployment.

“The United States must continue to attract the best and brightest from around the world to invest their talents, skills, and ideas to grow our economy and create American jobs,” said Secretary Napolitano. “Today’s announcements will help our nation fully realize the potential of existing immigration laws.”

“Current immigration laws support foreign talent who will invest their capital, create new jobs for American workers, and dedicate their exceptional talent to the growth of our nation’s economy,” said Director Mayorkas. “USCIS is dedicated to ensuring that the potential of our immigration laws is fully realized, and the initiatives we announce today are an important step forward.”

These actions mark the six-month anniversary of Startup America, a White House-led initiative to reduce barriers and accelerate growth for America’s job-creating entrepreneurs. They have also been one key focus of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, which has recommended taking action to help ensure that America can out-innovate and out-compete the world in a global economy.

USCIS has published a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) document on its website clarifying that entrepreneurs may obtain an employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant visa if they satisfy the existing requirements, and also may qualify for a National Interest Waiver under the EB-2 immigrant visa category if they can demonstrate that their business endeavors will be in the interest of the United States. USCIS will complement these FAQs with internal training on the unique characteristics of entrepreneurial enterprises and startup companies and incorporate input from the upcoming stakeholder engagements detailed below.

The EB-2 visa classification includes foreign workers with advanced degrees and individuals of exceptional ability in the arts, sciences, or business. Generally, an EB-2 visa petition requires a job offer and a Department of Labor certification. These requirements can be waived under existing law if the petitioner demonstrates that approval of the EB-2 visa petition would be in the national interest of the United States.

In response to stakeholder feedback, USCIS has also updated existing FAQs to clarify that an H-1B beneficiary who is the sole owner of the petitioning company may establish a valid employer-employee relationship for the purposes of qualifying for an H-1B nonimmigrant visa – which is used by U.S. businesses to employ foreign workers in specialty occupations that require theoretical or technical expertise in specialized fields, such as science, engineering, and computer programming.

The EB-5 immigrant investor program is also being further enhanced by transforming the intake and review process. In May, USCIS proposed fundamental enhancements to streamline the EB-5 process which include: extending the availability of premium processing for certain EB-5 applications and petitions, implementing direct lines of communication between the applicants and USCIS, and providing applicants with the opportunity for an interview before a USCIS panel of experts to resolve outstanding issues in an application. After reviewing stakeholder feedback on the proposal, USCIS is developing a phased plan to roll out these enhancements and is poised to begin implementing the first of these enhancements within 30 days.

Created by Congress in 1990, the program stimulates the U.S. economy through capital investment and resulting job creation by immigrant investors. As of June 30, 2011, it is estimated that the program has resulted in more than $1.5 billion in capital investments and created at least 34,000 jobs.

USCIS has also announced the expansion of its Premium Processing Service to immigrant petitions for multinational executives and managers (often referred to as “E13″). The Premium Processing Service allows employers to expedite processing of their petitions, absent evidentiary deficiencies, fraud or national security concerns.

Finally, USCIS is launching a new series of engagement opportunities for entrepreneurs and startup companies. These opportunities will focus on soliciting input from stakeholders on how USCIS can address the unique circumstances of entrepreneurs, new businesses and startup companies through its policies and regulations in the employment-based arena. For detailed information on USCIS’s public meetings, please visit www.uscis.gov/outreach.

For more information, visit www.uscis.gov.

On TV ASIA, U.S. Immigration Attorneys David Nachman & Michael Phulwani discuss various U.S. Immigration Law Updates:

1. Public Affair and Immigration Part 1 (David H. Nachman/Michael Phulwani)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdOzcZ-0Uiw

2. Public Affair and Immigration Part 2 (David H. Nachman/Michael Phulwani)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBe0nsSBK1Q

3. Public Affair and Immigration Part 3 (David Nachman/Michael Phulwani)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpVuHbB8hCs

4. Public Affair and Immigration Part 4 (David H. Nachman/Michael Phulwani)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EkDGN1yPKI

Notifying USCIS of a Change of Address Is Important.

It is the sole responsibility of the applicant/petitioner to ensure USCIS has the correct address information on file. For example, USCIS expects to adjudicate 750,000 family-based petitions on or before December 31, 2010. Adjudication of these filings can result in Requests for Evidence (RFEs), and most correspondence sent by USCIS is not forwarded even if a change of address was filed with the U.S. Postal Service. Generally, USCIS denies cases as abandoned when a customer fails to timely respond to an RFE. To ensure that USCIS correspondence is sent to the right address, those seeking benefits must take affirmative steps to notify the agency of address changes.

For more information click check out this link:

http://www.dhs.gov/files/publications/gc_1305649739320.shtm

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. 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 e-mail us at info@visaserve.com or call us at 201-670-0006 (x100).

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.

PRESS RELEASE – For Immediate Release

A Framework for Lasting Reform: Sen. Menendez Introduces “Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2011”

June 22, 2011

Washington, D.C. – Today, Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Harry Reid (D-NV), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Kristen Gillibrand (D-NY) and John Kerry (D-MA) introduced the “Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2011,” a bill that seeks to fix a system that has been broken for far too long. The legislation proposes a balance of solutions, such as enhanced enforcement measures and a mandatory E-verify program which is paired with strategies to address the current population of undocumented workers, improvements to regulating future flows of legal immigration, a commission to study and regulate temporary worker programs, as well as efforts to support the integration of immigrants into America.

The following is a statement from the American Immigration Council’s Executive Director, Ben Johnson:

“We welcome the introduction of the ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2011’ the first immigration reform bill of the 112th Congress that proposes a framework for lasting reform. Senator Menendez and co-sponsors should be commended for offering the country an alternative to the enforcement-only bills proposed by immigration restrictionists. While some politicians propose mandatory E-verify without any counter-balancing attempt to help needed workers retain their jobs, the Menendez bill proposes a strategy for the current population of unauthorized immigrants to get right with the law, implementing mandatory E-verify only in the context of broader system reforms.

The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act’ presents Congress with a clear choice between enforcement-only bills that squander the country’s resources and human capital, and thoughtful, long-range legislation that puts in place the tools for a 21st century immigration system. Members of Congress have, thus far, provided only simplistic enforcement-only solutions and sound bites. The Menendez bill, however, gives Congress the chance to prove that it is willing to put good policy over political expediency, engage in a serious and constructive debate over immigration reform, and focus on realistic solutions rather than passing this year’s political Band-aid.”

###

For press inquiries contact Seth Hoy at shoy@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7509.

CANADIAN IMMIGRATION UPDATE: New LMO Forms Coming!!!

As though the LMO application system was not already onerous enough, Human Resources and Social Development Canada (“HRSDC”) and Citizenship and Immigration Canada (“CIC”) have announced that effective March 25, 2011, the online Labour Market Opinion (“LMO”) application system will be unavailable until a new secure online Web system is installed in June 2011. During this period, all employers can still submit LMO paper application forms by mail or fax to the appropriate Service Canada Centre. The Live-in Caregiver Program online application process will continue to be available without interruption.

In addition, new LMO application forms will be available as of March 25, 2011. These new forms will be specific to each stream under the Temporary Foreign Worker Program such as the Live-in Caregiver Program, the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program, etc. My staff and I can’t wait to see the impact of the new forms on an already arduous system.

Completed LMO applications received by Service Canada by March 31, 2011, will be processed in accordance with the standard Program requirements. As of April 1, 2011, any LMO request received must be made using the new LMO application forms and will be processed in accordance with the new amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

For more information about the LMO and Work Permit process in Canada, please contact our office: veronique_malka@visaserve.com

MORE JOBS IN CANADA! Canadian Immigration prospects are better than ever. Economists had predicted that 15,000 people would join the Canadian workforce in January 2011. According to a recent announced by Statistics Canada however, almost 70,000 people were added to the workforce in Canada last month, almost 5 times the amount originally predicted! The provinces of Alberta and Ontario experienced the highest job growth rates, with Alberta adding 22,000 jobs last month. According to the report, Canada has regained all of its jobs lost from the recession. Please sign up for our free monthly E-zine at www.visaserve.com for regular updates about Canadian immigration.