New York City Immigration Lawyer. NYC immigration lawyer assisting with K-1 fiancee visas, EB 1-A Extraordinary Abilities Visa, EB 1-2 Outstanding Researchers and Professors Visa, and all other visas, green cards, naturalization and citizenship. Gafner Law Firm is a full service NYC immigration law firm serving clients in Manhattan, Staten Island, Brookyln, the Bronx, Queens, Nassau County, Suffolk County, Westchester County, Yonkers, Astoria, Greenpoint, Murray Hill, Bushwick, Park Slope, Bay Ridge, Brighton Beach, Brownsville, Corona, Harlem, SoHo, Tribeca, Longwood, Hunts Point, Flatbush, Brooklyn Heights, Wall Street, Jersey City and from throughout the world. » Employment-based Immigration

Cornell, Technion, and New York City Get It, Will the U.S. Government?

Chris Gafner — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 15:32:58 +0000

Yesterday, New York City Mayor Bloomberg announced that the joint team of Cornell University and Technion – Israeli Institute of Technology had won the city’s competition to develop a world-class technological institute on Roosevelt Island. It is hoped that it will be a catalyst to creating new and innovative companies in the New York City region.

Two major themes resonated throughout the announcement speeches given by the Mayor and two school presidents. First, they all recognized that this opportunity has the possibility of being a “game-changing” event that could dramatically alter the future of the city and the nation’s development. It is expected that the new institute will help energize New York City into the next Silicon Valley.

Second, the three leaders discussed how the project is meant to be inclusive and inviting – not exclusive. The institute intends to “expand the pool” of talented individuals coming to New York City to aid in its growth. This inclusion means not just Americans, but also talented foreign nationals who will be able to come and experience the United States while learning essential skills and knowledge. The selection of a team with a leading non-American institution demonstrates the desire for the institute to be international in scope.

The city hopes that the institute’s graduates will largely stay in New York City. However, the question remains, will the United States allow these foreign national graduates to remain – on a large scale – in the United States? Current immigration laws for highly-skilled workers do not make it easy for these graduates to stay. Creating a new, top-flight technological institute in New York City is a great boost to the city – keeping the best and the brightest immigrants in the United States will be a much greater boost to the country.

What Does this Immigration Symbol Mean?

Chris Gafner — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 13:14:28 +0000

Have you ever wondered what the immigration abbreviations meant on your immigration visa? The following is meant to provide an answer to at least some of the abbreviations. If you are unsure what your abbreviations mean, contact a NYC immigration lawyer for assistance.

IMMIGRANTS Immediate Relatives
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
IR1	Spouse of U.S. Citizen	201(b)
IR2	Child of U.S. Citizen	201(b)
IR3	Orphan Adopted Abroad by U.S. Citizen	201(b)
IR4	Orphan to be Adopted In the U.S. by U.S. Citizen	201(b)
IR5	Parent of U.S. Citizen at Least 21 Years of Age	201(b)
CR1	Spouse of U.S. Citizen (Conditional Status)	201(b) & 216(a)(1)
CR2	Child of U.S. Citizen (Conditional Status)	201(b) & 216
IW2	Child of IW1	201(b)
IB1	Self-petition Spouse of U.S. Citizen	204(a)(1)(A)(iii)
IB2	Self-petition child of U.S. Citizen	204(a)(1)(A)(iv)
IB3	Child of IB1	204(a)(1)(A)(iii)
VI5	Parent of U.S. Citizen Who Acquired Permanent Resident Status Under the Virgin Islands Nommigrant Alien Adjustment Act (Pub. L. 97-271).	201(b) & §2 of the Virgin Islands Nonimmigrant Alien Adjustment Act
	Vietnam Immigrants
AM1	Vietnam Amerasian Principal	584(b)(1)(A),
AM2	Spouse or Child of AM1	584(b)(1)(B), and
AM3	Natural Mother of Unmarried AM1 (Spouse or Child of Such Mother) or Person Who has Acted in Effect as the Mother, Father, or Next-of-Kin of Unmarried AM1 (and Spouse or Child of Such Person)	584(b)(1)(C) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1988 (As contained in §101(e) of P.L. 100-202) as amended)
	Special Immigrants
SB1	Returning Resident	101(a)(27)(A)
SC1	Person Who Lost U.S. Citizenship by Marriage	101(a)(27)(B) &324(a)
SC2	Person Who Lost U.S. Citizenship by Serving in Foreign Armed Forces	101(a)(27)(B) & 327
	FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES Family 1st Preference
F11	Unmarried Son or Daughter of U.S. Citizen	203(a)(1)
F12	Child of F11	203(d)
B11	Self-petition Unmarried Son or Daughter of U.S. Citizen	204(a)(1)(A)(iv) &203(a)(1)
B12	Child of B11	203(d)
	Family 2nd Preference (Subject To Country Limitations)
F21	Spouse of Alien Resident	203(a)(2)(A)
F22	Child of Alien Resident	203(a)(2)(A)
F23	Child of F21 or F22	203(d)
F24	Unmarried Son or Daughter of Alien Resident	203(a)(2)(B)
F25	Child of F24	203(d)
C21	Spouse of Alien Resident (Conditional)	203(a)(2)(A) & 216
C22	Child of Alien Resident (Conditional)	203(a)(2)(A) & 216
C23	Child of C21 or C22 (Conditional)	203(d) & 216
C24	Unmarried Son or Daughter of Alien Resident (Conditional)	203(a)(2)(B) & 216
C25	Child of F24 (Conditional)	203(d) & 216
B21	Self-petition Spouse of Lawful Permanent Resident	204(a)(1)(B)(ii)
B22	Self-petition Child of Lawful Permanent Resident	204(a)(1)(B)(iii)
B23	Child of B21 or B22	204(a)(1)(B)(ii)
B24	Self-petition Unmarried Son or Daughter of Lawful Permanent Resident	204(a)(1)(B)(iii)
B25	Child of B24	203(d)

	Family 2nd Preference (Exempt From Country Limitations)
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
FX1	Spouse of Alien Resident	202(a)(4)(A) & 203(a)(2)(A)
FX2	Child of Alien Resident	202(a)(4)(A) & 203(a)(2)(A)
FX3	Child of FX1 and FX2	202(a)(4)(A) & 203(d)
CX1	Spouse of Alien Resident (Conditional)	202(a)(4)(A) , 203(a)(2)(A) & 216
CX2	Child of Alien Resident (Conditional)	202(a)(4)(A) , 203(a)(2)(A) & 216
CX3	Child of CX1 & CX2 (Conditional)	202(a)(4)(A) & 203(d)& 216
BX1	Self-petition Spouse of Lawful Permanent Resident	204(a)(1)(B)(ii)
BX2	Self-petition Child of Lawful Permanent Resident	204(a)(1)(B)(iii)
BX3	Child of BX1 or BX2	203(d)

	Family 3rd Preference
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
F31	Married Son or Daughter of U.S. Citizen	203(a)(3)
F32	Spouse of F31	203(d)
F33	Child of F31	203(d)
C31	Married Son or Daughter of U.S. Citizen (Conditional)	203(a)(3) & 216
C32	Spouse of C31 (Conditional)	203(d) & 216
C33	Child of C31 (Conditional)	203(d) & 216
B31	Self-petition Married Son or Daughter of U.S. Citizen	204(a)(1)(A)(iv) &203(a)(3)
B32	Spouse of B31	203(d)
B33	Child of B31	203(d)

	Family 4th Preference
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
F41	Brother or Sister of U.S. Citizen	203(a)(4)
F42	Spouse of F41	203(d)
F43	Child of F41	203(d)

	EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCES Employment 1st Preference (Priority Workers)
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
E11	Alien with Extraordinary Ability	203(b)(1)(A)
E12	Outstanding Professor or Researcher	203(b)(1)(B)
E13	Multinational Executive or Manager	203(b)(1)(C)
E14	Spouse of E11, E12, or E13	203(d)
E15	Child of E11, E12, or E13	203(d)

	Employment 2nd Preference (Professionals Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability)
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
E21	Professional Holding Advanced Degree or of Exceptional Ability	203(b)(2)
E22	Spouse of E21	203(d)
E23	Child of E21	203(d)

	Employment 3rd Preference (Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
E31	Skilled Worker	203(b)(3)(A)(i)
E32	Professional Holding Baccalaureate Degree	203(b)(3)(A)(ii)
E34	Spouse of E31 or E32	203(d)
E35	Child of E31 or E32	203(d)
EW3	Other Worker (Subgroup Numerical Limit)	203(b)(3)(A)(iii)
EW4	Spouse of EW3	203(d)
EW5	Child of EW3	203(d)

	Employment 4th Preference (Certain Special Immigrants)
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
BC1	Broadcaster in the U.S. employed by the International Broadcasting Burueau of the Broadcasting Board of Governors or a grantee of such organization	101(a)(27)(M)
BC2	Accompanying spouse of a BC1	101(a)(27)(M)
BC3	Accompanying child of a BC1	101(a)(27)(M)
SD1	Minister of Religion	101(a)(27)(C) &203(b)(4)
SD2	Spouse of SD1	101(a)(27)(C) &203(b)(4)
SD3	Child of SD1	101(a)(27)(C) &203(b)(4)
SE1	Certain Employees or Former Employees of the U.S. Government Abroad	101(a)(27)(D)
SE2	Spouse of SE1	101(a)(27)(D)
SE3	Child of SE1	101(a)(27)(D)
SEH	Employee of the U.S. Mission in Hong Kong or Immediate Family	101(a)(27)(D)Section 152 of the Immigration Act of 1990
SF1	Certain Former Employees of the Panama Canal Company or Canal Zone Government	101(a)(27) (E)
SF2	Spouse or Child of SF1	101(a)(27) (E)
SG1	Certain Former Employees of the U.S. Government in the Panama Canal Zone	101(a)(27)(F)
SG2	Spouse or Child of SG1	101(a)(27)(F)
SH1	Certain Former Employees of the Panama Canal Company or Canal Zone Government on April 1,1979	101(a)(27)(G)
SH2	Spouse or Child of SH1	101(a)(27)(G)
SJ1	Certain Foreign Medical Graduates (Adjustments Only)	101(a)(27)(H)
SJ2	Accompanying Spouse or Child of SJ1	101(a)(27)(H)
SK1	Certain Retired International Organization Employees	101(a)(27)(I)(iii)
SK2	Spouse of SK1	101(a)(27)(I)(iv)
SK3	Certain Unmarried Son or Daughter of International Organization Employee	101(a)(27)(I)(i)
SK4	Certain Surviving Spouses of Deceased International Organization Employee	101(a)(27)(I)(ii)
SL1	Juvenile Court Dependent	101(a)(27)(J)
SM1	Alien Recruited Outside the United States Who Has Served or is Enlisted to Serve in the U.S. Armed Forces for 12 Years (Became Eligible After the Date of Enactment)	101(a)(27)(K)
SM2	Spouse of SM1	101(a)(27)(K)
SM3	Child of SM1	101(a)(27)(K)
SM4	Alien Recruited Outside the United States Who Has Served or is Enlisted to Serve in the U.S. Armed Forces for 12 Years (Became Eligible As of the Date of Enactment)	101(a)(27)(K)
SM5	Spouse or Child of SM4	101(a)(27)(K)
SN1	Certain retired NATO 6 civilians	101(a)(27)(L)
SN2	Spouse of an immigrant classified SN1	101(a)(27)(L)
SN3	Certain unmarried sons or daughters of NATO 6 civilian employees.	101(a)(27)(L)
SN4	Certain surviving spouses of deceased NATO-6 civilian employees.	101(a)(27)(L)
SR1	Certain Religious Workers	101(a)(27)(C)(ii) (II)&(III)
SR2	Spouse of SR1	101(a)(27)(C)(ii) (II)&(III)
SR3	Child of SR1	101(a)(27)(C)(ii) (II)&(III)

	Employment 5th Preference (Employment Creation) (Conditional Status)
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
C51	Employment Creation OUTSIDE Targeted Area	203(b)(5)(A)
C52	Spouse of C51	203(d)
C53	Child of C51	203(d)
T51	Employment Creation IN Targeted Rural/High Unemployment Area	203(b)(5)(B)
T52	Spouse of T51	203(d)
T53	Child of T51	203(d)
R51	Investor Pilot Program, OUTSIDE Targeted Area	203(b)(5) & §610 of the
R52	Spouse of R51	Departments of Commerce, Justice, R53 Child of R51 & State, the Judiciary & Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1993 (P.L. 102-395)
I51	Investor Pilot Program IN Targeted Area
I52	Spouse of I51
I53	Child of I51

	OTHER NUMERICALLY LIMITED CATEGORIES Diversity Immigrants (Beginning in FY 1995)
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
DV1	Diversity Immigrant	203(c)
DV2	Spouse of DV1	203(c)
DV3	Child of DV1	203(c)

	Transition for Employees of Certain U.S. Businesses in Hong Kong (Fiscal Years 1991-1993)*
Symbol	Class	Section of Law
HK1	Employee of U.S. Business in Hong Kong	§124 of the Immigration Act of 1990
HK2	Spouse of HK1	§124 of the Immigration Actof 1990
HK3	Child of HK1	§124 of the Immigration Actof 1990

USCIS Quickly Changes Course When ABC News Gets Involved

Chris Gafner — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 11:03:14 +0000

A couple nights ago ABC News ran a report about how the creator of CruiseWise.com was denied a visa even though his company had been named one of the “20 Hot Silicon Valley Startups You Need to Watch,” and had hired nine Americans (and expected to hire many more in the near future).

The reason for the denial didn’t seem logical and the report emphasized the negative consequences of the denial.

To the credit of USCIS, within 24 hours of the report airing, the visa petition was reopened and approved. It is commendable that USCIS took such swift action to correct the situation – but I wonder how many similar cases exist in the system? Not everyone can get a national news report highlighting the benefits that a company will have on the United States. What is USCIS doing to ensure its policies are being implemented universally? What will it do in the future?

DOL Updates Foreign Labor Certification’s Online Wage Library

Chris Gafner — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 12:16:04 +0000

The Department of Labor (DOL) has updated it’s Foreign Labor Certification Data Center’s Online Wage Library. The Online Wage Library is used in many employment-based immigration cases, including the H-1b visa. The wage library provides average salaries for workers throughout the country, and is broken down by metropolitan area, employment position, and experience . If you are seeking an employment-based visa, please contact an business immigration lawyer to discuss your case.

It is updated annually.

Permanent Residency Worker Petitions Filed at New Address

Chris Gafner — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:11:42 +0000

The USCIS has recently announced that all I-140 permanent residency petitions that are not premium processed will need to be submitted to the USCIS’s Dallas Lockbox. The I-140 petition is used for immigrants who seek to gain permanent residency through employment, including EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 visa applicants.

The new address is:

USCIS Dallas Lockbox

For U.S. Postal Service (USPS) deliveries:

USCIS
P.O. Box 660867
Dallas, TX 75266

For Express mail and courier deliveries:

USCIS
Attn: AOS
2501 S. State Highway 121
Business
Suite 400
Lewisville, TX 75067

Attracting the Best and Brightest – An Immigration Article Published By Chris Gafner

Chris Gafner — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 11:09:51 +0000

Immigration attorney Chris Gafner has published an immigration law article entitled Attracting the Best and Brightest: A Critique Of The Current Immigration System. Published in the Fordham Urban Law Journal,the article provides an in-depth analysis of the current U.S. immigration system for attracting the best and brightest immigrants to the United States. The article also examines the increasingly competitive international competition for these highly talented immigrants and suggests how the United States can better compete.

The United States has long been a leading destination for the most highly talented immigrants in the world. However, as the article highlights, the world has become highly competitive and many other countries are now competing to attract these highly-skilled immigrants. Compared to its competitors, the US immigration system for highly skilled workers is antiquated and unnecessarily subjective.

The United States possesses three main visa categories for the best and brightest immigrants.

The EB 1-A visa (also referred to as the EB 1-1 visa), is the most enticing visa the United States has to attract talented individuals to the United States. This visa allows foreign nationals to enter the United States and obtain permanent residency based upon having extraordinary abilities in a field that benefits the United States.

The EB 1-B visa (also referred to as the EB 1-2 visa) allows outstanding professors and researchers to enter the United States and gain permanent residency. To qualify, a foreign national must not only an outstanding professor or researcher, but also must be sponsored by a qualifying institution.

The National Interest Waiver (a.k.a. NIW) allows for talented immigrants to come to the United States and obtain permanent residency based upon the immigrant’s ability to provide a significant contribution to the United States’ national interest.

The article provides in-depth analysis of how the qualifications for these visas has changed over time.

The article was co-authored by Adjunct Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr of Cornell University.

List of Political and Business Leaders Seeking Immigration Reform Keeps Growing

Chris Gafner — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:19:12 +0000

Comprehensive Immigration Reform at the Federal Level seems to be stalled. Neither party has seriously pushed for comprehensive immigration reform in many years. What little debate about immigration that there is focuses on one tiny part of the immigration system.

Out of this void at the Federal level, many local politicians and business leaders have become more vocal about the economic need to fix the immigration system immediately. These leaders realize that a functioning immigration system is necessary to ensure the continued competitiveness of the United States on the economic world stage. These leaders have started the Partnership For a New American Economy. The partnership is bipartisan and has the sole purpose of “highlight[ing] the significant economic benefits associated with sensible immigration reform.”

The list of leaders is already rather extensive and includes:

Steven A. Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft Corporation

Robert Iger, President and CEO, Walt Disney Co.

J.W. Marriott, Jr., Chairman and CEO of Marriott International, Inc.

Jim McNerney, Chairman, President and CEO of Boeing

Rupert Murdoch, Chairman, CEO and Founder of News Corporation

Mayor Julián Castro of San Antonio

Mayor Phil Gordon of Phoenix

Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles.

Lee S. Ainslie, III, Managing Partner, Maverick Capital

Gerard J. Arpey, Chairman and CEO, American Airlines

David Barger, President & CEO, JetBlue Airways Corporation

Candace K. Beinecke, Chair, Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP

Frank A. Bennack, Jr., Chief Executive Officer, Hearst Corporation

Jeffrey L. Bewkes, Chairman & CEO, Time Warner Inc.

Lloyd C. Blankfein, Chairman & CEO, Goldman Sachs & Co.

Kathy Bloomgarden, Co-Chief Executive Officer, Ruder Finn, Inc.

Glenn A. Britt, Chairman, President & CEO, Time Warner Cable Inc.

Kevin Burke, Chairman, President & CEO, Con Edison

Michael A. Carpenter, Chief Executive Officer, Ally Financial Inc.

Russell L. Carson, Co-Founder and General Partner, Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe

Evan R. Chesler, Presiding Partner, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP

H. Rodgin Cohen, Senior Chairman, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

Cristóbal I. Conde, President & CEO, SunGard

Roger W. Crandall, President & CEO, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company

Stephen J. Dannhauser, Chairman, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

Philippe P. Dauman, President and CEO, Viacom Inc.

Todd C. DeGarmo, Chief Executive Officer, Studios Architecture

Barry Diller, Chairman & Senior Executive, IAC

James Dimon, Chairman & CEO, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Douglas A. Donahue, Managing Partner, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.

Brian Duperreault, President & CEO, Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

Richard W. Edelman, President & CEO, Edelman

Brad Feld, Managing Director, Foundry Group

Laurence D. Fink, Chairman & CEO, BlackRock, Inc.

Alan H. Fishman, Chairman, Ladder Capital Finance LLC

Paul Fribourg, Chairman & CEO, Continental Grain Company

Mark T. Gallogly, Managing Partner, Centerbridge Partners

William F. Glavin Jr., Chief Executive Officer, OppenheimerFunds, Inc.

Thomas Glocer, Chief Executive Officer, Thomson Reuters

Barry M. Gosin, Chief Executive Officer, Newmark Knight Frank

Robert Greifeld, Chief Executive Officer, The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.

Susan L. Hayes, President & CEO, Cauldwell Wingate Company

H. Dale Hemmerdinger, President, Atco Properties & Management, Inc.

C. Robert Henrikson, Chairman, President & CEO, MetLife, Inc.

Glenn H. Hutchins, Co-CEO, Silver Lake
Mel M. Immergut, Chairman, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
Brad S. Karp, Chair, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Charles R. Kaye, Co-President, Warburg Pincus LLC
Robert P. Kelly, Chairman & CEO, BNY Mellon
David P. Kirchhoff, President & CEO, Weight Watchers International, Inc.
Klaus Kleinfeld, Chairman & CEO, Alcoa Inc.
William P. Lauder, Executive Chairman, The Estée Lauder Companies, Inc.
Paul A. Laudicina, Managing Officer & Chairman of the Board, A.T. Kearney, Inc.
Rochelle B. Lazarus, Chairman, Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide
Richard S. LeFrak, Chairman & CEO, The LeFrak Organization
Don G. Lents, Chair, Bryan Cave LLP
Martin Lipton, Senior Partner, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Leonard Litwin, President, Glenwood Management Corp.
Terry J. Lundgren, Chairman, President & CEO, Macy’s, Inc.
Peter L. Malkin, Senior Partner & Chairman, Malkin Holdings, LLC
Donald B. Marron, Chairman & CEO, Lightyear Capital
Theodore Mathas, Chairman, President & CEO, New York Life Insurance Company
William L. McComb, Chief Executive Officer, Liz Claiborne Inc.
Raymond W. McDaniel, Jr., Chairman & CEO, Moody’s Investors Service
Harold McGraw, III, Chairman, President & CEO, The McGraw-Hill Companies
John F. Megrue Jr., Chief Executive Officer, U.S., Apax Partners, L.P.
Edward J. Minskoff, President, Edward J. Minskoff Equities, Inc.
Mitchell Modell, Chief Executive Officer, Modell’s Sporting Goods
Kenneth D. Moelis, Chief Executive Officer, Moelis & Company
Surya N. Mohapatra, Chairman & CEO, Quest Diagnostics
Thomas J. Moran, Chairman, President & CEO, Mutual of America Life Insurance Company
Robert E. Moritz, Chairman & Senior Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP
Duncan L. Niederauer, Chief Executive Officer, NYSE Euronext
Vikram S. Pandit, Chief Executive Officer, Citigroup Inc.
Richard D. Parsons, Chairman, Citigroup and Senior Advisor, Providence Equity Partners
Michael Patsalos-Fox, Chairman, The Americas, McKinsey & Company, Inc.
John Paulson, President, Paulson & Co., Inc.
James D. Robinson, III, Co-Founder & General Partner, RRE Ventures
Stephen M. Ross, Chairman & CEO, The Related Companies, L.P.
Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Chairman & CEO, WL Ross & Co. LLC
Michael I. Roth, Chairman & CEO, Interpublic Group
Steven Roth, Chairman, Vornado Realty Trust
William C. Rudin, CEO and Vice Chairman, Rudin Management Company, Inc.
Kevin P. Ryan, Chairman & Founder, Gilt Groupe
Stephen A. Schwarzman, Chairman, CEO & Co-Founder, The Blackstone Group
Dominick M. Servedio, Chairman & CEO, STV Inc.
Joseph C. Shenker, Chairman, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Peter Stringham, Chairman & CEO, Young & Rubicam
James S. Tisch, President & CEO, Loews Corporation
Edward D. Turen, Chairman and CEO, Control Equity Group
John B. Veihmeyer, Chairman & CEO, KPMG LLP
Rohan Weerasinghe, Senior Partner, Shearman & Sterling
Charles Weinstein, Chief Executive Officer, EisnerAmper LLP
Fred Wilson, Co-Founder, Union Square Ventures
Tim Zagat, CEO & Co-Chair, Zagat Survey LLC
Strauss Zelnick, Chief Executive Officer, ZelnickMedia Corporation

If you would like to join these leaders in advocating sensible immigration reform, please join the Partnership For a New American Economy.

USCIS Stops Accepting Concurrent Religious Visa Applications and Adjustment of Status Applications

Chris Gafner — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:46:23 +0000

The USCIS has announced that it will no longer accept the concurrent filing of permanent residency religious visas (“EB-4 Visa” ) with an application for adjustment of status. Since 2009, the USCIS has allowed immigrants applying for the EB-4 visa to file a concurrent adjustment of status application along with a request for employment authorization (I-765) and advanced parole (I-131).

The concurrent filing of these applications allowed an immigrant to become a lawful permanent resident faster and granted the applicant the ability to work while waiting for the permanent residency application to be approved.

With this decision, the EB-4 joins the EB-5 investor immigrant as the two employment-based permanent residency applications that do not allow concurrent filing. EB-1, EB-2 and EB-3 immigra nt applications do allow for current filing.

9th Circuit Rebuffs USCIS Adjudication of EB-1 Extraordinary Abilities Petitions

Chris Gafner — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:40:39 +0000

Last week, the 9th Circuit came down with a ruling that should have a great impact on how the USCIS adjudicates EB-1-1 Extraordinary Abilities petitions. The EB 1-1 (also known as EB 1-a) is used by highly successful foreign nationals to gain lawful permanent residency in the United States. The EB 1-1 visa requires an applicant to demonstrate that they have meet three of the requirements set out in the regulations.

Increasingly, however, the USCIS service centers have been adding additional requirements to EB 1-1 applicants. The added requirements have had no foundation in the law and have hindered well credentialed foreign nationals from obtaining permanent residency. The 9th Circuit’s decision rebuffs the added requirements and clearly stated that the USCIS can only decide EB 1-1 decisions based upon the requirements stated in the regulations.

With the 9th Circuit’s decision, the process for obtaining EB 1-1 immigrant visas should be less difficult and certainly more transparent.

New I-485 Form and Location Effective March 29

Chris Gafner — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 11:27:53 +0000

The USCIS has recently announced that a new I-485 form has been published and that all new applicants will need to use the form beginning before March 29. Additionally, the USCIS has announced a change in the location that I-485s are filed. The change in location is meant to facilitate a quicker means by which attorneys and applicants can follow their applications.

Form I-485 is used by foreign nationals who possess (or are applying for) immigrant visas using form I-130 or form I-140. The I-485 allows for foreign nationals to adjust status to lawful permanent residency.

H-1B Numbers Closing In On Annual Cap

Chris Gafner — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:01:47 +0000

H-1B Numbers Closing In On Annual Cap

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has announced that H-1B filings for the fiscal year are increasing and that only a tad over 10,000 H-1B visa slots remain available for the current fiscal year. The annual cap is 65,000 for normal H-1B visas. H-1B visa filings had remained steady at around 40,000 to 45,000 – however, over the last few months the numbers have increased. Those thinking of utilizing the h-1b visa should take notice and ensure they file soon.