Integrity Legal

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is taking steps to encourage entrepreneurial immigration to the United States of America. In order to provide further insight it is necessary to quote directly from the official website of the DHS, DHS.gov:

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…

The administration of this web log asks readers to click upon the relevant hyperlinks above in order to read this article in detail.

In previous postings on this blog it has been noted that travel documents such as the EB-5 visa can be a satisfactory tool for those wishing to travel to the United States for the purposes of investing and residence. It should be noted that there are other employment based visa categories such as the EB-2 visa, the EB-3 visa, the EB-1 visa, and the EB-4 visa which may be used by individuals who find themselves in differing factual circumstances. Meanwhile, visas such as the L-1 visa and the E-2 visa are often used by non-immigrants who wish to travel to the United States of America for the purpose of either undertaking specialized employment or investing in a small business therein. That stated, those seeking immigration benefits are well advised to contact an American immigration lawyer since issues associated with American immigration can be legally complex and the process can sometimes prove cumbersome for those unaccustomed to dealing with matters pending before various agencies within the American federal bureaucracy.

In news pertaining to the continuing struggle for LGBT Equality, it recently came to this blogger’s attention that an attorney for the United States government has filed a response in a case involving a New York woman suing the government to have her same sex marriage recognized. To quote directly from a posting by Mark Hamblett for the New York Law Journal on the website Law.com:

Congress has fired back in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act’s definition of marriage as between one man and one woman. In a motion to dismiss in the Southern District, former solicitor general Paul D. Clement and his legal team argue that the act, 1 U.S.C. §7, is entitled to a presumption of constitutionality, and that U.S. Supreme Court precedent holds that an exclusively heterosexual definition of marriage does not offend the equal protection clause. The motion came in Windsor v. United States, 10-cv-8435, which was brought by Edith Schlain Windsor…In his papers yesterday, Mr. Clement said that rational basis review, not heightened scrutiny, is the appropriate standard in judging the constitutionality of the statute and §3 “easily” passes that less exacting standard. In support of that view, he argues that DOMA does not infringe on the fundamental right to marriage, that “same-sex marriage is not a fundamental right” and that “DOMA implicates federal benefits, not the right of same-sex couples to marry.” Under the rational basis test, Mr. Clement said, Congress could have acted rationally “in the face of the unknown consequences of a proposed novel redefinition of the foundational social institution,” and it could have acted rationally to “protect the public fisc” in the balance it strikes in allocating federal burdens and benefits, and providing “consistency in eligibility for federal benefits based on marital status.” Congress also could have acted rationally “to avoid creating a social understanding that begetting and rearing children is not inextricably bound up with marriage” and to “foster marriages that provide children with parents of both sexes.”

This blogger recommends that readers click upon the hyperlinks above to read this article in detail as it is very enlightening about this case and the issues associated therewith.

The case noted above is interesting insofar as the underlying same sex marriage appears to have been legalized in Canada as opposed to another United States jurisdiction. How this fact will color a final adjudication remains to be seen, but it could have an adverse impact upon the outcome of the case as Full Faith and Credit issues pursuant to the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution may not be relevant under the circumstances. Frequent readers may recall that in an immigration context the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” precludes immigration benefits such as the K-1 visa, the CR-1 visa, or the IR-1 visa from same sex bi-national couples even if they have been married in an American jurisdiction which legalizes and/or solemnizes same sex marriages. Legislation such as Representative Jerrold Nadler‘s Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) and the Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA) would ameliorate this discrimination, but such legislation has yet to see enactment.

For information related to legal services in Southeast Asia please see: Legal.

Tags: 1 U.S.C. §7, CR-1 Visa, CR1 Visa, Defense of Marriage Act, E 2 Visa, EB-1 visa, EB-2 Visa, EB-3 Visa, EB-4 visa, EB-5 Visa, equal protection clause, exceptional ability, foreign entrepreneurial talent, former solicitor general Paul D. Clement, Full Faith and Credit, Full Faith and Credit Clause, heterosexual definition of marriage, IR-1 Visa, IR1 Visa, K-1 Visa, K1 Visa, L-1 visa, LGBT Equality, Representative Jerrold Nadler, Respect for Marriage Act, RFMA, Same Sex Bi-National Couples, Same Sex Marriage, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, Startup America, startup companies, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Supreme Court, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, USCIS, USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas, Windsor v. United States
Posted in Department of Homeland Security, E2 Visa, EB-1 Visa, EB-2 Visa, EB-3 Visa, EB-4 Visa, EB5 Visa, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K2 Visa, K2 Visa Thailand, L1 Visa, same sex visa | No Comments »

In a previous posting on this blog the discussion centered upon the EB-3 visa. To remain on a similar topic, the Employment Based visa preference category 4 is another type of travel document which is somewhat similar to other employment based visas although some of the criteria are different. To quote directly from the official website of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), USCIS.gov:

Employment-Based Immigration: Fourth Preference EB-4

You may be eligible for an employment-based, fourth preference visa if you are a special immigrant. The following special immigrants are eligible for the fourth preference visa:

• Religious Workers
• Broadcasters
• Iraqi/Afghan Translators
• Iraqis Who Have Assisted the United States
• International Organization Employees
• Physicians
• Armed Forces Members
• Panama Canal Zone Employees
• Retired NATO-6 employees
• Spouses and Children of Deceased NATO-6 employees

Petitioning for an Employment-Based Fourth Preference Immigrant

To petition for an employment-based fourth preference immigrant, your employer must file a Form I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant. However, there are certain situations where you, the employee, may self-petition on your own behalf. Please review the form instructions to see if you are eligible to self petition and what required supporting evidence needs to be included.

Readers are asked to remember that the above citation is not a satisfactory substitute for a full analysis of issues associated with the EB-4 visa especially as each individual immigration case is adjudicated pursuant to the unique factual circumstances present in the given situation.

This blogger has found that some of those who research this area confuse the EB-4 visa with the E-1 visa or the E-2 visa. In some cases, this category gets confused with the EB-5 visa. Regardless, the EB-4 visa is a stand alone visa category which provides the benefit of lawful permanent residence to the bearer upon lawful admission to the United States of America. Clearly, the criteria for EB-4 visa issuance are less stringent than, say, the EB-1 visa; but this visa category is still heavily scrutinized by adjudicators and for this reason prospective EB-4 visa seekers should be prepared to undergo such an adjudication by USCIS.

Concurrently, it should also be noted that those foreign nationals seeking an EB-4 visa abroad are likely required to undergo Consular Processing at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad in order to ultimately hope to receive a visa. Consular Officers at US Missions abroad are tasked with the responsibility of adjudicating visa applications for those foreign nationals wishing to travel to the United States of America.

For related information please see: US Visa Thailand.

Tags: Afghan Translators, Amerasian, American Consulate, American Embassy, Armed Forces Members, Broadcasters, Consular Processing, EB-1 visa, EB-2 Visa, EB-3 Visa, EB-4 visa, EB1 visa, EB2 Visa, EB3 Visa, EB4 visa, Employment Based visa preference category 4, Employment-Based Immigration: Fourth Preference EB-4, I-360, International Organization Employees, Iraqi Translators, Iraqis Who Have Assisted the United States, Panama Canal Zone Employees, Physicians, Religious Workers, Retired NATO-6 employees, Special Immigrant, Spouses and Children of Deceased NATO-6 employees, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, US Consulate, US Embassy, USCIS, Widower
Posted in EB-4 Visa | No Comments »

In a previous posting this blogger discussed issues associated with the EB-2 visa. On the same note, the following posting is a brief discussion of the Employment Based visa in the preference category 3. Readers should take note of the fact that Employment Based visa categories, classified as EB, are substantially different from the E-1 visa and the E-2 visa which are Treaty Trader and Treaty Investor visas, respectively, and somewhat dissimilar from employment based visas.  To quote directly from the official USCIS website, USCIS.gov:

The administration of this web log strongly encourages readers to keep in mind that the chart above is not an exhaustive explanation of the criteria associated with EB-3 visa issuance, but should merely be viewed as a brief overview of eligibility criteria for those thinking about petitioning for EB-3 visa benefits. The criteria for EB-3 visa issuance differ from the EB-1 visa and EB-2 visa criteria by some degree especially in the case of the EB-1 visa as that visa category is generally reserved for extraordinary recipients.

Those pondering petitioning for United States immigration benefits such as the EB-3 visa should bear in mind that the petition adjudication process is not necessarily the only phase of what could be a longer overall process if the proposed beneficiary resides outside of the United States and therefore must submit a US visa application and undergo Consular Processing at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad.

For related information please see: American Embassy.

Tags: American Consulate, American Embassy, Consular Processing, E 2 Visa, E-1 Visa, EB-1 visa, EB-2 Visa, EB-3 Visa, EB1 visa, EB2 Visa, EB3 Visa, Employment-Based Immigration: Third Preference EB-3, Labor certification, Other Workers, Professionals, Skilled Workers, Treaty Investor, Treaty Trader, U.S. baccalaureate degree, Unskilled Workers, US Consulate, US Embassy
Posted in EB-3 Visa | No Comments »

There are many different visa categories statutorily designed for those wishing to work and/or invest in the United States of America. The very plethora of visa categories can make researching immigration issues somewhat confusing for the layman. One visa category that relatively few prospective visa seekers seem to understand is the Employment Based First Preference Visa Category, or to put it more succinctly: the EB-1 visa. The eligibility criteria for this visa category are somewhat stringent compared to other visa categories. To elucidate this fact it may be best to quote directly from and eligibility chart found by this blogger on the official website of United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) at USCIS.gov:

Readers should be aware that the above citation is not intended to be utilized as an exhaustive tool for determining EB-1 visa eligibility, but the chart above does shed light upon some of the overall eligibility criteria which will likely be scrutinized during adjudication of a petition.

There are many factors which must be taken into consideration during the adjudication of an Employment Based visa petition. Frequent readers of this blog may recall that there is another visa category classified as EB that is sometimes discussed within these pages. That specific visa is the EB-5 visa which was designed for prospective immigrants wishing to come to the United States to make a substantial investment in the American economy. In the case of the EB-1 visa, the prospective visa holder would be asked to make an investment of sorts in that their extraordinary abilities would be invested in the United States as a likely consequence of issuance of a United States travel document which grants lawful permanent residence to the bearer upon lawful admission to the US by officers of the United States Customs and Border Protection Service (USCBP).

Readers should be aware that often USCIS adjudication is not the only phase of the EB visa process as Consular Processing at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad may also be required depending upon the unique circumstances of a given case.

For Information Related To Family Based Visa Petitions Please See: US Visa Thailand.

Tags: American Consulate, American Embassy, Consular Processing, EB-1 visa, EB-5 Visa, EB1 visa, EB5 Visa, Employment Based First Preference Visa Category, Employment Visa USA, Employment-Based Immigration: First Preference EB-1, Green Card, Lawful Permanent Residence, Lawful Permanent Resident, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, United States Customs and Border Protection, US Consulate, US Embassy, US Employment Based Visa, USA Employment Visa, USCBP, USCIS
Posted in EB-1 Visa, EB5 Visa, USCIS | No Comments »

In some cases, it may be necessary to file a lawsuit against the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). These instances are viewed as aberrations by most US Immigration lawyers because, for the most part, USCIS follows the statutory scheme set out by the United States Congress. In some case, a Petitioner or Beneficiary must seek to have an agency compelled to perform a function that is required pursuant to their duties in office. In cases such as this, a writ of mandamus may be the proper remedy. However, when USCIS acts outside of the rules, it may be necessary for a petitioner or beneficiary to take legal action in the form of a lawsuit in order to remedy an injustice.

Recently, the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard a case involving the adjudication of a petitioner for an EB-1 visa. To quote a recently promulgated email from the Immigration Policy Council:

“Kazarian v. USCIS, involves a theoretical physicist whose employment-based visa was denied because he did not demonstrate ‘the research community’s reactions to his [scholarly] publications’ – an arbitrary requirement with no justification in the law.”

Many people are under the mistaken impression that agencies, such as, but not limited to, USCIS, involved in the United States visa process make make unilateral decisions regarding what will be required of the petitioner and beneficiary in a given case. This is not true as the requirements for petition approval are based upon the relevant law. No agency, be it USCIS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), nor Customs and Border Protection (CBP) may unilaterally create requirements that do not exist under US law.  This point was driven home in the case itself when the court was quoted as saying that:

“neither USCIS nor an [Administrative Appeals Office] may unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements beyond those set forth [in the regulations].”

This case marks a positive step in the right direction away from governmental capriciousness. In an interesting comment about this case Mr. Benjamin Johnson, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council stated:

“Immigration law is complicated enough without the immigration agency imposing additional requirements and burdens of proof that aren’t in the statute or regulations and that ultimately undermine the goal of attracting the best and brightest to our shores.”

United States Immigration is a complex and often confusing area of the law. For more information on American visas, specifically those obtained in the Kingdom of Thailand, please see: US Visa Thailand.

Tags: American Visa, American Visa Thailand, EB-1 visa, Kazarian v. USCIS, US Immigration Lawyers, US Visa, US Visa Thailand, USCIS
Posted in General Legal Information, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »