Categories
Updates

USCIS Publishes Draft of EB-5 Changes for Public Comment

Share this:

USCIS, in an effort to improve the EB-5 Immigrant Investor program, has
published a draft of changes for public comment. Based on meetings with
internal and external stakeholders regarding the current adjudication
policies and practices, USCIS has taken a series of steps. These steps
include introducing a direct email contact between Regional Center
practitioners and the USCIS adjudication team, introducing an
accelerated process and premium processing for some applicants and
petitioners, using an expert decision board to assist adjudicators in
making final decisions on Regional Center petitions, bringing in
economists to help guide and support USCIS’ adjudication team and hiring
a consulting firm to help reengineer the adjudication process to ensure
a more efficient system.

USCIS states that additional reforms are planned in the future. In
addition, USCIS plans to consolidate various EB-5 changes into a single
overarching policy statement that will bring together constructive
stakeholder input into a single statement.

Categories
Global Pinoy

Revisiting Veterans’ Immigrant Petitions and Claims for Compensation

Share this:

Manong Eddie was carrying a very old picture of himself smiling with his comrades in the U.S. Army. According to him, he was a member of the Commonwealth Army of the Philippines under the Armed Forces of the United States during World War II. He has in his possession all his records of discharge and his enlistment record from the Philippine Army. He, however, lacks the certification from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) and therefore was unjustly denied his equity compensation as a U.S. veteran by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

A federal budget of $198 million was allocated for the Veterans Equity Compensation passed in 2009. Two years after the enactment of this legislation granting $15,000 or $9,000 to qualified veterans, a total of $221 million has already been paid to more than 18,000 Filipino veterans. Interesting to note is that, according to the data released by the Center for Minority Veterans, as of October 2011, there were 24,000 veterans who were denied their claims.

In addition to the $198 million that was allocated for the veterans equity compensation fund in 2009, a supplemental $67 million was added last year to this fund. This means that there is still a total of more or less $44 million funds to be disbursed to veterans who still have pending applications with the VEC.

Major Cause of Denial

The major cause for the denial of applications is the lack of status as a U.S. veteran despite proof of military service with the U.S. army. The criterion that is being used by the Veterans Affairs is the list of veterans kept by the National Personnel Record Center at St. Louis, Missouri. This is often referred to as the “Missouri list”. According to decisions denying claims of well-deserved veterans, the verification of  military service in the United States Armed Forces is the sole jurisdiction of the NPRC and that a status as a Philippine veteran does not automatically translate to status as an American veteran. Secondary evidence, including Philippine-generated documents, are not recognized as proof of military service by the Department of Veterans Affairs resulting in denial of thousands of claims for veterans equity compensation.

Reliance solely on the NPRC is unjust. Even the VA admits that the Missouri List is inaccurate due to the fact that the NPRC destroyed approximately 16-18 million Official Military Personnel Files. Among  those destroyed records, were personnel files of veterans who were discharged from November 1, 1912 to January 1, 1960.

The Lawsuit & the Hearing

In San Francisco California, a lawsuit, De Fernandez et al v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs  (CV-10-2468) was filed in 2010 with the U.S. Federal Court.  The plaintiffs in this case question the established criteria of the Veterans Affairs as being arbitrary and capricious. The complaint states that the criteria of relying solely on NPRC establish burdens for qualification that no Filipino veteran could reasonably be expected to overcome. The manner of determining eligibility violates the veterans due process rights.

The De Fernandez case which was filed jointly by Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy and Tancinco Law Offices is still pending. A hearing on November 15, 2011 before Honorable Judge Saundra B. Armstrong will be held on the Motion to Dismiss filed by the VA. If the plaintiffs prevail in this case and class certification is granted, those who were denied claims based on the Missouri list will be favorably impacted.

The Family Unity Case

Aside from the denied claims for equity compensation, the aging veterans are also concerned about the immigration petitions filed on behalf of their children. The mortality rate of this veterans generation is high. Based on information released by the Department of Veterans Affairs, approximately 1,153 veterans pass away everyday.  As more veterans die, their immigrant family petition are adversely affected because of the rule that “the petition dies with the petitioner” applies to most of these cases.

Adult children of U.S. citizens,  take more than 15 years to migrate. The reality is that by the time the petitions are ready for processing, most these petitioners/veterans are already deceased.  To address this situation, bills are introduced every year in US Congress for the children of Filipino World War II veterans to be exempt from the numerical limit set by the law making their children’s petitions’ priority dates all current. This year, Representative Mike Honda of San Jose, California introduced HR 1796  “Reuniting Families Act” on May 6, 2011.

If this bill is passed into law, all children of Filipino veterans whose petitions are still pending may be immediately processed for immigrant visas. Whether this law is going to pass, however, remains to be seen.
Every year during the month of November, America honors and recognizes the contributions of the war veterans. Each generation of war veterans from World War II to the current Afghanistan war are facing challenges with the VA as regards their claim to benefits. The economic crisis may have affected the budget of almost all federal agencies which is translating to more denial of claims. But whatever it may be, the manner of adjudicating should be more compassionate to these heroes who fought hard to defend our freedom and democracy.

(Tancinco may be reached at law@tancinco.com or at 887 7177 or 721 1963)

Categories
Updates

Latest Updates on FY 2012 H-1B Visa Availability Nov. 2

Share this:

On November 2, 2011, USCIS posted an update regarding the amount of
applications received for standard cap-subject and master’s exemption
H-1B visas for Fiscal Year 2012. According to USCIS, a total of 20,000
H-1B Master’s Exemption visas have been filed, and 50,800 standard cap
visas have been filed. Each fiscal year, a total of 20,000 master’s
exempt H-1B visas are available; up to 65,000 standard cap visas are
available.

USCIS began accepting petitions for H-1B visas for Fiscal Year 2012
(starting on October 1, 2011) on April 1, 2011. Petitions may be filed
no more than six months in advance of the requested start date. Please
note that up to 6,800 visas from the 65,000 cap-subject visas are set
aside each fiscal year for the H-1B1 program.

Categories
Updates

USCIS Introduces New Form for Medical Examinations

Share this:

On November 1, 2011, USCIS introduced a new and more user-friendly
version of Form I-693, the Report of a Medical Examination and
Vaccination Record. USCIS notes that civil surgeons who are completing
medical examinations for foreign nationals between the dates of November
1 and December 31, 2011, should use this new form, which is dated
10/11/11. USCIS will, however, continue to accept the older version of
Form I-693, dated 7/20/10, for examinations completed during this same
time period. After January 1, 2012, only the new version of the form
will be accepted. Medical examinations completed on or after that date
which use an outdated form will be rejected and the applicant will be
required to return to a civil surgeon and resubmit using the correct
form.

Applicants seeking to adjust to lawful permanent resident status are
required by USCIS to submit Form I-693, which reports results of a
medical examination performed by a designated civil surgeon. This
examination confirms that the applicant is admissible to the U.S. on
public health grounds.

Categories
Immigration Round Table

Serious Consequence of Failure to Terminate Prior Marriage

Share this:

Dear Atty. Lou,
 
My spouse and I together with our child came here in the United States as immigrants. We’ve been happily married for years now until a couple of days ago she confessed that long time ago she was previously married in the Philippines to a US immigrant who was in the process of applying for citizenship, the guy’s citizenship and his petition for her was not approved during that time due to insufficiency of time spent living here in the states. Their marriage was entered a couple of years before we met; the arranged marriage was her family’s idea of a quick fix so she can join a family member here in the States. My heart was crushed when I heard this from her; she hid it from me for years. Now this problem has surfaced because the guy is looking for ways to clear his records and to nullify that marriage, as he will be re-applying for citizenship.
 
My spouse and her family never thought about the consequence of her first marriage, they never fixed it before we got married and before she got her visa. She and her parents are naive about civil marriage laws. Now it appears our marriage (her second marriage with me) is not valid or legal at all, I am afraid that this will haunt us when the guy re-applies for citizenship and when its time for us to apply for citizenship. Attorney we still both love each other so much, and we do want to stay here in the States and apply for citizenship someday as this great country has given us hope and opportunities to live a life that we always dream of, please advise us on what options and actions to take.

 “Romeo”

Dear Romeo,

The facts of your case are quite similar to a very recent decision published on October 26, 2011, Alhuay v. US Attorney General, No. 10-15334. In this case, the respondent did not reveal a prior marriage she had in her home country and without terminating this marriage, went ahead and married her second spouse, a lawful permanent resident. According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, despite passage of more than five years from the time the green card is issued, the government is not barred from placing the non-citizen in removal proceedings when fraud or misrepresentation is involved. The misrepresentation here is the wife’s concealment of a prior marriage. The Department of Homeland Security discovered about the misrepresentation when she filed for naturalization. Instead of approving her naturalization application, a notice to appear for deportation was issued by the Department of Homeland Security. Hence, in your case, I suggest that you do not file for citizenship application until all the marriages have been declared null and void and that you have remarried.

A person may not contract marriage without dissolving any prior marriage. If the marriage was entered into without dissolving the first, the second marriage becomes bigamous and void from the beginning. Your marriage to your wife now is considered bigamous.

Your wife should take steps to determine the status of the first marriage. It appears that the first husband is diligently looking for ways to annul their marriage. If that is the case, then your wife should agree to that. You can also have your marriage annulled in the state family courts and when all these declaration of nullity are valid, you may re-marry your wife again.

It is always advisable to be truthful to lifetime partners especially when it comes to filing immigration petitions. No matter how long the prior marriage was entered into or the misrepresentation, it may always come up in any immigration application or petition. To those who are similarly situated, be reminded to avoid misrepresenting a material fact in immigration applications to prevent the trouble of a rescission of green card or being placed in removal proceedings.

Atty. Lou

(Lourdes Santos Tancinco Esq .is a partner at the Tancinco Law Offices, a Professional Law Corp. Her office is located at One Hallidie Plaza, Suite 818, San Francisco CA 94102 and may be reached at 415 397 0808 or at 1 888 930 0808, email at law@tancinco.com. The content provided in this column is solely for informational purposes only and do not create a lawyer-client relationship. It should not be relied as legal advice. This column does not disclose any confidential or classified information acquired in her capacity as legal counsel. Consult with an attorney before deciding on a course of action. You may submit questions to law@tancinco.com).