Categories
Updates

New Fee Schedule for U.S. Passports

Share this:

Fees for the U.S. Passport Book, the U.S. Passport Card and other
passport services will soon change. These fees, which are used to cover
the costs of producing passports and providing emergency services for
U.S. citizens overseas in crisis situations, will be amended starting
July 13, 2010. The new fee schedule will be:

U.S. Passport Book

Adults (First-Time Applicants): Passport Fee – $110; Acceptance Fee – $25
Adults (Renewal): Passport Fee – $110; Acceptance Fee – $0
Minors: Passport Fee – $80; Acceptance Fee – $25

U.S. Passport Card

Adults (First-Time Applicants): Passport Fee – $30; Acceptance Fee – $25
Adults (Renewal): Passport Fee – $30; Acceptance Fee – $0
Minors: Passport Fee – $15; Acceptance Fee – $25

Other Fees

Additional Visa Pages: $82
File Search Fee: $150
Expedited Processing: $60

Categories
Global Pinoy

Maintaining Green Card Status While Outside the US

Share this:

After more than 15 years of waiting for the priority date to become current, Luis was finally issued an immigrant visa with his spouse and minor children. Upon issuance of the visa, Luis traveled to the United States and stayed with his brother while he settles to find his own residence. In the meantime, Luis’ children are all in high school and want to return to Manila to finish their education.  After serious consideration, Luis allowed his spouse and his minor children to return to Manila. He initially stayed in the US to find work to support his family.

After several months Luis realized that it was not easy to find a job. In fact, he personally knows relatives and friends who lost their jobs and their homes. Frustrated with his situation and missing his family, he decided to obtain a “reentry permit” and departed for Manila to resume his employment and attend to their businesses

Luis has no plans to return to the US in the next two years. His spouse, Rhea, is very apprehensive about the status of their green cards if they do not return to the US.

Time Spent Outside the US

Entering the United States for a few weeks and returning to Manila thereafter gives rise to an issue of abandonment of residence. Some green card holders are under the impression that they will be able to maintain their lawful permanent resident status as long as they enter the US “at least once per year”. This may be too simplistic and may carry mistaken beliefs of what actually constitutes abandonment.

A returning resident is one who is returning to the United States from a temporary visit abroad and it the stay abroad was protracted, this is caused by reasons beyond the control of the individual and of which he is not responsible.

What constitutes a temporary stay abroad will actually depend on the circumstances of each case and not necessarily the length of stay spent outside of the United States. The periods of stay abroad are initially points of reference for the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) inspector at the airport but these inspectors are not prevented from inquiring further into the “intention of the green card holder” for purposes of abandonment.

Generally a lawful permanent resident returning to the United States after an absence of six months or less will be treated as if he or she never left the United States. This is the “less than six months” rule.

If returning to the US after six months but less than one year, the green card holder bears the burden of the presumption that he never intended to abandon his residence. He is deemed to be seeking admission.

If the stay abroad has been for more than one year, a re-entry permit or a returning resident immigrant visa is expected to be presented to the CBP inspector at the airport.

No Abandoning Acts

The fact that the “less than six months” rule is generally applies does not necessarily mean that a green card holder should return every six months and leave again to return before the sixth month. If this is the situation, while there will be no admission issues if the absence is less than six months, the pattern of entry and departure becomes a critical factor during the inspection process.  If the CBP inspector, through the database available to him, determines that more time is spent in Manila than in the US, then the question turns into identifying his principal place of abode to validate whether the individual is maintaining his US residency.

Most abandonment findings are a result of green card holder’s committing the “abandoning acts.” Subjective intent to maintain green card status must be supported by objective evidence such as the (1) purpose of trip outside the US; (2) nature of the employment whether it is temporary or indefinite; (3) filing of US taxes as a resident; (4) ties in the US to include house, bank accounts, credit cards state identification card or driver’s license; (5) residence of immediate family members.

If an individual has a protracted stay outside the US and still wants to maintain his green card status, the burden is on him to show that his principal place of abode and his unrelinquished residence is in the US. A re-entry permit may be applied from the USCIS. Preparing documents to prove ties in the US and carrying them during their return to the US is likewise advisable.

Should there be a finding of abandonment at the airport, the CBP inspector may issue a Notice to Appear and put the individual into removal proceedings before an immigration judge. Or in the alternative this individual may be asked by the CBP inspector to sign a Form I-407 abandonment of permanent residency status. If there is no intention to abandon, the individual should not sign this 407 form.

Considering the difficulty of obtaining green cards or US resident status, those who are now afforded the opportunity to live and work in the US should maintain their status as long as possible. While circumstances differ for each individual case, it is important to realize that nothing is permanent in character including the green card. It is either you “use it or lose it.”

(Tancinco may be reached at law@tancinco.com or at (02)887 7177)

Categories
Updates

New H-2A Job Registry: Online Tool Will Help the Public Search Active Agricultural Jobs

Share this:

Starting July 8, U.S. workers and organizations that represent
farmworkers will have a new way to learn about temporary agricultural
positions accepted by the Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC)
through a single online location. The new H-2A Job Registry will
display all active agricultural jobs until half the period of
employment has passed; some positions for certified agricultural jobs
will remain archived for up to 5 years.

The new web tool will provide a single, easily searchable point of
entry for the public to find information about agricultural jobs filed
under the H-2A visa program. The new tool was developed to fully comply
with new H-2A regulations (implemented in March 2010) and is integrated
into the OFLC’s iCERT Visa Portal System, available online at
http://icert.doleta.gov.

Categories
Updates

E-Verify To Require Additional Information from New Employers

Share this:

This week, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a
Privacy Impact Assessment update of the E-Verify program. In the
update, DHS provides an update about additional information that
E-Verify will now require from new employers that register with the
employment eligibility verification system. This new information will
be sent to Dun & Bradstreet, an organization that provides a range
of information about businesses; the information will be compared
against Dun & Bradstreet’s database to ensure that the new employer
is indeed an official enterprise.

New information that will be collected include the following:

1) The employer’s DBA name, if applicable (Doing Business As).

2) The employer’s DUNS number, if available (a Dun & Bradstreet
identification number). If the employer does not have a DUNS number,
the employer’s address, phone number and other data will be used to
clearly authenticate the employer.

3) The corporate administrator’s name.

4) The parent organization, if applicable.

5) The place where the employer heard about the E-Verify program (an optional field).

If Dun & Bradstreet is able to verify the authenticity of the
employer, the new employer will then be able to automatically register
for an E-Verify account. If Dun & Bradstreet is unable to verify
the employer’s authenticity, the employer will then need to be
contacted via phone or email.

Categories
Immigration Round Table

Difficulty in Proving Extreme Hardships During Economic Crisis

Share this:

Richard received an urgent call from his sister in the US. His son, John, who was studying in the US, was involved in an accident and was hospitalized. Unfortunately, Richard did not have a visitor visa at that time. He immediately approached a relative who helped him get a passport and obtain a US visa. Richard appeared before the consular officer using a fraudulent passport. The name he used was not in his real name. A visitor’s visa was issued and Richard used this visa to enter the US. His passport and his visa reflect the name of a certain “Albert”.

When Richard entered the US, he was issued an I-94 and was authorized to stay in the US for six months. Since his assumed name is “Albert”, he began to use this identity since his arrival in the US. John suffered from serious injuries as a result of the accident but survived all his afflictions with his father on his side. After a few years, John married a US citizen and had become a US citizen himself. He is now gainfully employed and filed a petition for his father. Instead of receiving an approval, this petition was denied by the immigration service. Richard is now facing deportation before an immigration judge.

Richard never felt resentment for using a fraudulent identity to enter until he was served with a Notice to Appear for deportation/removal.

Assumed Identity

The act of entering the US with an assumed identity is definitely classified as “fraud”. The fraudulent acts commence from the time Richard appeared before the consular officer to obtain a US visa and continued on until he carried over his assumed identity at his work place. His co-employees knew Richard as “Albert” since he never used his real name.

When his son petitioned for Richard, his counsel informed him that he has to reveal his real name. Among the many requirements to support the petition is the birth certificate of his son. To be able to show the filiations, the birth certificate of John must contain his father’s name. Presented with this predicament, Richard has no other option but to reveal his real identity and submit his legitimate passport and birth certificate.

In all his applications for the green card, Richard disclosed his use of an “assumed identity” upon entry in the US. His relatives informed him that to be truthful would assist him in getting his green card. He heard that a “waiver application” would condone his fraudulent entry into the US.

Waiver Applications

In most cases where an individual committed acts of fraud or misrepresented material facts in entering the US, the immigration law allows this individual to file for a waiver application as an incident to an immigrant petition. Upon filing of this waiver, the immigration examiner will determine whether the fraudulent acts committed may be disregarded and the individual may receive his green card.

The decision to grant or deny the waiver application is very discretionary on the part of the immigration officer. This is granted if the applicant for green card can establish “extreme hardship” to the US citizen or lawful permanent resident parent or spouse. The two most important factors to consider are the (1) presence of qualifying relatives and (2) extreme hardship. The present law, does not allow a parent of a US citizen to seek the waiver. The only qualifying relatives for the waiver are spouse or parents. Children are not considered qualifying relatives.

In the case of Richard, he is facing a dilemma. His son is not a qualifying relative for determining extreme hardship. He does not meet the first requirement and is therefore not eligible for the waiver.    

Extreme Hardship

The waiver application arises not just in removal proceedings but also in applications for US visas. The burden is on the applicant to establish his eligibility for the waiver. With hardships resulting from the US housing and economic crisis becoming a widespread occurrence to most families, determining what “extreme” hardship is for the waiver becomes a challenging task for the waiver applicant

Each waiver case is to be decided on its own merits. Only when extreme hardship is proven will the waiver be approved. And only when the waiver is approved, will an individual in deportation proceedings be granted relief and be declared a green card holder.

Although, the original intent of Richard who used the assumed name was to fulfill his moral obligation to his ailing son, the continuing use of the fraudulent identity did not work in his favor.
    
With the difficulty of obtaining waivers, desisting from engaging in fraud is key. Without the grant of a waiver, no fraudulent act may be justified and excused at the same time. 

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

Categories
Updates

USCIS Releases Report on Characteristics of H-1B Petitions Received for Fiscal Year 2009

Share this:

In a recent annual report submitted to Congress, USCIS presented the
numbers and characteristics of H-1B petitions received for Fiscal Year
2009. In the report, USCIS commented that the number of petitions
received during FY 2009 had decreased by 15 percent, as compared to the
previous year; the rate of approvals also decreased, down by about 20
percent.

Roughly 50 percent of approved petitions were for
individuals from India and about 40 percent were for computer-related
jobs. Additionally, the majority of approved H-1B workers were between
the ages of 25 and 34. Half of the approved individuals received an
annual salary less than $64,000; the other half received annual
salaries above that amount.

Categories
Updates

DHS and USCIS Issue Requests for Comments on Revisions of Immigration-Related Forms

Share this:

The Department of Homeland Security has issued a number of requests for
comments on whether it should revise certain forms. If the agency
decides to revise any of these forms, it will advise the public when it
publishes the 30-day notice in the Federal Register. Comments on any
revisions will then be accepted during that 30-day period.

Forms for which requests for comments have been issued include:

Form I-363, the Request to Petition for Custody for Public Law 97-359 Amerasian

Form I-600/I-600A, the Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate
Relative and the Application for Advance Processing of Orphan Petition

Form I-698, the Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident

Additionally, USCIS has issued 30-day extensions on the comment request
period for National Interest Waivers and the revised Form I-102, the
Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure
Document.

Categories
Immigration Round Table

Second Drug Offense is Not Necessarily Aggravated Felony

Share this:

Dear Atty. Lou,

My cousin is in removal proceedings because of his conviction of a drug offense. He has been residing in the United States since he was ten years old. He is now 25 years old and he was informed that he has no chance to be saved from deportation because his drug offense is an aggravated felony. We read in the papers that the Supreme Court rendered a decision that drug offense is not necessarily an aggravated felony. So I was hoping that this decision will assist my cousin in defending himself against deportation/removal. Please enlighten us on this matter.

Prima C

Dear Prima C,

You are referring to the June 14, 2010 decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, Case No.09-60 where it was decided that a person
who has been convicted of a second or subsequent simple possession of a controlled substance offense is not considered to be convicted of an aggravated felony at least where there was no finding of a prior conviction.

Generally, a non citizen who at any time after admission has been a narcotic/drug addict or a drug abuser is deportable. The exception is when the conviction is for a “single offense involving possession for one’s own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana.” In the case of Jose Carachuri, he was convicted of possessing less than two ounces of marijuana and received a jail term of 20 days. A year later, he pleaded no contest to possession of one tablet of prescription medication Xanax without prescription. According to the Department of Homeland Security, his second simple possession conviction constituted an aggravated felony. And with an aggravated felony, Carachuri is ineligible for cancellation of removal and is deportable.  The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that only recidivist simple possession offenses are punishable as a federal felony under that Controlled Substances Act. A noncitizen’s state conviction for a second or subsequent possession will not be considered an aggravated felony on the basis of recidivism unless the noncitizen’s status as a recidivist was either admitted by the noncitizen at plea or determined by a judge or jury in connection with a prosecution for the subsequent simple possession offense.

In writing the decision, Justice Stevens sent a strong a message that the aggravated felony provisions have become nonsensical. He stated in several paragraphs to that it makes no sense to categorize simple possession as an aggravated felony.

The impact of this decision relates to availability of relief to cases of individuals that may have two misdemeanor offenses where applicable. It does not change the general rule on inadmissibility or removability ground based on drug convictions. What must be emphasized here is that in Carachuri, the drug offense was for two ounces of marijuana and not any other controlled substance.

I hope this information about this new case is helpful

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, Ste 818, San Francisco CA 94102 and may be reached at 415.397.0808; email at law@tancinco.com or check their website at tancinco.weareph.com/old. The content provided in this column is solely for informational purpose only and do not create a lawyer-client relationship. It should not be relied upon 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 can submit questions to law@tancinco.com)

Categories
Updates

27,000 H-2B Petitions Received for the Second Half of the Fiscal Year

Share this:

As of June 11, 2010, USCIS has received 27,778 H-2B petitions toward
the 47,000 petitions the federal agency aims to accept for the second
half of this fiscal year. This current count includes about 26,000
approved petitions and about 1,500 pending petitions.

Currently, there is an annual H-2B cap of 66,000 per fiscal year, with
33,000 allocated for the first half of the fiscal year (October 1 to
March 31) and 33,000 allocated for the second half of the fiscal year
(April 1 to September 20). USCIS will accept 47,000 petitions for this
half of the fiscal year, a target number they believe will give them
enough petitions to reach the cap.