MurthyBulletin
VOL. XIII, no. 50; December 2007, week 2
Posted : December 14, 2007
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"We know your immigration matters!" SM
The MurthyBulletin is the eNewsletter on immigration from the Murthy Law Firm. This bulletin is not sent unsolicited. The information provided is of a general nature and may not apply to any particular set of facts or circumstances. It should not be construed as legal advice and does not constitute an engagement of the Murthy Law Firm. Full Disclaimer available.
To receive MurthyBulletin via eMail, follow this link to subscribe. To Unsubscribe, please go to the end of the eMailed MurthyBulletin and click the URL provided. This an Announcement Only list. Subscribers cannot post to the list.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TOPICS in this Edition of the MurthyBulletin :
1. Interim EAD Problems at USCIS District Offices
2. Stand Alone I-130s Filed at Chicago Lockbox
3. DHS Files an Appeal in No-Match Rule Case
4. DHS Develops Enhanced Driver's Licenses to Comply With the WHTI
5. January 2008 Visa Bulletin : EB2 India Retrogression
Posted on MurthyDotCom Dec 11, 2007
6. MurthyDotCom : Did You Know about Our Family Section?
7. Important Processing Times and Dates
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Engaging the Murthy Law Firm : Our office can conveniently and efficiently represent clients located anywhere in the United States or abroad on U.S. immigration matters.
Consultations with attorneys at the Murthy Law Firm : You may contact our office to schedule a one-time paid consultation with no further obligation. A scheduled consultation with an attorney at the Murthy Law Firm provides you with details and recommendations based on the specific facts of your case. This will help you with making the right decisions based on the legal options and strategies available.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1. Interim EAD Problems at USCIS District Offices
©MurthyDotCom
Many Adjustment-of-Status (I-485) applicants who filed during the 2007 summer rush also applied for Employment Authorization Documents (EADs). These filings generally were made concurrently with the I-485 or shortly thereafter. Some have received their EADs, while others have waited more than 90 days since the receipt date of their EAD applications. Some of the problems faced by those with delayed EADs are discussed here for MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers because our firm is receiving reports that some local USCIS offices are refusing to follow established procedures for requesting EAD issuance after the 90-day point.
©MurthyDotCom
No Interim EADs at the Local USCIS Offices
©MurthyDotCom
Under existing USCIS regulations, the USCIS shall adjudicate EAD applications within 90 days from the date of receipt. If it does not do so, it is supposed to issue an interim EAD, valid for 240 days. This was the practice for many years. The USCIS no longer follows this procedure, however, despite the fact that the regulation remains unchanged. The USCIS had indicated that it would change the regulation to comport with the changed procedures. As explained in our June 30, 2006 article, June 2006 Conference Update: Interim EADs to End, interim EADs, which had been issued at local USCIS offices, were eliminated due to fraud concerns. As this was explained by the USCIS, card production equipment at the local offices did not have the anti-fraud feature capabilities that were deemed appropriate. Equipment was removed from the local offices, but was not replaced with more advanced machines.
©MurthyDotCom
Following the end of local office issuance of interim EADs, the procedure changed to that described February 23, 2007 in our article, Interim EAD Procedure. The existing procedure requires the applicant to appear for an InfoPass appointment at the local USCIS office and present the proof of the 90-day-old EAD application. The local office is supposed to communicate with the USCIS service center where the EAD is pending so that the service center will issue the appropriate EAD promptly. This procedure was working reasonably well, and the CIS Ombudsman was even working to reduce the waiting time for making the request to 75-days, so that the card potentially could be in-hand within 90 days, as described in our August 31, 2007 article, Ombudsman: USCIS Service Centers and Lockboxes.
©MurthyDotCom
Problems with USCIS District Offices and the 90-Day Rule
©MurthyDotCom
While many have been able to address delays in their EADs by using the 90-day rule and procedures described above, problems related to this matter have arisen recently. We at the Murthy Law Firm have received reports that individuals were told the new USCIS policy is to start counting the 90 days from the date of fingerprinting, not the date of EAD filing. A variation on this is that the claimed policy in some local USCIS offices is apparently 90 business days from the fingerprinting. No statutory or legal authority exists for these alleged policy changes. The USCIS has made no announcements to this effect and the applicable regulation remains unchanged.
©MurthyDotCom
Action Taken to Request Correction
©MurthyDotCom
In light of the problems faced by some who are properly seeking EADs after 90 days, we at the Murthy Law Firm have contacted and filed a complaint with the CIS Ombudsman on this matter to help those who have been harmed by the USCIS change in position. Our firm will work to address this problem, given the importance of EAD issuance to our clients, their spouses, and many in the greater immigrant community, as the EAD provides them with the ability to work and earn a living. We have faith that the USCIS will address this problem promptly.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Stand-Alone I-130s Filed at Chicago Lockbox
©MurthyDotCom
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has revised its procedures for filing certain I-130 relative petitions. Effective December 3, 2007, the USCIS is encouraging I-130 petitioners to file their petitions with the Chicago Lockbox. This change applies to stand-alone I-130s only. A stand-alone I-130 is one that is filed WITHOUT an I-485, Application for Adjustment of Status. After filing, the petition will be forwarded from the Chicago Lockbox to the appropriate USCIS service center for adjudication.
©MurthyDotCom
If an I-130 is filed with the service center directly, it will be forwarded to the Chicago Lockbox, rather than be rejected. This, however, adds an unnecessary step that can delay the processing of the I-130. Thus, it is better to file the I-130 at the proper post office (P.O.) box at the Chicago Lockbox address.
©MurthyDotCom
Two Separate P.O. Box Addresses, Based on State of Residence
©MurthyDotCom
The I-130 petitions should be filed as follows:
©MurthyDotCom
Petitioners who reside in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, or Wyoming should file their stand-alone I-130s at:
USCIS
P.O. Box 804625
Chicago, IL 60680-1029
Petitioners who reside in Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, West Virginia, or the District of Columbia should file their stand-alone I-130s at:
USCIS
P.O. Box 804616
Chicago, IL 60680-1029
Receipt Notices Will Show Service Center
©MurthyDotCom
Even though the I-130 petitions are filed at the Chicago Lockbox, the
receipt notices issued in these cases reflect either the Vermont or
California Service Center - not the Chicago Lockbox. This is because the
cases are forwarded to the service centers for adjudication. Any follow-up
on the case will need to be directed to the service center that issued the
receipt.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW
FIRM. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
DHS Files an
Appeal in No-Match Rule Case
©MurthyDotCom
The U.S. Department of Justice filed an appeal December 4, 2007, on behalf
of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on a U.S. federal court
decision that enjoins the DHS from implementing what is referred to as the
Social Security "no-match" rule. As was covered in a series of
MurthyBulletin articles, including the October 19, 2007 article,
Federal Court Issues
Preliminary Injunction on No-Match Program, the injunction prevented
implementation of the no-match regulation issued by the U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) on August 15, 2007. The rule, which was intended
as part of enhanced
worksite
enforcement efforts, was widely criticized by various groups, including
labor unions,
as having the potential to adversely affect employers and their legal
employees. [Earlier reports on this topic are available for review on
MurthyDotCom.]
©MurthyDotCom
Government Argues "No-Match" Rule Beneficial for
Employers and Legal Employees
©MurthyDotCom
In its December 5, 2007 announcement of the appeal of the injunction, the
DHS argues that "the No-Match Rule is a major step forward in preventing
employment of illegal migrants." It further states that "the rule is not
harmful to legal workers." The DHS strongly supports the regulation and
indicates that the DHS "is not abandoning it." To support its position with
regard to the no-match rule, the DHS reiterates that the "safe harbor" rule
gives employers an opportunity to either correct a clerical error or to
explain the discrepancy in a social security number, and provides employers
with sufficient time to answer no-match inquiries. Therefore, according to
the DHS, employers and their legal employees would not suffer any adverse
consequences.
©MurthyDotCom
Conclusion
©MurthyDotCom
The U.S. federal court where the appeal has been filed by the DHS has to
rule on the appeal by either lifting or staying the injunction. The
plaintiffs in the case, which include labor groups, the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU), the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and immigration
groups, have not indicated their position with regard to the appeal. It is
expected, however, that they will continue to be concerned that mistakes in
the federal Social Security Administration database would penalize
individuals entitled to work legally in the U.S. and the employers of those
workers. Updates on this important case will be reported to MurthyDotCom
and MurthyBulletin readers, as they become available.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW
FIRM. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.
DHS Develops
Enhanced Drivers' Licenses to Comply with WHTI
©MurthyDotCom
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a fact sheet on
December 5, 2007, announcing the development of alternative documents to
meet the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) requirements for entry
at any land or seaport. For this purpose, the DHS is encouraging states to
submit proposals to modify their driver's license requirements to satisfy
the WHTI requirements. As regular MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin
readers will recall from our March 23, 2007 article,
DOS Takes Longer to Issue
U.S. Passports, WHTI requires all U.S. citizens to have passports
when they travel by air to Mexico, Canada, Bermuda, and the Caribbean
region. If new drivers' licenses meet the requirements of WHTI,
according to the DHS, travelers would be provided with a low-cost
alternative for border crossing purposes. Several states are already
committed to issuing enhanced drivers' licenses (EDLs) in the near future.
©MurthyDotCom
EDLs Meet REAL ID Requirements
©MurthyDotCom
The DHS has been developing guidelines for EDLs to also meet REAL ID act
requirements. The requirements for all state-issued drivers' licenses,
mandated by REAL ID, were reported to MurthyDotCom and
MurthyBulletin readers in our May 27, 2005 article,
Driver's License
Provisions of the Real ID Act. The DHS is coordinating efforts to
ensure that the standards for EDLs developed to meet WHTI requirements also
meet the standards defined by the REAL ID Act. There are some significant
distinctions, however. REAL ID requires proof of legal status in the United
States; EDLs will be issued only to U.S. citizens.
©MurthyDotCom
EDLs Will Remain Secure
©MurthyDotCom
The production of EDLs will require sophisticated, modern technology that
allows for collection and storage of biometric data. The DHS has indicated
that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will either maintain the
information from the documents in its secure database or use a different
agency that is able to meet CBP's standards. The EDLs will use Radio
Frequency Identification Technology (RFID).
©MurthyDotCom
The DHS has also provided assurances that no personally identifiable
information will be transmitted directly from the card, as the RFID chip
will send a number that only has meaning to the secure DHS database, where
the issuing information is held. This will allow the CBP officer to access
biographic information, a photo, and the results of terrorist / criminal
checks.
©MurthyDotCom
Border States Involved with EDLs
©MurthyDotCom
As of December 2007, the participating states working toward the development
and implementation of EDLs are Washington, Vermont, Arizona, and New York.
Discussions are underway with other border states, including Michigan,
Texas, and California.
©MurthyDotCom
Conclusion
©MurthyDotCom
EDLs are not being produced, yet, and U.S. citizens who travel by air or sea
to Mexico, Canada, Bermuda, or the Caribbean region need to use passports
while traveling, with limited exceptions. Information on various CBP travel
initiatives is available on the
CBP WebSite. Information on the phased-in WHTI, including acceptable
documents and dates for implementation at land borders, is available on the
U.S. Department of State (DOS) WebSite at
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cbpmc/cbpmc_2223.html.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW
FIRM. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
5.
January 2008 Visa Bulletin : EB2 India
Retrogression
Posted
on MurthyDotCom Dec 11, 2007
©MurthyDotCom
If you have not read our December 11, 2007
NewsFlash! on this topic, which was eMailed to MurthyBulletin
subscribers, be sure to review it on MurthyDotCom at
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_ind08r.html.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW
FIRM. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
6. MurthyDotCom : Did You Know about Our Family Section?
©MurthyDotCom
At MurthyDotCom
we provide visitors with a section specifically devoted to matters
surrounding your dependants and other family members. Whether you are
wondering about the aging out of a child or what the implications of a
change in law are for a nonimmigrant spouse (H-4, L-2, etc) or about your
eligibility to sponsor certain family members for visitors' or immigrant
visas, our Family section is an excellent place to begin your search
for information.
©MurthyDotCom
The next session MurthyChat will be Monday,
Dec 17, 2007, 9:00pm Eastern Time (U.S.). Please check the
chat page for any
necessary changes to the schedule. Meanwhile,
search the chat
transcripts for
answers to your questions.
©MurthyDotCom
MurthyForum :
Consider joining those who have discovered the value of this service. Our
message / discussion board is visited daily by one of our attorneys.
MurthyDotCom - MurthyBulletin - MurthyChat - and MurthyForum - Your
ultimate U.S. immigration resources on the Internet all start with MURTHY!
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW
FIRM. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
7.
Important Processing Times and Dates
©MurthyDotCom
Processing Times : For
links to processing times for the USCIS Service Centers, district
(or local) processing times, the Administrative Appeals Office,
Department of State Visa Bulletin, and Department of Labor dates for the
processing of labor certification applications.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW
FIRM. All Rights Reserved
Copyright : Documents from this site may be printed for personal use as long as the copyright notices are included on the print-outs and the documents are not modified or altered.