An Important disclaimer! The information provided on this page is not legal advice.
Transmission of this information is not intended to create, and receipt by you does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Readers must not act upon any information without first seeking advice from a
qualified attorney. Correspondence to firstname.lastname@example.org. Letters may be edited and may be published and otherwise used in any medium.
Editor's Comments of the Day
The premier issue of Immigrant's Weekly has gone out to more than 500
Immigrant's Weekly is not about immigration law,
but about the immigrant experience. What led up to your decision to move to a new country? Was it for a
better job? A better education? To be with your spouse? What problems did you encounter? How did you decide
which possessions to take and which to leave? What did you family and friends say? Did they encourage you
in your decision or beg you not to go? And what did you find when you arrived? Was it as you expected, or
nothing like you expected? Write us at email@example.com and let us know your immigrant experience.
Federal Register News of the Day
Habitual Residence in the Territories and Possessions of the US
This final rule amends INS regulations relating to the rights and limitations of habitual residents in the territories and possessions of the United States, other than American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands. The final rule establishes a policy that protects the rights of both habitual residents electing to reside in US territories and possessions, and the citizens of the territories and possessions effective September 19, 2000.
Extension of Comment Request for Form N-400, Application for Naturalization
The Adjudications Division of the INS has extended the comment period on a proposed revision to Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, since numerous comments have been received by the agency. Comments will be accepted until October 19, 2000.
Cases of the Day
Habeas Jurisdiction Remains in 2nd Circuit
In Calcano-Martinez v. INS, No. 98-4033 (2nd Cir. Sept. 1, 2000), the court determined that IIRIRA eliminated judicial review of removal orders based on convictions of aggravated felonies and controlled substance violations so it was unable to review Petitioners' final orders of removal. The court determined that habeas review of these orders remains since IIRIRA did not deprive federal district courts of jurisdiction over purely legal claims.
Congressional News of the Day
Senate Scheduled to Vote on H-1B Cloture
The Senate is scheduled to vote on the cloture on S. 2045 on Tuesday afternoon, September 19, 2000.
House Hears Senate Amendment to Intercountry Adoption Act
Senate amendments to H.R. 2909, the "Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000" were read into the record in the House.
NIW Rule Sent to Senate
Director of the Policy Directives and Instructions Branch, INS, Department of Justice, transmitted the report of a rule entitled "National Interest Waivers For Second Preference Employment-Based Immigrant Physicians Serving In Medically Underserved Areas Or At Department Of Veterans' Affairs Facilities" to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
INS News of the Day
President Clinton Comments on H-1B's
During the President's remarks at the dedication of the Gandhi memorial, the President commented on why he believed Congress would increase the number of H-1B visas.
Immigration News of the Day
The Human Side of Globalization
An article in the Montreal Gazette identifies the key challenge of a multicultural state in a global economy as how to assign, impart or define identity to your diverse citizens and to inculcate a sense of belonging in new citizens who have traditionally been perceived as the "other" and foreign.
The Blessing of Diversity
Marvin E. Aspen, Chief Judge U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois, writes in the Chicago Tribune about "the most precious gift of freedom known in history--citizenship in the United States."
ILW.COM Highlights of the Day
Help Your Friends Find the Immigration Attorney of Their Choice
Share the "Find a Lawyer" page with your friends.
ILW.COM Chats and Discussions of the Day
Special Event Chats!
ILW.COM is excited to offer a chat session with Linda Dodd-Major,,
Acting Director of DOJ/INS Office of Business Liaison, on October 18, 2000, at 9:00 p.m. New York time,
and with Canadian immigration attorney Catherine Kerr on November 1,
2000, at 9:00 p.m. New York time.
Letters to the Editor
I would be very grateful if you would publicize my online petition in favor of Senator Feinstein's bill to reduce INS backlogs.
As you are aware, anyone applying for a green card and eventual citizenship must jump through a seemingly never-ending series of hoops and at every stage there is an enormous and explosively growing backlog of unprocessed cases.
For example at the Phoenix INS office there is a backlog of 52 months for adjustment of status, and the backlog is growing by 16 months every year! Phoenix is by no means the busiest INS office, so the problem is obviously due to inefficiency and poor procedures rather than overwork.
The INS as a whole has seen its budget triple to $4 billion and its manpower increase by 15000 since 1992, yet the service it offers to legal immigrants is abysmally low and getting worse all the time. Throwing money at the agency will not fix it! This is why Feinstein's bill is significant - it earmarks additional funds for reducing backlogs, and also requires the INS to draw up an action plan to improve its efficiency and procedures before it can access the funds.
The petition can be viewed at: http://www.petitiononline.com/s2586
Thank you in advance for your help.
I filed a case against the INS with US District Court. The Court denied my motion for summary judgment.
Here is the story. In 1998, we filed H-1B. The beneficiary was H-1B valid till 2001. We provided the most recent paystub. The INS still kicked back requesting more recent even if the one we submitted was already the most recent. In response, we gave more recent one the beneficiary got when the case was pending. However, after we filed the case, the beneficiary was transferred to a different state. Based on this, the INS approved the H but denied the change of status, alleging that he was out of status by engaging in unauthorized employment since he did not file H amendment after relocation.
I need some cases to the points such as:
1. As long as you filed your case, you maintain your status. So it does not matter if you are transferred to a different location.
2. Even if you are transferred to a different worksite when you filed your case, it is not required to file H amendment simply because of relocation of work site.
I would appreciate it very much if you can pass it to some of our colleagues and get back to me. If you have questions, please give me a call or send me an email at: firstname.lastname@example.org. Thank you very much.