ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage


Immigration Daily

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily November 3, 2003
Previous Issues
The unmatched news resource for legal professionals. Free! Join 9000+ readers

Editor's Comments

Entrepreneurs And Investors

Our November 5th telephonic seminar will focus on Entrepreneurs and Investors. The agenda is as follows:

  • Using the B-1, WB and Other, More Untraditional Nonimmigrant Options to Establish the U.S. Enterprise
  • Selecting the Best Approach: E-1, E-2, L-1, H-1B and O-1 options for Entrepreneurs, Small Businesses and Global Companies
  • Dare We Try? - Examining EB-5 Employment-Creation Investment Options
  • Addressing and Resolving Ability-to-Pay Challenges for New Businesses
  • Developing a Bullet-Proof Business Plan
  • Representing the Venture Capitalist, the Investment Syndicate or the Joint Venture
  • Transitioning the Entrepreneur to Green-Card Status Despite Matter of Modular Container Systems, 89-INA-228 (BALCA July 16, 1991) and Obstacles in the Forthcoming PERM Rule
  • Deploying Best Practices for Jobs in the Financial-Services Industry
The deadline to register for this session is Monday, November 3rd. For more info. see: (Fax version:


Registration Deadline Is Monday, November 3rd

Monday, November 3rd is the deadline to register for "Invest, Build And Digitize: Immigration Law Opportunities In The Venture-Capital, Manufacturing And Information-Technology Sectors Of The U.S. Economy". This telephonic seminar series features distinguished practitioners John Brendel, David Cook, Tien-Li Loke Walsh, Julie Pearl, Steven Roby, Lincoln Stone, Alan Tafapolsky and Susan Wehrer as speakers, with Angelo Paparelli as discussion leader. For more info. see: (Fax version:

Featured Article

Presidential Paper Historical Series: 154 - Special Message to the Congress on the Employment of Agricultural Workers from Mexico (President Harry S Truman: 1945-1953)
President Truman sent this message to Congress on July 13, 1951.

Keep on top of the latest in immigration law! Attend ILW.COM seminars! You can attend ILW.COM phone seminars from the convenience of your office! For more info on the seminars currently available, please click here:

Immigration Law News

USCIS Training Materials On 212(h) Waivers
This document is the USCIS training material for its employees on 212(h) waivers (courtesy of David H. Nachman of Grotta, Glassman & Hoffman, P.A.).

Date On Employer's License Raises Questions
In the Matter of Ju, No. 2003-INA-78 (BALCA, Sep. 29, 2003), the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals noted that the license was submitted by the Employer three months before the date it was allegedly issued.

Lack Of Modicum Of Consistency Is Abuse Of Discretion
In Lin v. INS, No. 01-4113 (2nd Cir. Oct. 29, 2003), the court said that the Board of Immigration Appeals abused its discretion when it was inconsistent in denying the Petitioner's motion to reopen. The Petitioner had proffered new evidence an affidavit from an immigration expert to support his asylum case involving China's family planning policy.

Dangers While Serving As Military And Police Officer Do Not Amount To Past Persecution
In Ahmed v. Ashcroft, No. 02-2524 (7th Cir. Oct. 30, 2003), the court said that substantial evidence supported the BIA's finding that the dangers Petitioner experienced while serving as a military and police officer arose from the nature of his employment and did not amount to past persecution for purposes of an asylum claim. The court noted that the BIA's suggestion that there was a per se rule against finding past persecution for dangers encountered during service as a police officer went too far.

Court Overlooks Procedural Error
In Duran-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, No. 02-9513 (10th Cir. Oct. 28, 2003), despite Petitioner's procedural error, the court in the interests of justice, treated Petitioner's petition as if it was properly before the court and reviewed it as a direct appeal of the agency's action.

Walmart Raid Is Culmination Of 5-Year Federal Probe
The Salt Lake Tribune reports "The first clue came when police investigating an apartment burglary in the eastern Pennsylvania town of Honesdale picked up a young Russian immigrant who worked nights cleaning floors at the local Wal-Mart Supercenter."

Suit Threat Results In USCIS's Application Reexamination reports that according to immigration attorney Charles H. Kuck, "Immigration lawyers with clients seeking employment authorization cards for their clients might do well to keep a lawsuit handy."

Attorney listings on ILW.COM are searched 200,000 times/year! Each attorney listed is searched an average of once each day! Just one new client will pay for the entire year's fee! Click here for more info:


Help Wanted: Experienced Paralegal
A Toronto-based business immigration law firm is seeking a paralegal with experience in US business immigration matters. In this position, you will work with a team of paralegals and lawyers in providing business immigration services to business clients. Qualified candidates should have a minimum 2-3 years of varied US business immigration experience, especially in H-1B processing, and labor certifications. Strong drafting skills, and the ability to manage a busy workload is expected. Please e-mail or mail resumes to:; BHG Box 64388, 220 East 42nd Street, 16th Floor, NY, NY 10017. We are an equal opportunity employer.

We carry advertisements for Help Wanted: Attorney, Help Wanted: Paralegal, Help Wanted: Other, Positions Sought, Products & Services Offered, etc.
For information on advertising in the classifieds please click here

For a listing of current immigration events please click here
For services/products of use in your law practice please click here

Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor:
The case of In re Miguel Gadda, Attorney, 23 I&N Dec. 645 (BIA Sept. 25, 2003), is the first Board of Immigration Appeals legal ethics decision in about 10 years, and only the sixth of all time. I have recently written a short discussion of the case, which will appear in a forthcoming issue of Bender's Immigration Bulletin. As former chairman of the legal ethics committee, Washington-Baltimore AILA Chapter, and frequent lecturer on the topic, I was somewhat surprised, and interested, to see Mr. Gadda's letter to the Editor in yesterday's Immigration Daily, railing against the concept that he should be subject to discipline by his state bar. While one can sympathize with Mr. Gadda's discomfort at getting disbarred, by the California bar, by the U.S. Justice Department, and by U.S. federal courts, his arguments fly in the face of the fundamental organization of the U.S. legal system. I recommend that lawyers read the BIA's decision, which is clear, correct, and instructive.

Bruce A. Hake, Attorney at Law
Damascus, Maryland

Dear Editor:
I am an immigration attorney in Philadelphia and a subscriber to your service. I misplaced the 9/24/03 edition of Immigration Daily, specifically the article on CSPA by Ron Klasko and Tammy Fox-Isicoff. Could you please forward an additional copy?

Stanley Ellenberg

Editor's Note: You can retrieve any previous issue of Immigration Daily using our archives section by date. Alternatively, to find a specific item such as an article try using our advanced search engine. For example, type in the search term: CSPA And Klasko, select the boolean search, and search within articles. The following link to the article, "The Child Status Protection Act: Is Your Child Protected?" appears.

Dear Editor:
Mr. Murray seems to be advocating the gutting of the US asylum system with his two different positions in his letter regarding the asylum claim of Ms. Alvarado. First I feel the need to point out that it is clear that Ms. Alvarado was not "merely beaten" as Mr. Murray states in his letter. That aside, Mr. Murray wonders why Ms. Alvarado didnt flee to some neighboring country where they spoke Spanish. But he also says the US, has a duty to provided safe haven to bona fide refugees and asylum seekers. From these positions it appears that only Canadians or Mexicans should be able to seek asylum here in the US. Perhaps not even Mexicans, since we are not a Spanish speaking country. Every country has a neighbor. Under Mr. Murrays formula, all refugees and asylum seekers should seek help from their neighbor county rather than the US. The US government doesnt feel the same way and they shouldnt. Only in cases where it is clear the refugee resettled outside their country do we question their ability to be granted asylum here in the US. The US is constantly telling the world that we will protect and help those that have been wronged. We wage wars to protect foreign citizens against persecution by their government or other groups in their countries. Is it any surprise that people who are persecuted seek safety in the arms of the almighty US? Also, as an alternative to asylum, Mr. Murray feels that our government can merely contact the foreign government and tell them to protect the individual. I wonder if that is his position in all asylum cases where it is a non-governmental entity persecuting the refugee, not just in this type of case. Under that theory, all asylum cases that are not specifically related to persecution by the government should be denied and we should simply ask the foreign government to protect the individual. Congress seems to have recognized that working with a foreign government might not be all that easy. Congress (a body not made up of "bleeding hearts") allows asylum claims where the government did the persecuting or where the government will not protect the persecuted from some non-governmental entity doing the persecuting. I hope that Ms. Alvarado and her attorneys fight her case all the way to the top if need be and pray that they are successful. If not, the US really needs to stop pretending we are the moral ruler by which the world should measure itself and stop holding ourselves out as the saviors of the world.

Justin G. Randolph, Esq.
Carpenter & Capt, Chtd., Chicago, IL

Dear Editor:
I am so happy that Mr. Morris can see the whole picture and take a stand to what amounts to the time when the pallid faces came to my land illegally invading it without having any invitation from my ancestors. Where is the invitation of my ancestors given to your ancestors for you to claim this land as your land only and nobody else? Under the reality of my people, you deserve to be here as much as the ones that you call "illegal immigrants" because you are one of them also despite having a paper that tells you are not. Go back in history and you will find out that there is no document from my ancestors giving you such right unless it was obtained by force. Mr. Morris properly states that the 9/11 terrorists came with student visas and not illegally as I heard many times from some xenophobes, and also, as it has been said before, they came with thousands of dollars to spend in flight school. Why insist on calling the terrorists illegal immigrants? They came with student visas, attended flight schools and not one got a job to clean our toilets, cut backyard.s grass, and watched children so parents can drive a BMW, and so on. The hard working immigrants that are here because today's system of government does not allow them to be recognized as legal citizens, do not deserve to be counted with those filthy terrorists. There is a huge difference there in character and principles. If one wants to ignore the facts and use 9/11 as an excuse to persecute those that came to work in jobs that we do not want, there is nothing we can do to be clearer. President Bush before 9/11 recognized that there were jobs in America that people here did not want to take. Why the fuss about the tired hands that come to our shores seeking to take those low pay jobs and submit themselves to be discriminated by the American society? We are spitting on the dish that we eat. They are the plate we eat on. Every facet of our society depends on them and nobody in America is independent of their backbreaking work. As the Lord of President Bush said before: "Those that do not have sin cast the first stone." If you do not condemn, you will not be condemned also. Unless you are a Native American, you should be thinking on a way to legalize the "illegals" the same way you were legalized. There will be always the other side of any story and those that want to be intolerants should not ask me to be tolerant about their ancestor's invasion of my land. If you feel you have the right to persecute others for invading "your land", I have the right to complain about your presence here in America also.

Erick Seven Hawks

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. Send Correspondence and articles to Letters and articles may be edited and may be published and otherwise used in any medium. Opinions expressed in letters and articles do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.

Editorial Advisory Board
Marc Ellis, Gary Endelman

© Copyright 1999-2003 American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM