Some readers occasionally experience trouble receiving Immigration Daily. This can occur for different reasons. For example, email programs (Microsoft Outlook, Yahoo, MSN, Gmail) automatically send certain emails into your junk email folder because Internet Service Providers (ISPs) mistake it for spam. To avoid this, add Immigration Daily (firstname.lastname@example.org) to your contact list or whitelist in your email program and mark the email as "not junk" to prevent future delivery of emails to the junk email folder. Adding email@example.com to your whitelist confirms that messages sent by firstname.lastname@example.org are desired and not spam. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) also maintain whitelists which they use to filter email delivered to their customers. You may need to contact your ISP directly if difficulty receiving Immigration Daily continues so that ILW.COM can be added to their whitelist of accepted domains.
Please note that ILW.COM stops your email delivery of Immigration Daily only when you specifically instruct us to do so. If you have not received your Immigration Daily (email version), try following these simple steps to ensure your Immigration Daily delivery.
We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to email@example.com.
Family-Based Immigration: Nuts And Bolts
Our new book, Family-Based Immigration: Nuts & Bolts; Editor: Charles Wheeler of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC) features:
++ Chapters: Immediate Relatives And The Preference System, Overview Of The Application Process For Permanent Residence, Adjustment Of Status, Consular Processing, Immigrating Through Marriage, Grounds Of Inadmissibility, Waivers Of Inadmissibility,
Affidavit Of Support, Self-Petitions For Abused Spouses And Children, & Ethics
++ 35 Appendices include: Sample Request For Criminal History, Documenting I-130 Petitions, Sample Motion To Reinstate I-130, Consular Processing Instruction Package, Consular Processing Appointment Package, Suggested Evidence Of Bona Fide Marriage, I-601 Waiver Packet Based On INA § 212(h) (Criminal Convictions), I-601 Waiver Packet Based On INA § 212(i) (Fraud Or Misrepresentation), I-601 Waiver Packet Based On INA § 212(a)(9) (B)(v) (Unlawful Presence), & I-212, Request For Permission To Reapply For Admission After Deportation
++ CD-ROM includes: relevant regulatory sections from 8 CFR, 22 CFR, etc., many forms from USCIS, DOS, SSA & IRS, significant statutory provisions, key BIA & Federal cases, selected USCIS memos, public health service documents, etc.
For more info on Family-Based Immigration: Nuts & Bolts, and to order, http://www.ilw.com/books/familybasedimmigration.shtm.
Building A Competitive Workforce: Immigration And The US Manufacturing Sector
David L. Bartlett writes "Shortages of skilled labor constitute the foremost challenge confronting U.S. manufacturers who face growing competition from manufacturers in Asia, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere."
AAO Says Video/Film Director Is H-1B Specialty Occupation
In Matter of X, WAC 04 172 53199 (AAO, Aug. 15, 2006), an unpublished decision, the Administrative Appeals Office issued a finding that a "video/film director" for a video game production company meets the requirements for an H-1B specialty occupation (courtesy of Daniel Huang, Esq.)
Help Wanted: Immigration Attorney
Raleigh, NC - Maupin Taylor, P.A., an established multi-specialty corporate law firm with offices in Raleigh, RTP and Wilmington, N.C. seeks immigration attorney to head immigration practice in Raleigh office. 5+ years' experience in business immigration and naturalization law, with excellent writing, communication and organization skills, and an exceptional client service approach. NC Bar preferred. Spanish language skills helpful.
Competitive compensation and excellent benefits offered in a pleasant office environment. Please send resume in confidence to Anne Webster, Director of Administration and Recruiting, by email: firstname.lastname@example.org or mail: P.O. Drawer 19764, Raleigh, NC 27619-9764.
Help Wanted: Immigration Attorneys
Toronto, Canada - Egan LLP, a business immigration law firm allied with Ernst & Young in Canada seeks (2) associate lawyers - one for our U.S. immigration team and the other for our Canadian immigration team - to join our firm of 11 lawyers and 16 law clerks. Demonstrate understanding of Canadian/US business immigration law and effectively apply knowledge. Prepare applications for Canadian/US employment authorizations, permanent residence, citizenship and passport matters. Manage staff. US associate requirements- law degree + US bar admission. 2-4yrs of post-bar business immigration experience. Canadian associate requirements - LL.B. + Canadian bar admission. 3-6yrs of post-bar business immigration experience. Broad exposure to Canadian immigration law. Both positions require excellent managerial, organizational, and verbal/written communication skills. Dual Canadian-U.S. bar admission is plus. Relocation pkg available depending upon applicant. To apply, send resume to Thomas Byun, Egan LLP, email@example.com.
Back Office Services
We offer a wide range of back-office & clerical support services to immigration attorneys in NIV and IVs, including managing
checklists, form completion, drafting cover/employer letters, consular processing assistance, follow-up/correspondence with
clients and other related services. Our services cover document generation, data entry, accounts, scheduling/calendaring,
clerical & archival. Adnet Services, Inc. http://www.adnetservices-nyc.com. Headquartered in New York City, Adnet Services provides the highest quality services to law firms enabling them to cost effectively and securely outsource law firm back office processes, and focus on increasing earning, growth and servicing their clients. We work as your partner offering tailored services that accelerate product delivery. With state-of-the-art communication facilities and infrastructure, our offsite center functions as a virtual extension of your office providing 24 x 7 support and significant cost savings. Convenient billing options are available. For more info. Contact Johaina Mumtaz at firstname.lastname@example.org or call 212 406-3503 ext 224.
Adnet Advertising Agency Inc. has provided labor certification advertising services to immigration attorneys since 1992. Adnet helps attorneys find appropriate places to run labor cert ads, places the ads, obtains the tearsheets, and offers a variety of billing options. Attorneys can manage the entire ad process through Adnet's secure web-based Ad-managment system. Most of Adnet's services are free since we receive a commission from the newspapers and journals where the ad is placed. Adnet services large international law firms as well as solo practice attorneys. Call us at 212-587-3164, visit www.adnet-nyc.com, or email us at
email@example.com. Contact us today to find out why we are the ad agency of choice for immigration attorneys since 1992.
Readers can share their professional announcements (100-words or fewer at no charge), email: firstname.lastname@example.org. Readers interested in learning about featuring your event or conference in Immigration Daily, see here. To feature your newsletter in Immigration Daily, see here.
Panel discussion: 'The Inevitability of Worker Verification'. Center for Immigration Studies, 1522 K Street NW, Suite 820, Washington, D.C. Thursday, August 24, 2006, 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. The Center for Immigration Studies will host a briefing to detail the government’s activities and plans related to the Basic Pilot, and to offer a demonstration of one of the private-sector tools that promise to simplify the process of worker authorization. Contact: John Keeley at (202) 466-8185 or email@example.com.
Readers are welcome to share their comments, email: firstname.lastname@example.org (300-words or fewer preferred). Many letters to the Editor refer to past correspondence, available in our archives.
MH's letter (08/22/06 ID) displays an appalling lack of knowledge about the requirements, information and documents required in an H-1B case. His letter reflects an apparent lack of knowledge that the following steps are necessary, how they are done or how long they take: (1) An attorney handling an H-1B case must first gather extensive documents and information about the proposed employer, employee and job to see whether the case looks approvable. If it does not, there is no point in going any further.
(2) The attorney must obtain a prevailing wage determination from the appropriate state agency and a labor condition application from the US Department of Labor. (3) The attorney must also obtain a foreign equivalence evaluation from an evaluation service if the proposed employee graduated from a foreign university, or an experience equivalence evaluation for the much more difficult cases in which the proposed employee does not have a degree. (4) Only then can the relatively straightforward petition (which must be in duplicate) be prepared, and it must then be signed and filed along with various supporting documents. (5) If the USCIS issues a request for evidence, the attorney must provide the requested evidence and/or information in a manner that will satisfy the USCIS's requirements. His letter is in the same league as, say, a letter from a non-doctor claiming that delivering a baby involves nothing more than standing there and catching it. As for the preposterous allegations about low paid, unskilled H-1B employees, one really needs to start getting information from factual sources instead of from anti-immigrant propagandists. For example, an H-1B employer who pays less than the prevailing wage is subject to prosecution.
Sid Lachter, Esq.
Responding to MH's letter (ID 08/22/06), add about 8-10 more hours to that and we may have a reasonable estimate of how long it takes an attorney to complete an H-1B case. If we are to take MH's list of tasks performed literally, it didn't include the time it takes to get the credentials evaluation or to obtain the labor condition application. The employer or the beneficiary was not interviewed, nor the biographical and documentary information obtained. The SOC or NAICS Codes weren't researched, nor the prevailing wage form obtained from the LCA online system/SESA. The lawyer's work is not complete when he/she files the forms with CIS, but that there may be a request for evidence, which requires further detailed documentation. Even after the H-1B is approved, the lawyer must provide the employer with mandatory documentation to put in the personnel file, the private file, and the public inspection file. MH's letter fails to recognize that the H-1B petition is not a task to be attempted by oneself - that is if you want it approved - because if it is denied, the filing fee is lost, which is either $1,440 or $2,190, depending upon the size of the employer, plus an additional $1,000 for premium processing. MH's letter fails to recognize that there is a miniscule window to file an H-1B petition because of cap restrictions, and that if the H-1B petition is denied, there may be no second chance for 1 1/2 years. The H-1B is decided on the basis of the job description, the employer's letter, the beneficiary's qualification and documentation prepared and submitted - this is where the skill comes in, and provides the basis for either approval or denial by the USCIS. The devil is in the details and lawyers dwell on small details. That's why we earn our pay.
David D. Murray, Esq.
Newport Beach, CA
This is my response to MH's letter (08/22/06 ID). I find MH's rant on immigration attorneys charging $4,000 for an H-1B amusing. How I wish that were the case. I don't know who s/he's talking to, but most of my solo-practitioner colleagues don't charge anywhere near as much. Try 25% of that figure. Throw in constantly changing regulations, cut-throat competition from attorneys and notarios, lengthy processing times, inconsistent decisions, volumes of free information on the internet, and argumentative clients who claim to know more than we do because they've spent a couple hours on the internet, and I often wonder if I made the right career choice.
Attorney's Name Withheld Upon Request
More comments on "esquire" from the Illinois Bar Journal (see 08/18/06 ID comment). "In 14th century England, when the title Esquire (Esq.) was first recorded, it meant 'shield-bearer,' and referred to a county gentleman aspiring to knighthood, who could gain that rank by apprenticeship to a knight. But the original esquires were probably biblical, the title having been used in 1 Samuel 14, when Saul's son Jonathan called the young man who bore his armour his "armour-bearer." But when Esquire crossed the ocean, it encountered an American society that disdained honorifics indicating social rank. Article I, Section 9(8) of the United States Constitution forbades such titles: 'No title of nobility shall be granted ....' So Esquire came to indicate occupation, not social status. In the 19th century it designated a justice of the peace or an associate judge, and finally was expanded to include lawyers, who were always male. When female lawyers began to practice, it included them-despite some protest. One American lawyer, writing from England, said that it never applies to women there. He added that he had heard 'certain ribald comments on the receipt of letters addressed to women when the name was followed by the title Esq.' In this country, however, only a small minority of letter-writer disapproved of using the title for both sexes. One such letter-writer described it as an honorific that 'exacerbated the impression that lawyers are a posturing, self-serving group.' However, most lawyers disapproved of applying the title to themselves. As one writer commented, 'The title Esq. (Esquire), should be a courtesy one extends to others, not to oneself.'" Block, Language Tips, (ISBA Sept. 15, 2000).
Eugene J. Flynn, Esq.
As an immigration paralegal, I read with amusement MH's letter (08/22/06 ID) about his or her supposed attempt at preparing an H-1B petition. One should instead work as a paralegal for a real taste of what preparing an H-1B petition entails. It is not a mere 'filling in' the boxes on the Form I-129; MH's letter conveniently forgets the LCA, the petitioner's support letter and the various H supplements, not to mention the many pitfalls that H-1B petitions may present if one is not knowledgeable about the several rules and regulations governing prevailing wages, wage surveys, documentation requirements and so on. Lest we forget, we are also dealing with someone's life and future, definitely not matters to be taken lightly. MH's letter should realize that immigration law is not a 'one size fits all' specialty and many times, indeed more often than not, the work we do costs much more than the legal fees that are charged.
Alessandra B. Hall, Paralegal
Roger Algase letter's (8/22/06 ID) raises even his bar of demagoguery to new heights. The letter's inflammatory misuse of the words "extremists", "smear", "zealots", "white supremacist ideology", "appeal to fear", "propaganda", "use of the Big Lie" and gross exaggeration adds nothing to a rational discussion, and is in stark contrast to the more objective, subject article by Tom Barry (8/21/06 ID), who at least correctly referred to restrictionists half of the time and rationally discussed, "Concern about national security since Sept. 11". Turning back the clock to 1923, then Pres. Calvin Coolidge wisely told Congress: "American institutions rest solely on good citizenship. They were created by people who had a background of self government. New arrivals should be limited to our capacity to absorb them into the ranks of good citizenship. America must be kept American. For this purpose, it is necessary to continue a policy of restricted immigration. It would lie well to make such immigration of a selective nature with some inspection at the source, and based either on a prior census or upon the record of naturalization ... We should find additional safety in a law requiring the immediate registration of all aliens. Those who do not want to be partakers of the American spirit ought not to settle in America". The 1965 law jumped legal immigration to 1.1 million annually and gave us 106 million added people in the past 40 years contrary to promises at the time. SB 2611 will give us another 100 million in three decades and limitless work visas. This is not comprehensive, but reprehensive. The issue is not only national security, but also who are the owners of America - the citizens or the special interests who profit at their expense?
R. L. Ranger
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. Copyright 1999-2006 American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM. Send correspondence and articles to email@example.com. Letters and articles may be edited and may be published and otherwise used in any medium. The views expressed in letters and articles do not necessarily represent the views of ILW.COM.