ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily September 15, 2006
Previous Issues
The unmatched news resource for legal professionals. Free! Join 17,000+ readers


Arizona Primary Win

According to a CQ news story, "Randy Graf, a conservative activist and former state representative, won a bruising Republican primary in Arizona's open 8th Congressional District, despite the opposition of popular retiring Republican Rep. Jim Kolbe and much of the state and national Republican Party establishment"(for the full story, see here). The National Republican Campaign Committee took the unusual step of taking sides in this primary race as noted in the news story. Rep. Graf's hardline approach against immigration appears to have struck a chord with voters in the primary election. However, his hard-core conservative Republican stance on immigration may well alienate moderate voters, providing the opportunity for Democrats to take control over the House.

We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to


Seminar On E-Visas

The curriculum for the September 21st phone seminar on E-visas is as follows:

E-2 visas

  • What is a "substantial" investment?
  • How do you show investment funds are "at risk"?
E-1 visas
  • What is "substantial trade"?
  • When is it possible to base an E-1 on "trade in services"?
  • When is the E-1 the better option than the E-2?
The deadline to sign up is Tuesday, September 19th. For more info, including speaker bios, detailed curriculum, and registration information, please see: (Fax version:


19 Important Points To Consider Before You Select A Law Marketing Program
Trey Ryder writes "When you're thinking about hiring a marketing consultant who wants to help you profit from his method of marketing, ask yourself whether the marketing method is... "


USCIS Extends TPS For Burundi Nationals
DHS announced today a 12-month extension of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nationals of Burundi until November 2, 2007.

Section 8(1) of CSPA Covers Applications Not Filed
In Rodriguez v. Gonzales, No. CV 04-8671 (USDC, Central District of CA, May 31, 2006), the court, in an issue which appears to be one of first impression, said Petitioner was covered under Section 8(1) of the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) because there was no final determination on the naturalization application because no application was filed (as a first preference alien, his priority date was not current, and thus no application could be filed). The court noted that the CSPA does not expressly state that an application for an immigrant visa must have been filed in order for the beneficiary to be covered by section 8(1). The court granted mandamus relief. For the opinion, see here. For the order, see here (courtesy of Jack Golan, Esq. of Popkin, Shamir & Golan).


Help Wanted: Immigration Attorney
Washington, D.C. - USCIS Office of the Chief Counsel (OCC) seeks an experienced attorney for the position of Litigation Coordination Counsel for its Headquarters Office. This position is primarily responsible for assisting in the provision of litigation support in immigration cases involving USCIS operational components. The role of the Litigation Coordination Counsel is to assist in the oversight and tracking of federal court litigation facing USCIS through coordination with OCC counsel located throughout the country and at HQ. Deadline is September 29, 2006. E-mail to apply. For detailed information, including duties, qualifications, benefits, see here or enter vacancy announcement #CIS-COU-2006-0011 in

Help Wanted: Immigration Attorney
New York City, NY - Hodgson Russ LLP, a 225-plus lawyer firm with offices in Buffalo, New York City, Albany, Boca Raton and Toronto seeks an associate attorney for our immigration group in our NYC office. Our group represents multinational corporations, entrepreneurs, athletes, entertainers, scientists and specialized workers. We seek an attorney with experience counseling U.S. and foreign employers. The ideal candidate will have 3-5 years of business immigration experience. Please send cover letter, resume and law school transcript to Mariely Downey:

Help Wanted: Immigration Paralegal
Paralegal sought for small Nassau County, Long Island, immigration firm. Minimum 2 years' experience; bachelor's degree preferred. Must be detail - oriented, have Spanish knowledge, computer skills and good oral and written communication skills. Benefits package. Convenient to LIRR, Southern Parkway, buses, free parking. Send resume with salary requirements to:

Help Wanted: Immigration Paralegal
Experienced immigration paralegal sought for Mid-town Manhattan office in NYC of large immigration practice of 230-attorney law firm founded in 1817. 2 years experience in immigration law required including preparation and filing of business visas (H-1B, L, E) petitions and permanent residency applications. The ideal candidate will have strong computer, communication and writing skills and proficiency with Windows, Word, Excel and Outlook and internet research. Lexis or Westlaw skills required. Korean speaking skills preferred. Send resume in confidence to: Employment Manager, Hodgson Russ LLP, One M&T Plaza, Buffalo, NY 14203 or by email to Melanie Smith at

Case Management Technology
At ImmigrationTracker our clients say it best: "Our criteria for choosing a solution were simple: I wanted an integrated system that was powerful but easy to use. The fact that many of my most respected colleagues use Tracker made the decision a no-brainer" Steve Clark, Managing Attorney, Flynn & Clark. While other vendors talk about bells and whistles, we talk about our track record: 13 Past AILA Presidents, 18 of the 25 largest immigration firms and thousands of immigration professionals who rely on ImmigrationTracker. While others talk about building and customizable systems, we partner with AILA's best attorneys and build it for you -- so you don't have to. If you have been promised the moon but have been left with cheese, give us a call and find out why more firms trust Tracker than anyone else. Call us for a free guided demo at 1-888-466-8757 ext. 278 or email or visit us at


Readers can share their professional announcements (100-words or fewer at no charge), email: Readers interested in learning about featuring your event or conference in Immigration Daily, see here. To feature your newsletter in Immigration Daily, see here.

Share Your Professional News
Send your professional announcement to: Examples include: New Position, Honors And Awards, Mergers & Acquisitions, New Office Address, New Appointment, New Associate, New Attorney, New Partner. This is a free service.


Readers are welcome to share their comments, email: (300-words or fewer preferred). Many letters to the Editor refer to past correspondence, available in our archives.

Dear Editor:
More about why I believe that all Americans, even those who favor lower immigration levels, should be very concerned about any possibility that a bill like HR 4437 could be rammed through as an attachment to a "must pass" appropriations bill: First this bill would require a huge number of federal, state and local law enforcement personnel to track down, jail, prosecute and deport the estimated 10-12 million people who are here illegally, every single one of whom would have the right to court appointed counsel and the full range of protections available in criminal cases but not in civil ones, as is the case under present immigration law. How this enormous diversion of law enforcement resources would make us safer from the real criminals and terrorists is incomprehensible. Second, by making a criminal of any legal immigrant involved in even the most trivial or technical immigration violation, such a reporting an address change a day late, or of any US citizen who gives any sort of help or advice to an immigrant who has violated any technical regulation, HR 4437 would make criminals of millions of law abiding immigrants and Americans alike, and would create a climate of terror in immigrant communities throughout this country. This, not protection against terrorism or crime, is the real purpose of this pernicious and dangerous bill. No matter how much some "restrictionistas" may wish to reduce the percentages of immigrants from Latin America and Asia, is it worth turning this country into a police state in order to do so?

Roger Algase, Esq.
New York, NY

Dear Editor:
If the Roger Algase letter (9/14/06 ID) has the "greatest respect" for retired INS agent Tim Houghtaling's viewpoints (09/14/06 ID), he should also respect, not question, their primary responsibility of keeping out all illegal alien invaders, not just "terrorists". And while Mr. Algase's letter continues to attribute entry laws to racism and questions how enforcement makes US more safe and secure, existing entry law actually does not mention any race or goal of security, only what constitutes violation of our sovereign right to control legal immigration and to stop the illegal variety. The problem with some immigration attorneys and others who have for too long benefited from lax entry policies, is that now that the American people are demanding that we enforce existing and needed new law on entry, these special interests resist and call such efforts "draconian". Illegal entry should absolutely be made a felony as it is a serious offense, too lightly treated in the past. Those who would aid and abet any criminal activity are also culpable as has always been the law. If the special interests don't have the discipline to support common sense entry limits and enforcement that is in the American interest, then they will and should "miss the train" that is soon leaving. Even the liquor industry advises to "drink responsibly". Illegal and excessive entry, amnesty in any form and liberal visa policies can no longer be tolerated in this post 9/11 era with over population problems, strained budgets and limited resources as well as honoring our rule of law, deal with it.

R. L. Ranger

Dear Editor:
Persecution of minority immigrants, or any immigrants, is wrong and should never be tolerated by anyone in this country. Prosecution of illegal immigrants is what the law demands. What is fascinating is how far those in the legal profession will go to excuse the crime. I can only sit in utter disbelief when I read what Immigration Daily readers say. To intimate that my support for enforcement of the law is racist because of the color of the criminal is ludicrous. I could care less what color the criminal is. If the person committing the crime of illegal entry into the US should not answer the charges and face the court for prosecution of same, please explain why. The legal profession in Congress crafted the law so that we could better control our borders. If that Congress never intended to enforce a law that they crafted, then they need to be prosecuted as well. Once and for all...I support adherance to the law by all who choose to come here. The issue is not immigration. The issue is illegal immigration. But...A) Close The Border While you do so, b) stop the flow while you honestly address the many complications involved, and c)stop the name calling. There's plenty of blame to go around on both sides of the political aisle. Tell me, who is actually trying to do something? Clearly it is not ILW.COM.

Gordon Keller
Mesa, AZ

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 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.

Publisher:  Sam Udani    Legal Editor:  Michele Kim                        ISSN:   1930-062X