• Hours & Info

    (562) 495-0554
    M-F: 8:00am - 6:00 p.m.
    Sat: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
  • Past Blog Posts

  • https://api.whatsapp.com/send?phone=13104885414

Be careful if you own the company doing the PERM and you are also the beneficiary

BALCA affirmed the Certifying Officer’s denial of certification, finding that the employer did not establish that the job opportunity was open and available to all U.S. workers as required by 20 CFR §656.10(c)(8), where the beneficiary and her husband each had a 50% ownership interest in the sponsoring entity.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/denial-of-perm/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm/

https://californiaimmigration.us/green-card/perm-employment-petition-for-immigration/

The October Visa Bulletin Fiasco

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington issued an order denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the State Department in the class action lawsuit regarding the October 2015 Visa Bulletin. The court’s order stated, “While the Court appreciates the confusion caused by the two Visa Bulletins published in September and the potentially wasted expenses Plaintiffs incurred as a result, because Plaintiffs fail to meet the critical elements for a temporary restraining order at this time, the Court cannot issue injunctive relief.”

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/department-of-state-dos/

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/dos/

https://atomic-temporary-10880024.wpcomstaging.com/tag/dos-travel-warning/

https://californiaimmigration.us/dos-expands-interview-waiver-eligibility/

Get a Lawyer to help with PERM Advertising

BALCA affirmed the Certifying Officer’s denial of certification, finding that the employer’s failure to advertise the option of free housing, despite the employer’s argument that the benefit was normal to the occupation and could have been assumed, was an omission of a material aspect of employment that would influence whether or not a U.S. worker would apply for the job.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm-labor-certification/

https://californiaimmigration.us/green-card/perm-employment-petition-for-immigration/

Fighting a deportation because of drug use?

The Fifth Circuit vacated the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision and remanded, finding that the petitioner’s misdemeanor conviction for the possession of marijuana within 1,000 feet of his high school (a “drug-free zone”) under Texas law satisfied the personal-use exception under INA §237(a)(2)(B)(i).

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/possession-crime/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/drug-charge/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/drug-crime/

https://californiaimmigration.us/drug-offense-removability-uphelod/

H-1B border security fees at an end

USCIS issued a notice that certain H-1B and L-1 petitions filed on or after October 1, 2015, should not include the additional filing fees of $2,000 or $2,250, often called “border security fees,” that were previously required by Public Law 111-230. The additional fees expired on September 30, 2015. All other H-1B and L-1 fees, including the base processing fee, the Fraud Prevention and Detection Fee, and the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 Fee (when applicable) are still required.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/h-1b-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/amended-h-1b-petition/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/h-1b/

https://californiaimmigration.us/h-1b-work-visa-for-specialty-occupation-visa/

Be careful when presenting your asylum case

The Ninth Circuit dismissed the petition for review, holding that, pursuant to the jurisdiction-stripping provisions of INA §242(a)(2)(A), the court lacked jurisdiction to review the Immigration Judge’s affirmance of the asylum officer’s negative credible fear determination in the petitioner’s expedited removal proceedings. The court rejected the petitioner’s argument that the jurisdiction-stripping provisions unconstitutionally deprived the petitioner of any forum in which to bring a procedural due process challenge to his expedited removal proceedings, because there exist certain exceptions to the restriction on judicial review.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/asylum-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/appeal-asylum/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/asylum/

https://californiaimmigration.us/asylum/

The State Department released the Visa Bulletin for November 2015, including the availability of immigrant numbers for “Application Final Action Dates” (indicating when DOS or USCIS can make a decision on the applications) and “Dates for Filing Applications” (indicating when immigrant visa applicants should be notified to submit required documentation). There was no forward movement from the revised October 2015 Visa Bulletin in the “dates for filing” for the family-based, first and third preference categories for Mexico; the employment-based, second preference categories for mainland China and India; or the employment-based, third preference category for the Philippines.

Visa bulletin

Visa bulletin and adjustment of status

Visa bulletin chart

DOS provides Visa bulletin 

Stop Time rule applies moment NTA is served

The Ninth Circuit upheld the Board of Immigration Appeals, holding that the failure of a Notice to Appear (NTA) to specify the date and location of a removal hearing has no effect on the stop-time rule. Accordingly, the court found that the petitioner, who had not accrued the requisite period of continuous physical presence by the time he was served with the NTA in his removal proceeding, was statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/defective-nta/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/deficient-nta/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/nta/

https://californiaimmigration.us/our-immigration-law-firm/

CBP released force incidents

Today, CBP released statistics on the number of use of force incidents that occurred between FY2011 and FY2015, broken down by fiscal year. The data, which reflects the application of the use of force by U.S. Border Patrol agents, CBP officers, and air interdiction agents, indicates that there were 768 use of force incidents in FY2015, compared to 1037 such incidents in FY2014.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/force-incidents/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/immigrationlawyer/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/immigrationattorney/

https://californiaimmigration.us/our-immigration-law-firm/

Get help from an experienced attorney if you claimed to be a US Citizen

The Eighth Circuit denied the petition for review, finding that the petitioner forfeited his right to a merits hearing on the charge of falsely representing himself as a U.S. citizen in violation of INA §237(a)(3)(D) when he failed to make a timely assertion of that right. As such, the court held that the petitioner’s arguments alleging due process, statutory, and regulatory violations could not prevail.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/us-citizen/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/claiming-to-be-a-us-citizen/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/claim-to-us-citizenship/

https://californiaimmigration.us/us-citizen-is-charged-with-defrauding-foreign-national-employees-that-were-hoping-to-obtain-legal-citizenship/