Why should you schedule consultation with an attorney. Why can't an attorney give you free consultation and answer your quick questions on a spot when you call our office.

Almost daily, I hear from some of our callers: "I don't need legal consultation, I don't want to hire an attorney. I have only one or two very simple (or quick, or easy) questions, and I want an attorney to answer my questions right now and free of charge because my questions are so simple, quick, and easy!"

I will try to explain why this request doesn't make any sense and how to get proper legal advice.

U.S. immigration law is very complex and constantly changing. There have been no major immigration reforms or amnesties in the past few years. However, there have been significant changes introduced by our administration and executive branch in the form of USCIS memorandums, executive actions, guidance, practice advisories; and changes through our judicial branch (courts), such as, the caselaw, decisions by the BIA, AAO, Courts of Appeals, US Supreme Court, or even by a federal district court judges (for example, the temporary injunction by a judge in Texas which singlehandedly put on hold nationwide federal revised DACA and new DAPA programs).

U.S. immigration law is federal in nature and is the same in all states. However, it may apply differently to your situation depending on your background, your place of residence or domicile, US embassy in the country where you apply for a visa, etc.

An experienced immigration attorney may be able to guide you and advise you about specifics, loopholes, various options, and can spot possible problems before they happen, even if it seems to you that your case is pretty straightforward and you have only "one quick question". Even an easy case and a simple or quick question not always can be answered with a simple "yes" or "no" answer. You may not realize it, but a situation may have a lot of hidden potholes or variables depending on your venue, court jurisdiction, your factual circumstances, your arrest and criminal record, your family situation and status, timing, prior legal assistance, or prior legal actions and applications filed, etc.

You can find a lot of useful immigration-related INFORMATION on our Blog. We often post here updates and news about various visas, new policy guidance, reforms and relevant caselaw.

To ask basic questions about USCIS immigration forms, filing fees or to inquire about status of your pending case, you can contact USCIS, Department of Homeland Security, by calling their 800 Customer Service Hotline (number is on their website), or send an e-request via a webportal at USCIS website. Case status can be checked online, as well. Immigration courts, U.S. embassies and consulates and National Visa Center each have their own hotlines, call centers or other ways to contact them.

To receive a case-specific legal advice you should talk to a lawyer. Before we can advise you and schedule a consultation with you, we always email you our confidential immigration questionnaire, and ask you to complete and return it to us. In some cases, we can ask you to email us copies of your immigration forms, paperwork, some personal documents. When an attorney reviews your answers to our questionnaire and your paperwork, it helps her to get to know you, your situation, and decide what legal and/or visa options you shall consider, what are your best chances of obtaining certain visas and immigration benefits, how and when can you bring your family to USA, are you eligible for permanent residency or a green card in the United States, can you safely apply for a US citizenship, how can your children become US citizens, etc.

It's important that you provide truthful, accurate and complete answers to our questions because an attorney's advice to you is based on information you provided to an attorney. It could be dangerous to give misleading or incorrect answers to an attorney.

An attorney or a lawyer is often called "a counselor in law". It means that an attorney counsels and advises you, helps you to understand your situation better, anticipates any possible future issues or complications, offers guidance, and a long-term strategy and planning for yourself and your family. 

Legal advice is never a simple "yes" or "no" answer, it's never "use this form"  or "this is the link where you can find all information and all answers you need". Legal advice or consultation is like going to see a doctor. A doctor will ask you questions, take your vitals and administer necessary tests, then she will be able to diagnose you and offer you an appropriate treatment plan. The same is true about work of a good and ethical attorney. An attorney will have to ask you a number of questions, review your documents and paperwork, and only then she will be able to advise you, and offer you guidance and counsel.

In order to avoid mistakes and future complications, it's smart to consult an attorney before starting any legal, immigrant or visa process. Consultation with knowledgeable and ethical attorney should serve as a preventative measure and a way to establish a roadmap and plan your future.

In over ten years of my practice in the United States, I have come across of many unfortunate people who got themselves into deep trouble after reading wrong advice on internet forums, listening to their friends, co-workers, relatives and neighbors advice based on their experience, or paying to complete their "paperwork" to an unlicensed "immigration consultant", or "notario", or "tax preparer", or somebody else who speaks their native language in their immigrant community but has no proper training and is not a licensed attorney. In some of these cases, person's chances of living in USA legally were permanently destroyed. Some can become permanently banned from the United States, no matter how many close family members (wife, kids, parents) and other ties they have in USA. Immigration law is more complex than tax law, and non-compliance could bring more severe consequences than penalties in criminal law (except for the death penalty, of course). Where a convicted criminal can usually expect to be released from prison after a number of years and be reunited with his family, a person who was deported and permanently banned from USA may never be able to reunite with his family and loved ones in the United States. Lack of knowledge or bad advice is not always an excuse in immigration law. "Simple mistakes" in immigration law context could be costly and often irreversible.

Do yourself a favor and consult a knowledgeable immigration attorney in advance before filing of any application or petition with the USCIS Department of Homeland Security, or before submitting any visa application online. You can also schedule a consultation to seek a second opinion, if not sure that your attorney's advice is correct as applies to you. When you have questions or need legal advice you can email us to schedule a consultation. We will be glad to help you.

May 2015 Visa Bulletin: Retrogression for EB-5 Visa Category for China to May 01 2013. Dependent children under 21 and CSPA issues.

In May 2015 Visa Bulletin, the US Department of State had implemented a cutoff date for EB-5, immigrant investor visa category for China. 
In May 2015 Bulletin, it retrogresses to May 1, 2013 (two years).

How will it affect dependent children of a primary investor? How to protect dependents from ageing-out and becoming ineligible for a visa?

On April 13, 2015, Visa Office attended IIUSA 2015 EB-5 Regional Economic Advocacy Conference and provided some guidance on application of CSPA to those derivative children:

May 2015 visa bulletin can be found here. 

See at Smal Immigration Law Office Blog. 

O-1B denial case: stable owners sued USCIS for denial of O-1B extension to their racehorse trainer. AAO upheld denial for "material error" in the previous approvals.

This case proves once again that O visas (visas for individuals with Extraordinary Ability or Achievement) could be tricky and sometimes unpredictable. This O-1B (extraordinary ability visa in arts) was approved and extended two times prior to subsequent denial of another extension.

A popular thoroughbred racehorse trainer has accused the USCIS in a D.C. federal court of engaging in “capricious” and “arbitrary” behavior by denying an assistant trainer an extension of his nonimmigrant worker status after previously granting it without incident.

Mott Thoroughbred Stables Inc. said in its Friday complaint that by surprisingly and abruptly denying an O-1B petition extension to an “indispensable employee” on which the famed stables has relied since he began working there in 2010, the USCIS has caused irreparable harm to Mott Stables’ multimillion-dollar horse-training business.

The complaint asks the court to compel the USCIS to set aside the petition denial and promptly re-adjudicate the petition with deference to the prior approvals. It also asks the court to order the agency to postpone the effective date of its denial of the petition for assistant horse trainer Rodolphe Brisset and grant a temporary visa status pending the outcome of the instant suit.

“The USCIS failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the denial, failed to cite relevant authority for its decision and failed to clearly articulate the reasons for its abrupt departure from past and ongoing practice of approving O-1B petitions for horse trainers,” the complaint says.

The lawsuit says the unsuccessful petition is virtually the same as the ones USCIS previously approved, and that the agency only now has decided that its past approvals were a “material error” on the part of the agency, “in contravention of internal agency guidance on deference to prior approvals.”

Petitioner also asked the court to open up limited discovery to ascertain the agency’s grounds for denying the company’s petition in light of the two previous approvals of the same petition.

Mott Stables is challenging an October 2014 decision by the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office to uphold the denial of an O-1B extension to the trainer.

After two successful approvals, in 2013 the USCIS sent Mott Stables a request for evidence ( RFE)regarding the international acclaim and recognition Brisset has received a horse trainer, according to the complaint.

Among the types of evidence Mott Stables could hand over was “comparable evidence” of Brisset’s distinction as a prominent horse trainer, and in February 2014 the company sent to the USCIS a letter signed by six expert member of the equine community attesting to Brisset’s skills, according to the complaint. Mott Stables also explained the “unique nature” of the thoroughbred racing industry and why the trainer plays “an essential and critical role” in successful training operations, the complaint says.

In March 2014, the USCIS denied the petition, saying Mott Stables hadn’t demonstrated that Brisset had extraordinary ability in the field of endeavor nor that he had sustained national or international acclaim, according to the complaint.

On appeal, Mott Stables argued that a Department of Homeland Security memo says that deference must be given to a prior determination that an individual is eligible for a particular nonimmigrant classification, where extension of that nonimmigrant petition’s validity “involves the same parties and the same underlying facts,” the complaint says.

Mott Stables argued that the USCIS had not explicitly said why it refused the petition and that changed circumstances and new material information — possibly dispositive developments — did not form the basis of the agency’s decision.

When the USCIS’ appellate body AAO upheld the denial, it ruled that the memo's deference order didn’t apply when there was a "material error," which in this case was that since 2010 the agency had incorrectly found that Brisset’s occupation fell within the O-1B classification, according to the complaint.

Mott Stables said in its Friday complaint that this was the first time the USCIS had ever ruled that Brisset’s horse-trainer position did not qualify as a creative activity or endeavor, such that he could have been classified as an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts.

Read at http://law-visa-usa.com/1/post/2015/03/o-1b-denial-case-stable-owners-sued-uscis-for-denial-of-o-1b-extension-to-their-racehorse-trainer-aao-upheld-denial-for-material-error-in-the-previous-approvals.html


- Law360, Mar. 10, 2015.

DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP CHARTS: how children born abroad to a US citizen parent acquire or derive US citizenship at birth.

DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP CHARTS:

How children born abroad to a US citizen mother or father acquire or derive US citizenship through their parents, their mother or father. How children used to derive US citizenship under the old laws (which is still relevant because it applies to those children who were born during those timeframes).


Please see charts on acquisition/derivation of citizenship here:

 http://www.ilrc.org/resources/naturalization-quick-reference-charts

Chart A: 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64881744/1.CHILD_CITIZENSHIP_CHART_1_natz_chart-a-2014-11-12.pdf

Chart B:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64881744/1.CHILD_CITIZENSHIP_CHART_2_OUT_OF_WEDLOCK_natz_chart-b-2014-11.12.pdf

Chart C: 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64881744/1.CHILD_CITIZENSHIP_CHART_3_natz_chart-c-2015_3-4.ak_.pdf

Big news for H4 spouses. Effective May 26, 2015, some H-4 spouses can apply for a work permit or EAD.

Big news for H4 spouses: USCIS announced today that, effective May 26, 2015, the DHS is extending eligibility for employment authorization to certain H-4 dependent spouses of H-1B nonimmigrants who are seeking employment-based lawful permanent resident (LPR) status. DHS amended the regulations to allow these H-4 dependent spouses to accept employment in the United States. 

Eligible individuals include certain H-4 dependent spouses of H-1B nonimmigrants who: 

• Are the principal beneficiaries of an approved Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; or 
• Have been granted H-1B status under sections 106(a) and (b) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 as amended by the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act. The Act permits H-1B nonimmigrants seeking lawful permanent residence to work and remain in the United States beyond the six-year limit on their H-1B status.

Under the new rule, eligible H-4 dependent spouses must file Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, with supporting evidence and the required $380 fee in order to obtain employment authorization and receive a Form I-766, Employment Authorization Document (EAD). USCIS will begin accepting applications on May 26, 2015. Once USCIS approves the Form I-765 and the H-4 dependent spouse receives an EAD, he or she may begin working in the United States.

See also at: http://law-visa-usa.com/1/post/2015/02/effective-may-26-2015-some-h-4-spouses-can-apply-for-a-work-permit-or-ead.html

Read more at DHS Extends Eligibility for Employment Authorization to Certain H-4 Dependent Spouses of H-1B Nonimmigrants Seeking Employment-Based Lawful Permanent Residence | USCIS