We are asked on a daily basis by our clients to provide visa bulletin predictions and when a particular priority date may become current.   As a result, on behalf of our clients, we appreciate that Mr. Oppenheim has shared his first-hand knowledge of the demand in the employment-based green card categories and has afforded us to get some advance sense of the movement of the priority dates and also on short- and long-term immigrant visa trends.

Summary of Mr. Oppenheim’s January 2012 Visa Bulletin Predictions

The main points are that due to lower than anticipated demand in EB filings, EB-2 India and China cutoff dates may move forward by another 6 months in the March 2012 Visa Bulletin, and then slow down (or even retrogress) over the summer.   The slow demand in EB-1 is expected to continue this year as well.

Observations of the Demand in Employment-based Visa Numbers

Unexpectedly Low EB-2 Usage and Rate of Filings.  The employment-based (EB) visa number usage has been very slow in FY2012; as a result, the Department of State (DOS) is moving the dates forward to see how many cases are out there waiting to be filed.  Mr. Oppenheim indicated that he is relying on USCIS and their estimates of the incoming EB I-485 cases (because 85 to 90% of all EB filings are I-485s filed with USCIS).  It seems that USCIS had anticipated a higher demand — the rate of I-485 adjustment of status (AOS) filings has been only 50% of their estimates.

EB-1 Demand Low.   Mr. Oppenheim assumes low usage of EB-1 numbers again this year.  A “fall-down” of 12,000 additional EB-1 numbers into EB-2 is calculated into Mr. Oppenheim’s projections for 2012, although he thinks EB-1 number availability may be down by approximately 1,000 as compared to last year, due to heavier EB-5 usage since unused EB-5 numbers “spill up” to EB-1 and then down to EB-2.     Mr. Oppenheim is very surprised by the severe downturn in EB-1 numbers –  possible reasons are the impact of Kazarian on USCIS filings and demand for EB-1 EA numbers.

EB Visa Bulletin Predictions for 2012

March 2012 Visa Bulletin.   According to Mr. Oppenheim, employment-based priority dates will advance again with the March 2012 Visa Bulletin, very likely by at least a few months.    An advance of six months is possible, although an advance of one year is not likely.    Mr. Oppenheim noted that given current AOS processing times of 4-6 months, filing AOS in March is the last time to get a case possibly approved before the end of the fiscal year on September 30, 2012.

Spring, Summer and rest of FY2012. After some movement in the March (and possibly the April 2012 Visa Bulletin), Mr. Oppenheim expects to hold the priority date over the summer, and then retrogress or advance, as needed and as determined by demand over the summer.  Mr. Oppenheim does not have enough data at this time to predict demand and priority date changes in the last quarter of FY2012.

Conclusion

Mr. Oppenheim’s comments are extremely helpful to get a sense of the visa cutoff dates over the next few months.  Overall, Mr. Oppenheim’s comments are likely to create some mixed feelings among our employment-based clients.   Although EB-2 is likely to continue to move forward over the next one or two months, the long term prospects of EB-3 China and India are not good.

Our office has been very active and aggressive in preparing and timely filing I-485 adjustment of status applications for clients who have become “current” over the past few months.   We will continue to be ready to handle the anticipated forward movement in the EB-2 China and India categories.    Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can review your case or answer any questions.  We are also happy to provide a free quote for preparing and filing your I-485 application.  We also invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to receive timely updates on this and related topics.  Finally, if you already haven’t, please consider our Visa Bulletin Predictions tool which provides personalized predictions and charts helping you understand when a particular priority date may become current and what are the movement patterns.

Among the most common USCIS application types which require biometrics are I-485, Application to Adjust Status, I-131, Application for Travel Document (Reentry Permit) (please see our specialized Expedited Reentry Permit site), and I-90, Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card.   Our office handles a fair number of these applications and we hope to provide some additional background on the biometrics process.

Biometrics Codes

Normally, an ASC Biometrics Notice would contain (in the top right area), a field named “Code.”    The “Code” field is intended to indicate the type of biometrics processing to be performed.  The possible values are:

• Code 1 – fingerprinting only (10 prints);
• Code 2 – biometrics (photo, signature and index finger);
• Code 3 – fingerprints (10 prints) and biometrics (photo, signature and index finger).

USCIS has indicated that the applicable code for each biometrics appointment is determined based on the type of an application and certain relevant case factors.

Reusing/Transferring Biometrics Across Applications

A question which arises often with respect to some applicants is whether USCIS can reuse biometrics for different types of applications.   Some examples are a reentry permit applicant, who needs to renew his or her green card, or for I-485 adjustment applicant who need to apply for a reentry permit soon after I-485 approval.

The government has confirmed that they are indeed willing and able to transfer biometrics across applications; however, such flexibility is available only to military service members and their families who have unique situations regarding deployment, moving, and living overseas which affect their ability to provide fingerprints and fulfill the background check requirements.    This authority is provided by the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act, enacted on June 26, 2008, requires USCIS to use fingerprints taken for previous immigration purposes or fingerprints provided during military enlistment to complete the required naturalization fingerprint check.

Can Biometrics Be Waived?

Unfortunately, USCIS is very clear that the collection of biometrics cannot be waived with very limited waivers available for certain medical conditions (generally, medical conditions which affect the applicant’s ability to do the biometrics).

DOS/USCIS to Stop Approving EB Immigrant Visas Until October 1

As a result of reaching the annual EB visa number limit, DOS has stopped approving immigrant visas in all of the employment-based categories.   Employment-based immigrant visas at U.S. Consular Posts are being held or returned to applicants for resubmission on or after October 1.

Similarly, DOS has advised USCIS that due to reaching the quota, no new I-485 adjustment of status applications would be approved for the remainder of the fiscal year (which ends on September 30, 2011).    There may be a limited number of I-485 approvals between now and October 1 but such approvals are based not on changes in the availability of visa numbers, but due to the fact that some I-485 cases have had their visa number already requested, authorized and allocated under the FY2011 limit.

Conclusion

Some of our clients and readers have already experienced returned passports by US Consular section around the world with notations indicating that they should resubmit their application on or after October 1 once the numbers become available again.     As a result of this memo to USCIS, we expect that the number of I-485 approvals for EB cases for the remainder of the month of September to drop to close to zero.

The good news is that after October 1, and in accordance with the October 2011 Visa Bulletin, normal employment-based immigrant visa processing would resume.    Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of any assistance and please feel free to subscribe to our weekly immigration newsletter to obtain related news and developments.

Background

Under Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), an individual seeking admission to the United States or seeking to adjust status to permanent resident (obtaining a green card) is inadmissible if the individual “at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge.” If an individual is inadmissible, admission to the United States or adjustment of status will not be granted.

Immigration and welfare laws have generated some concern about whether a noncitizen may face adverse immigration consequences for having received federal, state, or local public benefits. Some noncitizens and their families are eligible for public benefits – including disaster relief, treatment of communicable diseases, immunizations, and children’s nutrition and health care programs – without being found to be a public charge.   As a result, there is some confusion as to what kind of benefits do constitute a public charge and what kind of benefits do not.   With USCIS guidance, we seek to provide guidance.

Public Charge – Definition

USCIS defines “public charge” as

an individual who is likely to become “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance, or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.”

See “Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds,” 64 FR 28689 (May 26, 1999).

In determining whether an alien meets this definition for public charge inadmissibility, a number of factors are considered, including age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills. No single factor, other than the lack of an affidavit of support, if required, will determine whether an individual is a public charge.

Benefits Subject to Public Charge Consideration

USCIS guidance specifies that cash assistance for income maintenance includes Supplemental Security Income (SSI), cash assistance from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program and state or local cash assistance programs for income maintenance, often called “general assistance” programs.   Acceptance of these forms of public cash assistance could make a noncitizen inadmissible as a public charge if all other criteria are met.  However, the mere receipt of these benefits does not automatically make an individual inadmissible, ineligible to adjust status to lawful permanent resident, or deportable on public charge grounds.   Each determination is made on a case-by-case basis in the context of the totality of the circumstances.  See “Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds,” 64 FR 28689 (May 26, 1999).

In addition, public assistance, including Medicaid, that is used to support aliens who reside in an institution for long-term care – such as a nursing home or mental health institution – may also be considered as an adverse factor in the totality of the circumstances for purposes of public charge determinations. Short-term institutionalization for rehabilitation is not subject to public charge consideration.

Benefits Not Subject to Public Charge Consideration

Under the USCIS guidance, non-cash benefits and special-purpose cash benefits that are not intended for income maintenance are not subject to public charge consideration. Such benefits include:

• Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases, use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, prenatal care and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
• Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
• Nutrition programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)- commonly referred to as Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
• Housing benefits
• Child care services
• Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
• Emergency disaster relief
• Foster care and adoption assistance
• Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary or higher education
• Job training programs
• In-kind, community-based programs, services or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
• Non-cash benefits under TANF such as subsidized child care or transit subsidies
• Cash payments that have been earned, such as Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans’ benefits, and other forms of earned benefits
• Unemployment compensation

Some of the above programs may provide cash benefits, such as energy assistance, transportation or child care benefits provided under TANF or the Child Care Development Block Grant (CCDBG), and one-time emergency payments under TANF.   Since the purpose of such benefits is not for income maintenance, but rather to avoid the need for ongoing cash assistance for income maintenance, they are not subject to public charge consideration.

Conclusion

As described above, a public charge can have very serious consequences on one’s immigration process.  As a result, we caution that the information provided above is based on general USCIS guidance which can vary based on individual case facts.   We urge our clients and readers to conduct extensive research (and/or consult us) before accepting benefits which may be deemed to be public charge.

Low EB-1 Demand to Cause Visa Number Spillover to EB-2

USCIS has reported that the demand for EB-1 visa numbers has dropped significantly since October 1, 2010.   As a result, the planned visa number demand in this category can be adjusted downwards.  By doing this, the unused EB-1 numbers can be allocated to other categories.  This is Mr. Oppenheim’s statement:

“[US]CIS says they have seen a decline in filings, and does not expect a change in the number use pattern. Therefore, this decline in EB-1 number use will allow me to begin having those ‘otherwise unused’ numbers drop down and be available for use in the EB-2 category. Based on current indications, that would mean that at least 12,000 additional numbers will be available to the EB-2 category. This situation will allow me to advance the India EB-2 cut-off date for May. The reason being that all ‘otherwise unused’ numbers are provided strictly in priority date order, and the India demand has the largest concentration of early dates.”

EB-2 India Expected to Move Forward (Substantially?) in the May 2011 Visa Bulletin

Based on Mr. Oppenheim’s comments, it is expected that the EB-2 India category will move forward in the May 2011 Visa Bulletin (please see our Visa Bulletin topic page where updates are posted immediately).  This should be a welcome development for the thousands of EB-2 India filers who have been waiting for 8 months now without any movement in this category.   While we cannot estimate by how much EB-2 India will advance, we hope that the move would be substantial, based on the 12,000 available visa numbers mentioned by Mr. Oppenheim.

Porting of EB-3 India to EB-2 India to Continue — Heavy Demand in EB-2 Expected

Our office has been advising over the past couple of years, and we continue to do so, that all EB-3 India filers who are now eligible to port their priority dates into EB-2 to do so.   In many cases porting is extremely helpful in advancing one’s green card application substantially, especially when the EB-3 priority date, as ported to EB-2 becomes current, and especially considering a possible significant forward movement in EB-2 India.   Please contact us if we can provide analysis of your ability to port your EB-3 priority date into EB-2.

EB-2 India Expected Forward Movement to Cause Increase in I-485 Filings and Interfilings

We also expect the EB-2 India forward priority date movement to cause an increase in I-485 adjustment of status filings for both primary beneficiaries or for family members who have not been able to file I-485 previously (most often during the summer of 2007).

Additionally, many I-485s remain pending and “connected” to I-140s which reflect an older EB-3 priority date which is not current.  If a subsequent EB-2 I-140 has been filed and if the earlier EB-3 priority date has been ported into the new I-140, an “interfiling” may be needed to notify USCIS and have them “connect” the pending I-485 with the new, and current, EB-2 I-140.

Please contact our office if we can help you prepare and file your I-485 application or if you need assistance with interfiling your pending I-485 to a new and (soon to be) current EB-2 I-140.   We also invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to obtain alerts of related news and developments.

The new combined EAD/AP card (I-766) looks like this sample image and has an annotation at the bottom reading “SERVES AS I-512 ADVANCE PAROLE.”    The new card would replace the paper-based (and often easy to damage) Form I-512 Advance Parole documents which one had to obtain under the previous guidance.

Who Would be Eligible to Obtain the New EAD/AP Card?

Not all I-485 adjustment of status applicants who also wish to obtain an advance parole would receive the new card.  According to USCIS, an applicant may be issued this card when he or she applies a I-765, Application for Employment Authorization and I-131, Application for Travel Travel Document concurrently with or after filing Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status.   Separate EAD and AP documents will still be issued for all other applicants.

Procedures for Using the New EAD/AP Card

The new EAD/AP card will continue to be an accepted employment authorization document as a List A document when completing Form I-9.  Holders of the new card can also use it to return to the U.S. as parolees after a short travel abroad without abandoning the pending I-485 adjustment application.  The holder of the EAD/AP card must present it at the port of entry to request that he or she be admitted as parolee.   As a result, it is important that holders of this card continue to follow closely its expiration and prepare timely renewal applications (at least 90 days in advance).

Our practice includes handling EAD and AP applications for I-485 adjustment of status applicants so please do not hesitate to contact us if our office can be of any help or if you have any questions.

The U.S. State Department just released the January 2011 Visa Bulletin which is the fourth Visa Bulletin for the FY2011 fiscal year and first for the calendar year.    The major headline in the upcoming month’s bulletin is the major retrogression in family-based visa numbers, accompanied by the continued slow forward movement across the employment-based categories.  The retrogression in family-based categories is a surprise following recent comments by the State Department that family-based categories (especially 2A) should continue to move forward.

Summary of the January 2011 Visa Bulletin – Employment-Based (EB)

Below is a summary of the January 2011 Visa Bulletin with respect to employment-based petitions:

• EB-1 remains current across the board.
• EB-2 ROW (Rest of World), Mexico and Philippines remain current, EB-2 China moves forward by two (2) weeks to June  22, 2006, while EB-2 India remains (again, for a number of consecutive months) unchanged at May 8, 2006.
• EB-3 ROW moves forward by one (1) month to March 22, 2005, EB-3 China  moves forward by one (1) week to December 15, 2003, while EB-3 India  moves forward by also one (1) week to February 1, 2002.  EB-3 Mexico moves forward by 9.5 months to April 15, 2003 and EB-3 Philippines moves forward by one (1) month to March 22, 2005.
• The “other worker” category remains unchanged at  April 22, 2003 for ROW and China and Philippines.  It moves forward by one (1) week to February 1, 2002 for India.  Mexico moves forward by 9.5 months to April 15, 2003.

Summary of the January 2011 Visa Bulletin – Family-Based (FB)

Below is a summary of the January 2011 Visa Bulletin with respect to family-based petitions:

• FB1 ROW, China and India retrogress and go back by more than thirteen (13) months to January 1, 2005.  FB1 Mexico moves forward by one (1) week to January 8, 1993.
• FB2A ROW, China, India and Philippines retrogress and go back by 32 months from August 1, 2010 to January 1, 2008.  This is the most significant development this month.
• FB2B ROW, China and India retrogress and go back by approximately twenty-two (22) months to April 15, 2003.  FB2B Mexico remains unchanged at June 22, 1992 and FB2B Philippines moves backwards by almost 9 months to May 15, 1999.

Slow Movement  for Employment-based Petitions and Significant Backwards Movement in Family-based Priority Dates

The slow forward movement across many employment categories continues, as expected, although the movement in the employment-based categories may be very disappointing to many, especially in the the EB-2 India category which did not move at all this month (EB-3 India moved forward by only a week).

However, the most notable and significant movement was across the family-based preference categories.  The FB-2A category, which was widely expected to continue to move forward, and to even  be current by the February 2011 Visa Bulletin (see our comments on Charles Oppenheim’s predictions from September 2010) has retrogressed significantly from August 2010 to January 2008.

What Are the Reasons for the FB Category Retrogression?

Simply stated, the reason for the retrogression is high demand, caused by the prompt forward movement of family-based categories over the past months.   Those past forward movements have resulted in a dramatic increase in the level of applicant demand received in recent months.   This, according to the State Department, has required the retrogression of many Family preference cut-off dates for January 2011 in an effort to hold number use within the various numerical limits.   Unfortunately, according to the State Department, further retrogressions cannot be ruled out should demand continue at the current levels.

Family-based Applicants with Current Priority Dates Should File Adjustment of Status (I-485) Applications by the End of December 2010

Given the retrogression in family-based preference categories, those who have approved (or pending) I-130 petitions, who are otherwise eligible to file adjustment of status (I-485) application and whose priority dates will be affected by the retrogression in the family-based categories should consider filing their I-485 adjustments before the end of December 2010.  Please contact us immediately if we can help you prepare your I-485 application.

We invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to receive timely updates on this and related topics.  We also invite you to contact us if our office can be of any assistance in your immigration matters or you have any questions or comments about the January 2011 Visa Bulletin.

The “Code” field is intended to indicate the type of biometrics processing to be performed.  The possible values are:

• Code 1 – fingerprinting for 10 prints only.
• Code 2 – photo, signature and index finger press-print;
• Code 3 – photo, signature, index finger press-print and fingerprinting for 10 prints.

Procedure and Process

Notification of AC21 Change of Employer
I-485 applicants who wish to change employer and retain their adjustment process pursuant to AC21 are advised to follow the following steps:

1. Identify only one applicant in a single e-mail. E -mails must pertain to applicants whose I-485s have been pending for 180 or more days and who are eligible for AC21 porting.
2. Send an email to: EBUPDATE.Tsc@dhs.gov.
3. On the subject line,  write “EB I-485/AC21.” (Example: EB I-485/AC21)
4. In the text of the email, provide: A-number, old employer’s name and new employer’s name.  Attach a copy of the new employer’s letter of employment. The letter must identify the following information: the new employer, the letter’s author and his/her job title, the applicant’s new job title, start date of new employment, hours per week, salary, and specific description of the duties to be performed.
5. If the applicant has more than one A-number, they should be typed on the same line separated by a “/”. (Example: All 1222333 I A444555666). If there are multiple family members, they should be typed  all on the same line separated by commas. (Example: AIII222333, A222333444, A444555666). You should also indicate which of the A-numbers is that of the principal I-485 applicant / I I-140 beneficiary.

Notification When an Applicant Has Multiple I-140s With Available Priority Dates

Notification When Applicant is Eligible for Cross-Country Chargeability

Applicants who are eligible to obtain chargeability under a different country should follow the following procedure:

1. As with the categories described above,  identify only one applicant in a single e-mail. E-mails should pertain to applicants whose I-485s are currently eligible for processing because the applicant is entitled to receive a cross-charged priority date from a qualifying family member under Section 202 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
2. Send an email to: EBUPDATE.Tsc@dhs.gov
3. On the subject line, write “I-485/ CC”
4. In the text of the email,  provide A-numbers, including the A-number of the I-485 applicant who will acquire the current priority date from the qualifying family member, and the country of cross chargeability. Also include the A-number of the family member who will confer the current priority date.  If the applicant who is to receive the cross-charged priority date has more than one A-number, or if there are multiple family members,  the instructions described above under AC 21 portability apply.

Notification of Case in Need of Transfer

Applicants can also notify TSC of cases which are in need of transfer.  The procedure is as follows:

1. Identify only one applicant in a single e-mail. E-mails must pertain to applicants whose I-485s are eligible for processing because the priority date of another petition relating to the I-485 applicant (such as an I-130) has a visa available.
2. Send an email to: EBUPDATE.Tsc@dhs.gov
3. On the subject line,  write “Transfer”.
4. In the text of the email, provide A-numbers or receipt numbers and the office to which the I-485 should be transferred. If the applicant has more than one A-number, or if there are multiple family members please follow the instructions described above under the AC 21 portability instructions.

Conclusion
TSC’s pilot notification program is a great idea; however, its success will depend on how well TSC will respond to legitimate notifications send to them via the new email address and how well TSC will advise applicants who use the notification tool of the status and progress of their request.  We will continue monitoring this pilot program and using it with selected clients who can benefit from it and will provide further updates on the pilot program’s usefulness.

Generally, a new job should be in the same job classification as the job for which the approved immigrant petition was filed.  For example, an adjustment applicant working as Computer Analyst, where the PERM/I-140 were filed for Computer Systems Analysts (SOC code 15-1051.00) classification should be able to switch to a new job which fell under the same classification – 15-1051.00.

In a recent teleconference, the Nebraska Service Center (NSC) provided some unofficial but helpful guidance on their reasoning and practice when adjudicating AC21-related cases.   NSC was asked to provide some guidance as to their criteria in adjudicating the “same or similar” job standard.  In response, NSC confirmed that the “same or similar” has not been a significant issue because NSC has been applying a “common sense” approach – NSC has confirmed that most petitions invoking AC21 portability based on similar occupations are indeed usually similar, i.e. accountant doing another accounting position, IT consultant working in the IT field.    On the other hand, IT worker making “slurpees at the 7-Eleven” would not be considered to qualify under AC21.

While this conference call and the information about the “common sense” approach NSC takes with respect to AC21 review does not state the official USCIS position, it nonetheless provides a helpful insight into the operations and standards at NSC.  Also, it should serve to provide some relief and flexibility to the thousands of I-485 adjustment applicants who are seeking to switch jobs but when the new proposed jobs are not exactly similar to the jobs for which they were initially sponsored.

Mr. Oppenheim’s Comments

Although there is no guarantee that Mr. Oppenheim’s comments to AILA would turn into reality, he has been very accurate and careful in his comments in the past.

EB-3 Worldwide (ROW).  Visa numbers are expected to progress to April-August 2005.  Such movement will be gradual and is expected to start in January or February of 2010.

EB-2 China and India.  Annual limits are expected to be reached no later than May.  It is possible that otherwise unused second preference numbers to be made available.  This makes the cut-off date for both EB-2 India and China to progress to October-December 2005.

EB-3 China.  It is expected to move along with EB-3 ROW over the next few months.  The fiscal year is expected to end with a June-September 2003 cut-off.

EB-3 India.  Very slow movement expected.  There are 58,000 pending applications and it is expected to move only  up to five (5) weeks over the entire fiscal year.

Our Conclusion

While there are some good news in this announcement, it becomes clear that some categories, especially EB-3 India, become very undesirable and we strongly recommend clients and readers who are in EB-3 India to consider either filing in EB-2, if possible, given education and experience.  Many EB-3 India applicants who have been waiting for 4-5 years already find themselves facing another 4-5 year wait.  As a result, we often see second EB-2 applications using the recently gained experience filed (often by switching employers) by retaining the earlier EB-3 priority date.  Please contact us if we can help you understand whether your case may qualify.

In a recent guidance, USCIS provides clarity to these important adjustment of status questions.

Pending Adjustment Applications

USCIS has indicated that since November 13, 2009, USCIS will hold any application that would have been denied solely on the applicant’s failure to show proof of having received the HPV or zoster vaccine.  USCIS will resume adjudication on these cases after December 14, 2009, when the new rules take effect.

New Adjustment Applications

Under the new USCIS guidance, prospective applicants to adjust status  do not need to wait until December 14, 2009, to file their I-485 petitions.  Instead, the I-485 may be filed before December 14 without having proof of the HPV or zoster vaccine.  Given current processing times, it is impossible for USCIS to complete processing of the I-485 by December 14 so that once the application is due to be reviewed, the new CDC rules would have taken effect on December 14, 2009.

Background About the Required Vaccinations

Under Section 212(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), any alien who seeks admission into the United States as an immigrant, or who seeks adjustment of status to the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, is inadmissible into the United States if the alien is unable to present documentation of having received vaccination against “vaccine-preventable diseases, which shall include at least the following diseases: Mumps, measles, rubella, polio, tetanus and diphtheria toxoids, pertussis, Haemophilus influenzae type B, and hepatitis B, and any other vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.”  Current guidance by the Center of Disease Control (“CDC”) includes the HPV vaccin to the list of vaccine-preventable diseases and is therefore required by girls and women between the ages of 11 and 26 who are seeking to become legal permanent US residents.  Those within this age range were required to get at least the first dose of the HPV vaccine, which protects against some strains of the virus blamed for cervical cancer. Additionally, the Gardasil shot was added to the vaccine list for immigrants in July 2008 by the CDC.

HPV Vaccine Requirement Controversy 

While HPV remains the single most widespread sexually transmitted disease in the country, only a small percentage of those infected with the virus will go on to develop life-threatening diseases like cervical cancer. The cost-effectiveness of the Gardasil vaccine (the HPV vaccine) remains largely in debate especially when young girls coming from a variety of foreign nationalities and cultures have to be subjected to medical exam and vaccination.  Additionally, the price of the vaccine, which is administered in three separate shots, can cost anywhere from $400 to $1000  (and the cost is often not reimbursable by insurance companies).

New CDC Guidance

Accordingly, CDC has announced a revised rule which becomes effective December 14, 2009, and under which the HPV vaccine will not be required for aliens seeking admission as an immigrant or seeking adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.

In providing explanation to this change in policy, CDC recognized that genital infection with HPV is an extremely common infection due to its efficient transmission via sexual intercourse. There are approximately 6 million incident infections occurring annually in the United States. Over half of sexually active men and women will develop HPV infection at some point in their lives and 15% of all Americans have current infection with HPV.

Although there are millions of HPV infections annually, it is very difficult to distinguish those cases which resolve from those (about 10,000 per year) cases which result in cervical cancer.  Therefore, while HPV may be an age-appropriate vaccine for an immigrant applicant, HPV neither causes outbreaks nor is it associated with outbreaks (per explanation in the background section).  Further, HPV has not been eliminated, nor is in the process of elimination, in the United States. Therefore, because HPV does not meet the adopted criteria, it will not be a required vaccine for immigrant and adjustment of status to permanent residence applicants.

To address this kind of cases, USCIS Ombudsman has provided a new procedure which may help derivative applicants.   Under the new procedure, if a family member’s derivative adjustment of status application has been pending in excess of 30 days from the approval date of the principal applicant’s Form I-485, an email inquiry with subject line of “Unapproved Derivative I-485″  should be submitted to cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov with the following information:

• DHS Form 7001;
• A copy of the principal applicant’s Form I-485 approval notice;
• A copy of the Form I-485 receipt notice for the derivative; and
• Any other evidence that is pertinent to the case.

This procedure was announced on October 8, 2009, so we do not yet have opinion about its usefulness, but we hope that it provides another avenue for derivative beneficiaries to move forward with their I-485 adjustment of status application.

How Can I Determine My Place in the AOS Queue?

An AOS application’s preference category, priority date, and country of origin determine its place in line for a visa.  The earlier your priority date is, the closer you are to the front of the line.     The “Pending Employment-Based Form I-485 Report” displays the total number of pending adjustment of status applications, per preference classification. The report shows how many pending adjustment of status (green card) applications in each preference classification have priority dates in a given month and year.  You can use this chart to determine how many applicants in your preference classification have priority dates in the same month and year as your own.  Also, you can determine how many applicants in your preference classification are ahead of you in line for a visa number by adding together the number of cases with an earlier priority date than your own.

 Ensure That You Use The Report Relevant to Your AOS

All applicants for an employment-based green card may use the pending Form I-485 report to determine their place in line for a visa.  Because certain countries experience higher demand than others, applicants in these “oversubscribed” countries may move forward in line more slowly than applicants in countries experiencing less demand.  In other words, in order to obtain a visa, applicants in oversubscribed countries may need to have earlier priority dates than applicants in countries experiencing less demand.  Applicants in oversubscribed countries may therefore want to also refer to the report for their specific country of chargeability to determine where they stand in line with other applicants from that country.

Conclusion

We are pleased with USCIS’ efforts to provide more transparency by compiling and releasing the I-485 inventory data.  While we realize that for some of our clients and readers the inventory information will show that there is still a significant wait, the fact that AOS applicants can obtain some empirical estimate of their relative place in the processing queue is important.

Until now, USCIS has a policy from a Memorandum of Feb. 28, 2003 from William R. Yates, “Procedures for Concurrently Filed Family-Based or Employment-Based Form I-485 when the Underlying Visa Petition is Denied” pursuant to which policy TSC has been using its discretion to wait 30 days before denying the I-485 applications, in case an I-290B was filed on the I-140 denial and TSC might be able to act on that at the Service Center level.

Under the new policy, both TSC and NSC will deny I-485 applications when they deny the underlying I-140 petition.   As a result, a motion to reopen/reconsider or appeal on Form I-290B will have to be filed not only on the I-140 denial but also for all of the I-485 denials (more than one of the direct beneficiary has dependents). This not only creates additional work for preparing and filing more I-290B forms, but also requires additional payments of the I-290B filing fee (which is $585.00 as of the time of this writing).

The goal was to achieve a performance (which can actually be sustained going forward) of completing 98 percent of name checks requests submitted by USCIS within 30 days and the remaining 2 percent within 90 days.   USCIS has announced that this performance level will become the standard.

USCIS has noted, however, that any information provided by the FBI through these checks may require further evaluation and may need additional interaction with agencies outside USCIS to obtain updated or additional information. This could result in additional delays in processing and is not governed by the processing goals contained in the joint business plan.  There is no estimate on the percentage of such cases in which additional checks (and the corresponding delays) may be expected.

Processing Numbers.   TSC has shown improvement in the processing numbers.  Previously, TSC was processing between 3,000-4,000 I-140s and concurrent I-140/I-485sper month.  Recently, TSC has improved to 3,500-4,500 such cases per month.  TSC’s goal is to improve the processing of I-140s down to 4 months by June 2009 (this month!).

Pre-processing.  Similarly to the Nebraska Service Center, TSC is pre-processing (or “pre-adjudicating”) I-485s.  TSC reported that they have pre-processed 85,000 I-485s which are in queue for processing and are waiting for a visa number to be available.

July 2007 “tsunami”.  TSC reported that they have “almost completed”  adjudication of I-140s filed during the “visa tsunami” of July and August 2007.

The report provides a very useful breakdown by category and year which allows us to analyze the trends in green card approvals.  It is important to note that both 2007 and 2008 noted a slight decrease in the total number of green cards given.  In 2006, DHS recorded  1,266,129 green cards.  The decrease in 2008 is wholly attributed to a decrease in the family-based petitions. Despite this slight decrease, the numbers of green cards approved for each of the family-based categories remained fairly stable over the past three years.

The employment-based petitions in 2008 increased from 159,081 (2006) to 162,176 (2007) to 166,511 (2008).  It is interesting to note that the number of EB-1 petitions remained stable, while the number of EB-2 green cards approved increased significantly, more than 3 times from 21,911 (2006) to 70,046 (2008).   On the other hand, EB-2 recorded a significant decrease, from 89,922 (2006) and 85,030 (2007) to only 48,903 in 2008.  What do these numbers mean?  We think that they suggest a trend in that many applicants for green cards who are in EB-3 are, after many years of waiting, trying to upgrade and ultimately succeeding in obtaining their green cards approved under the EB-2 category.

Also, Charles Oppenheim of the State Department has indicated that further retrogression or “unavailability” at any time cannot be ruled out.” As a result, it is highly unlikely the EB-3 category will remain available in the near future. Further retrogression or “unavailability” may occur at any time.   As a result, immigrant visas can be issued by consular posts at interviews this month only if the consular post has obtained the visa number prior to the announcement of the cut-off. Additionally, USCIS will not approve any adjustments in the EB-3 category with cutoff dates before May 1, 2005, unless the visa number already had been assigned.

We have been receiving numerous inquiries from individuals who wish to “port” their green card process to a “same or similar job” with different employer.  In addition to the question whether the new job is “same or similar”, the answer to which is beyond the scope of this post, the second most often question we receive is “When Should I Invoke AC21?”

Should I File AC21 Notification with USCIS?

Invoking AC21 is automatic.  In other words, by meeting the AC21 requirements (e.g. switching to a different employer and by working in a “same or similar job”) the individual has  successfully taken advantage of green card portability provisions of AC21.  However, USCIS does not know that the individual has changed job.  As a result, it is best to notify USCIS of the job change and to inform USCIS that AC21’s requirements have been met. Filing a Ac21 notification with USCIS helps avoid problems in the future.

If a USCIS adjudicator has no knowledge of an individual using AC21 portability, and there is something wrong with the Form I-140 (revoked, for example), the adjudicator is required to issue a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) the pending I-485.  There have been cases when applicants responded to NOID with necessary documents to prove their eligibility for AC21, and their cases were still denied.  Although it is not difficult to reopen such a case with further explanation, it can be a real hassle and waste of time.

Another reason for filing AC21 notice is the opportunity to change the attorney of record on the I-485 case.  Often the I-485 is filed by an attorney of the former employer and after the employee departs, the former employer’s attorney may not be motivated to share with the employee any correspondence from USCIS, including time-sensitive RFE/NOIDs.

If I Decide to File AC21 Notification, When Is the Best Time To Do So?

Generally, there are two opportunities to file AC21 notification.  One is shortly after the individual starts his or her employment with the new employer.  The second one is if there is an RFE or NOID issued by USCIS.   Recognizing that there may not be an RFE or NOID issued at all, the question becomes whether it is worth spending the time (and money) to prepare and file AC21 shortly after starting the new job.

From our practice, there are certain distinct advantages to filing AC21 upon starting a new job, as opposed to doing so after receipt of a RFE/NOID:

• You will control the timing of preparing and filing the AC21 documents — you will have time and be able to carefully prepare the documents required by the employee and your employer will have time to prepare a good employment verification letter.  On the other hand, if you wait for RFE/NOID, you will most likely be under a 30-day filing window to prepare and file the RFE/NOID response and rushing the preparation and filing of the documents will affect their quality and ultimately your case will not be presented as well as it could have been.
• Your employee/employer relationship is likely to be very good – your employer is not likely to object to providing an employment verification letter soon after you start work.  On the other hand, if you wait for an RFE/NOID and the employer has grown unhappy, there is a strain on the employer/employee relationship or if the employer’s business is not doing well, it may be more difficult to ask for and obtain an employment verification letter.
• You can change the attorney of record on your I-485 — if your former employer’s attorney is the attorney on record for the I-485, it is good idea to change the attorney of record as early as possible.  As indicated above, your former employer’s attorney may not be motivated or willing to share with you promptly time-sensitive correspondence from USCIS, including RFE/NOIDs.  Having your own attorney receive and address such correspondence as early as possible is important.

We Can Help You Analyze The Best Course of Action for AC21

We have helped many individuals change employers and invoke AC21 while preserving their green card process.  If done properly, such AC21 porting should not raise problems with USCIS and should allow you to take full advantage of your skills and education.  Please contact us and we would be happy to review your AC21 case and advise you on the best course of action.

Among the most notable items of the report was the criticism and reserved hope that FBI will clear the backlog of pending security checks.  According to the GAO,  of the approximately 917,000 applications for LPR USCIS received from January 1, 2006, through May 31, 2007, 516 (0.05 percent) were referred to USCIS’s Office of Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) for national security concerns.

In addition, USCIS had encountered delays in obtaining the results of FBI name checks—FBI checks of its investigative files—for LPR applicants and others, and had issues regarding the usefulness of these results, but USCIS and the FBI have taken a number of actions that have improved these checks. The FBI dedicated more staff to process name checks, and USCIS provided additional funding and training to FBI staff. As a result, the number of pending name checks has decreased 90 percent, from 329,000 in May 2007 to 32,000 as of September 30, 2008. The FBI plans on being able to complete all name checks within 90 days of receipt by June 2009.

Finally, some concerns were raised about the ability of USCIS to detect benefit fraud, most notably lack of ability to  verify evidence submitted in support of LPR petitions.  GAO’s recommendation was to implement some requirements and procedures whereby certain evidence submitted by petitioners be properly verified.  USCIS has agreed with this recommendation and has indicated that it would work on creating a set of guidelines on supporting document verification.  It is unclear at this time what these guidelines would look like.

According to the new procedure, which is effective immediately, I-485s are subject to the new procedure only when an immigrant visa has been made available, according to the State Department Visa Bulletin.   The new procedure allows submission via email of I-485 cases which are subject to review based on the visa numbers.  An automatic system picks up the cases and determines whether they are subject to review.  If they are, it has some mechanism to prioritize them and distribute the case to a case worker.

The procedures are as follows:

EB I-485 Cases

The procedure may be used by AILA-member  attorneys who see that a visa number is available to his or her client according to the Visa Bulletin.  The inquiry can be submitted as soon as the Visa Bulletin is published.

1. Identify all clients on one email whose visa numbers will be available according to the visa bulletin.
2. Send an email to streamline.tsc@dhs.gov
3. On the subject line, write “EB I-485/”MM” (Example:EB I-485/OCT)
4. In the body of the email, provide A numbers only. The system will use these A numbers to pull cases and distribute them to floor case workers.
5. If the applicant has more than one A number, type both separated by a “/” (Example: A111222333/A444555666)
6. If there are multiple family members, type them all on the same line separated by commas (Example: A111222333, A222333444, A444555666)

I-140 Cases

Attorneys who are AILA members can use this procedure when the filing date is prior to the processing time date for the I-140 as published on the USCIS website.

1. Identify all clients on one email whose filing dates are prior to the published timeframe
2. Send an email to streamline.tsc@dhs.gov
3. On the subject line write “I-140″
4. In the body of the email, provide A numbers only. If there is no A number on the receipt, provide the receipt number only.  (For stand-alone I-140s where the beneficiary is out of the U.S. and will be applying for a visa at the consulate).  Do not provide any additional information as the text of the email will be used to automatically check the submitted cases and pull the cases for distribution to floor case workers.
5. If the applicant has more than one A number, type both separated by a “/” (Example: A111222333/A444555666)

Full text of these instructions is available here.

We are AILA members and we will be happy to assist you in moving your case along using the new TSC streamline procedure.  Please contact us.