White House, Sept. 30, 2024 "MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE SUBJECT: Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2025 By the authority vested in me as President by the...
BIB Daily presents bimonthly PERM practice tips from Ron Wada , member of the Editorial Board for Bender’s Immigration Bulletin and author of the 10+ year series of BALCA review articles, “Shaping...
Texas v. Mayorkas "In September 2022, after a notice-and-comment period, the Biden administration promulgated a new Rule redefining the term ["public charge"]. In response, the State of...
White House, Sept. 30, 2024 "...I have now concluded that in order to better achieve Proclamation 10773’s goal of enhancing our ability to address historic levels of migration and more efficiently...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 10/01/2024 "This public notice provides information on how to apply for the DV-2026 Program and is issued pursuant to the Immigration...
ITSERVE Alliance v. DHS
"Under federal law, an employer must file a new or amended H-1B visa petition on behalf of a U.S.-based foreign national employee whenever that employee experiences a “material change” in employment. In Simeio Solutions, LLC, 26 I&N Dec. 542 (AAO 2015), the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) altered USCIS’s interpretation of the phrase “material change.” Before Simeio, a change of location within the United States was not material. So an employer did not have to file an amended H-1B visa petition when it moved a foreign employee from one domestic location to another. That changed after Simeio, which defined a “material change” to include changes in work location. Plaintiff ITServe Alliance, Inc. challenges Simeio on summary judgment. ... ITServe’s arguments that Simeio executes an end-run around the APA are nonfrivolous. Simeio expanded USCIS’s already broad regulatory authority without the hassle of notice-and-comment rulemaking. Perhaps it would be better for USCIS to announce such an important change through a regulation. But as the APA binds agencies, so precedent binds this Court. And here precedent favors USCIS. The Court thus will deny ITServe’s motion for summary judgment and will grant DHS’s cross-motion for summary judgment except as to standing."
From Law360: "Jon Wasden, a Wasden Banias LLC attorney and counsel to ITServe, told Law360 that the decision "is not terribly important" because counsel knew the case was headed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals "from the start." "The case raises some substantial issues about agency authority and the dividing lines between two agencies' jurisdiction in the H1B program," Wasden said in a statement on Friday. "Those structural issues make the case great vehicles for good positive law." "