USCIS, July 16, 2024 "U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is issuing policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to address the new provisions added to the Immigration and Nationality...
DOS, July 15, 2024 " On June 18, 2024, the Biden-Harris Administration announced actions to more efficiently process employment-based nonimmigrant visas for those who have graduated from college...
Cyrus D. Mehta and Jessica Paszko, July 13, 2024 "Portability under Section 204(j) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) allows certain employment-based green card applicants to change jobs...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/12/2024 "The Department of State (the Department) publishes a final rule revising the Code of Federal Regulations to amend...
Visa Bulletin for August 2024
Luna-Deportillo v. Garland
"The Board dismissed the Petitioners’ appeal after determining that Luna-Deportillo’s particular social group of the nuclear family of a teenage girl who was threatened due to her refusal to join a criminal gang and the gang’s perception that she was a “snitch” was not cognizable. The Board relied on the Attorney General’s decision in In re L-E-A-II to conclude that the Petitioners’ nuclear family was not socially distinct and was impermissibly circularly defined. In light of the Attorney General’s decision to vacate In re L-E-A-II in its entirety and our precedent holding that the nuclear family is the “prototypical example of a particular social group,” Crespin-Valladares v. Holder, 632 F.3d 117, 125 (4th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted), we conclude that the Board erred by rejecting Luna-Deportillo’s particular social group for lacking social distinction. We further conclude that the particular social group was not impermissibly circularly defined. The particular social group of the nuclear family exists independently of the fact that the family members fear persecution on account of the criminal gang’s attempt to recruit Luna-Deportillo’s daughter. Accordingly, we grant the petition for review and remand the case to the Board for further proceedings.∗ ∗ We take no position on whether the Petitioners should be granted relief."