Texas Woman Sentenced to 2 1/2 Years for Alien Trafficking

A local woman was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison Thursday, June 28, 2012, for her role in a conspiracy to transport and harbor illegal aliens, announced U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson, Southern District of Texas. The investigation was conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).

Petra Hernandez, 35, of Laredo, Texas, was also sentenced by U.S. District Judge George P. Kazen to serve three years of supervised release and 150 hours of community service. Judge Kazen also forfeited Hernandez's personal residence, which was used as a stash house and purchased with proceeds from the alien smuggling conspiracy spanning more than a decade. Hernandez pleaded guilty to the charges Sept. 7, 2011.

On July 10, 2011, HSI special agents executed a search warrant at Hernandez's residence and discovered 16 illegal aliens who had arranged to be smuggled to various parts of the United States. Hernandez was arrested and later indicted along with Rachele Lynn Munoz, 31, of Laredo, for harboring aliens at her home.

On Aug. 1, 2011, HSI special agents received information that a group of illegal aliens had been found in the brush by U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) Border Patrol. This information led special agents to suspect the person harboring them was Hernandez, who was out of jail on bond. She was again arrested, along with Nancy Rodriguez, 29, also of Laredo.

The indictment was later superseded charging Hernandez, Munoz and Rodriguez with conspiracy to harbor and transport aliens, and four substantial counts of harboring and transporting aliens. Hernandez subsequently pleaded guilty to one count of alien smuggling conspiracy. At the plea hearing, Hernandez admitted to being involved in transporting and harboring aliens from August 2001 through August 2011, and having used the proceeds from the illegal activities to fund a lavish lifestyle, including purchasing a house with cash and a cashier's check.

Munoz and Rodriguez also pleaded guilty to separate counts of alien transporting and alien harboring, and are awaiting sentencing. Munoz was released on bond pending sentencing. Rodriguez will remain in federal custody as an illegal alien subject to deportation after the judicial proceedings.

Hernandez had been on bond awaiting sentencing. However, on May 21, HSI special agents again found her harboring five illegal aliens. She was indicted on those charges June 5, and is currently pending trial on that case. She will remain in custody.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sonah Lee and D.J. Young, Southern District of Texas, prosecuted the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Mary Ellen Smyth handled the asset forfeiture matter.

Deferred Action Directive F.A.Q.s: Part IV

If an individual who satisfies the eligibility criteria is encountered by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or ICE, will he or she be placed into removal proceedings?

This policy is intended to allow ICE and CBP to focus on priority cases. Pursuant to the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, for individuals who satisfy the eligibility criteria, CBP or ICE should exercise their discretion to prevent them from being apprehended, placed into removal proceedings, or removed. If individuals, including individuals in detention, believe they were placed into removal proceedings in violation of this policy, they should contact either the Law Enforcement Support Center.


If an individual accepted an offer of administrative closure under the case-by-case review process or if his or her case was terminated as part of the case-by-case review process, can he or she receive deferred action under the new process?

Yes. Individuals who can demonstrate that they meet the eligibility criteria will be eligible for deferred action even if they had accepted an offer of administrative closure or termination under the case-by-case review process. For individuals who are in removal proceedings and have already been identified as meeting the eligibility criteria as part of ICE’s case-by-case review, ICE will immediately begin to offer deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal.


If an individual declined an offer of administrative closure under the case-by-case review process, can he or she receive deferred action under the new process?

Yes. Individuals who can demonstrate that they meet the eligibility criteria will be eligible for deferred action even if they declined an offer of administrative closure under the case-by-case review process.

Deferred Action Directive F.A.Q.s: Part III

Does this policy apply to those who are subject to a final order of removal?

Yes. An individual subject to a final order of removal who can demonstrate that he or she meets the eligibility criteria can request a review of his or her case and receive deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal. All cases will be considered on an individualized basis.
This process is not yet in effect and requests should not be submitted at this time. In the coming weeks, USCIS will outline and announce the procedures by which individuals can engage in this process. Beginning June 18, individuals may call the USCIS hotline at 1-800-375-5283, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., with questions or to request more information on the new process. The hotline offers assistance in English and Spanish. Individuals seeking more information on the new process should visit USCIS’s website (at http://www.uscis.gov).


How soon after USCIS receives a request to review a case will the individual receive a decision on his or her request?

USCIS will provide additional information on this issue in the coming weeks. Information will be made publicly available at www.uscis.gov.


If an individual who is about to be removed by ICE believes he or she satisfies the eligibility criteria for the new process, what steps should he or she take to ensure his or her case is reviewed before removal?

Individuals who believe they can demonstrate that they satisfy the eligibility criteria and are about to be removed should immediately contact either the Law Enforcement Support Center’s hotline at 1-855-448-6903 (staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week) or the ICE Office of the Public Advocate through the Office’s hotline at 1-888-351-4024.

Deferred Action Directive F.A.Q.s: Part II

Are individuals who receive deferred action pursuant to the new directive eligible for employment authorization?

Yes. Pursuant to existing regulations, individuals who receive deferred action may apply for and may obtain employment authorization from USCIS provided they can demonstrate an economic necessity for their employment.


Does the process result in permanent lawful status for beneficiaries?

No. The grant of deferred action under this new directive does not provide an individual with permanent lawful status or a pathway to obtaining permanent lawful status. Only the Congress, acting through its legislative authority, can confer the right to permanent lawful status.


Why will deferred actions only be granted for two years?

Grants of deferred action will be issued in increments of two years. At the expiration of the two year period, the grant of deferred action can be renewed, pending a review of the individual case.


If an individual’s period of deferred action is extended, will individuals need to re-apply for an extension of their employment authorization?

Yes. If an individual applies for and receives an extension of the period for which he or she was granted deferred action, he or she must also request an extension of his or her employment authorization.

Deferred Action Directive ('Dream Act') F.A.Q.s: Part I

Who is eligible to receive deferred action under the Department’s new directive?

Pursuant to the Secretary’s June 15, 2012 memorandum, in order to be eligible for deferred action, individuals must:

1. Have come to the United States under the age of sixteen;
2. Have continuously resided in the United States for at least five years preceding the date of this memorandum and are present in the United States on the date of this memorandum;
3. Currently be in school, have graduated from high school, have obtained a general education development certificate, or are honorably discharged veterans of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States;
4. Have not been convicted of a felony offense, a significant misdemeanor offense, multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety;
5. Not be above the age of thirty.

Individuals must also complete a background check and, for those individuals who make a request to USCIS and are not subject to a final order of removal, must be 15 years old or older.



What is deferred action?

Deferred action is a discretionary determination to defer removal action of an individual as an act of prosecutorial discretion. Deferred action does not confer lawful status upon an individual. In addition, although an alien granted deferred action will not be considered to be accruing unlawful presence in the United States during the period deferred action is in effect, deferred action does not absolve individuals of any previous or subsequent periods of unlawful presence.

Under existing regulations, an individual who has been granted deferred action is eligible to receive employment authorization for the period of deferred action, provided he or she can demonstrate “an economic necessity for employment.” Deferred action can be terminated at any time at the agency’s discretion or renewed by the agency.



How will the new directive be implemented?

Individuals who are not in removal proceedings or who are subject to a final order of removal will need to submit a request for a review of their case and supporting evidence to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Individuals may request deferred action if they meet the eligibility criteria. In the coming weeks, USCIS will outline and announce the procedures by which individuals can engage in this process.

This process is not yet in effect and requests should not be submitted at this time. Beginning June 18, individuals may call the USCIS hotline at 1-800-375-5283, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., with questions or to request more information on the new process. The hotline offers assistance in English and Spanish. Individuals seeking more information on the new process should visit USCIS’s website.

For individuals who are in removal proceedings before the Executive Office for Immigration Review, ICE will, in the coming weeks, announce the process by which qualified individuals may request a review of their case. Beginning June 18, individuals may call the ICE hotline at 1-888-351-4024, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., with questions or to request more information on the new process.

For individuals who are in removal proceedings and have already been identified as meeting the eligibility criteria as part of ICE’s case-by-case review, ICE will immediately begin to offer deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal.

Sponsoring an Employee for Permanent Resident Status: Part V

Key Information

Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker	I-140
Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant	I-360

USCIS

• On the Internet at: www.uscis.gov

For more copies of this guide, or information about other citizenship and immigration services, please visit our website. You can also download forms, e-file some applications, check the status of an application, and more. It’s a great place to start!

If you don’t have Internet access at home or work, try your local library. If you cannot find what you need, please call Customer Service.

•                      Customer Service: 1-800-375-5283 or

•                      Employment-based Visa Questions: 1-800-357-2099

•                      Hearing Impaired TDD Customer Service: 1-800-767-1833

Other U.S. Government Services
General Information	www.usagov.gov	1-800-333-4636
New Immigrants	www.welcometoUSA.gov
U.S. Dept. of State	www.state.gov	1-202-647-6575
	www.travel.state.gov/ visa
U.S. Dept of Labor	www.dol.gov	1-877-872-5627

Sponsoring an Employee for Permanent Resident Status: Part IV

What happens after I file a petition on behalf of a current or prospective employee?

If you file by mail, we will mail you a receipt to inform you that we have received your petition. If your petition is incomplete, not signed, or filled with incorrect fees, we may have to reject it, or ask you for more evidence or information, which will delay processing.

Please send all required documents the first time to avoid delay.

We will notify you when we make a decision. Normally, when we approve the petition, we will send it to the U.S. Department of State’s National Visa Center (NVC). Once the foreign national reaches the front of the line for a visa number, the NVC will notify you and the foreign national, inviting him or her and the qualifying dependents to apply for immigrant visas. You can get more information about immigrant visa processing from the State Department’s website at www.state.gov.

How long will it take USCIS to process my petition?

Processing times depend on a number of factors. You can check out current processing times on our website. Once you file a petition, we will post an updated estimate of the processing time on the USCIS website.

Where can I find more information about this process?

For information on all filing requirements and fees for a labor certification request with the Department of Labor, please visit that agency’s website at www.dol.gov.

For specific information regarding each category or qualifying occupation, please refer to our website at www.uscis.gov, or call Customer Service at 1-800-357-2099.

Dream Act - Deferred Action for Young People without Immigration Status

Dream Act - Deferred Action

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano today announced that effective immediately, certain young people who were brought to the United States as young children, do not present a risk to national security or public safety, and meet several key criteria will be considered for relief from removal from the country or from entering into removal proceedings. Those who demonstrate that they meet the criteria will be eligible to receive deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal, and will be eligible to apply for work authorization.

DHS continues to focus its enforcement resources on the removal of individuals who pose a national security or public safety risk, including immigrants convicted of crimes, violent criminals, felons, and repeat immigration law offenders. Today’s action further enhances the Department’s ability to focus on these priority removals.

Under this directive, individuals who demonstrate that they meet the following criteria will be eligible for an exercise of discretion, specifically deferred action, on a case by case basis:

• Came to the United States under the age of sixteen;
• Have continuously resided in the United States for a least five years preceding the date of this memorandum and are present in the United States on the date of this memorandum;
• Are currently in school, have graduated from high school, have obtained a general education development certificate, or are honorably discharged veterans of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States;
• Have not been convicted of a felony offense, a significant misdemeanor offense, multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety;
• Are not above the age of thirty.

Only those individuals who can prove through verifiable documentation that they meet these criteria will be eligible for deferred action. Individuals will not be eligible if they are not currently in the United States and cannot prove that they have been physically present in the United States for a period of not less than 5 years immediately preceding today’s date. Deferred action requests are decided on a case-by-case basis. DHS cannot provide any assurance that all such requests will be granted. The use of prosecutorial discretion confers no substantive right, immigration status, or pathway to citizenship. Only the Congress, acting through its legislative authority, can confer these rights.

While this guidance takes effect immediately, USCIS and ICE expect to begin implementation of the application processes within sixty days.

For individuals who are in removal proceedings and have already been identified as meeting the eligibility criteria and have been offered an exercise of discretion as part of ICE’s ongoing case-by-case review, ICE will immediately begin to offer them deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal.

For more information visit www.uslegalvisa.com for a FREE case evaluation.

Million Health Care Fraud Scheme New York

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Charges Against 36 Individuals for Participating in $279 Million Health Care Fraud Scheme
Largest No-Fault Automobile Insurance Fraud Case Charged to Date Includes 10 Doctors and Three Lawyers; Charges Also Include Racketeering and Money Laundering

U.S. Attorney’s OfficeFebruary 29, 2012

Southern District of New York(212) 637-2600

Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York; Janice K. Fedarcyk, the Assistant Director in Charge of the New York Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”); and Raymond W. Kelly, the Police Commissioner of the City of New York (“NYPD”), announced today the unsealing of charges against 36 defendants involved in a systematic scheme to defraud private insurance companies of more than $279 million under New York’s no-fault automobile insurance law. The indictment includes racketeering charges against eight members and associates of a criminal organization consisting primarily of individuals of Russian descent who were the owners and controllers of fraudulent medical clinics (the “No Fault Organization”), as well as 10 licensed doctors and three attorneys. The alleged scheme identified today is the largest single no-fault automobile insurance fraud ever charged, and the first case of its kind to allege violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) Act.

All of the defendants were arrested this morning in connection with today’s charges. Thirty-five were taken into custody in New York and New Jersey and will be presented and arraigned in Manhattan federal court before U.S. Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz later this afternoon. One defendant was arrested in Duluth, Minnesota and will be presented tomorrow in federal court in the District of Minnesota.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said: “Today’s charges expose a colossal criminal trifecta, as the fraud’s tentacles simultaneously reached into the medical system, the legal system, and the insurance system, pulling out cash to fund the defendants’ lavish lifestyles. As alleged, the scheme relied on a cadre of corrupt doctors who essentially peddled their medical licenses like a corner fraudster might sell fake IDs, except those medical licenses allowed unlawful entry, not to a club or a bar, but to a multi-billion-dollar pool of insurance proceeds.”

FBI Assistant Director in Charge Janice K. Fedarcyk said: “Our investigation uncovered a pattern of lucrative fraud exploiting New York’s no-fault auto insurance system to the tune of more than a quarter-of-a-billion dollars. The criminal enterprise, while it lasted, was obscenely profitable. The scheme not only unjustly enriched the defendants and defrauded insurance companies. Auto insurance fraud is also a crime that indirectly victimizes every driver in New York.”

NYPD Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said: “Our undercover officers were treated like thousands of other ‘patients’ receiving therapy, tests, and medical equipment they didn’t need. I want to congratulate the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the agents and detectives assigned to the joint FBI-NYPD Organized Crime Task Force for bringing this investigation to a successful conclusion.”

The following allegations are based on the unsealed indictment and other documents filed today in Manhattan federal court:

Under New York state law, every vehicle registered in the state is required to have no-fault automobile insurance, which enables the driver and passengers of a registered and insured vehicle to obtain benefits of up to $50,000 per person for injuries sustained in an automobile accident, regardless of fault (the “No-Fault Law”). The No-Fault Law requires prompt payment for medical treatment, thereby obviating the need for claimants to file personal injury lawsuits in order to be reimbursed. Under the No-Fault Law, patients can assign their right to reimbursement from an insurance company to others, including medical clinics that provide treatment for their injuries. New York state law also requires that all medical clinics in the state be incorporated, owned, operated, and/or controlled by a licensed medical practitioner in order to be eligible for reimbursement under the No-Fault Law. Insurance companies will not honor claims for medical treatments from a medical clinic that is not actually owned, operated, and/or controlled by a licensed medical practitioner.

From at least 2007 through 2012, the No-Fault Organization has engaged in a massive and sophisticated scheme to defraud automobile insurance companies of hundreds of millions of dollars by, among other things, creating and operating medical clinics that provided unnecessary and excessive medical treatments in order to take advantage of the No-Fault Law. In order to mislead New York authorities and private insurers, the true owners of these medical clinics (“Clinic Controllers”), almost all of whom were also members and associates of a criminal organization consisting primarily of individuals of Russian descent, paid licensed medical practitioners, including doctors, to use their licenses to incorporate the professional corporations, through which the medical clinics billed the private insurers for the bogus medical treatments. These doctors effectively operated as “straw owners” of the clinics.

The Clinic Controllers paid thousands of dollars in kickbacks to runners who recruited automobile accident passengers to receive medically unnecessary treatments from the no-fault clinics. They also instructed the clinic doctors/straw owners to prescribe excessive and unwarranted referrals for various “modality treatments” for every patient they saw. The treatments included physical therapy, acupuncture, and chiropractic treatments—as many as five times per week for each—and treatments for psychology, neurology, orthopedics, and audiology. Clinic doctors also prescribed unnecessary MRI’s, x-rays, orthopedics, and medical supplies. The Clinic Controllers received thousands of dollars in kickbacks for patient referrals from the owners of the modality clinics (“Modality Controllers”), who were members and associates of the same criminal organization to which the members of the No-Fault Organization and Clinic Controllers belonged.

The Clinic Controllers also referred patients to personal injury lawyers who filed bogus lawsuits on behalf of the patients and coached them on what injuries to claim in order to get as many treatments as possible. The personal injury lawyers also paid the Clinic Controllers thousands of dollars in kickbacks for these referrals.

In order to conceal and disguise the millions of dollars in claims paid by the automobile insurance companies, the members of the No-Fault Organization laundered the money through shell companies and corrupt check-cashing services. Often, checks would be written from the No-Fault or Modality Clinics with the payee line left blank, and in amounts less than $10,000 in order to avoid potential financial institution reporting requirements and other scrutiny. The checks were then cashed through check-cashers who made the checks payable to shell companies they controlled in order to conceal the true nature and purpose of the checks. The cash was then returned to members of the No-Fault Organization to fund kickbacks and for their personal use. At other times, the members and associates of the No-Fault Organization paid themselves through their own shell companies and then used the criminal proceeds to fund expensive vacations and to purchase luxury goods.

***

A chart identifying each defendant, the charges, and the maximum penalties, is below. The case is assigned to U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken.

U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara thanked the FBI and the NYPD for their work in the 18-month investigation, which he noted is ongoing. Mr. Bharara also thanked the National Insurance Crime Bureau and the investigative units of the insurance companies that provided invaluable assistance with the investigation, as well as the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.

The case is being prosecuted by the office’s Organized Crime Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Daniel S. Goldman, Nicholas L. McQuaid and Carolina Fornos are in charge of the prosecution. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason L. Cowley of the office’s Asset Forfeiture Unit is responsible for the forfeiture of assets.

The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

- Prepared remarks of ADIC Fedarcyk at press conference

Count	Charge	Maximum Penalty
Count one	RICO conspiracy (mail fraud and money laundering)	20 years
Count two	Conspiracy to commit health care fraud	10 years
Count three	Conspiracy to commit mail fraud	20 years
Count four	Conspiracy to commit money laundering	20 years

Defendant	Age/Residence	Alleged Role in the Scheme	Charges	Maximum Penalty
Mikhail Zemlyansky	35/Hewlett, NY	Clinic/modality controller	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Michael Danilovich	38/Brooklyn, NY	Clinic/modality controller	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Yuriy Zayonts	40/Staten Island, NY	Clinic/modality controller	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Mikhail Kremerman	41/Staten Island, NY	Clinic/modality controller	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Matthew Conroy	42/Melville, NY	Attorney	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Michael Barukhin	32/Brooklyn, NY	Clinic/modality controller	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Mikhail Ostrumsky	42/Brooklyn/NY	Clinic controller	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Boris Treysler	42/Brooklyn/NY	Clinic controller	Counts one, two, three, four	70 years
Andrey Anikeyev	37/Fort Lee, NJ	Modality controller	Counts two, three, four	50 years
Vladimir Grinberg	35/Staten Island, NY	Modality controller	Counts two, three, four	50 years
Vladislav Zaretskiy	40/Staten Island, NY	Clinic/modality controller	Counts two, three, four	50 years
Yevgeniy Shuman	33/Brooklyn, NY	Clinic manager	Counts two, three, four	50 years
Dmitry Slobodyansky	41/Brooklyn, NY	Modality controller	Counts two, three, four	50 years
Alexander Sandler	57/East Brunswick, NJ	Clinic controller	Counts two, three	30 years
Gregory Mikhalov	56/Brooklyn, NY	Modality controller	Counts two, three	30 years
Michael Morgan	33/Port Washington, NY	Modality controller	Counts two, three	30 years
Mark Danilovich	60/Brooklyn, NY	Modality controller	Counts two, three	30 years
Jeffrey Lereah	56/Suffern, NY	Modality manager	Counts two, three	30 years
Dmitry Lipis	44/Brooklyn, NY	Clinic manager	Counts two, three	30 years
Lynda Tadder	34/Brooklyn, NY	Clinic manager	Counts two, three	30 years
Maria Diglio	47/Garden City, NY	Attorney	Counts two, three	30 years
Sol Naimark	53/Flushing, NY	Attorney	Counts two, three	30 years
Sergey Gabinsky	54/Brooklyn, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Tatyana Gabinskaya	57/Brooklyn, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Joseph Vitoulis	42/Valley Stream, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Lauretta Grzegorczyk	64/Staten Island, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Eva Gateva	48/Bronx, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Zuheir Said	64/Bronx, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
David Thomas	42/Hopewell Junction/NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Billy Geris	53/Morganville, NJ	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Mark Shapiro	46/Brooklyn, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Robert Della Badia	72/South Salem, NY	Doctor	Counts two, three	30 years
Michelle Glick	33/Duluth, MN	Acupuncture practitioner	Counts two, three	30 years
Pavel Poznansky	52/Brooklyn, NY	Acupuncture practitioner	Counts two, three	30 years
Chad Greenshner	45/Flushing, NY	Chiropractic practitioner	Counts two, three	30 years
Constantine Voytenko	40/Brooklyn, NY	Chiropractic practitioner	Counts two, three	30 years

Sponsoring an Employee for Permanent Resident Status: Part III

After I file, how long will it take before the foreign  national can immigrate?

The combination of high demand and the limits set by law on how many people can immigrate each year under each category and from a particular country affects the waiting time. For some foreign nationals there may be no waiting period, while others may have a significant waiting period.

Generally speaking, if a foreign national entered the United States legally and is presently in the United States (and meets certain other requirements), he or she may be able to file an application to adjust to permanent resident status if the employment-based immigrant visa category for that foreign national is currently available.

For other foreign nationals who are on the visa waiting list, once the foreign national reaches the “front of the line,” the U.S. Department of State will contact and invite him or her to apply for an immigrant visa.

What about the foreign national’s family?

In most cases, when the foreign national’s place in line is reached and he or she applies to immigrate, the foreign national’s spouse and unmarried children under 21 can apply as dependents.

For example: You file a petition on behalf of a prospective employee. You cannot directly petition for the employee’s spouse and children. However, the employee's spouse and children can apply for immigrant visas (or adjustment of status) at the same time as your prospective employee when the prospective employee reaches the front of the line.

Sponsoring an Employee for Permanent Resident Status: Part II

What does the petition do for my employee?

Filing a petition shows that you have the intent to hire the employee upon the approval of the petition. By proving that you will have an employer-employee relationship and that the employee has the necessary qualifications for the job, you provide the employee with a place in line among others waiting to immigrate based on the same kind of EB visa category. When the foreign national employee reaches the head of the line, he or she may be eligible to apply to immigrate to the United States.

The foreign national’s place in line, known as a “priority date,” will be based on the date you file the labor certification with DOL or, if a labor certification is not required, the date your petition is filed with USCIS. For this reason, there is an advantage to filing as soon as you are certain that you wish to permanently employ the foreign national.

How do I file for a current or prospective employee?

You need to determine if the prospective or current employee meets the criteria of one of the four preference categories shown above.

Then, the process begins as follows:

•                      For category EB-1, file a Form I-140 with USCIS.

•                      For categories EB-2 and EB-3, first file a labor certification with the Department of Labor (DOL).

•                      Then with the approved labor certification, file a Form I-140 with USCIS. Note that, for category EB-2, the requirement for labor certification has been waived for foreign nationals who qualify for a national interest waiver.

•                      For category EB-4, file a Form I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant, with USCIS.

Sponsoring an Employee for Permanent Resident Status: Part I, What Employees Can a U.S. Citizen Employer File For?

Which employees may I file for?

A U.S. employer may sponsor a prospective or current foreign national employee who is inside or outside the United States and who may qualify under one or more of the employment-based (EB) immigrant visa categories. The EB visa categories are divided into several preference categories. These EB visa categories are organized by occupational priorities as mandated by Congress. The first four of these EB visa categories are available to otherwise eligible foreign nationals sponsored by U.S. employers:

EB-1 – Priority Workers

•                      Aliens with extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics;

•                      Outstanding professors and researchers;

•                      Multinational executives and managers.

EB-2 – Professionals With Advanced Degrees or Persons With Exceptional Ability

• Aliens who, because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit the national economy, cultural, or educational interests or welfare of the United States;

• Aliens who are members of professions holding advanced degrees or the equivalent.

EB-3 – Professional or Skilled Workers

•                      Professionals with a baccalaureate degree;

•                      Aliens capable of performing skilled labor (requiring at least 2 years of training or experience) for which qualified workers are not available in the United States;

•                      Aliens capable of performing unskilled labor for which qualified workers are not available in the United States.

EB-4 – Special Immigrants

•                      Religious workers;

•                      Panama Canal Company Employees, Canal Zone Government Employees, or U.S. Government in Canal Zone Employees;

•                      Certain physicians;

•                      Certain others.

Public Comment Period for Proposed USCIS Provisional Waiver Ends

On June 1, 2012, the formal public comment period closed for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (USCIS) Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers of Inadmissibility for Certain Immediate Relatives rule. The proposed rule, published in the Federal Register on April 2, 2012, proposes a new filing process for certain immediate relatives of U.S. Citizens (i.e. spouses, children, and parents) who seek a waiver of inadmissibility for unlawful presence in the United States.

The provisional waiver process would allow applicants to remain in the United States with their U.S. citizen spouse, child or parent while USCIS processes their waiver requests. It would reduce the time U.S. citizens are separated from their immediate relatives who must obtain an immigrant visa abroad to become lawful permanent residents of the United States.

USCIS is currently considering the comments received as part of the federal rule making process and plans to publish a final rule in the coming months.

USCIS reminds the public that these proposed procedures are not in effect and will not be available to potential applicants until USCIS publishes a final rule in the Federal Register specifying an effective date.

A detailed Web page addressing the proposed rule is available at www.uscis.gov/provisionalwaiver. This change is separate and distinct from the centralized filing and adjudication process for waivers of inadmissibility announced on May 23, 2012.

First Steps as a U.S. Citizen: Part III

Protecting Your Right to Work

Federal law states that employers cannot discriminate against you because of your citizenship or immigration status or national origin. Employers cannot treat you differently because of your citizenship or because of your place of birth, native language, accent, or appearance. Employers may not demand more or different documents than necessary when completing Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, or treat you differently when using E-Verify based on your citizenship or immigration status or national origin. Employers cannot retaliate against you if you complain about the treatment above.

Replacing Your Certificate of Naturalization

If you lose your Form N-550, Certificate of Naturalization, you may submit Form N-565, Application for Replacement Naturalization/ Citizenship Document, to USCIS. Follow the instructions on Form N-565 to determine where to submit this application and the current filing fee. You may request Form N-565 by calling the USCIS Forms Line (1-800-870-3676) or by downloading the form at www.uscis.gov/forms. You may use your U.S. passport as evidence of citizenship until you receive your replacement certificate.