• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
ABIL
  • Home
  • About
  • ABIL Lawyers
    • North America
      • Canada
      • Costa Rica
      • Mexico
      • United States
    • South America
      • Colombia
    • Europe
      • Austria
      • Belgium
      • France
      • Germany
      • Italy
      • Netherlands
      • Poland
      • Spain
      • Switzerland
      • Turkey
      • United Kingdom
    • Asia Pacific & Africa
      • Australia
      • Hong Kong
  • Global Immigration
    • North America
      • Canada
      • Costa Rica
      • Mexico
      • United States
    • South America
      • Colombia
    • Europe
      • Austria
      • Belgium
      • France
      • Germany
      • Italy
      • Netherlands
      • Poland
      • Spain
      • Switzerland
      • Turkey
      • United Kingdom
    • Asia Pacific & Africa
      • Australia
      • China
      • India
      • Japan
  • Services
    • Complex Cases
    • Compliance
    • Corporate Immigration
    • Foreign Investment
    • Global Immigration
    • Government Policy
    • Litigation
    • Pro Bono
  • Industries
  • Resources
    • Blogs
    • News
    • Newsletters
    • Videos & Recordings
    • Articles
  • Contact
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

Posts

ABIL Global Update • December 2018

December 15, 2018/in Global Immigration Update /by ABIL

Headlines:

1. ELECTRONIC DEVICE SEARCHES UPON ENTRY INTO CANADA: AN OVERVIEW -This article provides an overview of electronic device searches upon entry in Canada.

2. BELGIUM -Belgium will implement new gross salary thresholds in January. Also, implementation of the single permit is expected soon.

3. COLOMBIA -Colombia’s Ministry of Labor has implemented a Unique Registry of Foreign Workers in Colombia, or RUTEC, to better track foreign labor and foreign workers’ employment status, and to monitor employer compliance with working conditions.

4. GERMANY -The German Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community has introduced a draft law on corporate immigration that clearly defines the country as open for employee migration and welcomes qualified workers.

5. ITALY -The work holiday visa is a special type of visa, issued for 12 months, that allows the holder to travel to Italy and work there for up to six months. It is an opportunity for youth of each participating country to experience the language, lifestyle, culture, and job environment of the receiving country.

6. TURKEY -Turkey has announced several new developments, including updated employment agreements being requested for work permit renewals, the replacement of the visa-on-arrival (sticker visa) with the electronic visa, rejection of most in-person filings, the likely removal of the 5:1 exemption for Syrians in lawful work or residence status, and year-to-date totals for work permit approvals.

7. UNITED KINGDOM -This article discusses the implications for EU citizens living in the UK following the November acceptance by EU leaders of the terms of the UK withdrawal and the political declaration for a post-Brexit trade agreement between the EU and UK. Also, the Immigration Health Surcharge is being doubled.

8. New Publications and Items of Interest -New Publications and Items of Interest

9. Member News -Member News


Details:

1. ELECTRONIC DEVICE SEARCHES UPON ENTRY INTO CANADA: AN OVERVIEW

This article provides an overview of recent developments in Canada with respect to device searches upon entry.

Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers routinely search the electronic devices of individuals entering Canada, both randomly and in a targeted fashion.

The Customs Act grants the CBSA broad powers to search people and goods entering Canada. The definition of “goods” includes “any document in any form,” which encompasses files stored on an electronic device. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) allows the CBSA to conduct a warrantless search of the “luggage and personal effects” of a person seeking to enter Canada, if the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the individual has hidden information relevant to his or her admissibility, or is involved with document fraud or human trafficking. CBSA is also known to conduct targeted searches based on undisclosed indicators. Single men traveling alone, those exhibiting nervousness or agitation, those in possession of multiple electronic devices, and those who have traveled to higher-risk destinations may be more likely to be subject to a random search.

While the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to border crossings, and the CBSA has policy guidelines dictating the scope of searches, not every search is conducted in compliance with these safeguards. Further complicating the issue is the fact that the courts have not taken a clear position on what border officers can and cannot do when searching or seizing an electronic device. Travelers who have refused to provide their passwords have been threatened with arrest and with hindering or obstructing a CBSA officer (a criminal offense carrying a sentence of up to $50,000 in fines and five years’ imprisonment), even though it is not clear whether travelers are legally required to do so.

What is clear, though, is that searches of electronic devices may result in anything from an inconvenient delay at the border to a huge intrusion on personal privacy. There are also concerns that these searches may result in breaches of confidentiality, if the device contains sensitive company data or privileged material. Therefore, it is important to keep some best practices in mind. The best safeguard against an electronic search is not to carry the data at all when entering Canada. Consider dedicating a device for travel purposes and do not store any sensitive data on it. Remember that deleted data on an electronic device, while not easily accessible by an officer, can likely be retrieved with the use of recovery software. Keep in mind that data stored in the cloud, once accessed by a device, may be stored on the device and may be accessible without an Internet connection. If you must bring in such material, separate privileged and confidential documents and label them accordingly, and inform the officer conducting the search that you are in possession of sensitive documents.

Back to Top


2. BELGIUM

Belgium will implement new gross salary thresholds in January. Also, implementation of the single permit is expected soon.

New Gross Salary Thresholds as of January 1, 2019

One of the requirements for certain Belgian fast-track work permits B, as well as for the Blue Card, is a salary threshold. The annual gross remuneration must meet the threshold amount, which is adjusted/indexated on a yearly basis.

The new salary thresholds effective January 1, 2019 will be:

  • For highly skilled work permits: 41,739 € (40,972 € for 2018);
  • For executive level work permits: 69,637 € (68,356 € for 2018);
  • For Blue Cards: 53,971 € (52,978 € for 2018).

The Ministries will only issue a fast-track work permit B or Blue Card if it is clear that the employee’s salary will meet the threshold amount. The Ministries will only take into account amounts that will definitely be paid in consideration for the employee’s work; a discretionary bonus cannot be taken into account when processing the work permit application. COLA (Cost of Living Allowances) as well as most other allowances are not taken into account either. Some benefits in kind can be taken into account, up to a certain extent and if clearly mentioned and assessed/quantified in the employment contract/assignment letter.

Furthermore, correct salary payment will be crucial for a work permit renewal.

Single Permit as of (Probably) January 1, 2019

The single permit will be implemented, probably on January 1, 2019. In the federal and regional areas (three regions: Brussels, Flanders, and Wallonia), authorities are finalizing the new rules and practical arrangements. The final rules are expected imminently.

The single permit will be a document authorizing work and residence for more than 90 days. It will be a residence permit with confirmation of the right to work. Paper work permits will no longer be issued for more than 90 days.

The single permit application file must contain not only the documents currently required for a work permit application but also those currently required for a visa/residence permit application (including proof of payment of levy (350 €); police clearance; medical certificate for visa/residence; possibly health insurance). This may require a longer preparation time. In some countries, it can take a long time to obtain a police clearance.

The maximum processing time for the single permit application would be four months after notification by the authorities that the application is complete.

If an application for more than 90 days will be filed before the effective date of the single permit (probably January 1, 2019), the current “dual permit” system will still apply. If it will be filed after the effective date of the single permit, the single permit system will apply.

To be clear, the single permit only relates to applications for a permit of more than 90 days. For short-term work (90 days or fewer), the current system will in principle (there may be minor changes) continue to apply: the employer applies for employment authorization; a paper work permit is issued; the employee can enter with a visa or on a visa waiver.

The Flanders region has prepared work permit legislation to implement the ICT Directive. This legislation, which will probably also extend the maximum duration of some work permits from one year to three years, will probably also take effect on January 1, 2019.

Back to Top


3. COLOMBIA

On October 9, 2018, Colombia’s Ministry of Labor implemented a Unique Registry of Foreign Workers in Colombia, or RUTEC, to better track foreign labor and foreign workers’ employment status, and to monitor employer compliance with working conditions. Labor authorities may use the information collected in the new registry as a basis for creating or changing the country’s policies affecting immigrant labor.

To whom does the registration apply?

All foreign nationals working in Colombia in the public or private sector must be registered by their Colombian employers. Self-employed foreign workers must also register themselves. Dependent and independent foreign workers who are working in the country must be registered, including workers with a Special Permit of Permanence (PEP). Also, the personnel of the embassies and consulates in Colombia must be registered.

What are the deadlines and validity time?

Foreign national workers must be registered within 120 days of the commencement of the employment contract or assignment. Companies have 120 days from the issuance of Resolution 4388 to register their existing foreign workers. Registration is valid for the length of the employment contract, and any changes must be reported within 30 calendar days. Penalties for non-compliance are between one and five thousand times the Minimum Legal Monthly Wages (SMMLV). The SMMLV for 2018 is reportedly US $252.

SIRE vs. RUTEC

Employees who are already registered in SIRE (Information System for the Report of Foreigners) must also register in the new RUTEC system, as they are separate databases and maintained by different government agencies. SIRE is administered by immigration authorities and RUTEC is administered by labor authorities.

Back to Top


4. GERMANY

The German Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community has introduced a draft law on corporate immigration that clearly defines the country as open for employee migration and welcomes qualified workers. The new draft law has been published for discussion of the civil associations and will be put forth into the regular lawmaking process in December.

The draft law does not change the existing rules on the immigration of highly qualified workers, acclaimed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) as being a very good immigration law. It also keeps the notion that immigration in principle requires an employment contract before entering Germany and that all foreign workers must be employed with working conditions at least equal to those of German personnel. The draft law does introduce new categories for qualified workers without an academic education, reflecting the shortage of employees currently experienced by German employers. Workers with limited vocational training may obtain required additional qualifications within a period of several years after arrival in Germany during employment.

The new law also introduces a fast track to expedite worker migration and streamlines processing. Finally, it enables workers with vocational training as well as those with academic qualifications to enter Germany for a limited period of six months to search for employment if they can sustain their living costs with sufficient funds. The draft also introduces an obligation to employers to notify the authorities if an employment relationship ends prematurely and clarifies that the work permit contained in the immigration visa/permits is to be automatically transferred to allow employment with a new employer when corporate restructuring affects the employment relationship.

As noted above, with the draft law, Germany clearly defines the country as open for employee migration and welcomes qualified workers. The draft provides some answers to the administrative problems and shortcomings that employee migrants currently experience in the process. Hopes are high that employee migration to Germany will improve in the coming years.

Back to Top


5. ITALY

The work holiday visa is a special type of visa, issued for 12 months, that allows the holder to travel to Italy and work there for up to six months. It is an opportunity for youth of each participating country to experience the language, lifestyle, culture, and job environment of the receiving country.

Italy has bilateral agreements on work holiday visas with New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and South Korea. Each bilateral agreement sets the conditions for participation in the program and also the maximum number of visas that can be issued in a year.

The procedure consists of two steps:

  • File the visa application at the Italian consulate having jurisdiction over the place of residency abroad
  • Once in Italy, file the residence permit application within 8 days of arrival

If and when the applicant finds an employer willing to hire him or her, a work permit is not necessary. The work holiday residence permit allows the holder to work up to a total of 6 months, and up to 3 months with the same employer.

Below are details of the existing agreements with Italy:

New Zealand agreement

Who can apply: New Zealand citizens between the age of 18 and 30

Duration of allowed stay: 12 months, not renewable

Type of work activity allowed: No restrictions but no longer than 3 months with the same employer and 6 months in total

Number of visas per year: Up to 1,000

Australia agreement

Who can apply: Australian citizens between the age of 18 and 30

Duration of allowed stay: 12 months, not renewable

Type of work activity allowed: No restrictions but no longer than 3 months with the same employer and 6 months in total

Number of visas per year: Up to 1,500 for Australian citizens

Canada agreement

Who can apply: Canadian citizens between the age of 18 and 35

Duration of allowed stay: 12 months, not renewable

Type of work activity allowed: No restrictions but no longer than 3 months with the same employer and 6 months in total

Number of visas per year: Up to 1,000

South Korea agreement

Who can apply: South Korean citizens between the age of 18 and 30

Duration of allowed stay: 12 months, not renewable

Type of work activity allowed: No restrictions but no longer than 6 months (up to 6 months with the same employer allowed)

Number of visas per year: Up to 500

Back to Top


6. TURKEY

Turkey has announced several new developments, including updated employment agreements being requested for work permit renewals, the replacement of the visa-on-arrival (sticker visa) with the electronic visa, rejection of most in-person filings, the likely removal of the 5:1 exemption for Syrians in lawful work or residence status, and year-to-date totals for work permit approvals.

Updated Employment Agreement Now Requested by MOL for Work Permit Renewals

The Ministry of Labor (MOL) has recently begun requesting a copy of a new or updated employment agreement (EA) signed by the sponsor and applicant for work permit renewals. Unfortunately, the MOL is currently not accepting previously executed agreements and requires the agreement to be updated in line with the details in the application for renewal. It is not clear why the MOL has made this document a necessity, as the work permit application itself has been held to create an employer-employee relationship. It is not clear whether a signed protocol update will suffice in lieu of a new EA. Employers should be prepared to execute an updated agreement for all renewals.

Full Elimination of Visa-on-Arrival

Although not yet officially announced on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, the Ministry has almost completed the elimination of the visa-on-arrival (sticker visa) with the intention of full replacement by the electronic visa (online “e-visa”). The e-visa system to obtain a visitor visa instantaneously online was formally initiated on April 17, 2013. However, until recently, eligible applicants who had not purchased an e-visa were still able to purchase a visa-on-arrival to Turkey. The Turkish airport counters that previously offered purchase of the visa-on-arrival have now been removed. All eligible visitors to Turkey should evaluate their needs for an e-visa in advance and plan to purchase their e-visas before departure to Turkey.

Rejection of Most Documents Filed In Person with MOL

The Work Permit Directorate recently announced that it will no longer accept most applications or petitions filed in person. Although work permit applications have not been accepted in person for some time, now commencement and cancellation petitions, work permit loss petitions, job title change petitions, and others are no longer accepted in person either. Any acceptance of documents filed in person is discretionary (although Ratio Exemption applications are still accepted in person).

Likely Removal of 5:1 Exemption for Syrians in Lawful Work or Residence Status

Previously, Syrian nationals in Turkey in lawful residence or work status have benefited their prospective employers by a blanket exemption of the 5:1 ratio. However, officers of the Work Permit Directorate recently said that this exemption has been eliminated. This is not pursuant to an official announcement, so confirmation is awaited.

Year-to-Date Work Permit Approvals Announced

Local media have announced that the MOL released its year-to-date totals for work permit approvals. From January through October 2018, 97,991 work permits were granted. This number is out of a total of 122,115 submissions within the 10-month period. Syrian national applicants are the most common. This announcement makes clear that there is a steady rise in work permit grants, as 87,182 were granted in all of 2017 and 59,873 were granted in all of 2016.

Back to Top


7. UNITED KINGDOM

This article discusses the implications for European Union (EU) citizens living in the United Kingdom (UK) following the November acceptance by EU leaders of the terms of the UK withdrawal and the political declaration for a post-Brexit trade agreement between the EU and UK. Also, the Immigration Health Surcharge is being doubled.

On November 25, 2018, EU leaders formally accepted the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU and the political declaration for a post-Brexit trade agreement between the EU and the UK. Prime Minister Theresa May will now need to persuade the British Parliament to accept the deal that has been negotiated. A vote was due to take place December 10, 2018, but Prime Minister May postponed it, acknowledging that it would have been “rejected by a significant margin.” Meanwhile, the European Court of Justice ruled that the UK could cancel Brexit without the agreement of the other EU members, although Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay reportedly said there was “absolutely no intention” to do that.

The Prime Minister has conducted a countrywide publicity campaign to garner support for the agreement from the British public. Now is an appropriate moment to reflect on the implications for EU citizens living in the UK in the event of a worst-case scenario with the UK potentially crashing out of the EU on March 29, 2019, without a deal.

Under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement, provision has been made for EU citizens living in the UK to obtain settled status in the UK or limited leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme, which now forms part of the Immigration Rules. EU citizens, including those arriving after Brexit Day, will have until June 30, 2021, to apply for this new status during a transition period, which will run from March 30, 2019, until December 31, 2020. Under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement, EU citizens and their family members will be able to continue to come to the UK to live and work under the specified provisions throughout the transition period.

Although the Home Office press office has issued various assurances that the EU Settlement Scheme will remain in place in the event of a no-deal Brexit, there still has been no formal confirmation of this. While the ongoing rights of EU nationals currently living in the UK to continue to live in the UK post-Brexit is more certain (the Prime Minister has stated on numerous occasions that they will not be forced to leave the UK following Brexit Day), it is still unclear what the position will be for new EU arrivals in the UK after Brexit in the event of a no-deal scenario. The government has remained completely silent on whether the EU Settlement Scheme will remain in its current format or will apply only to EU citizens living in the UK up to Brexit Day.

This all begs a number of questions for employers, who first need to know whether they can continue to recruit EU nationals arriving in the UK after Brexit Day and, if so, on what terms, and second, need to know how they will be able to differentiate between those who arrived before and those who arrived after Brexit when conducting right-to-work checks.

So what will happen to EU nationals living in the UK if the Withdawal Agreement is rejected by Parliament?

Information on this issue was first gained during the questioning of Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes, when she was called to address the Home Affairs Select Committee on October 30, 2018, on this very point.

The Minister said nothing to appease employers’ concerns since she would not confirm that employers would not need to differentiate between EU nationals arriving pre- and post-Brexit. She was particularly vague about whether there would still be a transition period and, if so, how long this would last. More specifically, the Minister stated that the Immigration Bill due to be published later this year would be brought forward and also suggested that a registration scheme for new arrivals could be introduced for those wishing to stay more than three months.

Unsurprisingly, this received a great deal of press coverage due in no small part to the uncertain position this would leave employers. An announcement by Hilary Bagshaw of the Home Office swiftly followed. She stated that following Brexit, citizens will continue to be able to evidence their right to work by showing a passport or national identity card. This provided some needed clarity for employers conducting right-to-work checks and was subsequently confirmed by Home Secretary Sajid Javid during an interview.

But what about free movement? Ms. Bagshaw said that free movement will end when the UK leaves the EU, but most observers believe that until the new immigration system is rolled out following the publication of the Immigration Bill, the most likely scenario is that free movement will effectively continue in all but name. Mr. Javid also vaguely referred to the need for a sensible transition period, but he would not specifically confirm that the status quo would be maintained until December 30, 2020.

Increase in the Immigration Health Surcharge

On November 21, 2018, the House of Commons approved an order to double the immigration health surcharge on every non-EU migrant from £200 to £400 per year. This is expected to come into force at some point in December.

Back to Top


8. New Publications and Items of Interest

Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers:

  • The latest immigration news is at https://www.abil.com/news.cfm.
  • The latest published media releases include:
    • ABIL Says Proposed Change to Public Charge Rule Would Exclude Immigrants from Government Programs
    • New Data Show Increase in H-1B Denials and RFEs
    • ABIL Urges Administration to Change “Buy American and Hire American” Executive Order
    • ABIL Member Kuck Baxter Immigration Commercial Nominated for an Emmy
    • ABIL Members Note Immigration Threats for Employers in 2018
  • ABIL is available on Twitter: @ABILImmigration.
  • Recent ABIL member blogs are at http://www.abilblog.com/.

Back to Top


9. Member News

The following Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers member firms were listed in U.S. News & World Report’s Best Law Firms:

Chin & Curtis, LLP—National Tier 2; Boston Tier 1

Clark Lau LLC—National Tier 2; Boston Tier 1

Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC—National Tier 1; New York City Tier 1

Foster LLP—National Tier 2; Austin Tier 1; Houston Tier 1

Fredrikson & Byron P.A.—Des Moines Tier 2; Minneapolis Tier 3

Garfinkel Immigration Law Firm—Charlotte Tier 1

Goel & Anderson, LLC—Washington, DC Tier 3

Joseph Law Firm, P.C. —Colorado Tier 1

Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP—National Tier 2; Philadelphia Tier 1

Kuck Baxter Immigration LLC—Atlanta Tier 1

Maggio + Kattar—National Tier 1; San Diego Tier 1; Washington, DC Tier 1

Mark Ivener, A Law Corporation—National Tier 3; Los Angeles Tier 2

Pearl Law Group—San Francisco Tier 2

Seyfarth Shaw LLP—National Tier 1; Atlanta Tier 1; Boston Tier 1; Houston Tier 1; Los Angeles Tier 2; Washington, DC Tier 3

Siskind Susser PC—Memphis Tier 1; Nashville Tier 2

Wolfsdorf Rosenthal LLP—National Tier 1; Los Angeles Tier 1; New York City Tier 2

The national rankings are at https://bestlawfirms.usnews.com/immigration-law. The regional rankings are under each firm’s profile.

Dagmar Butte and Vic Goel were quoted by Forbes in “New H-1B Lawsuit: USCIS Lacks Authority to Limit Visa Duration.” The article notes that companies and attorneys have said they are now regularly getting H-1B approvals that last 6 months or less. “It happens all the time,” Mr. Goel said, particularly with any company providing information technology services. Ms. Butte noted, “We are getting approvals of 6 months or less. We have to immediately turn around and file an extension, which means more legal fees and filing fees and less certainty for the beneficiary and the company.” The Forbes Article

Vic Goel (Goel & Anderson, LLC) and Lawrence Lorber (Seyfarth Shaw LLP) were quoted by Forbes in “Trump Labor Department to Use New H-1B Form Against Tech Companies.” Mr. Goel said, “This revision to the labor condition application is nothing more than an attempt to discourage contracting out for services by U.S. companies whose contractors employ H-1B professionals.” The article notes that the Department of Labor used the term “secondary employer” on the form to describe the worksite where an H-1B visa holder would perform services. “Calling someone a secondary employer is nonsense. It raises a lot of issues in the joint-employer context, which is a major policy issue,” Mr. Lorber noted. The article is at Forbes.com.

Avi Gomberg spoke on “Investor Immigration to Québec, Canada” at the New York State Bar Association conference held in Montréal, Canada, on October 24, 2018.

Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP is expanding its business litigation practice with its experienced attorney team. H. Ronald Klasko, managing partner, is also leading the new Administrative Litigation Task Force formed within the American Immigration Lawyers Association. Mr. Klasko’s goals are to initiate impact litigation on key immigration issues and policies and to educate other immigration attorneys on how to litigate visa denials where they believe the law was misinterpreted. He is currently co-counsel for a lawsuit challenging the new USCIS policy on unlawful presence for foreign students and exchange visitors. Daniel Lundy is involved in significant litigation work, both in the EB-5 arena and with regard to employment-based immigration applications and petitions. He has frequently been involved in litigation on behalf of EB-5 investors, regional centers, and projects that are facing USCIS actions or delays, regional center terminations, or SEC litigation. More information here.

Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP has issued a client alert and blog by William A. Stock and Steven R. Miller, “.”

Cyrus Mehta has authored several new blog entries: “H-1B Visa Contest: US Master’s Degree v. Foreign Degree,” “New Mutant H-1B Gene: Undifferentiated Engineering Degrees,” and “Labor Certification: Musn’t the U.S. Job Applicant Be Able to Perform the Job Even if Qualified on Paper?”

Mr. Mehta and Sophia Genovese, of Mr. Mehta’s office, co-authored a new blog entry,”Trump Is Not King. He Cannot Change the U.S. Asylum System Through Executive Orders.”

Rodrigo Tannus has authored several new articles in Diario la República: “Circulación laboral en la Alianza del Pacífico (III),” and “Implementación del Registro Único de Trabajadores.”

Mr. Tannus was included in Chambers Latin America and Legal 500 Latin America. Tannus & Asociados undertakes labor advice, audits, due diligence, trainings, and procedures before various entities. The team is helping Intertug grow its operations in Jamaica, Bolivia, Mexico, Brazil, and Venezuela by developing labor and immigration bases for managerial and operational staff.

Mr. Tannus was quoted by Diario la República: “[L]os nacionales venezolanos que no acaten los deberes y obligaciones descritos en la normatividad migratoria colombiana, pueden ser sujetos de sanciones económicas, que oscilan entre medio y 40 salarios mínimos legales mensuales vigentes; o incluso ser objeto de deportación o expulsión del país. Además, argumentó que las medidas no tienen diferencias con otras nacionalidades, salvo un trato preferencial para nacionales ecuatorianos y países miembros del Mercado Común del Sur (Mercosur).”

Stephen Yale-Loehr was quoted by Deutsche Welle in “Can Donald Trump Use Force Against the ‘Migrant Caravan’?” Mr. Yale-Loehr commented on President Trump’s new proclamation mandating that individuals claiming asylum can do so only at official ports of entry. Those entering the country without authorization are barred from seeking asylum, but can apply for two alternative forms of relief known as “withholding of removal” and relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture, he noted. “The Trump administration claims that allowing people to apply for those other forms of relief satisfies our international obligations not to return people to countries where they might face persecution”, said Mr. Yale-Loehr, adding that to decide whether President Trump’s argumentation is correct and the order legal, the courts will have to weigh competing considerations. “Courts have traditionally ruled that presidents have large discretion on immigration issues, since immigration touches on national sovereignty. However, the United States has signed the United Nations protocol on refugees, which bars countries from returning people to countries where they might be persecuted. And the U.S. asylum statute explicitly allows people to apply for asylum no matter how they enter the United States. The president cannot repeal the asylum statute; only Congress can do that.” The Deutsche Welle article

 

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by the New York Times in “Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Proclamation Targeting Some Asylum-Seekers.” Mr. Yale-Loehr said the court’s ruling shows that Presidential discretion has limits. “The ruling is a significant blow to the administration’s efforts to unilaterally change asylum law. Ultimately this may have to go to the Supreme Court for a final ruling,” he said. The New York Times article

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by the Voice of America in “EB-5 Program: American Citizenship Door for International Students.” “I can say there are hundreds of EB-5 students a year. No one knows for sure,” he said. “I compare [EB-5] to a Rubik’s cube. The migration component must be in harmony with the investment component, harmonized with the employment component…Sometimes, if the students study business, they are very sophisticated.” The article (in Vietnamese)

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by U.S. News & World Report and other publications (via Reuters) in ” Trump Demand That Asylum Seekers Wait in Mexico May Turn on Legal Clause.” The Trump administration will likely argue that the U.S. Constitution’s due process clause only applies in U.S. territory, Mr. Yale-Loehr noted. The U.S. News & World Report article

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by National Real Estate Investor in “As the EB-5 Program Comes Up for Another Extension, Recent Litigation Puts the Spotlight on the Program’s Flaws.” He explained that there are two types of litigation in the EB-5 world. One scenario is fraud from the outset: the project developer takes the money and runs. The other scenario is where the developer is trying to do everything correctly, but because of a change in the project, the developer is unable to finish it on time or needs to re-deploy the foreign investors’ funds in another way. With a years-long process to get permanent residence coupled with the need to keep funds at risk and create permanent jobs, there are more windows for problems to crop up. “That’s not necessarily fraud,” he said. “I predict that Congress will extend EB-5 again without any changes … maybe in the spring everybody can agree on a reform package that Congress can enact,” Mr. Yale-Loehr said. The article

Stephen Yale-Loehr moderated a panel on immigration court reform at “A Tribute to Juan Osuna: Access to Justice, Due Process, and the Rule of Law in the U.S. Immigration System: Present Realities and a Vision for the Future,” on November 15, 2018, at Hogan Lovells in Washington DC. More information on the event, sponsored by the Center for Migration Studies, is available here.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted through the AFP Internacional wire service in numerous articles around the world, many in Spanish, about the possibility of U.S. immigration reform in the coming year. Mr. Yale-Loehr sent the following quote to the AFP: “Immigration reform is theoretically possible. Indeed, the White House offered a four-point plan for immigration reform last January. However, that plan had too many poison pills, such as increased border enforcement and a reduction in family immigration, for the Democrats to accept. I doubt the two sides will be able to agree on immigration reform.” One of the articles, “¿Una reforma migratoria saldrá del nuevo Congreso de EEUU? Poco probable,” is available here.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by Reuters in “Trump Signs Order Limiting Migrant Asylum at U.S.-Mexico Border,” which was published in numerous media outlets. He said the administration may struggle to justify the national security concerns underpinning the order, as the flow of migrants across the southern border has fallen in recent years. “We also have an obligation under international law not to return people to a country where they fear persecution,” he noted. The article is available at Reuters.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in several other recent publications:

  • Politifact, in “Donald Trump Falsely Says Democrats Invite Migrant Caravans“: The article noted that a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case said that immigrants, regardless of immigration status, are allowed free elementary and secondary education. “But immigrant children can’t access that right if they are detained waiting for their asylum hearings, except in a few family detention centers,” Mr. Yale-Loehr noted.
  • Law360, in “Midterms Won’t Break Immigration Reform Gridlock, Attys Say.” “Immigration is so controversial right now that it will be almost impossible to get any major immigration reform bill through Congress, no matter which party is in power. Even if the Democrats win control of both the House and Senate and manage to pass an immigration reform bill, President Trump would veto the measure. We won’t see immigration reform until 2021 at the earliest.” Available by registering at law360.com.
  • Newspaper in Taiwan re possible proposal to eliminate duration of status for students (in Chinese). More
  • Raw Story, “How Everyone Can Help Blunt Trump’s Racist Lies Instead of Amplifying Them.”
  • Univision, re birthright citizenship (Spanish), “¿Puede Trump quitar la ciudadanía a hijos de indocumentados nacidos en EEUU? Respondemos tus preguntas.”
  • Video interview with the NBC TV affiliate in Atlanta, about birthright citizenship, “Verify: Did the Authors of the 14th Amendment Not Intend to Offer Birthright Citizenship to People Born of Foreign Parents?”

 

https://www.abil.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/ABIL_Logo-2021.png 0 0 ABIL https://www.abil.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/ABIL_Logo-2021.png ABIL2018-12-15 11:11:042023-08-14 14:11:52ABIL Global Update • December 2018

ABIL Global Update • October 2018

October 15, 2018/in Global Immigration Update /by ABIL

Headlines:

1. DATA PROTECTION IN INDIA: AN OVERVIEW -This article provides an overview of data protection in India.

2. CANADA -Canada has expanded biometric information collection for foreign nationals.

3. HONG KONG -A landmark decision by Hong Kong’s highest court means that same-sex spouses and partners may now receive dependent visas.

4. ITALY -A security and immigration decree, making substantial changes to the immigration and citizenship law, has been signed.

5. SPAIN -Spain has implemented an EU directive on research and student permits.

6. TURKEY -Turkey has lowered financial thresholds for Citizenship by Investment.

7. UNITED KINGDOM -The UK’s Migration Advisory Committee has published its long-awaited recommendations for work migration post-Brexit, following a call for evidence from employers and other stakeholders.

8. New Publications and Items of Interest -New Publications and Items of Interest

9. Member News -Member News


Details:

1. DATA PROTECTION IN INDIA: AN OVERVIEW

This article provides an overview of recent developments in India with respect to data protection.

India has not yet enacted specific legislation on data protection. Until now, the accepted legal framework for the Indian technology sector is the Information Technology Act, 2000 (ITA). The ITA was amended in 2008 to include Section 43A and Section 72A, which came into force on October 27, 2009. and stipulated a right to compensation for improper disclosure of personal information. Under Section 43A of the ITA, the Indian central government subsequently issued the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Personal Sensitive Data or Information) Rules, 2011 (Rules), which came into force on April 11, 2011. The Rules have imposed additional requirements on commercial and business entities in India relating to the collection and disclosure of sensitive personal data or information. While the Rules apply only to a body corporate or any person located within India, the provisions of the ITA also apply to any offense committed by a person outside India using a computer, computer system, or computer network located in India. Entities in regulated sectors such as financial services and telecommunications are subject to obligations of confidentiality under sectoral laws that require them to keep personal information of customers confidential and use it only in the manner agreed upon with the customer for prescribed purposes.

Personal data under the Indian laws and rules is termed “personal information.” Personal information has been defined under the Rules as “any information that relates to a natural person, which either directly or indirectly, in combination with other information available or likely to be available with a body corporate, is capable of identifying such person.”

Sensitive personal data exists as the concept of sensitive personal data or information under the Rules. It means personal information that consists of: (i) passwords; (ii) financial information such as bank account, credit or debit card, or other payment instrument details; (iii) physical, physiological, and mental health conditions; (iv) sexual orientation; (v) medical records and history; (vi) biometric information; (vii) any detail relating to the above items provided to a body corporate for providing services; and (viii) any of the information received under the above items by a body corporate for processing that is stored or processed under a lawful contract or otherwise. Sensitive personal data or information does not include information that is freely available or accessible in the public domain or furnished under the Right to Information Act, 2005, or any other applicable law.

The Rules contain specific provisions regarding the collection of sensitive personal data or information. The key rules on collection are: (i) it is necessary to obtain the consent of the provider of information prior to the collection. The provider of information must be given an option not to provide the requested sensitive personal data or information and to withdraw its consent by informing the body corporate in writing; (ii) sensitive personal data or information can only be collected where necessary for a lawful purpose that is connected with a function or activity of the body corporate or any person on its behalf; and (iii) the body corporate should provide additional information to the provider of information. The body corporate must also comply with other general requirements, such as not keeping sensitive personal data or information for longer than is required and ensuring it is kept secure or applying reasonable security practices and procedures which contain managerial, technical, operational and physical security control measures to protect sensitive personal data and information.

Additional rules apply to the disclosure of sensitive personal data and information. The body corporate and any person acting on its behalf are not allowed to publish any sensitive personal data or information. Further, the disclosure of sensitive personal data or information to any third party requires the prior permission of the provider of information. The only two exceptions to this requirement are: (i) when such disclosure has been agreed upon in the contract between the body corporate and the provider of information; or (ii) when it is necessary to disclose the information in compliance with a legal obligation. The third party that receives such sensitive personal data or information shall not disclose it further and must be based in a country offering the same levels of data protection as India. The body corporate is allowed to share information with government agencies mandated under the law to obtain information.

Indian courts have developed indirect safeguards relevant to the protection of personal data. In a landmark judgment, Justice K. S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India, delivered on August 24, 2017, the Supreme Court of India recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India as a part of the right to life and personal liberty. The court held that informational privacy is a facet of the right to privacy and, thus, information about a person and the right to access that information should be given the protection of privacy. The court stated that every person should have the right to control commercial use of his or her identity and that “the right of individuals to exclusively commercially exploit their identity and personal information, to control the information that is available about them on the internet and to disseminate certain personal information for limited purposes alone” emanates from this right. This is the first time that the Supreme Court has expressly recognized the right of individuals concerning their personal data and overruled its previous judgements in Kharak Singh vs The State Of U. P. & Others and M. P. Sharma And Others vs Satish Chandra, which had held that there is no fundamental right to privacy under the Indian Constitution. Moreover, this landmark judgement has opened the gates for far-reaching implications with respect to the daily lives of Indians. On September 6, 2018, the Supreme Court of India in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India unanimously struck down a 157-year-old law criminalizing gay sex, further reaffirming the right to privacy.

In July 2017, the Indian Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEIT), recognizing the importance of data protection and keeping the personal data of citizens secure and protected, constituted a Committee of Experts under the chairmanship of Justice B. N. Srikrishna, Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India. The Committee of Experts has submitted its 176-page report and draft Personal Data Protection Bill, 2018. MEIT solicited feedback from the public on the draft until September 30, 2018.

The key recommendation made by the Committee of Experts is that companies processing large amounts of data might have to register themselves as significant data fiduciaries to the Data Protection Authority for greater accountability. This will most likely increase compliance costs that include periodic company audits and the need for data protection specialists, among others. The draft bill borrows significantly from the recently implemented General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe and, as experts claim, “comes with ambiguities and has its own pain points.”

Today India is one step closer to having its own data protection law. Even as recommendations and the draft bill continue to stir debate, all stakeholders are united in their stance for a law that should safeguard customers and support India’s fast-growing digital economy.

Back to Top


2. CANADA

Canada has expanded biometric information collection for foreign nationals.

On July 31, 2018, amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations providing for the expansion of biometric information collection for foreign nationals seeking to enter or remain in Canada entered into force.

As such, since July 31, 2018, the Canada Border Services Agency; the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; Shared Services Canada; and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada have begun collecting biometric information for all foreign nationals between the ages of 14 and 79 applying for work permits, study permits, temporary resident permits, temporary resident visas, or Canadian permanent residence, regardless of whether visas are required. regardless of whether they are visa-requiring or visa-exempt nationals. These rules do not apply to U.S. nationals seeking to enter Canada on a temporary status (permanent residence applications will require biometrics for U.S. nationals) as well as visa-exempt nationals seeking to enter Canada solely as visitors with valid Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA) documents.

The expansion of biometric collection is being rolled out in two phases. Since July 31, 2018, citizens of most countries in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East (and some Asian countries) must provide biometric information. The second phase is set to begin on December 31, 2018, and will add countries from both Asia and the Americas (including Australia and New Zealand). In practice, biometric information is being collected directly at Canadian ports of entry for visa-exempt nationals eligible to present their temporary resident applications upon arrival in Canada and at Visa Application Centers for visa-requiring nationals presenting their temporary resident applications from abroad.

To facilitate this increased biometric collection, the government of Canada has announced the implementation of “biometric collection service points” at approximately 57 ports of entry across Canada (which includes all major airports) as well as the addition of numerous biometric collection service points around the world. The biometric information collected is valid for a 10-year period. Foreign nationals who have already provided biometric information will not be subject to this new regulation until their biometric information expires. Similarly, applicants applying to renew their temporary resident status from within Canada will not need to provide biometric information until the implementation of in-Canada enrollment services expected some time in February 2019.

The objective behind this biometric expansion project is to help Canada protect the safety of its borders and the security of all Canadians by providing the relevant authorities with the tools necessary to effectively screen temporary and permanent resident applicants before they enter Canada. It is unclear whether the benefits of the Biometric Expansion Project will outweigh potential frustrations associated with a more cumbersome application process, especially for visa-exempt nationals who may be unaccustomed to these types of increased security measures.

Back to Top


3. HONG KONG

A landmark decision by Hong Kong’s highest court means that same-sex spouses and partners may now receive dependent visas.

In a landmark decision on July 4, 2018, the Court of Final Appeal, Hong Kong’s highest court, ruled that the Hong Kong Immigration Department must issue a dependent visa to a same-sex partner for immigration purposes. Accordingly, while the definition of “marriage” as between a man and a woman under Hong Kong law remains unchanged, marital status and civil union partnerships of same-sex couples entered into in a jurisdiction that recognizes such relationships are now recognized in Hong Kong for the purpose of applying for a dependent visa if the other partner holds permanent resident status or an employment visa.

The ruling was welcomed by a host of global financial institutions, law firms, executive search firms, and other businesses. This ruling strengthens Hong Kong’s ability to attract global talent and its competitiveness as recruiting and relocating talent to Hong Kong had sometimes been hampered because of the immigration restrictions on same-sex couples.

Back to Top


4. ITALY

A security and immigration decree, making substantial changes to the immigration and citizenship law, has been signed.

After being approved by the Italian government, a new Law Decree was signed by the President and published in the Italian Official Gazette (n. 113) on October 4, 2018. The Law Decree entered into force October 5, 2018.

The decree must be converted into law by the Parliament within 60 days of its publication. Failure to do so will result in the decree becoming retroactively ineffective from the publication date. The Parliament may introduce amendments to the decree upon conversion into law.

Main Changes to Immigration Law

  • A permit for humanitarian reasons (granted to those who cannot obtain refugee or subsidiary protection status but are recognized to be in danger if repatriated) will no longer be issued. Instead, “special reasons” permits can be issued to certain categories of applicants, such as victims of exploitation and domestic violence, people from countries hit by natural disasters, people in need of medical care. and those performing “acts of civic value.”
  • The decree widens the range of criminal offenses that can result in revocation of international protection and refugee status.
  • Migrants can be kept in pre-removal detention centers (CPR) up to 180 days (instead of 90 days).
  • More funds will be available for repatriating migrants who have no right to stay in the country.

Main Changes to Citizenship Law

  • The decree increases the processing time for citizenship by marriage and naturalization applications (48 months).
  • It introduces the possibility for citizenship by marriage applications to be rejected after the 48-month period.
  • The application fee has been increased (from €200 to €250).
  • Citizenship acquired by marriage or naturalization will be revoked for people convicted of terrorism-related offenses or offenses related to public security.

Back to Top


5. SPAIN

Spain has implemented an EU directive on research and student permits.

Spain has finally implemented, or “transposed,” European Union (EU) Directive 2016/801/EC through the Royal Decree-Law 11/2018, effective September 4, 2018. The Directive’s goal is to continue to attract talented and skilled people to the EU.

The transposition introduces into the Spanish legal framework the regulation of an EU research permit granting the right to intra-EU mobility, with validity for 12 months to enable researchers to seek employment once the research permit has expired.

Regarding students, the transposition introduces a permit valid for 12 months for students to seek employment once their student permits have expired, the possibility of their obtaining student permits through an in-country process (skipping the visa step process), and sponsoring of the student permit application by the Study Center instead of by the student. Also, a new training permit for students is valid for up to two years after obtaining a university degree.

In a nutshell, new permits have been implemented under Spain’s legal framework to facilitate foreign nationals’ research activity in Spain and their intra-EU mobility and to facilitate the training of foreign students and, under certain circumstances, their incorporation into the Spanish labor market.

Back to Top


6. TURKEY

Turkey has lowered financial thresholds for Citizenship by Investment.

On September 18, 2018, Turkey announced a lowering of the financial thresholds for Citizenship by Investment in Turkey. For a comparison with the previous levels for each type of investment (e.g., real estate, bank deposit, government bonds), please see the chart below.

It is hoped that these new lower thresholds will allow the investment program to lead to more citizenship filings and approvals.

Turkish Citizenship by Investment Level
(5627 Regulation on the Implementation of the Turkish Citizenship Law)

https://abil.sharefile.com/d-s5a17ae8d9d240669

Back to Top


7. UNITED KINGDOM

The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has published its long-awaited recommendations for work migration post-Brexit, following a call for evidence from employers and other stakeholders during the summer of 2017.

The key recommendations of the United Kingdom’s (UK) MAC include:

  1. The general principle behind migration policy changes should be to make it easier for higher-skilled workers to migrate to the UK than lower-skilled workers. This is in line with proposals in a leaked government document publicized in 2017, where the government indicated it was in favor of granting long-term visas for highly skilled European Union (EU) migrants and shorter-term visas for low skilled migrants, subject to a salary cap.
  2. There should be no preference for EU citizens unless this forms part of an agreement between the UK and the EU. As the UK government and the EU are still in negotiations to determine the nature of a future UK/EU agreement, it is possible the UK government will concede some preferential treatment for EU citizens as part of any final agreement.
  3. Abolish the cap on the number of migrants under Tier 2 (General). For more on this, see https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/immigration-law-blog/scrap-the-cap-why-its-time-for-the-tier-2-immigration-cap-to-go.
  4. Tier 2 (General) should be open to all jobs at RQF3 and above. This would bring many more non-graduate-level, medium-skilled occupations back into the SOC codes (occupation list), which have been excluded since the threshold for inclusion in the occupation list was raised first to RQF level 4 and later to RQF level 6. The Shortage Occupation List will be fully reviewed in the MAC’s next report in response to the SOL Commission. If a job appears on the SOL, there is no requirement for employers to advertise the role before offering a job to a non-EU migrant. Furthermore, extra points are awarded to migrants under the Tier 2 cap if they will be performing shortage occupation roles.
  5. Maintain existing salary thresholds for all migrants in Tier 2. The MAC believes that this will avoid downward pressure on salaries.
  6. Retain but review the Immigration Skills Charge (ISC). This is currently set at £1,000 per annum and was set to double to £2,000 at some point.
  7. Consider abolition of the Resident Labour Market Test (RLMT). If not abolished, extend the numbers of migrants who are exempt through lowering the salary required for exemption.
  8. Review how the current sponsor licensing system works for small and medium-sized businesses.
  9. Consult more systematically with users of the visa system to ensure it works as smoothly as possible.
  10. For lower-skilled workers, avoid Sector-Based Schemes (with the potential exception of a Seasonal Agricultural Workers scheme). The government has already introduced a visa scheme for fruit and vegetable growers on a pilot basis to run until the end of December 2020.
  11. If a SAWS scheme is reintroduced, ensure upward pressure on wages via an agricultural minimum wage to encourage increases in productivity.
  12. If a “backstop” is considered necessary to fill low-skilled roles, extend the Tier 5 Youth Mobility Scheme.
  13. Monitor and evaluate the impact of migration policies.
  14. Pay more attention to managing the consequences of migration at a local level.

Although the report does contain some positive recommendations, particularly regarding the scrapping of the Tier 2 cap, some observers say it is difficult to see how the government can entertain the prospect of bringing EU migrants within Tier 2 without massively increasing its resourcing of the Home Office.

Currently, EU migrants can come to the UK and immediately take up a job with minimal bureaucracy and no involvement of the immigration services. Even if the government were to introduce a more simple and streamlined application process with no RLMT and no Tier 2 cap, this would still be a substantial administrative burden for many employers.

Now that the government has the MAC’s recommendations, it is expected that a White Paper will be published shortly on the architecture of the UK’s post-Brexit immigration system.

Back to Top


8. New Publications and Items of Interest

Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers:

  • The latest immigration news is at https://www.abil.com/news.cfm.
  • The latest published media releases include:
    • ABIL Says Proposed Change to Public Charge Rule Would Exclude Immigrants from Government Programs
    • New Data Show Increase in H-1B Denials and RFEs
    • ABIL Urges Administration to Change “Buy American and Hire American” Executive Order
    • ABIL Member Kuck Baxter Immigration Commercial Nominated for an Emmy
    • ABIL Members Note Immigration Threats for Employers in 2018
  • ABIL is available on Twitter: @ABILImmigration.
  • Recent ABIL member blogs are at http://www.abilblog.com/.

Back to Top


9. Member News

Dagmar Butte was quoted by Forbes in “The Next Harmful Move Against H-1B Visas.” Commenting on what might be included in an upcoming Trump administration regulation to make it more difficult for employers to hire H-1B workers, Ms. Butte said, “I think they will eliminate the Level 1 wage. That would be contrary to the statute, which mandates 4 wage levels. This would definitely buy them a lawsuit unless Congress changes the statute. I also think they will attempt to eliminate certain kinds of third-party employment or require formal co-employment. However, I am not sure how they’ll do it…. All of this will hit employers and ‘entry-level’ foreign national workers the hardest.” Ms. Butte explained that most new graduates, whether foreign-born or native-born, are considered entry-level workers. “If the Level 1 or entry level wage is eliminated, employers are not likely to hire an entry-level worker at the next wage level, which in almost all H-1B occupations is significantly greater when you look at the DOL wage ranges. Therefore, a foreign student would not be able to obtain entry-level work in the U.S. upon graduation. This would be true even for many advanced degree graduates.” She also warned that revising the definition of a specialty occupation to include achievement beyond the existence of a degree would make the process arbitrary for employers. She noted that a separate problem would emerge if a revised definition were to focus narrowly on the title of the degree and overlook the individual’s body of knowledge because that would ignore what employers seek in a competitive labor market.

The Forbes article

Charles Foster, chairman of Foster LLP, is the driving force behind an effort to build a monument to Lyndon B. Johnson in Houston, Texas. An article about this effort is available here.

Corporate Immigration Law Firm and Gomberg Dalfen, S.E.N.C., were named by Canadian Lawyer to its Top Ten Immigration Boutiques list. They are the firms of ABIL members Barbara Jo Caruso and Avi Gomberg, respectively. For more information, see Canadian Lawyer.

Several attorneys from Gomberg Dalfen, S.E.N.C., were listed in Who’s Who Legal: Canada 2018: Avi Gomberg, Seth Dalfen, Geneviève Hénault, and Isabelle Owston (see Who’s Who Legal). Also listed was Barbara Jo Caruso (see Who’s Who Legal).

The following attorneys from Gomberg Dalfen, S.E.N.C., were listed in the 2019 Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory: Avi Gomberg, Seth Dalfen, and Geneviève Hénault.

Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP, was included in the 2018 Best Places to Work by the Philadelphia Business Journal. The firm was named a Best Place to Work for the third consecutive year. Klasko issued a statement: “Given the emotionally charged climate surrounding immigration, the firm is honored to have continued the tradition of consistently fostering a rewarding and positive work environment.”

Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP, has released a new episode in its “Statutes of Liberty” series. Episode 10: .

Ronald Klasko and William Stock earned placement in Human Resource Executive and Lawdragon’s annual joint publication of their “best of” lawyers list for the 11th year. In addition to Mr. Stock’s repeated recognition, which is bestowed on 216 lawyers, Mr. Klasko has been inducted into the publication’s Hall of Fame. The standard for this honor is high, with only 16 inductees this year, needing a minimum of 35 years of practicing law and consistently high recognition. .

Mr. Klasko, Mr. Stock, and Elise A. Fialkowski have been included in The Best Lawyers in America© 2019 in the area of immigration law. Mr. Stock was named the Best Lawyers® 2019 Immigration Law “Lawyer of the Year” in Philadelphia. It is the second time he has received this honor.

Mr. Klasko was quoted by Law360 in “4 USCIS Policies Changing the Face of Business Immigration.” He said he is mustering plaintiffs to launch a lawsuit against a new USCIS policy on unlawful presence, accusing the agency of violating the Administrative Procedure Act’s requirements to provide notice and an opportunity for the public to comment on a new agency rule: “We’re very concerned about this because the immigration service has overturned a legal interpretation and policy that has been in place for 21 years without APA notice and comment rulemaking. The implications are huge.” It could mean that universities would have to take on massive liability, he noted. If, for example, a foreign student adviser incorrectly counsels a student that he or she can work extra hours on a campus job without violating visa status and accruing unlawful presence, that student may have grounds to sue, Mr. Klasko said. He noted that the policy does not necessarily change his strategy for filing visa applications. He said he already submits extensive documentation with every application to cover every possible issue. He is, however, more cautious about ensuring that he establishes a good record with that initial filing in the event the case needs to be litigated. The article is available by registering at law360.

Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP, welcomes associate Natalia Gouz. Ms. Gouz, a graduate of New York Law School, has extensive experience in both nonimmigrant and immigrant matters. She assists clients from a broad spectrum of industries including the financial sector, information technology, telecommunications, higher education, healthcare, logistics, and hospitality.

Kuck Baxter Immigration is working with Emory Law School and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints on an Immigrant Services Initiative law clinic, inaugurated August 8, 2018, in Chamblee, Georgia. The article is available by registering at law.com.

Robert Loughran has authored “5 Steps Businesses Can Take as U.S. Ramps Up Immigration Audits,” published by Austin Business Journal. The article is available at Foster Global or by subscription here.

Mr. Loughran addressed immigration options and unique port-of-entry considerations for musicians during a panel presentation on International Touring Development & Logistics at the Austin-Toronto Music City Alliance Summit. The panel, held October 11, 2018, was designed to focus on development of management/venue/promoter/agent networks between Canada and the United States, including establishing additional touring routes for Austin and Toronto artists, as well as current and evolving best practices for securing visas.

Cyrus Mehta received the Advocate Award at the annual gala of the Northern Manhattan Improvement Corporation (NIMC) on October 4, 2018. Since 1979, NMIC has been a source of support and opportunities for the most vulnerable community members in upper Manhattan, and now the Bronx. NIMC provides immigration services, preserves and develops affordable housing, and supports survivors of intimate partner violence. For more information, see NIMC.

Mr. Mehta has authored several new blog entries: “,” “,” and “”

Mr. Mehta spoke at the New York City Bar on “Stress Testing International Law: A Time of Archipelagos, Moats, and Walls” on October 9, 2018. For more information, see NYC Bar Association.

Mr. Mehta was quoted extensively by the Times of India in “Tough Policy for International Students in U.S.” The article is here. He was also quoted in “,” and “.”

Sophia Genovese, of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, has authored several new blog entries: “,” and “Indirect Refoulement: Why the U.S. Cannot Create a Safe Third Country Agreement with Mexico.”

David Isaacson, of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, has authored a new blog entry, “Jaen v. Sessions: The Second Circuit Reminds Us That Government Manuals Aren’t Always Right.”

Cora-Ann V. Pestaina, of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, has authored a new blog entry, “F-1 Cap Gap Students In Limbo from October 1, 2018 Onward If Their H-1B Cases Have Not Been Approved.”

Angelo Paparelli has authored several new blog entries: “The Long-Lived ‘Con Job’ Structural Injustice in the Immigration ‘Courts’,” “Where is the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director?“, and “California Can Revive the Immigrant Worker Protection Act by Challenging the Authority of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ ‘FDNS’ Enforcement Officers.”

Rodrigo Tannus has authored several new articles in Diario la República: “Circulación laboral en la Alianza del Pacífico (I),” and “Circulación laboral en la Alianza del Pacífico (II).”

Karl Waheed was quoted by Bloomberg in “France: New Immigration Law Would Ease Some Visa Requirements for Foreign Professionals.” Law No. 2018-778 of Sept. 10, 2018, for Managed Immigration, an Effective Right of Asylum, and Successful Integration, published September 11, 2018, “for the most part aimed to make the asylum process more restrictive for asylum seekers, but it also includes a handful of very business-friendly immigration measures for the corporate world,” he said. The article, which includes additional quotes, is available here.

Bernard Wolfsdorf was quoted by MarketWatch in “U.S. Immigration Fund: Washington Update: EB-5 Regional Center Program Reauthorization Extended to December.” Mr. Wolfsdorf said that “while Congress has attempted to reform the EB-5 program for several years, my view is the stars are now in alignment and we can expect to see new legislation before the end of 2018. I am hopeful Congress will provide meaningful reform including a long-term extension, reasonable grandfathering of TEA rules and a moderate increase in the minimum investment amount so that the already diminished demand is not cut off. Most important, I am hopeful Congress will correct the program to 10,000 investors, not only allow 3,000 investors and their family annually.” The article is at MarketWatch.

Stephen Yale-Loehr coordinated Cornell Law School’s conference on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) held at the New York City Bar Association building on October 5, 2018. The conference presented a comprehensive overview of the legal and political situation around DACA and other forms of temporary immigration status. Expert panelists explored the origins of the “Dreamer” population, the administrative and litigation responses to the situation, and where we go from here, both for Dreamers and others in tenuous immigration situations. Mr. Yale-Loehr moderated the first panel, “Politics, Passions, Parents: How the DREAMers Gained Momentum.” For more information, see Cornell Law School.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by the Voice of America in “International Students Can Use U.S. Investor Visa to Gain Green Card.” “I would think several hundred students” get an EB-5 visa each year, he said. “But nobody knows for sure. It may only be a hundred.” The article notes that although parents and families typically provide the money, students sometimes decide where to invest. “That is probably the most daunting part of the EB-5 process for many investors. I compare it to a Rubik’s Cube,” he explained. “The immigration component has to line up with the [investment] component, which has to line up with the job creation element. … Sometimes, if the students are majoring in business, they’re very savvy.” The article is at Voice of America.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by Inside Higher Ed in “A Dream Denied.” Commenting on what’s known in immigration law as “nonimmigrant intent,” which is a common reason why prospective students are denied visas to come to the United States, Mr. Yale-Loehr noted, “It’s hard because it is subjective. It’s really up to the individual consular officer to determine whether they think the individual will go back to their home country after they finish their studies. For some countries it is harder than others: it’s a lot easier to show nonimmigrant intent if you’re from a Western European country than if you’re from a West African country. It’s always been the case, and this is just the latest example of that. There’s no magic bullet or document that will necessarily satisfy a consular officer. The more evidence that an individual has, such as a job offer or owning land or being married to someone who is staying behind in the home country, the better the chances that someone will satisfy that ‘nonimmigrant intent’ requirement. But for many students, they’re not married, they don’t own land and if they’re the first one in their family to be going to college, it can be hard to prove that they really do intend to return home after they finish their studies.” The article is at Inside Higher Ed.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by Univision in “Unos 100,000 cónyuges de visas H-1B están a punto de perder sus permisos de trabajo” [“100,000 Spouses of H-1B Visa Holders are on the Verge of Losing Their Work Permits”]. He noted (in Spanish), that Trump’s executive order of April 18, 2018 “is too simple a solution to a complex problem.” He added that changes in immigration laws should be monitored “to make sure that companies pay the right salary, but that they do not damage innovation in the process.” The article is at Univision.

Mr. Yale-Loehr participated in an hour-long panel discussion on the Syracuse PBS TV station about how President Trump’s immigration changes are affecting people in New York. A recording is available at WCNY.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by the San Jose Mercury News in “H-1B: U.S. Officials Cracking Down on Indian Citizens, Report Says.” “Cases that used to be approved without a second thought are now receiving requests for evidence and are being denied,” he noted. Mr. Yale-Loehr said that the Trump administration’s H-1B crackdown could ultimately hamper U.S. firms’ ability to hire U.S. workers: “They may not be able to continue to grow their companies the way they would like. It may make larger companies more likely to set up overseas operations rather than expand in the United States, and that ultimately hurts U.S. workers.” On the issue of whether Indian citizens are being singled out by the U.S. government, Mr. Yale-Loehr said that was unclear. “It could just be because Indians are over-represented among computer professionals; therefore they’re over-represented in these requests for evidence and denials,” he noted. The article is at San Jose Mercury News.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by ABC News in “First Lady Melania Trump Sponsored Parents’ Green Card Application.” He noted, “The most obvious way that they would have become green card holders is by being the parents of a U.S. citizen—i.e., Melania Trump.” The article is at ABC News.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by the Miami Herald in “Venezuelan Military Deserter Faces Deportation Back to Government U.S. Calls Dictatorship.” Mr. Yale-Loehr, who has represented military deserters seeking asylum in the United States and co-directs the asylum clinic at Cornell Law School, said that in the past those who have fled the military from governments of U.S. adversaries have been more likely to gain asylum. “If you’re fleeing a government that the United States supports, like Canada, you’re more likely to lose asylum,” he noted. “But if you’re fleeing a government like Venezuela that the United States opposes then you’re more likely to win asylum, even if the facts are similar.” The article is at Miami Herald.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was also quoted in the following media:

  • Fox News, re reduction in migrant deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border: “I don’t know if reducing the number of deaths is or is not a deterrent to entering the Unites States—from a humanitarian perspective anything that can be done to reduce the number of deaths is to be applauded.” The Fox News story
  • Univision, re public charge rule (in Spanish)
  • Law360, re public charge rule: Denying Green Cards Over Benefits Would Invite Lawsuits: Mr. Yale-Loehr said immigrants should not panic over the proposed rule yet. The public will have 60 days to comment. Moreover, the administration will need to review the thousands of comments it will receive before it can finalize its rule. “Even then, litigation could prevent the final rule from ever taking effect.” Article available by registering at Law360.
  • Marketplace, re public charge rule (available here; the story starts at about the 3:45-minute mark)

https://www.abil.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/ABIL_Logo-2021.png 0 0 ABIL https://www.abil.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/ABIL_Logo-2021.png ABIL2018-10-15 11:13:592023-08-14 14:12:17ABIL Global Update • October 2018

Archive

  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • October 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • April 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006

ABIL is a corporation with over 40 top-rated immigration law firms and 1,500+ professionals.

News

  • ABIL Immigration Insider • October 5, 2025
  • ABIL Immigration Insider • September 7, 2025
  • ABIL Global Update • August 2025
  • ABIL Immigration Insider • August 3, 2025

Sign Up for our Newsletters

Sign up for our Immigration Insider & Global Updates Newsletters

Select list(s) to subscribe to


By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact
© Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers (ABIL) All Rights Reserved 2025
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Home
  • About
  • ABIL Lawyers
  • Global Immigration
  • Services
  • Industries
  • Resources
  • Contact
Scroll to top