USCIS, Sept. 18, 2024 "Effective Sept. 10, 2024, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services automatically extended the validity of Permanent Resident Cards (also known as Green Cards) to 36 months...
Singh v. Garland "Petitioner Varinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, seeks rescission of a removal order entered in absentia. We previously granted Singh’s petition because the government...
BIB Daily presents bimonthly PERM practice tips from Ron Wada , member of the Editorial Board for Bender’s Immigration Bulletin and author of the 10+ year series of BALCA review articles, “Shaping...
Castellanos-Ventura v. Garland "Petitioner Bessy Orbelina Castellanos-Ventura, a native and citizen of Honduras, seeks review of an April 19, 2021 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA...
EOIR PM 24-01 "This Policy Memorandum provides updated standards to Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) adjudicators and personnel regarding the receipt of Notices to Appear (NTAs) filed...
"While countless undocumented immigrants seek legal status under unilateral executive initiatives, the Court is tasked with reviewing an executive agency’s decision denying a visa to an educated woman who sought to manage a medical office. ... Because the denial of the visa petition was based on legal error and findings of fact unsupported by substantial evidence, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion and DENIES Defendants’ Motion. ... The USCIS erred in denying W.C.’s petition. W.C. showed that Kiwan’s proposed position was a Medical and Health Services Manager as described in the OOH, and that the Medical and Health Services Manager role normally requires a bachelor’s degree in a specific field. The USCIS’s findings to the contrary were unsupported by substantial evidence. The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and DENIES Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court reaches this result after reviewing all arguments in the parties’ papers. Any arguments not specifically addressed were either unpersuasive or not necessary to reach given the Court’s holdings. The case is REMANDED to Defendant for further proceedings consistent with this Order." - Warren Chiropractic v. USCIS, Jan. 12, 2015. [Hats off to Michael Piston!]