Friday, February 26, 2010

I-485 changes again

Revised Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent
Residence or Adjust Status, and Revised Filing Locations
WASHINGTON - U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced that it has
posted a revised Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, Form I-485. In addition to a revised form, there are new filing locations. The changes are part of an overall effort to transition the intake of USCIS benefit forms from Service Centers to Lockbox facilities.
Centralizing form and fee intake allows USCIS to provide the public more efficient and effective initial processing of applications and fees.
Beginning February 25, 2010, most applicants must submit Form I-485 to a USCIS Lockbox facility, depending on the eligibility category under which they are filing, as provided in the form instructions. USCIS Service Centers will forward all Form I-485 applications to the appropriateLockbox facility until March 29, 2010. USCIS will accept previous versions of Form I-485 until March 29, 2010. After March 29, 2010, USCIS will only accept the Form I-485 dated “12/03/09.”Any previous versions of the the form that are submitted will be rejected. After the transitional period,t he Service Centers will return any incorrectly filed Form I-485 with instructions to send the application to the correct location.
At this time, applicants should not concurrently file Form I-485 with an Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140) at a USCIS Lockbox facility. Refer to the Form I-140 filing Instructions for information on how to file forms concurrently.
When filing Form I-485 at a Lockbox facility, you may elect to receive an email and/or text messagenotifying you that USCIS has accepted your application. To receive notification, you must complete an E-Notification of Application/Petition Acceptance (Form G-1145), and attach it to the first page of your application.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Funny of the Day- Why Your Lawyer will not return your calls

By William L. Pfeifer Jr. on the

10. Your lawyer is busy on something more important. While you may think and act like you are your lawyer’s only client, the reality is that a lot of other people hired the same attorney as you. Your business alone will not pay your lawyer’s bills. Lawyers have to meet crucial deadlines. They spend hours standing around in courtrooms, and more hours researching and preparing to stand around in courtrooms. They are in meetings with clients, interviewing witnesses, taking depositions, and a million other important things. Your whiney question about a case that won’t be going to trial for two or three years is not as pressing as the case set for trial tomorrow.

9. There is nothing new to tell you. Many people believe that there are always new developments in their case, or that there should be. In reality, most cases involve many periods of intense activity but also include many times of little or no activity. For example, if you send interrogatories to the opposing party, there is probably nothing going on until they submit their answers a month from now. If all discovery has been done and you are just waiting for trial, you could experience months of inactivity in a case just waiting to get in front of a judge. If there is nothing to tell you, your call inquiring about the status of the case may not get returned until there is absolutely nothing else of any importance that the lawyer needs to do.

8. You talk too much. Some people act like a lawyer has all the time in the world, and want to chat endlessly about trivial matters that just aren’t relevant. Lawyers quickly learn which clients can be efficient and which ones are time hogs. If you know how to get to the point, get your answer, and move on, your lawyer is much more likely to return your calls than if he or she knows that your call will go on forever. Lawyers are busy, they only have a limited number of hours in a day, and they can’t spend all day listening to you blab on and on. It’s nothing personal, you are just a waste of time. If the lawyer starts the conversation with, “I’ve only got 5 minutes before I have to do X,” that may be a warning sign that you are a time waster. Make your calls short and to the point, and you’ll hear from your lawyer sooner and more often.

7. Your lawyer has issues. Surprisingly few people do much research before hiring a lawyer. This lack of diligence works out well for lawyers with substance abuse problems, mental illnesses, or a poor work ethic. What do you really know about this person who has been entrusted with the most important matters in your life? Statistics indicate that lawyers suffer from alcoholism and depression at rates significantly higher than the general population. In fact, lawyers have the most alcoholics of any profession. You may have hired a fantastic attorney who is swamped with work, or you may have hired an alcoholic lawyer who is too drunk to talk to you right now.

6. Your lawyer screwed up. While still fairly rare, this does happen more often than people realize. Your lawyer could be avoiding telling you the unpleasant truth that your case has already been lost. How can this happen? The most common way is that the lawyer missed a filing deadline. If there was a statute of limitations on when your case had to be filed with the court and the lawyer missed that deadline, then you are screwed. Your lawyer doesn’t want to tell you because he or she doesn’t want to have to admit to committing malpractice. So he stalls, delays, and avoids you until he can figure out a way out of this mess.

5. Your lawyer is an ass. Most lawyers are not as bad as the reputation of the profession would lead one to believe. In fact, most are ordinary people who just happen to be in a job that turns them into bitter, cynical asses who hate what they do every day. Most started out with high aspirations for all the good they could do in the world as a lawyer, only to discover so much of the job is just doing the bidding of some of the sorriest SOBs on the planet (such as you). This is very hard on one’s soul, and over time it can turn lawyers into rather unpleasant people. Note: It could also be that he was already an ass before becoming a lawyer, in which case joining the legal profession is like living a dream for him.

4. You are not the client. It is absolutely amazing how many people think they have a right to know what is going on in other people’s cases. Parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, neighbors, ex-wives, employers – the number of people who call lawyers wanting to know “what is going on” would surprise most people. If you are leaving messages about someone else’s case and aren’t getting a return call, consider that the lawyer has no obligation to call you. The lawyer doesn’t represent you, can’t tell you anything, and really doesn’t have time to argue with you about why he can’t tell you anything. It doesn’t matter if you are the client’s momma, if you have written authorization, if you have a power of attorney for the client, or even if you are paying the bill. If you aren’t the client, mind your own business.

3. You are an idiot. This one is pretty self-explanatory. You are a dumbass who doesn’t understand anything you are told, or who disregards it to do whatever you want to do anyway. You are going to be getting into trouble for the rest of your life because you are just so dumb. Seen those “stupid criminal” videos? That’s you. Your lawyer is tired of telling you what to do, only to watch you disregard it to indulge your impulses or because you think you are smarter than everyone else. You aren’t. No one likes to waste time talking to a moron.

2. You won’t listen. This one often overlaps with “you are an idiot.” No matter how many times something is explained to you, you ask the same questions over and over because you don’t like the answers you received. You think that if you ask the same question over and over, at some point the answer will change into something you want to hear. This isn’t your mommy saying you can’t have a cookie and finally giving in because you asked for it 100 times. If you’ve been told the same answer a dozen times already, maybe it is because that really is the answer. Since the lawyer doesn’t want to tell you again, he just won’t bother talking to you.

1. You are an ass. The biggest reason that your lawyer doesn’t want to talk to you is that you are an ass. You are rude, demanding, pushy, arrogant, whiney, and annoying. You think that you can catch more flies with a flamethrower than with honey. Your lawyer is the only person who is trying to help you, and yet you want to treat him like this? Hating you is not a good motivator for trying to help win your case. The squeaky wheel may get the grease, but it doesn’t get a returned phone call. Try being polite and pleasant, and you’ll have much better communications with your lawyer.

Big Changes for the K-3 Visa

Per the US State Department Website. not sure this was the Congressional intent

How will the Department of State process my K-3 visa petition?

Important Notice: Effective February 1st, 2010, when both the I-129F petition for a nonimmigrant K visa and the I-130 petition for an IR-1 (or CR-1) spouse of a U.S. citizen visa have been approved by USCIS and sent to the National Visa Center (NVC), the availability as well as the need for a nonimmigrant K-3 visa ends. If the NVC receives both petitions:

The nonimmigrant K visa will be administratively closed.
The application process explained below will not be applicable and cannot be used.
The NVC will contact the petitioner and you with instructions for processing your IR-1 (or CR-1) immigrant visa. For more information on the immigrant visa process review the Immigrant Visa for a Spouse webpage.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Joke of the Day

DEA officer stops at a ranch in Texas , and talks with an old rancher. He tells the rancher, "I need to inspect your ranch for illegally grown drugs." The rancher says, "Okay, but do not go in that field over there," as he points out the location.
The DEA officer verbally explodes saying, " Mister, I have the authority of the Federal Government with me." Reaching into his rear pants pocket, he removes his badge and proudly displays it to the rancher. "See this badge? This badge means I am allowed to go wherever I wish . . . . On any land. No questions asked or answers given. Have I made myself clear? Do you understand?"
The rancher nods politely, apologizes, and goes about his chores.
A short time later, the old rancher hears loud screams and sees the DEA officer running for his life chased by the rancher's big Santa Gertrudis bull . . . . . .

With every step the bull is gaining ground on the officer, and it seems likely that he'll get gored before he reaches safety. The officer is clearly terrified.
The rancher runs to the fence and yells at the top of his lungs . .. . . .
"Your Badge, show him your Badge!"

Monday, February 22, 2010

Changes on I-824


WASHINGTON - U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced revised
filing instructions and addresses for applicants filing Form I-824, Application for Action on an
Approved Application or Petition. The new form is dated 12/11/09. The changes are part of an
overall effort to transition the intake of benefit forms from USCIS local offices and Service Centers
to USCIS Lockbox facilities. Centralizing form and fee intake to a Lockbox environment allows
USCIS to provide customers with more efficient and effective initial processing of applications and
Beginning February 19, 2010, applicants must file Form I-824 with a USCIS Lockbox facility, based
on which Service Center or local office approved their original petition or application. Detailed
guidance is available in the updated Form I-824 instructions.
USCIS Service Centers will forward all Form I-824 applications to the Lockbox facility for the next
30 days. After February 19, 2010, the Service Centers will return any incorrectly filed Form I-824
applications with instructions to send the application to the correct location.
When filing Form I-824 at a USCIS Lockbox facility, applicants may elect to receive an email and/or
text message notifying them that USCIS has accepted their application. To receive notification,
applicants must complete an E-Notification of Application/Petition Acceptance (Form G-1145), and
attach it to the first page of their application.
For more information on USCIS programs, visit or call the National Customer
Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Immigration Rant of the Day

This is a dissenting opinion from the Honorable 6th Circtui Judge Boyce F Martin Jr.

He aupines

BOYCE F. MARTIN, JR., Circuit Judge, dissenting from denial of rehearing en
banc. From 1994 until the government initiated deportation proceedings, Ibrahim Parlak operated a restaurant and raised his family in a small town in Michigan. There is no indication that he ever caused any problems here in the States. Why our government would elect to expend the time and money to rid our population of someone like Mr. Parlak is beyond me. As I acknowledged in my dissent to the panel opinion, however, “for the nation’s immigrants, past may always be prologue,” Parlak v. Holder, 578 F.3d 457, 471(6th Cir. 2009) (Martin, J., dissenting), and, in any event, it is the government’s prerogative to fritter away our resources as it sees fit. But one would assume that, if the government is going to expel a beneficial member of society for the alleged sins of his distant past, the government would go about its chosen folly correctly, in an above-board and dignified manner, and without over-reaching. One would further assume that those of us in the position of deciding Mr. Parlak’s case, in the agency and in the judiciary, would demand this
high standard of the government.

One would be wrong.

To read the rest of his scathing dissrnt please see
Parlak v. Holder 09a0425p.06 on the 6th Circuit website

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Immigration Rant of the Day Fiance visa K-1 version

From the Immigration Listserve Immlog, one of my colleagues issued this rant about the policies fo the California Service Center

I saw an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) on a K1 recently from CSC.
I thought we had settled that last year.

It turns out that I was right.

What CSC is apparently doing now is issuing NOID's on K1 re-files.
Thus, if a K1 is refused at the consulate, P receives an
Notice of Decision (NOD) from CSC notifying him or her that the petition
has expired and that re-filing with IMBRA waiver is an option.

However, on that re-file, CSC can send out an NOID based
on the consular memorandum from the previous interview.
Thus, there are no 120 day expiration & revalidation issues.

It makes sense to me.
BTW, for lawyers like me who collect consular refusal reasons.
here is one for your collection:

"The beneficiary provided email and chat transcripts for review.
Many of the emails from the beneficiary included poems. The beneficiary
said he would find them on Google and send them to the petitioner."

That's it.

It's unclear if the officer objected to B's taste in poetry, or if he was accusing
B of plagiarism. Either way, it might be wise for a skilled practitioner to write
the consulate in advance, & request a list of approved poems,so that the evidence
your client submits can better conform to the office's poetic sensibilities.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

H-1b Meeting invitation, RSVP to USCIS??

February 12, 2010

Meeting Invitation

TO: USCIS National Stakeholders

FROM: U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services - Office of Public

SUBJECT: Collaboration Session – Determining Employer-Employee
Relationships for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions
February 18, 2010 @ 1:00pm EST
Tomich Center
111 Massachusetts Ave NW

The USCIS Office of Public Engagement invites you to participate in a
collaboration session to discuss the implementation of the memo issued on
January 8, 2010 which provides guidance on determining if a valid employer-
employee relationship exists. A copy of the memorandum is attached along
with this invitation.

We are interested in hearing feedback and input on the impact of this
guidance and to understand any concerns that stakeholders may have.

There are two ways to attend this meeting:

In person – please provide your full name and the organization you represent
to Mary Herrmann, at or (202) 272-1213.

Be sure to arrive at least 15 minutes early to allow extra time to be processed
through security and bring a photo I.D.

Via telephone – call-in information will be provided when you respond.
Please provide your full name and the organization you represent to Mary
Herrmann, at

We hope you will be able to join in this important discussion.

AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10021665. (Posted 02/16/10)

AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10021665. (Posted 02/16/10)

8 year delay for adjustment of status is not "unreasonable" according to the 8th Circuit

"Given the facts specific to Debba that have caused the delay, and
assuming for purposes of our analysis that there is a judicially-enforceable
“reasonable time” requirement, we conclude the delay in processing Debba’s AOS
application was not unreasonable."

Debba v. Heinauer, Feb. 16, 2010.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Immigration Rant of the Day

While this is not directly a rant about immigration, it is a rant about the ineffectiveness of our Federal government.

Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Indiana, said Monday afternoon that he won't seek a third term in the Senate -
"Congress is not operating as it should," Bayh said at a news conference in Indianapolis, adding there's too much partisanship and "the people's business is not getting done." Bayh said he loves public service, but does "not love Congress" and is "not motivated by strident partisanship or ideology."

Immigration adovcates will miss Bayh and his leadership in Congress.

BIA Establishes Temporary "Grace Period"

Because of the sever weather. The Board of Immigration Appeals has allowed for a grace period of certain filings.

On this occasion, the Board will apply a temporary "grace period" for the following filings:

(1) the filing was due on any date from Friday, February 5, 2010, to Thursday, February 18, 2010, and

(2) the filing was received on or before February 19, 2010.

The grace period will apply automatically. No request or documentation is required.

Filings that arrive after February 19, 2010, are subject to normal filing deadlines. If weather is an issue for any of those filings, parties should consult the BIA Practice Manual, Chapter 3.1(b)(v), on page 34 ("Natural or manmade disasters"). The BIA Practice Manual is available on-line at (under the links for both "Virtual Law Library" and "Statistics and Publications").

ICE Fines Cincinnati Company over 500K!

As a result of an investigation that resulted in numerous arrests,

Cincinnati firm fined at conclusion of worksite investigation

CINCINNATI - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced today that Koch Foods of Cincinnati LLC paid a $536,046 fine for administrative violations of U.S. immigration laws.

The ICE Office of Investigations in Cincinnati conducted a worksite investigation of Koch Foods after receiving information from a concerned citizen alleging that the company was employing more than 100 illegal aliens at their poultry processing facility in the Cincinnati area. In August 2007, ICE subsequently executed a search warrant at Koch's Fairfield, Ohio, processing facility and arrested 161 illegal aliens and seized relevant documents. ICE also executed a search warrant at Koch's corporate offices in Chicago seizing relevant documents.

Employers are required to complete and retain a Form I-9 for each individual they hire for employment in the United States. This form requires employers to review and record the individual's identity document(s) and determine whether the document(s) reasonably appear to be genuine and related to the individual. The fine relates to I-9 violations at Koch's Fairfield, Ohio, facility. The company has cooperated with ICE in the investigation employing the use of E-Verify and ensuring that its policies and procedures are in compliance with legal requirements.

"Employers have a responsibility to hire men and women who are authorized to work in the United States and fines are an important component of ensuring their compliance," said Brian Moskowitz, Special Agent in Charge of ICE Office of Investigations in Michigan and Ohio. "The significant civil fines leveled here represent ICE's firm commitment to holding employers accountable."

ICE issued a Notice of Intent to Fine in the specified amount on Feb. 8. The Final Order was issued and fine paid on February 9 in Cleveland. The company has implemented measures revising its hiring and immigration compliance program, and has established new procedures to prevent future violations of federal immigration laws, which includes the removal of the individual employed as the human resource manager during the time period surrounding the violations.

In April 2009, ICE implemented a new comprehensive strategy to reduce the demand for illegal employment and to protect employment opportunities for the nation's lawful workforce. Under this strategy, ICE is focusing its resources on the auditing and investigation of employers suspected of cultivating and knowingly employing illegal aliens in the workplace.

ICE commends the Butler County Sheriff's Office, the West Chester and Fairfield Police Departments, and U.S. Department of Agriculture's Office of the Inspector General for their invaluable assistance in the investigation. In addition, ICE would like to recognize the West Chester and Fairfield Fire Departments for their assistance in ensuring the safety of the officers and illegal aliens present during the warrant execution.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Immigration Rant of the Day!

Client contacted us after waiting over a month for USCIS to issue a reciep for an Advanced Parole Travel Document.

They finally found my petition. I did not file the new one as they kept on saying that they have mailroom full of unopened boxes!!!
They still cannot trace my wife's petition!!!!!

Great "Service"

USCIS Issues Additional Information Regarding the

WASHINGTON—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today provides additional
guidance regarding the Employ American Workers Act (EAWA) to employers seeking to file H-1B
The EAWA was enacted to ensure that companies that receive funding under the Troubled Asset
Relief Program (TARP) or section 13 of the Federal Reserve Act do not displace U.S. workers.
Under this legislation, any company that has received covered funding and seeks to hire new H-1B
workers is considered an “H-1B dependent employer.” An H-1B dependent employer must make
additional statements to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regarding the recruitment and
non-displacement of U.S. workers when filing a Labor Condition Application (LCA). Please refer to
the DOL’s Web site for guidance regarding the LCA filing requirements.
Subsequent to the enactment of EAWA, USCIS revised its Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant
Worker, to include a question asking whether the employer received covered funding (Question
A.1.d). See the first page of the H-1B Data Collection and Filing Fee Exemption Supplement.
Question A.1.d. is meant to identify petitioners who received funding under TARP or section 13 of the
Federal Reserve Act when the petition is filed.
USCIS understands that some businesses who received covered funding may have subsequently
repaid their obligations and may not know how to respond to Question A.1.d. (For information on
whether covered funding obligations have been repaid, recipients of TARP funding should seek
guidance from the Department of Treasury, or the Federal Reserve, respectively.) If you have repaid
your obligations, then answer “No” to Question A.1.d. If you wish to provide further information with
the petition to assist USCIS in determining that your status for purposes of EAWA is correct, you may
do so.
USCIS reminds you that a valid LCA must be on file with DOL when the H-1B petition (with a copy of
the LCA) is filed with USCIS. Processing delays or a denial of the H-1B petition may result if the LCA
does not correspond with Question A.1.d of the H-1B petition, unless any inconsistency is explained
to the satisfaction of USCIS. For example, if the LCA includes the additional statements, but Question
A.1.d is answered “no,” you can explain that you had received covered funding at the time of filing
the LCA but repaid the obligation before filing the Form I-129. However, please note that if you
indicate on the petition that you are subject to the EAWA, but the LCA does not contain the proper
declarations relating to H-1B dependent employers, USCIS will deny the H-1B petition.
USCIS additionally reminds employers that EAWA applies only to new hires and not to H-1B petitions
seeking to change the status of a beneficiary working for the petitioning employer in another
work-authorized category. It also does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an

Is the Asylum "clock" Broken?

Here is an interesting article published by Marcia Coyle
'Asylum clock' broken, say immigration advocates
Marcia Coyle

February 11, 2010

Immigrants seeking asylum in the United States often face excessive delays in getting authorization to work and, in some cases, are forced to work illegally out of desperation because of government mismanagement of their work applications under federal laws and regulations, according to a report being released Feb. 12 by two advocacy groups.

The problems center around the so-called asylum clock, which potentially affects more than 50,000 asylum applicants per year, according to the report by the Center for Immigrants' Rights at the Penn State Dickinson School of Law and the American Immigration Council's Legal Action Center.

The clock, officially known as the Employment Authorization Asylum Clock, is "a less known but critically important component" of the immigration adjudicatory process, said the report's authors. It measures the number of days after an asylum application is filed before the applicant is eligible for work authorization.

The law's waiting period for work authorization is 180 days. There is also a 180-day case completion deadline for immigration judges to rule on asylum applications. The law allows asylum officers and immigration judges to stop the work clock for delays in the adjudication process caused by the applicant.

In practice, however, applicants wait much longer than the legally permitted time frame, and sometimes never receive a work permit, the report found.

"We are interested in the practices in immigration proceedings — in what works and doesn't work," said Emily Creighton, staff attorney at the American Immigration Council. "We became sort of a clearinghouse for immigration attorneys who are coming up against this unexpected problem when representing asylum applicants. It's such an important issue for applicants. They would like to work and already are waiting six months."

The Council and the Center found some of the following problems with the administration of the work clock by both the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which acts on the work permits, and the Executive Office of Immigration Review, which oversees immigration courts:

Lack of transparency. Immigration judges often do not inform asylum applicants that their work clock is running, or that they have stopped the clock, and there are no findings on the record. Practitioner interviews revealed that applicants frequently learn that the clock has been stopped only when USCIS rejects their application for work authorization. At that point, the applicants may never get a work permit before the final adjudication of their asylum application.

Clerical errors. According to the government's own estimates, errors in stopping the work clock are due to coding mistakes in the computer tracking system and the error rate is 60/40, meaning the government is wrong 40% of the time.

Lack of clarity. In some immigration courts, it is not clear who controls the clock. Attorneys have asked on the record to have the clock re-started after an improper stoppage, only to have the judge say she had no authority to do so and that the attorney should speak to the court administrator. In turn, court administrators have refused to correct clock information that was entered incorrectly, stating that it is "impossible" to re-start or correct the work clock.

Interpretation problems. Immigration courts and judges have wide discretion to define "delay requested or caused by the applicant." Different judges will rule differently on what a delay is in order to determine whether to stop the clock. And some judges stop clock whenever delay benefits the application, even where the continuance was requested by the government.

Case completion goals. The adjudication clock for deciding asylum cases is different from the work clock. But case completion goals have led immigration judges to treat the two clocks as one and to find ways to stop the asylum clock to take pressure off of their dockets.

The report offers recommendations on how to fix the problems, which, it says, are extensive but can be resolved.

"We've had government involvement on this issue," said Creighton. "Everyone would like to fix it, but there's sort of passing the buck among the agencies."

Work authorizations are decided by USCIS and the work clock is being stopped by asylum officers and the Executive Office of Immigration Review, she explained. Immigration judges are making decisions on the ground on why the clock should stop and USCIS is listening to them.

"Immigration judges say, `The clock is not our problem; we're not in charge of granting work authorizations,'" she added. "USCIS is saying, `We're looking at what is happening in the asylum proceedings.'"

The report gives the government "practical solutions for fixing the asylum clock and ensuring that genuine asylum seekers have the ability to earn a livelihood while their applications are pending," said Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, director of Penn State Law's Center for Immigrants' Rights.

Marcia Coyle can be contacted at

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Immigration Rant of the day

Client filed I-130 on behalf of his brother in 1996. It was approved.
Last month I filed I-824 ( Application for Action on Approve Petition) asking that the approval be send to consul. I attached a copy of approval.
Today I get a denial of I-824 saying I-130 is " ... still pending." ARRRG!
Must client file a Motion to Reconsider and pay USCIS an unwarranted fee of $585.00!!!!!

Still Closed

Washington DC is still digging our from Snowmageddon '10. Therefore USCIS is Washington D.C. is closed.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

USCIS closed yet Again

Due to the Winter Storm that has hit Washington DC and the surrounding areas. the USCIS press release reads
USCIS Offices in the Washington, DC area remain closed on Wednesday February 10, 2010 due to continuing snow storms.

Storm impacts may continue to be felt through February 12, 2010.

If you plan to visit a USCIS office in an area affected by the severe weather or you believe may be affected by severe weather, please call the

National Customer Service Center (NCSC): 1-800-375-5283 1-800-375-5283

to ensure the office is open for business and for further instructions on rescheduling your appointment if the office is closed.

Sunday, February 7, 2010


BTW>.. Thanks Girl Named Bong for your guidance. You are my inspiration.
Check out her thoughts on pop culture and her hilarious commentary

This is my first post and has nothing to do with Immigration law. Sitting here with my mentor and father Richard Fleischer watching the Super Bowl . Good game so far. Go Saints!