Immigration Visa Lawyer Blog

The EB2 employment-based second preference immigration visa requires a labor certification and job offer. There is an exception to these requirements if it can be established that granting a visa is in the national interest of the United States. This is the national interest waiver. The criteria are a three-part test established by case law:

1. The foreign national's work must be in an area of substantial and intrinsic merit;
2. It must be established that the foreign national's benefit will be national in scope;
3. The foreign national must benefit the US to a substantially greater degree than those with equivalent minimum qualifications;

The USCIS will consider 14 criteria in making the determination whether to grant a national interest waiver if the foreign national's work will achieve one or more of the following:

1. Improve the US economy;
2. improve US working conditions and wages
3. Improve training and education programs for under qualified workers and for US children;
4. Improve healthcare;
5. Make available more affordable housing for US residents who are poorer and either young or old;
6. Improve the US environment and use natural resources more productively;
7. An interested US government agency has requested the foreign national;
8. Improve the US economy;
9. improve US working conditions and wages
10. Improve training and education programs for under qualified workers and for US children;
11. Improve healthcare;
12. Make available more affordable housing for US residents who are poorer and either young or old;
13. Improve the US environment and use natural resources more productively;
14. An interested US government agency has requested the foreign national.

A petition requesting a national interest waiver will be denied when the petitioner establishes only the importance of the beneficiary's occupation. It is also imperative to establish that a beneficiary plays a significant role in achieving an accomplishment in the US national interest to a greater extent than would US workers with the same qualifications. This is because the benefit of the foreign national's skill or background must outweigh the inherent national interest of the labor certification process in protecting US workers.

The measure of impact required to establish national interests is less than "major significance," but instead is "some impact on the field as a whole." The key to accomplishing this is to establish the beneficiary's past impact in the field that distinguishes the beneficiary from others. It would be a mistake to solely establish future impact on the life it is connected to past impact. In order to do this petition should provide independent evidence establishing some amount of past impact within his or her field that distinguishes the foreign national from others.

When making the decision whether to file for adjustment of status (AOS) in the United States or to get consular processing (CP) abroad, there are several factors to examine. The processing time to get an immigrant visa and the time to get adjustment of status can vary. Many foreign nationals are eager to finish the process as fast as possible. Employment-based immigrants may worry about getting laid off before their process has completed. Family-based immigrants may be anxious to ultimately reach naturalization and obtain US citizenship so that they may begin filing petitions for other family members.

Advantages of Adjustment of Status

AOS allows you to remain in the United States. The application is filed by mail, which is convenient because you do not have to travel and incur the trouble and cost of attending an interview at the consulate abroad. The USCIS will usually waive the interview requirement and simply approve the application based upon the information provided in the forms and the evidence attached as supporting documentation. However, the interview is not waived for family-based and diversity visa lottery applications. You may be able to obtain work authorization EAD and advance parole AP permission to travel outside the US while your application is pending. Employment-based applicants may be able to take advantage of AC21 portability benefits to switch employers.

Advantages of Consular Processing

CP takes place in your home country at the US Consulate. CP may be faster in some cases. There is no requirement to maintain valid status while your application is pending. Consular processing applications are less likely to be denied. If you have immigration violations on your record, a criminal record, or other negative issues, you may want to choose CP instead of AOS. An application for adjustment of status filed with the USCIS is discretionary, meaning that your application can be denied if the USCIS officer adjudicating your application simply decides not to approve it. Conversely, an immigrant visa application filed with a consular office is not discretionary and must be granted unless it can be denied based upon specific legal grounds.

With these factors in mind, it may be advantageous to get advice from a professional, experienced immigration attorney to help you with your decision.

Since the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) was passed by Congress, H1B visas can be extended beyond the six year maximum under Sections 106(a) and 104(c). Section 106(a) allows extensions of three-year increments beyond the six-year maximum if 365 days or more have passed since the labor certification was filed. Section 104(c) allows extensions in one-year increments beyond the six-year maximum in cases where there is an approved labor certification, and an approved I-140 petition, and the foreign national H1B worker's priority date is not yet current to allow the filing of an I-485 application for permanent residence.

Pay attention to time traveled abroad and time spent in other visa status

Extra time can be added to the six-year maximum limit, and push back the expiration date by recapturing time that was spent abroad. When an H1B worker departs from the United States, his or her time abroad is not counted toward the six-year limit. Moreover, the time spent in L2 or H4 status also does not count toward the six-year limit. However, time spent in H3 status does count.

Necessary calculations for determining AC21 eligibility for H1B extensions

It is critical to conduct a thorough review to determine whether an AC21 H1B extension is available. Such review should include a complete examination of approval notices, passport visas, all dates of entry and departure, and any changes of visa status. Any prior labor certification applications and I-140 immigrant petitions must be taken into account as well. Retaining a competent and professional immigration attorney with the experience to properly analyze such cases is invaluable.

In the adjudication of permanent labor certification cases, the US Department of Labor (DOL) said that it will increase its scrutiny of PERM applications even further by conducting more integrity checks, meaning more audit investigations and more supervised recruitment. The DOL's current objective is to conduct integrity checks on 30% of all PERM applications it receives. The DOL uses two methods for conducting integrity checks: audit investigations and supervised recruitment.

Audits Investigations

The DOL can order an audit of any PERM case. Some audits are commenced at random, while others are commenced due to the presence of certain triggers. During an audit, the DOL makes a request to the employer for documentary evidence to support the PERM application and verify that the employer has complied with all statutory and regulatory requirements.

Supervised Recruitment

When conducting supervised recruitment, the DOL directs the employer to conduct further attempts to recruit qualified US workers. During this phase, the DOL will receive job applications instead of the employer.

Integrity Review Triggers

Employers can carefully craft the PERM application to reduce the chance of triggering an integrity check. There are several factors that can trigger DOL integrity review, some of which are:

• The position does not require at least a bachelor degree
  
• The position requires a bachelor degree without prior work experience
  
• The position requires travel
  
• The requirements of the position identify it as being low-skilled
  
• No one has applied for the position
  
• The position offers a high salary but requires low education or experience
  
• The position has a language requirement
  

A PERM application that is subjected to audit will take an average of 224 days to be adjudicated and has about a 40% chance of denial. Applications subjected to supervised recruitment will take an average of 300 days for adjudication and will be denied about 67% of the time. In light of the DOL's announced intention to increase integrity review, employers can reduce the chances of DOL scrutiny by carefully crafting the PERM application. Retaining legal counsel experienced in the labor certification process may prove to be invaluable.

It is readily apparent that in the few weeks leading up the presidential election, neither President Obama, nor former Governor Romney are willing to commit themselves to any firm and unequivocal stance on employment based, legal, immigration. This reluctance to take a stand further frustrates the thousands of Indian nationals and their employers who have undertaken the emotional, financial and time investment of who have placed themselves at the mercy of the USCIS, US Department of Labor and US Department of State though use of the current employment based preference system. However, while explicit pledges will not be forthcoming from either the current or the potential future president until the elections have passed, their subordinates continue to make the true stance of the candidates known through their actions and interactions with foreign dignitaries. Recent comments from Timothy Geithner, secretary of the treasury (and fifth in the line of succession to the president) to his counterpart in the cabinet of India are indicative of this phenomenon.

Indications of Future Executive Policy toward PERM and H-1B Visas for Indian Nationals.

Speaking at a joint press conference with the Finance Minister P. Chidambaram in New Delhi on October 9, 2012, Secretary Geithner commented on the future of bi-lateral investment between the two countries, stating that "...[Y]ou [will] see a significant expansion of the role played by Indians and Indian companies in the American economy." He went on to say "I think we're at the early stage, even acknowledging and recognizing the huge benefits to the American economy already of the scale of Indian investment and Indian talent in the United States."

Under current immigration law, the only way for US companies to invest in the Indian talent mentioned above on a permanent basis is to sponsor an Indian national for permanent immigration. This sponsorship in turn almost always requires the employer to triumph over the three headed monster known as the PERM process. However, due to the current policy only 140,000 per year, no more than 7% of this total going to any one country per year, there is a backlog of high skilled Indian Nationals who have reserved their place in line to receive a visa, but no visa is available for them because the demand exceeds the supply by thousands of visas per year.

H-1B visa applicants find themselves in a similar situation. Currently, only 65,000 H-1B visas for temporary-high skilled workers are made available per year, with an additional 20,000 made available to persons holding a US master's degree (colleges and Universities are given unlimited visas) In recent years, this quota has not been met few a few months after the date that applications are accepted, however, with the economy improving, it is anticipated that this quota could be met with over 85,000 applications on the first day that filing is available.

Simple Solutions to the Visa Backlog: Allocate More Visas

The simple translation of what Secretary Geithner has stated above in real policy change language is that the administration would like to see an increase of the total number of visas allocated per year. Only an increase in visas made available as a whole would allow for the investment in Indian talent that the secretary has pointed out. Recent proposals to do away with the per-country limitation of 7% on permanent visas per year would only serve to place every employment based visa preference category from every county into a backlog.

The same solution should be applied to the H-1B quota, which could be increased to allow more highly skilled Indian nationals into the county to meet the demands of US industry.

Continue reading "PERM and H-1B Visas for Indian Nationals: More Double Talk from the Executive Branch" »

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Alejandro N. Mayorkas announced yesterday that it will create a new office to oversee adjudication of the EB-5 Immigrant Investor program. The EB-5 program allows foreign nationals to become eligible for permanent residency by making a capital investment in a commercial enterprise in the United States. The new office is needed due to the recent exponential growth of the EB-5 program, which is caused by economic growth from capital invested in the U.S. economy from foreign investors to project developers. More than 3,100 EB-5 petitions were approved by the USCIS in Fiscal Year 2012, which is three times the number of petitions approved in fiscal year 2009.

The size of the USCIS' EB-5 adjudication team has been quadrupled since 2009. Eight new expert economists have been brought on board to ensure expeditious handling of EB-5 cases. The USCIS plans to hire two new full-time attorneys who will bring transactional experience to the EB-5 team. At the end of July, every pending application for which a denial has been recommended will be reviewed by a special review board consisting of two Supervisory Immigration Services Officers and one economist, and applicants will be given the opportunity to discuss their cases in person before the USCIS renders any final adverse decision. Today, the USCIS is posting an advertisement for a new position titled Chief of Immigrant Investor Programs, who will lead the new office.

Director Mayorkas said that the USCIS understands that it needs to do more work to further improve its EB-5 program administration, and the USCIS is committed to this work.

Click here to see the official message

The Immigrant Investor Program, otherwise known as the "EB-5," allows foreign nationals to obtain permanent residency (green card) by making a capital investment in a commercial enterprise in the United States. Congress created the EB-5 program in 1990 as a way to stimulate the economy by creating jobs. A commercial enterprise is defined as any for-profit activity formed for the ongoing conduct of lawful business including, but not limited to a sole proprietorship, partnership (whether limited or general), holding company, joint venture, corporation, business trust or other entity that may be publicly or privately owned.

One the immigrant investor is admitted to the United States he/she is granted Conditional Permanent Resident status. This status is conditional upon whether 10 full-time jobs are created for qualifying U.S. workers within a two year period. These jobs may be either direct jobs or indirect jobs. Direct jobs are real identifiable jobs for qualified employees situated inside the company in which the immigrant investor has directly invested capital. Indirect jobs are those that were made collaterally or as a consequence of capital invested in a commercial enterprise affiliated with a regional center by an immigrant investor. A foreign investor may only use the indirect job calculation if affiliated with a regional center.

Capital is defined as cash, equipment, inventory, other tangible property, cash equivalents and indebtedness secured by assets owned by the immigrant investor entrepreneur, if the investor entrepreneur is personally and primarily liable and that the assets of the new company upon which the petition is based are not used to secure any of the indebtedness. All capital shall be valued at fair-market value in United States dollars. If you have questions about the EB-5 Immigrant Investor program, the attorneys at The Law Firm of Shihab & Associates, Co., LPA have decades of combined experience. Contact us for a consultation.

Immigrants and advocates for immigrants' employment rights have had several victories in recent weeks, with many challenges remaining. First, the Obama administration announced a policy of "deferred action" for young undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States as children and meet certain criteria for education or military service. Qualifying immigrants may obtain work authorization if the government approves an application for deferred action. Then, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Arizona v. United States last week overturning several employment provisions in Arizona's immigration law. One provision struck down by the court would have made it a state crime for an immigrant to work without authorization. The court held that this infringed on the federal government's authority to regulate immigration. Now, a recent study suggests that the state of Ohio lags behind the rest of the country in its immigrant workforce, but that the state could benefit from more immigration. At the same time, some surveys suggest that public opinion is turning against further immigration.

A recent survey of immigration and employment statistics by the Dayton Daily News reportedly found that the rate of growth of immigrant groups in Ohio is slower than in other states. The rate of growth appears explosive over the past twenty years, with the total number of immigrant workers in the state doubling and an increase of over sixty percent in the number of immigrants owning small businesses. The rate of growth of the immigrant worker population, however, places Ohio in forty-second place nationally. Between 1990 and 2010, immigrant workers went from 2.5 percent of Ohio's workforce to 4.7 percent, but the national average is sixteen percent. In terms of immigrant small business owners, Ohio's growth rate puts it in thirty-seventh place among the thirty-nine states with available data.

Continue reading "Ohio Lags in Number of Immigrant Workers, While the State's Public Opinion May Oppose New Immigration Policies" »

The Department of Homeland Security and the US Citizenship & Immigration Services released unredacted copies of documents that have been sought by the American Immigration Lawyers Association after prolonged litigation. This is the result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the Legal Action Center of the American Immigration Council on AILA's behalf with Steptoe & Johnson LLP, AILA v. DHS, No. 10-01224 (D.D.C. filed July 20, 2010). The purpose of the FOIA lawsuit was to compel DHS and USCIS to release records of agency policies and procedures in connection with H-1B fraud investigations.

AILA submitted three FOIA requests to the USCIS in 2009 for documents including memoranda, standard operating procedures, and templates used for Requests for Evidence regarding H-1B petition fraud. USCIS initially decided to withhold documents. Once AILA filed suit in US District Court to compel turnover of the documents, USCIS determined that some information could be disclosed and released heavily redacted documents. The Court ordered the USCIS to better explain why the withheld information cannot be produced. Subsequently, in May 2012, USCIS disclosed the documents in full.

Documents released are the October 31, 2008 Neufeld Memorandum "H-1B Anti-Fraud Initiatives - Internal Guidance and Procedures in Response to Findings Revealed in H-1B Benefit Fraud and Compliance Assessment," H-1B Petition Fraud Referral Sheet, and Compliance Review Report.

The Neufeld Memorandum provides the following. Identification of the "10/25/10" fraud indicators include:

1. petitioners with a gross annual income of less than $10 million,
2. petitioners which employ 25 employees or less, or
3. petitioners whose business was established within the last 10 years.

The Memorandum provides that as a result of such review, the petition should be referred to the Center Fraud Detection Office if one or more of the following are identified:

1. presence of fraudulent information relating to the petitioner, the beneficiary, and/or any forged documentation,
2. evidence that the reported business was non-existent such as a questionable organization chart, photos of the business in a staged setting, zoning inconsistencies, or website information conflicts with the petition, or
3. inconsistent or questionable evidence of job duties and/or qualifications including experience letters without signatures, missing company addresses and/or telephone numbers, discrepancies or mismatches in required skills, age, or education.

The Memorandum provides that petitioners who meet the "10/25/10" fraud indicators above, should be paid particular attention for the presence of the following:

1. the physical job location is not listed on the Form I-129 petition and/or LCA,
2. the beneficiary is not receiving the prevailing wage as listed on the LCA,
3. misrepresentations regarding the beneficiary's current or prior immigration status,
4. evidence that the beneficiary paid the ACWIA fee,
5. conflicting information about the business and/or its operation,
6. the facility would not be appropriate for the type of work performed, or
7. the job offered is inconsistent with the normal activities of the business.

The Alabama Legislature voted on Wednesday, May 16, 2012 to amend its controversial immigration law, HB 56. Recent court challenges by the federal government and others have blocked some of the law's more infamous provisions. Meanwhile, some arrests made pursuant to the law have revealed unintended consequences, which lawmakers reportedly hope the amendment will resolve. The new provisions could have further negative impact on immigrant communities not only in Alabama but around the country.

Alabama's HB 56, formally known as the Hammon-Beason Alabama Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act, became law on June 9, 2011. The bill as passed requires law enforcement to inquire about a person's immigration status during any legal stop if the officer has "reasonable suspicion" that the person is undocumented. It also prevents undocumented immigrants from receiving state or local public benefits. It does not prohibit undocumented children from attending school, but it requires school districts to keep track of undocumented students and report annual tallies to the state government. It prohibits "transporting or harboring" undocumented immigrants, renting property to undocumented immigrants, or knowingly hiring undocumented immigrants. It requires employer participation in the federal E-Verify program. It prohibits undocumented immigrants from applying for jobs. It nullifies contracts between an undocumented immigrant and a person with knowledge of the other's immigration status.

Continue reading "Alabama Amends Controversial Immigration Law Amid Court Challenges" »

Impatient with the current state of immigration discussions in Congress, some high-tech companies have started their own programs to support undocumented children and young adults who want to attend college and legally build careers in the United States. Tech companies have also lobbied Congress to allow more legal immigration, explicitly stating that to do so will allow America to remain competitive globally. They are pushing for Congress to enact the DREAM Act, legislation that would have offered a path to legal status for certain youths, but which failed to pass in 2010.

A group of technology companies known as the Silicon Valley Leadership Group is lobbying Congress for immigration reform. The news is currently dominated by the highly controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) and other pending bills that deal with technological privacy, security, and intellectual property issues. Immigration plays a role in these discussions, since the tech companies want as many highly-educated and motivated youths studying technology in the United States as possible. Allowing as broad a base of students as possible to study in the U.S. and then stay here for jobs after they graduate, these companies argue, will improve America's competitiveness with other countries.

Members of Congress have introduced various versions of the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act since 2001. It passed the House of Representatives by a slim margin in December 2010, but the Senate failed to pass it during that session. The bill, had it become law, would have given certain qualified undocumented youths an opportunity to gain permanent residence. Youth who spent two years serving in the military or enrolled at a four-year college could obtain temporary residency valid for six years. If they completed a degree program or served at least another two years of honorable military service during those six years, they could obtain permanent residence. Congress has not considered a similar bill since 2010.

Continue reading "Tech Companies Promote Immigration Reform in Meetings with Congress" »

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), a labor union that represents workers in various service-related occupations, filed a complaint with the United Nations' International Labor Office (ILO) against the United States government. The complaint centers around HB 56, the controversial immigration law passed by the Alabama Legislature last year. The SEIU alleges that the law denies civil rights and freedom of association to immigrants and minorities in Alabama, and it accuses the federal government of failing to establish an effective national policy on immigration. SEIU representatives filed the complaint with the Committee on Freedom of Association in the ILO's office in Geneva, Switzerland, and announced it in conjunction with a meeting with Daimler AG executives in Berlin. The SEIU urged the company, which operates a plant in Alabama, to publicly oppose the law.

HB 56 is described as the toughest immigration law at the state level in the country. Alabama's governor signed it into law in June 2011. The law requires state and local police to inquire about a person's immigration status if they have "reasonable suspicion" that the person is undocumented. This has brought up numerous concerns over racial profiling and harassment. HB 56 prohibits anyone from transporting an undocumented immigrant, denies government benefits to undocumented immigrants, and prevents undocumented immigrants from enforcing contracts and other rights in court.

The ILO is a Nobel Peace Prize-winning agency of the United Nations headquartered in Geneva. It deals with international labor standards, both in establishing standards and investigating alleged violations. It can adopt conventions, which countries can ratify, thus establishing a binding international labor standard. In most cases, it issues "recommendations," which lack binding legal force.

The complaint filed by the SEIU and its allies alleges that the U.S. government wrongfully allowed Alabama to infringe on the rights of trade unions and workers with HB 56. It focuses on three major costs to unions and workers: general civil rights violations against undocumented immigrants, "the climate of fear" that goes beyond undocumented immigrants to affect most racial minorities in the state, and the negative impact on union organizing and enforcement of existing agreements.

The U.S. reportedly has not ratified the ILO conventions that would give it full jurisdiction over the complaint. The U.S. is a member of the ILO, however, so the complaint asks the ILO to investigate possible violations of its conventions and offer remedies that might not be available through the domestic litigation process.

Continue reading "Coalition of Unions and Civil Rights Groups File Complaint Against Alabama Immigration Law with United Nations" »

The USCIS began accepting H-1B visa petitions for the 2013 fiscal year on April 2, 2012. To date, more than 17,400 cap subject H-1B visa petitions have been received by the USCIS, filed on behalf of temporary workers in a specially occupation. In addition, more than 8,200 petitions for persons holding a master's degree from a college or university in the United States have been receipted into the USCIS processing system.

When will the cap be reached?

While there is no way to accurately predict a date on which the H-1B visa cap will be reached under current economic conditions, which seems to take two steps forward and one step back from month to month, it is not inconceivable that the H-1B cap could be reached in August or a soon as July of this year.

Reaching the cap much sooner than in 2012 (late November) and 2011 (December) is much more likely this year in part because of two discernible patterns. First, there is a spike in H-1B visa petitions on the first day of filing eligibility. Here, the spike in petitions received between April 2, 2012 and today demonstrates a remarkable increase over last year, at which time only 5,900 cap cases and 4,500 master's cap cases were reached.
Secondly, for the past two years, there has been a dramatic increase in H-1B cap cases filed as soon as the master's cap is reached and at the time when it appears that regular cap visas are also becoming scarce. This is because people who qualify for the master's cap, who file after the master's cap is reached, are placed into the regular cap quota. Finally, every year when it appears that the regular cap will soon be reached; there is a dramatic upswing in visa petitions received by the USCIS due to people who seek to file last minute.

What should I do if I want to apply for a cap-subject H-1B Visa?
Our advice to you is to file as soon as possible. You do not want to wait until the last minute in order to obtain your visa under the cap. The quota usage is unpredictable, and waiting could jeopardize your case.

Continue reading "2013 H-1B Visa Cap: Petitions more than double over early April 2012" »

The position of Market Research Analyst does qualify as an H-1B specialty occupation even though it does not require a baccalaureate degree in that single academic discipline, according to a recent decision by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division (Residential Finance Corporation v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Case No. 2:12-cv-00008 03/12/12).

Residential Finance Corporation (RFC) filed a petition seeking an H-1B visa to employ a prospective employee in the position of a Market Research Analyst. The USCIS subsequently denied the petition on the basis that the "Market and Survey Researcher" section of the Occupational Outlook Handbook (OOH) does not indicate that market analyst research positions normally require at least a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty. The USCIS concluded that the occupational category was not a specialty occupation because the OOH did not specify that a specific specialty degree is required for the position.

RFC sought judicial review from the Court and filed a motion for summary judgment. The Court granted RFC's motion, overturned the denial, and ordered the USCIS to grant the H-1B petition and change the beneficiary's status to H-1B nonimmigrant.

The Court said that the USCIS approach was too narrow, and that the prospective employee's knowledge is what is relevant, and not the title of the degree. The Court held that diplomas rarely come bearing occupation-specific majors, and that what is required is an occupation that requires highly specialized knowledge and a prospective employee who has attained the credentialing indicating possession of that knowledge. The Court cited legal precedent that reasoned such narrow interpretation would preclude any position from satisfying the "specialty occupation" requirements where a specific degree is not available in that field.

The Court noted that a market and survey researcher is a distinct occupation with a specialized course of study that includes multiple specialized fields, that the prospective employee had completed such specialized study in the relevant fields of marketing and finance, and that RFC sought to employ him in such a position. The Court held that it was enough that RFC provided evidence that the position required a baccalaureate degree, and there is no apparent requirement that the specialized study needed to be in a single academic discipline as opposed to a specialized course of study in related business specialties.

The Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, H.R. 3012, passed the U.S. House of Representatives this week with almost unanimous approval with a 389 to 15 vote. The legislation would remove the per-country quotas on immigration work visas. The current quota system places a limit on the number of visas available to each country. For example, Iceland has a population of 320,000 and is allotted the same number of visas as China, which has a population of 1.3 billion people. The result is that foreign nationals of some countries can obtain U.S. permanent residency fairly quickly, yet foreign nationals from China and India face huge backlogs and must wait several years.

After the bill sailed through the House, it was stopped in the Senate by Republican Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa. Grassley put a hold on the bill, blocking the legislation from being debated on the floor. Grassley said he would lift his hold on H.R. 3012 if Senator Chuck Schumer will stop pursuing the Irish-visa proposal. Chuck Schumer, Democrat Senator from New York and chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wants to add another special visa category to the H.R. 3012 bill that would provide an immigration benefit for Irish Nationals.

Schumer says that he is not the only one holding up the bill. Republican Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts also wants to tack on the Irish-visa proposal to H.R. 3012, but won't say whether or not he will block H.R. 3012.

Several versions have of The Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act H.R. 3012 have been introduced in recent months, but each has failed to pass. And with this latest version, those Senators who are blocking H.R. 3012 from the Senate floor say they actually do support it, but it seems they would rather hold the bill hostage until their own proposals get tacked on first.