IssueNet Archive - January 2009
IssueNet submissions fall into two categories - Report an Issue and Get Liaison Help.
Report an Issue submissions are forwarded to content experts on the Education Abroad and International Student and Scholar Regulatory Practice Committees. Submissions to Get Liaison Help go directly to Regulatory Ombuds who follow up with USCIS liaisons at the Service Centers to assist you. To read case submissions from the past month, click on the type of case below.
Your IssueNet submissions are used for:
- Agendas for liaison calls and meetings with agency personnel
- Prioritizing NAFSA's practice advocacy agenda
- Anecdotal support for policy advocacy
- Identifying areas for development of training and resources
See What Happened to Your Input!
Visit the ISS-RP and EA-RP Updates and the SEVIS Liaison Call Summaries.
Total Issues Submitted This Month: 113
Get Liaison Help
| Type of Case |
Submissions
|
| I-765 |
21 |
| I-539 |
19 |
| I-129 |
7 |
| SEVIS |
13 |
| I-485 |
1 |
| I-140 |
1 |
| DOS Waiver Case (212e) |
1 |
| Total this Month |
63 |
Updated January 29, 2009
Each week, Report an Issue submissions are read by staff and forwarded to the Education Abroad and International Student and Scholar Regulatory Practice Committees. Content experts from the committees recommend action to the committee chairs. To view issues, click on one of the links below.
Types of Submissions
| Education Abroad |
Submissions |
Visas/Passports for Students Going Abroad
Adviser reports institution has prepaid all tuition fees, housing, food, etc. on the behalf of full-scholarship student admitted to study abroad in France for one semester with an affiliated program. Institution provided student with a cash stipend for spending money. Student has completed all required components of student visa application including Campus France approval. She cannot provide a bank statement or affidavit of support from her parent, any relative, or her own funds showing $3400. She doesn't need this money as institution is taking care of all financial needs and has provided a notarized letter outlining this. This works consistently with all the other consulates but for the third year in a row NY consulate will not accept such a letter of financial guarantee, despite the fact that this option is listed as one of three acceptable forms of financial proof on its website. If student cannot find some relative or stranger with $3400 to sign a guarantee and make bank statements available (unlikely) she cannot get the visa. This will mean a loss of a French experience for a French minor/Euro Studies major. It will mean a loss of funds to the institution for all the prepaid expenses. Student is a U.S. citizen. |
1 |
| Two students planning to depart for a program in London have not yet received their student visas. They were sent to the consulate in Los Angeles. The students are not able to get in touch with anyone to find out the status. Adviser has advised them to fax a letter and their flight itinerary in hopes it might be expedited. Both students have been in touch with their congressman/senator for help. They will need to change their flights, for a fee, if the passports do not arrive in the next couple of days. |
1 |
| Adviser reports that office submitted nearly 30 visa applications to the Spanish Consulate in NY on November 14, 2008. On the 29th of December, institution was alerted by a student with an early departure date that she had not received her passport or visa. Upon speaking with a representative of the Consulate, adviser learned that the Consulate was aware that several passports had been lost and the packages that contained them were never received by the US postal service. Ultimately, 14 students' passports and visas were lost. The Consulate recommended that students expedite new passports and agreed to re-issue the visa stamp for each student. On 1/9/2009, adviser learned that another student who had submitted her visa application materials independently had also never received her passport or visa. Her father reported that the Consulate estimated a total of 100 passports may have been lost. No compensation or formal apology was issued to the affected students by the Consulate. However, the consular officials have been very accommodating about issuing the new visas without appointments (and in the course of a few hours), as long as the student was willing to go directly to the Consulate with the new passport. |
1 |
| DOL Issues |
Submissions |
| Processing times for Labor Certs. Is there any hope for a return to quicker processing? The centralized prevailing wage determinations for H-2s will take at least 30 days. When PWD are centralized for H-1Bs in January 2010, are advisers to expect a 30-day delay in receiving those as well? Adviser just received an audit request on a PERM filing from November 2007. Adviser hadn't realized the Labor Cert was still pending because the employee had left the university. Adviser thought that DOL was processing audits from that era, not that they were just now contacting employers. Other audit cases asked for the information to be sent to Atlanta; this one is to be sent to Chicago. Is Chicago now processing PERM applications again? |
1 |
| Adviser received an Audit Notification, mailed the requested information nearly two weeks in advance of the required respond-date, and then received a Denial Notice stating that "the employer failed to respond... by the date specified in the audit letter." Adviser sent the packet by first class mail (won't do again), though the packet was definitely postmarked prior to the deadline. The packet was never returned to adviser, and was correctly addressed, so they had to have received it. Adviser sent packet on January 5; a "motion to reopen" with full documentation and has heard nothing since. |
1 |
| Drivers' Licenses |
Submissions |
| The Texas Driver's License rules are restricting the immigration status of students. If a student's driver's license needs to be renewed and there is less than 6 months left on their status, they will not renew the license. This means that a student could be stuck without a legal way to drive in the US despite the fact that they are here legally. A student that lives off campus would not be able to attend class unless they can find a ride and if they are on OPT, they would not be able to drive to work. One student on OPT had an emergency he needed to drive to, but his driver's license was expiring. He was unable to renew because he had 3 months left on his OPT. Before they would see him, he had to prematurely end his OPT and begin his graduate program. This required him to quit his job, register for classes and get a continuing attendance I-20 for the graduate program. Then they allowed him to apply for the driver's license renewal. |
1 |
| NSC Questions |
Submissions |
| When are the Service Centers going to update their estimated processing times on the web? The current estimates are from 9/30/08. NAFSA note: the USCIS Processing Times web site has been updated with the processing times as of November 30, 2008. |
1 |
| Social Security/SAVE Database Issues |
Submissions |
F-1 student from Canada was issued immigration classification at POE. This student went into the SS office to apply for a SSN. Student was told that she could not be cleared in their system because the Birthdate on her I-20 (which is correct) did not match the information they had in their system. The student was told it can take up to 2 weeks to get her information cleared by immigration office. The student was scheduled to begin work as a Teaching Assistant, and the university will allow student worker to begin working because they are cleared by the hiring office. The student could lose her job. Adviser believes the mistake was made when entering her I-94 data incorrectly into the immigration data base.
NAFSA Note: The DHS Verification Office advises SSA applicants to make an appointment with their local USCIS field office to inquire about resolving DHS database inconsistencies in SAVE. However, if it's an I-94 issue, the student may also try to get the issue resolved at the local CBP deferred inspection office. |
1 |
| F-1 student from Japan was told her SSN application will take a long time to process because they could not clear her in their database. Although this student traveled to the U.S. with her I-20, F-1 visa, and valid passport the POE personnel admitted her on visa waiver status. The student went to USCIS office and was luckily able to get her I-94 fixed, she now has a correct I-94 that states F-1 D/S. Student went to visit SS office where she was told it can take up to 2 weeks to get clearance from immigration before they can find out if she is eligible for a social security number. This student is in need of extra income and was scheduled to begin her employment in a week. The university will not allow any student workers to begin their employment before they are processed by the hiring office. This student is at risk for losing her job. |
1 |
| Adviser reports two students whose SSN applications are still pending after 3 months. Contacts at the local SSA office state that they are still awaiting verification of the students' documents from DHS/SAVE. At this point in time, the only solution offered is for the students to make an appointment at the local USCIS office with all of their documents. This is affecting the students' ability to work. |
1 |
| Entry-Exit-Travel |
Submissions |
| H-1B employee from Russia traveled to Canada for less than 30 days. Planned to reenter pursuant to automatic revalidation. Adviser processed a COS from F-2 to H-1B for employee in August 2007; he had no H-1B visa in his passport. Upon presenting himself for admission at the U.S. CBP inspection site in Toronto, he presented his passport, original lower portion of the I-797 approval notice and a copy of the upper portion, copy of the H-1B petition, expired F-2 visa and I-94 from his last admission. The first inspector said that since he was no longer an F-2, he would have to complete a new I-94. She confiscated his F-2 I-94 and sent him to the back of the line to complete a new I-94. Upon reaching the front of the line again, a second inspector asked him where his I-94 was. He explained that the first inspector had taken it. They looked for his first I-94 in a pile of surrendered I-94s but were unable to find his. They told him that he should have both the original upper and lower portions of the I-797, and that he was required to carry the original copy of the petition (not copies). Ultimately, they gave him a new I-94 and admitted him as an H-1B for the validity of his H-1B petition. The inspectors at this POE need further training on automatic revalidation and appropriate travel documentation for H-1Bs (i.e., when originals and when copies are appropriate). |
1 |
| At adviser's institution a handful of F-3 commuter students live in Canada and pursue part-time degree programs. An F-3 student came to check in twice, and the CBP agents have given him F-1 status on his I-94. The first time the CBP agent said they were new and did not receive any training regarding F-3s. They pulled student into secondary, where the agent proclaimed that the border station does not issue F-3s. So student was given an F-1. Today student crossed the border using a different POE. The CBP agent recognized that F-3 was for part-time study, but asked for the opinion of other agents at the crossing. They conferred and decided to issue him an F-1 I-94. Has this happened to anyone else? If so, has there been any impact on the student's immigration status/record? Are there any plans to eliminate F-3 status? |
1 |
| Adviser reports hearing from several students who are entering with Initial Attendance I-20s that they should have an endorsement signature on the third page. Adviser has had cases at local airport. It seems that more training for CBP officers concerning F-1 students is needed. |
1 |
| J Visa Issues |
Submissions |
| In the SEVIS 6.0 EVP finally made Research Scholar and Professor interchangeable. Something NAFSA requested years ago. Advisers were told that it was on the list of things to fix in SEVIS and they would get to it eventually. In the 6.0 clarification that came out today, they stated that only programs eligible for both Professor and Research Scholar category could participate in the interchangeability. Adviser has sent an email to EVP and has repeated conversations with them about this. In the meantime, there are institutes all over the country that are only eligible for the research categories because they are strictly research institutes. A lot of visitors who may come in the Professor category will, as part of their academic objective, wish to transfer to one of those research institutes (many of who are funded by NSF) before going home. It has been a nightmare for these good, solid, valid programs since SEVIS went into effect. The regulations clearly have no objection to a visitor being both a professor and a researcher during a visit and it is so much a part of the academic world for both to be true, why penalize the research institutes? |
1 |
| Entry-Exit-Travel |
Submissions |
| An F-1 student applied for the OPT STEM extension through his previous school. The USCIS website shows that his case is received and pending. The SEVIS HelpDesk told adviser that his case was denied on December 23. When his case was denied on December 23, his record must have automatically completed. He's recently been transferred to adviser's school with a completed SEVIS record. Adviser is trying to determine if he is in status or out of status and has e-mailed the SC to try to ask if the case has been denied or is still pending. The SC replied that a final notice will be received in 7 days. The question is whether he needs to apply for reinstatement or should there be a grace period after an OPT STEM extension denial. He did remain working while waiting for the OPT STEM extension decision. The case may have been denied because he used the wrong I-765 initially and had to re-submit his paperwork which may have been received after his first OPT ended. |
1 |
Correction to change student's record from canceled to active. Student's record was not on POE alert. Status correction requested on January 12th. RFI received January 14th for
- Copy of all I-20's used by the student, specifically those with Port Of Entry stamps
- Copy of visa page and I-94 (front and back) from the student's passport
- A letter on school letterhead signed by the PDSO or a DSO (specify which) explaining the situation in detail
Documentation faxed with analyst name and request ID on January 15th. Also followed up with a phone call to the analyst to let him know that the documentation was faxed that morning (January 15th).
Denial notice received on January 23rd. Reason for denial was that the documentation was not received. |
1 |
| Adviser reports problem caused by the SEVIS HelpDesk making an improper interpretation of the 5-month Temporary Absence as discussed in the NAFSA Advisor's Manual at 3.38.3.1 in reference to 8 CFR.214.2(f)(4). Per the SEVIS HelpDesk official, “If a student leaves the U.S prior to start of or after completion of a session, the leave of absence cannot exceed five months and the student must start class w/in 5 months OF THE LAST DATE OF ATTENDANCE.” The regulations only speak of absence from the U.S.--not about calculating the absence from the date of last attendance prior to the absence, which could be several weeks or more, earlier. In the case of three students, the SEVIS HelpDesk refused to return the students to "Active" status from "Authorized Early Departure" as the procedure instructs them to do, even though their absence was less than 5-months. So, the students had to re-enter in "Initial" status, which caused them to lose their right to work off-campus in that immediate semester, as they were due. Please see what can be done to make the SEVIS HelpDesk follow the regulations rather than creating interpretation that go beyond the regulatory language and deny students benefits they are due. NAFSA Note: NAFSA has reported similar cases to SEVP, and SEVP Policy Branch is currently reviewing the HelpDesk information. NAFSA is sending examples like this to SEVP. |
1 |
| SEVIS Issues |
Submissions |
| F1 student graduated in May and started Masters in August. Student is in Sweden and trying to renew her visa, but only the deactivated record shows. SEVIS sent a push last week and it did not work, so the student had to change her plane ticket. Student is now waiting for the second push to reach there on Thursday. NAFSA note: SEVP and Dept. of State Visa Services are aware of this issue and have developed protocols. SEVP recommends that the DSO e-mail Toolbox.SEVIS@dhs.gov with the subject line “ATTN: Amy Bullock- Event Summary Review.” |
1 |
| International student from Canada paid SEVIS fees July 2008, arrived in the US for short-term study requirement in July and departed at the end of July 2008. Student will be returning for another short-term study from January 18-30, 2009. Since the student will have been outside of the United States for more than 5 months will a new I-20 form be required? Will the student also have to pay another SEVIS fee? Note that the fees paid in July 2008 are within the one-year time-frame. |
1 |
| Adviser reports student whose company filed for H-1B April 08; the student terminated employment to go back to school, and the company filed for H-1B withdrawal back in August. Her SEVIS record got terminated on October 1 anyway. SC informed institution in October that this issue is being reviewed and that they are waiting for guidance from Headquarters. |
1 |
SEVP has moved to a new address, including the unit to send I-515A forms to. But the new address is not on the I-515A forms. And the new address for this purpose has not been announced to schools. Adviser inquired with SEVP about this and was told, via email, that "Mail sent to our previous address should still be forwarded to our new location, at least for a little while. However, please use the new address in future." Adviser is concerned about both the delay in processing current I-515A's as well as problems and delays caused for years to come when the forms are sent to the old address by either schools or students. SEVP should create new I-515 forms and destroy all the old ones, and keep the mail forwarding in place for long time. Also, a message should be sent through the SEVIS message boards to alert schools to the new address. Students should be given an extension of the 30 days to get the forms in, if they send to the incorrect old address.
NAFSA Note: NAFSA staff has been corresponding with SEVP on this issue. See www.nafsa.org/sevis for the current address and more information. |
1 |
| E-Verify |
Submissions |
| F-1 international grad student reviewed and approved for CPT on Wednesday, 12 November 2008. His part-time CPT was to begin on Monday, 05 January 2009 and end on Friday, 06 March 2009. Two weeks ago (just before he was to start this internship), he stopped in at the HR office of the public school where he would be teaching. HR staff told him that there was one more thing they needed to do before he was official: he needed to "pass" E-Verify. This school district apparently just went on-line with E-Verify on 01/01/2009, so the system is very new to them. They plugged all of the student's info into E-Verify and it came back as a "Tentative Nonconfirmation". As it states in the E-Verify instructions that came back with the decision, a potential employee can contest a "Tentative Nonconfirmation" decision at a local DHS/USCIS office, which the scholar did. The agent he spoke with told him they "don't handle those matters here" and that he should "apply for OPT". This student has done everything properly. Adviser has all the documents and forms. The school district really wants the student to do his internship with them, but they cannot hire him if E-Verify (DHS) says that it "cannot verify his employment eligibility." NAFSA Note: Because of the way CPT is authorized in SEVIS, it is not reflected in the SAVE database used to verify employment authorization for E-verify. However, the DHS Verification Office can access SEVIS and other DHS databases to confirm the employment authorization. Encourage the student to follow the instructions on the Tentative Non-Confirmation form to contact DHS. Please note: E-Verify must be used only after hire and after completion of the Form I-9. Employers may not pre-screen applicants through E-Verify. Employers cannot terminate an employee while a tentative non-confirmation is pending. Please see the E-verify web site for more information, and encourage the student to follow up with the DHS Verification Office: 1-888-464-4218. |
1 |
| Several students were provided incorrect E-verify numbers for I-765 OPT-STEM applications. Most were provided with the TIN. Adviser had no way to determine whether the E-verify number and institution name were accurate. The only source for this information currently is the source that provided the incorrect information. Adviser was not aware of the problem until the students' RFEs or denials arrived in response to the student's I-765 applications. Also, there is no clear guidance on the procedure when a student changes employers, E-verify to E-verify. NAFSA Note: At the Region IV Conference the USCIS Verification Office stated that the E-Verify Client Number has 5-6 digits. The Employer can find it on the top left side of their E-verify MOU. However, this info is not explained on the I-765 form or instructions. |
1 |
| U.S. Consular Affairs and Visas |
Submissions |
| Current F-1 applied to extend visa. In SEVIS, student has a deactivated record and an active record under one SEVIS ID number. The US Consulate in Chengdu can only read the deactivated record and not the active record. The consulate will not issue the visa. Adviser emailed copies of the SEVIS record showing an active record to the Consulate but they refuse to issue the visa. This has happened at a US Consulate in Mexico with another student but the issue was resolved after sending a letter of clarification. |
1 |
| Adviser reports an issue seen in China and Portugal. Institution has had three cases in the past two days of change of level students being denied F-1 entry visas. The embassy tells them that their SEVIS record has been deactivated; however this is not the case. Their record at the previous level of education (such as Masters) has been deactivated; however their new record (such as Doctorate) is active. Either the embassies cannot see the new record, or they are not looking for it. However this seems to be a growing problem. |
1 |
| Adviser reports an incoming J-1 scholar from Italy who applied for his J-1 visa stamp at the US Consulate in Copenhagen, Denmark. His original program start date was 1/1/09. Scholar's visa interview took place on 12/30/08. At the interview, the officer told scholar that he must ask institution to change his start date to 1/7/09 since that was scholar's tentative entry date. While institution didn't understand, they did so in order to make the scholar more comfortable. However, scholar did not get his visa by that date and on that date he received an email from the NIV Unit in Copenhagen saying that he must have his program start date amended again so that they can issue the visa and he can have time to enter. Apparently the consular officer does not realize that J-1 visa holders can enter the US up to 30 days after their program start date. They are refusing to issue the visa until they can see in the SEVIS system that the start date is well into the future. Here is the text of that email message: “We have received the confirmation of your extended start date, but as that date is today, it leaves you in the same position as you were before. We recommend you have it extended 10-14 days from now in order that there is chance for us to issue the visa and for you to feasibly travel and enter on a later date.” |
1 |
| Graduate student returned to India in November to attend a family wedding. Student appears to now be stuck there for an indefinite period. Student applied for her return student visa, with the final interview conducted on November 26. Since then, she has received no information and is not allowed to contact the visa office. Student is a senior and is near completion of her thesis, with the plan to graduate by this coming summer. Her department has faxed a supporting letter to the US Embassy in India. Adviser believes that she applied at the US Embassy in Chennai, but has not yet received confirmation of this from the professor or student. |
1 |
| Adviser reports three H-1B applications held for SAO's at consulates throughout India over winter break. They're requiring the applicant to complete a questionnaire apparently focused on technical skills. At this point adviser doesn't think it's a coincidence but some type of tech skill survey. |
1 |
| Research scholar in molecular biology went to the US Embassy in New Dehli for an H-1B visa revalidation. The scholar was told everything "looked fine," but additional information was needed; detailed descriptions of the current research, proposed research, practical applications and practical applications for USA, position description, responsibilities, CV, references and publications. All documents were sent and scholar was told the processing time was 6-8 weeks. NAFAS note: Dept. of State Visa Services has confirmed that Security Advisory Opinions are taking longer, up to 90 days. The survey is most likely related to a MANTIS clearance. If the delay exceeds 90 days, please contact the Dept. of State Public Inquiries number (202.663.1225). |
1 |
DHS/USCIS Service Center Issues
| Region I |
Submissions |
| Student filed for reinstatement in August 2008. When three months had passed, a colleague sent a request though Issue Net asking why the case was still pending. One month later, adviser received an e-mail from sysadmin.sevis@dhs.gov indicating that additional evidence was necessary to complete the review of the application. The student never received a formal Request for Evidence. Is this a new method of requesting evidence? NAFSA note: This e-mail was sent from SEVP, not USCIS. We have received reports that this type of e-mail from SEVP sometimes precedes a formal RFE sent from USCIS. |
1 |
| Adviser submitted a routine H-1B extension for an employee who received his Master's degree in the United States and Bachelor's degree in Turkey--both related to the occupation. The degrees were cited in H-1B extension materials, but no copies of diplomas were included, as it was an extension. Received an RFE requesting adviser to provide, among other things, "the original degree the beneficiary received from his Bachelors and Masters programs. Do not send additional photocopies. Do not send an original document different than the one from which the photocopies were obtained." The word "original" in "original degree" was underlined. Adviser/applicant are also told to provide original transcripts. Adviser's understanding of request is that they need to send original diplomas. Adviser has learned that another state university received a similar request for an H-1B extension. At some institutions it can be extremely difficult to get a duplicate original diploma issued. Is it reasonable to require someone to provide their original diploma to USCIS for an H-1 extension? |
1 |
| Region II |
Submissions |
| Adviser filed an I-140 for an Outstanding Professor/Researcher and received an RFE which had unclear language about what was needed. For "original contributions to the field", the RFE indicates that letters from peers and colleagues 'do not overcome the documentary evidence that the work has made an impact on the field...assertions about the value of the beneficiary's work do not establish or imply international recognition'. For "authorship of scholarly books", the RFE states "authorship and publication of results is a normal part of a researcher's duties. The very act of publishing...does not constitute a scholarly contribution of major significance." Adviser submitted additional documents to show that beneficiary also was asked to present in prestigious conferences, and that her work has been cited more times than average with letters to document the impact of the work. However, they received a denial which essentially restates the objections in the RFE. Adviser submitted documents very similar to others that have been submitted before and have obtained approvals. |
1 |
| Region III |
Submissions |
| H-4 I-539 change of status from H-1B petition was received by USCIS on 07/23/2008. The university filed a change of status from H-4 to H-1B via I-129 with premium processing on 08/25/2008, adjudicated on 09/05/2008 for the validity period of 09/15/2008 - 08/30/2011. Within the I-129 petition, adviser requested USCIS to adjudicate the I-539 H-4 petition filed on 07/23/2008 due to request for a change of status from H-4 to H-1B. On 01/05/2009 USCIS approved the I-539 H-4 petition which was filed on 07/23/2008 for the validity period of 01/02/2009 - 07/14/2009. This is an error on USCIS's part due to the above H-1B petition adjudicated as a change of status on 09/05/2008. Since, the H-4 I-539 petition should have been adjudicated before the H-1B I-129 petition due to the request as a change of status. A USCIS representative on 01/22/09 indicated that in order for the beneficiary to receive the benefits of an H-1B visa, a new petition for change of status from H-4 to H-1B will have to be filed. |
1 |
| Region IV |
Submissions |
| A prospective student currently in F-2 status applied for a COS to F-1. Application receipt date at the Service Center is 02 Sep 2008. Case is still pending, though the SC reports only a 3 month backlog. Student is slated to begin studies this semester, and will not be able to get classes after Friday 23 Jan 2009. Semester began 20 JAN 2009. NAFSA note: See Immigration Resources for International Student and Scholar Advisers for information on inquiring with Service Centers. |
1 |
| Region V |
Submissions |
A student transferred in terminated status in the middle of the semester (student did not register F/T at previous school & was terminated before he could be admitted to another institution). The student applied for reinstatement on 11/21/2008 and received an I-797 dated 11/25/2008. Adviser had anticipated that the reinstatement should have been approved before the start of the spring semester.
The student stopped in to International Programs & Services office 1/26/2009 to provide a copy of the I-797. When adviser looked up the status of the application, she found that the current status is: "This case has been sent to another office for processing because it has jurisdiction over the case." Apparently, on 1/22/2009, the SC sent the student's application (without adjudication or prior notification) to another service center. Adviser spoke with a RegBud about this issue and advised to report to IssueNet.
It may take several more months for the application to be adjudicated. By that point in time, the student will then have been in terminated status for more than 5 months and this will also create economic hardship for him as he will not be able to find a job on campus before his reinstatement is approved. The student is maintaining full-time hours and this application should have been approved quickly and easily. Perhaps this application could have been sent to yet another Service Center for quicker processing (or another reliable district office).
NAFSA Note: VSC has confirmed that it has transferred approximately 5,000 I-539s to CSC. CSC has reported that they expect to receive 10,000-15,000 I-539s from VSC.
*Premium Processed H-1B change of status cases are taking longer than the normal 14 days due to "security/background" check. Individual who has been in the U.S. as a student for several years requested a change of status from F1 OPT to H1B ran out of time for regular processing (student's OPT coming to an end), so adviser sent through a check for PPS. To date student and adviser have been waiting approximately 6 weeks from the receipt of the PPS check. When adviser inquired with SC PPS (2 times, about 10 days apart) by email they reported that the delay is because of security checks. Student is a Jordanian citizen which may explain the rigorous check.
NAFSA note: Unfortunately there is no way for an applicant or USCIS to speed up the security check process. Filing “Premium Processing” has no effect on the security check process. |
1 |
An I-140 for special handling was denied for the following reasons:
- Lack of credential evaluation shown for a PhD from the U.K. (this same diploma was accepted for the H-1B filed just months before)
- Proof was not submitted that institution can pay the offered wage
While these are valid requests, an RFE rather than a full denial would have been more appropriate. Especially since dozens of other similar I-140 cases submitted by institution have been approved without the above documentation. |
1 |
| OPT applicant received EAD card with employment dates of 1/1/09- 12/31/09 but there was a typographical error. On 11/11/2008, adviser contacted SC via fax regarding typographical error and on 11/21/2008 was asked to fax copy of EAD card (cut to pieces), with copy of passport or birth certificate. A fax was sent with requested documentation on 11/25/2008. On 1/8/2009, adviser emailed the SC regarding the EAD card replacement for an update and still have not heard back. This student was hoping to start work on 1/1/09. |
1 |
| J-2 applications for EAD's have been pending 7-9 months. Applicants contacted Customer Service line, as instructed by DHS and requested interim cards. Told they cannot have interim cards and they must wait 45 days for inquiry....They may not call again for 45 days. They call after 45 days and are told they must now wait another 45 days. Again told they cannot have interim cards. Local office does not have any appointments permitted. Advisor twice e-mailed the SC to ask for interim EAD's and got no answer at all. It appears that the USCIS promise to provide interim cards after 90 days is not true. |
1 |
| Adviser reports receiving 6-page RFE which was written in such a way that requests were not clear. H-1B petition submitted to PP unit at SC. Applicant is a post-doctoral researcher in physics with a Ph.D. in physics. Original application included copy of Ph.D. diploma & degree equivalency statement. Only problem/error with application was that certified LCA was slightly garbled on two lines. This happens occasionally with final copy of LCA printed by DOL on-line system. Examples of apparent requests in RFE: 1) why does job require a college degree? 2) exact job duties, percentage of time used for each and why degree is needed for each task 3) proof that employer normally requires a degree for this position 4) original college transcripts in envelope with a signature on the envelope flap and name/phone # of person in charge [applicant's institution does not issue transcripts] 5) evaluation of foreign credential [RFE stated evaluation provided was not adequate because they can only evaluate foreign degrees] 6) RFE said institution was using combination of experience and education to qualify [institution was not] & asked for evaluation of all training and experience by college official who has authority to grant credit for experience 7) affidavits from 2+ authorities in field certifying applicant's recognition and expertise 7) last three pay stubs to prove beneficiary has maintained H-1 status [beneficiary was changing status from J-1; has not had H-1 status. |
1 |
| Region VII |
Submissions |
| Adviser reports several Change of Status to F-1 status applications pending with VSC. The applications are taking 10 months to be approved. Students are receiving assistantships and cannot avail themselves of the award because they may not go to school and work. Is there anything that can be done about this length of time? NAFSA note: VSC has transferred a significant number of I-539 to California Service Center in an effort to catch up on the I-539 backlog. |
1 |
F-1 students have been reporting that NCSC is telling them that biometrics are required for OPT EADs. Adviser received an email from a student with this issue (below). Please forward this information to SCOPS so that they can attempt to again fix their scripts.I am a December graduate. I filed application for OPT in mid-November last year. As I called USCIS for updates on my application status today, I was suddenly notified that I need to give biometrics (finger prints). According to the receipt notice I received in November, if USCIS has such request, I will be sent a separate notice, which I have never received. Since none of my classmates who applied for OPT got such a request, I made four phone calls about this issue, but all the customer representatives, even the supervisor, said that all OPT applicants are required to give finger prints. They told me that they will inquire into why I didn't receive the notice, and I can call back if I don't hear from them by February 27, 2009.
|
1 |
| Region X |
Submissions |
Adviser reports three pending change of status cases (two are F-2 to F-1, one is F-1 to have F-2) that have just been forwarded by the Vermont Service Center to the California Service Center on January 23, 2009. The applications have been with Vermont since: F-2 to F-1 October 24, 2008 F-2 to F-1 November 7, 2008 F-1 to F-2 November 13, 2008 The students are concerned that this will delay their cases even more. Neither of the two F-2 to F-1 cases can enroll in school until their cases are adjudicated. Both now need to defer until the Fall 2009 term.
- Why are these cases being forwarded to CSC?
- How quickly will these cases be adjudicated?
- There was a huge processing fee increase a year ago, and the argument put forth was that service would improve. It's not improving, it's worsening. Vermont used to adjudicate COS to F-1 within 90 days.
NAFSA Note: CSC & VSC have confirmed that VSC is transferring I-539 to CSC in order to reduce the VSC's backlog, as allowed under bi-specialization of Service Centers.
|
1 |
| Student applied for OPT and received an I-797 receipt dated Nov 17, 2008. When she goes on the USCIS website to track the status, the following error message appears: “Your case cannot be found at this time in Case Status Online. Please check your receipt number and try again. If you need further assistance please call the National Customer Service Center at 1.800.375.5283.” The student has tried to call the Customer Service Hotline but has not been able to get through the voice mail system. Adviser tried to call, but they will not talk to the adviser without the student present. Student is currently away. Was it one of the applications sent to California? Also, why does "09" appear in the receipt number when the student filed in 2008? NAFSA note: See Immigration Resources for International Student and Scholar Advisers for information on inquiring with Service Centers. |
1 |
| Application for post-completion OPT was sent in November 2008. The SC received it on November 7. The student has graduated and wishes to start his employment. He has heard nothing yet, and it is January 12, 2009. |
1 |
| Are DSOs prohibited from recommending post completion OPT to students who may have already completed OPT at the same educational level in the past? Or may the DSO recommend OPT to any student who otherwise qualifies and let USCIS decide if the student is disqualified? For example, if the student may have had OPT through a different school in the past and the DSO has no knowledge of this or if the student has told the advisor of the prior period- if the DSO then recommends OPT, will the DSO be considered to be in violation of their responsibilities and at risk for denial of re-certification of their school? This issue has come up on the international school advisors listserv, and some have taken this position, that the DSO is in serious error to recommend OPT in this situation and would be at risk of severe penalties. Exactly what is a DSO is required to know, other than that the student has completed one academic year, before recommending OPT? |
1 |
| Region XI |
Submissions |
| Adviser has been receiving with increased frequency RFEs requesting original diplomas or transcripts (and in at least one case both) for H-1B cases. The transcript requests go so far as to ask that the official transcript be in a sealed envelope with the date and signature "of the person in charge of records" in 2 places on the sealed flap of the envelope. These requests have been for both overseas credentials (which were presented with evaluations) and for renown US institutions. Is there a reason for this increased scrutiny? |
1 |
| On 5/27/2008 I-129 H-1B extension Petition was submitted to SC Cap-Exempt Processing Unit. On 12/01/2008, adviser contacted National Customer Service Center to report case outside normal processing times. USCIS will review case and send written explanation of delay with 4 weeks. On 12/23/2008 H-1B petition approved retroactively to 10/01/2008. |
1 |
| Adviser reports four cases where the student applies for OPT and gets a receipt notice, and although 90 days do not pass, other students who have filed at the same time received their cards several weeks prior. The student's OPT start date passes and both the student and the adviser go to "Case Status Online" where it says that there is no record of this case online. In two cases, the case was adjudicated right after adviser contacted the SC to find out what was going on with the case. Adviser is wondering if the cases would not have been approved unless that inquiry was made. Two students had jobs and were unable to start working due to lack of OPT cards and one of those lost the job opportunity altogether. |
1 |
| Region XII |
Submissions |
| An H-4 spouse of an employee changed addresses while a petition was pending. The I-539 I-797 was sent to the original address. The beneficiary changed addresses through NCSC. Case status online states I-797 was returned and requests an address update. Apparently, the system can't recognize that the address has been updated. After 15 minutes of getting to Tier One, adviser pleaded that the address has been updated, that adviser is a "translator," and really needed to speak with Tier Two. After performing the same ritual with Tier Two, adviser has twice been told that a service order has been requested and that it's just about to go out. The last one was six weeks ago. Shortly the returned notice will be moved to Records and they'll tell adviser he never updated the address. Adviser is seeking liaison help from the Regulatory Ombudsman. The process would be better if the beneficiary understood USCIS's bureaucracy and acronyms or the Tier One operator had been more patient. Adviser spends too much time trying to convince USCIS that he may speak on behalf of beneficiary. Adviser requests that NAFSA speak to the SC school liaison again where this problem could have been resolved in a single phone call. NAFSA note: In general, USCIS may only speak with the I-539 applicant, an attorney identified in a signed G-28, or an individual when the applicant is present and has given permission for the individual to speak on his/her behalf. To request case-specific assistance from a NAFSA Reg Ombud, please submit to IssueNet: Get Liaison Help. |
1 |
