Teleconference: L-1B Specialized Knowledge
Overview
On May 12, 2011, the Office of Public Engagement, the Service Center Operations Directorate, and the Office of Policy and Strategy hosted a stakeholder engagement to discuss issues related to the L-1B nonimmigrant classification. More specifically, USCIS was seeking feedback on the interpretation of the term “specialized knowledge” within the regulatory framework and what standards and evidentiary requirements should be followed in determining eligibility for this classification.
Principal Themes
Interpreting Specialized Knowledge
An overwhelming majority of stakeholders asserted that the existing regulatory definition of “specialized knowledge” and USCIS policy memoranda which relate to this issue are fine as written, and there is no need to issue any new policy memorandum. Some stakeholders provided feedback indicating that the definition of “specialized knowledge” should be interpreted more broadly than is currently being practiced at the Service Centers. Stakeholders noted that USCIS is interpreting the definition too narrowly as evidenced by the Requests for Evidence (RFE) and denials which are being received by many petitioners for this category. One stakeholder stated that it appears that USCIS has made a change in its interpretation in recent years without any change in the law.
USCIS also sought feedback from stakeholders on whether the current interpretation being used by Service Centers meets the needs of employers. Some stakeholders stated that the current interpretation did not meet the needs of employers because it was being too strictly and narrowly interpreted. They suggested that it would better serve employers if there was an increased flexibility and a broader interpretation of the term specialized knowledge.
Requests for Evidence
One stakeholder commented that petitioners were unsure of what documentation to submit with L-1B petitions at this time because it appeared that USCIS officers were making determinations as to required evidence on a case by case basis rather than having a general requirements list for all cases. They requested that USCIS provide stakeholders with a list of recommended initial evidence as well as additional evidence that should be included with a petition for an L-1B nonimmigrant so as to help petitioners avoid receiving so many Requests for Evidence.
Some stakeholders indicated that petitioners are overwhelmed by the information being requested in RFEs and that some RFEs requested evidence associated with O-1 requirements. They commented that these RFEs are too burdensome and costly and may lead petitioners to withdraw their petitions. Stakeholders also commented that this may lead to highly qualified individuals deciding to go to other countries rather than sharing their expertise to strengthen the U.S. economy.
Several stakeholders commented that USCIS should provide additional training on the proper adjudications standards for USCIS officers working on L-1B nonimmigrant petitions in order to avoid lengthy and repetitive RFEs in the future. Stakeholders suggested that this training should include input from various industries so as to provide USCIS officers with real life examples of how companies utilize L-1B nonimmigrants. It was further suggested by stakeholders that USCIS officers are not following the “preponderance of the evidence” standard, and that this evidentiary standard should be reinforced through training. It was also suggested that the Service Centers should implement a more rigorous supervisory review on all potential RFEs and denials on L-1B adjudications.
Factors in determining Specialized Knowledge
USCIS also asked stakeholders to provide feedback on what relevant factors should be considered in determining if a beneficiary possesses specialized knowledge. One stakeholder commented that the specialized knowledge held by the beneficiary may be of the petitioner’s already existing product rather than of a product the beneficiary is producing or developing for the petitioner.
Another stakeholdercommented that in some cases, an individual is brought in to lead the implementation of a product and to guide the team rather than to create a new product. In other cases, the knowledge relates to the industry rather than a particular company. It is not unique to the company, but rather enhances a company’s competitiveness. Another stakeholder commented that in certain industries such as the software industry, the information is not unique to the company in that there are other individuals who have knowledge of the software as well. The goal, however, is to bring skilled individuals from the overseas market in order to be more competitive.
Stakeholders also indicated that specialized knowledge is different from proprietary knowledge and should not be confused. Some stakeholders reminded USCIS that the L-1B nonimmigrant classification did not require the individual to be extraordinary, and that specialized knowledge need not be proprietary. It was pointed out that specialized knowledge is a special knowledge of the product or processes of a company. Stakeholders also stated that specialized knowledge need not to be narrowly held by a select few individuals within a company. Furthermore, stakeholders stated that specialized knowledge should not be determined by country of origin or by the petitioner’s business model.
Next Steps
USCIS will provide additional guidance and training to USCIS officers adjudicating L-1B petitions.
H-1B CAP COUNT AS OF 06/24/2011
As of June 24, 2011, approximately 17,400 H-1B cap-subject petitions were receipted. Additionally, USCIS has receipted 11,300 H-1B petitions for aliens with advanced degrees.
Changes to Visa Validity for Iranian Student Applicants in F, J, and M Visa Categories
As of May 20, 2011, qualified Iranian applicants for visas in the F, J, and M categories for non-sensitive, non-technical fields of study and research and their dependents will be eligible to receive two-year, multiple-entry visas. This is an increase in the current visa validity of three months, single entry.
This change will allow Iranian students and exchange visitors to travel more easily, furthering our goal of promoting the free flow of information and ideas. This important decision is being taken as the global community witnesses the Iranian Government’s increasing censorship and isolation of its own people.
Iranians currently in the United States on a three-month, single-entry visa in one of these categories must reapply outside the United States at a consular post in order to obtain two-year, multiple-entry visas. Keep in mind that the validity of a visa refers to the time period the visa holder has to enter the U.S. It has no bearing on the length of stay pe
rmitted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials at the port of entry. Iranian students and exchange visitors in good standing in the United States do not need to apply for a new visa until after they depart the United States.
PRN: 2011/807
H-1B Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Cap Count as of 06/25/2011
FY 2012 H-1B Cap Count
|
Cap Type |
Cap Amount |
Cap Eligible Petitions |
Date of Last Count |
|---|---|---|---|
|
H-1B Regular Cap |
65,000 |
13,100 |
5/26/2011 |
|
H-1B Master’s Exemption |
20,000 |
9,000 |
5/26/2011 |
Cap Eligible Petitions
This is the number of petitions that USCIS has accepted for this particular type of cap. It includes cases that have been approved or are still pending. It does not include petitions that have been denied.
Cap Amounts
The current annual cap on the H-1B category is 65,000. Not all H-1B nonimmigrants are subject to this annual cap. Please note that up to 6,800 visas are set aside from the cap of 65,000 during each fiscal year for the H-1B1 program under the terms of the legislation implementing the U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreements. Unused numbers in this pool are made available for H-1B use for the next fiscal year.
ICE updates list of Student and Exchange Visitor Program approved schools
ICE updates list of Student and Exchange Visitor Program approved schools
Georgia Legislature passes HB 87
On 4/14/11, the Georgia Legislature passed HB 87, an immigration enforcement bill that
USCIS Data on the approval and denial for the E-11 classification (Alien of Extraordinary Ability) of the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers.
Table A provides data on the approval and denial for the E-11 classification (Alien of Extraordinary Ability) of the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers.
Table A: I-140 E-11 Approval/Denial by Fiscal Year 2005 to 2010
|
Fiscal Year |
Approvals |
Denials |
Approval Rate |
Denial Rate |
|
2005 |
791 |
647 |
55% |
45% |
|
2006 |
1,646 |
1,032 |
61% |
39% |
|
2007 |
2,236 |
2,313 |
49% |
51% |
|
2008 |
2,329 |
2,667 |
47% |
53% |
|
2009 |
4,337 |
3,053 |
59% |
41% |
|
2010 |
3,200 |
1,998 |
62% |
38% |
Table B provides data on the approval and denial for the E-12 classification (Outstanding Professor or Researcher) of the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers.
Table B: I-140 E-12 Approval/Denial by Fiscal Year 2005 to 2010
|
Fiscal Year |
Approvals |
Denials |
Approval Rate |
Denial Rate |
| 2005 | 5,042 | 340 | 94% | 6% |
| 2006 | 2,991 | 146 | 95% | 5% |
| 2007 | 2,459 | 283 | 90% | 10% |
| 2008 | 2,148 | 172 | 93% | 7% |
| 2009 | 3,893 | 300 | 93% | 7% |
| 2010 | 3,140 | 306 | 91% | 9% |
Last updated:02/28/2011
Taxation of Resident Aliens
|
Page Last Reviewed or Updated: December 07, 2010
Taxation of Nonresident Aliens
|
Page Last Reviewed or Updated: November 17, 2010
Questions about Same or Similar Occupational Classifications Under the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (AC21)
Introduction
Section 106(c) of AC21, commonly known as the job flexibility provision, was enacted as Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) section 204(j). This portion of the INA is provided below for convenience:
A petition under subsection (a)(1)(D) [redesignated as (a)(1)(F)] for an individual whose application for adjustment of status pursuant to section 245 has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more shall remain valid with respect to a new job if the individual changes jobs or employers if the new job is in the same or a similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
This section of law allows certain aliens to change or port the offer of employment on which their adjustment of status application is based from one job to another job as long as both jobs are in the same or similar occupational classification. Within these questions and answers, the term “port” or “porting” means to change the offer of employment from one job to another job in a way that allows an applicant to remain eligible to adjust status without having to file a new I-140 immigrant petition. For an alien to change the offer of employment, his or her adjustment of status application, Form I-485, must have been pending with USCIS for 180 days or more.
Questions and Answers
Q1. What is an “occupational classification”?
A1. The Department of Labor (DOL) uses the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system to group and classify jobs and occupations. The purpose of the SOC system is to classify workers into occupational categories to organize occupational data. The SOC system covers all occupations where work is performed for pay or for profit. Occupations are categorized based on the type of work performed. Additionally, certain occupations are also classified based on the skills, education and training required to perform the job.
The SOC system is organized using codes, which generally consist of six numerical digits. For example, the SOC code for a stonemason is 47-2022.
- [47]-2022: The first two digits, “47” represent the major group, which includes all construction and extraction occupations.
- 47-[2]022: The third digit, “2” represents the minor group, which includes all construction trade workers.
- 47-2[02]2: The forth and fifth digits, “02” represent the broad occupation, which includes brickmasons, blockmasons, and stonemasons.
- 47-202[2]: The sixth digit, “2” represents the detailed occupation, which only includes stonemasons.
47-0000 Construction and Extraction Occupations
47-2000 Construction Trades Workers
47-2020 Brickmasons, Blockmasons, and Stonemasons
47-2022 Stonemasons
No occupation will be assigned to more than one category at the lowest level of the classification (sixth digit). A USCIS memo titled, Interim Guidance for Processing Form I-140 Employment-Based Immigrant Petitions and Form I-485 and H-1B Petitions Affected by the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) (Public Law 106-313) (December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo) instructed USCIS officers to consider the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) code as part of the same or similar occupational classification analysis. The DOT has been replaced by the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) under the sponsorship of DOL’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA). The O*NET system relies upon the SOC codes.
Q2. How does USCIS determine what qualifies as a same or similar occupational classification?
A2. USCIS generally makes a determination as to whether one job is in the “same or similar” occupational classification as another by referring to the DOL’s SOC system. USCIS officers also consider multiple factors to conclude if two jobs are considered to be in similar occupational classifications for porting purposes (see above question for definition of “porting”). USCIS officers may compare factors including, but not limited to:
- The job duties of both positions
- The SOC code from the Immig
rant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140) and the appropriate SOC code for the new position - The wages associated with each position
USCIS officers will view the totality of the circumstances to determine if the two jobs are the same or similar for porting purposes.
Q3. Does USCIS only use the first two or the first three numbers of the SOC code to determine if two occupational classifications are same or similar?
A3. As noted above, USCIS does not use a simple numerical comparison of SOC codes to determine if two jobs are the same or similar. USCIS aims to determine in all cases whether a new position is in the same or similar occupational classification as the original job offer.
When referring to the SOC system, USCIS will analyze the SOC codes of the two jobs it is comparing. However, there is no hard and fast rule for matching any particular order of digits in two SOC codes.
In the example in Q.1, the “47” encompasses all construction and extraction occupations, which is a broad category and would not determine whether two jobs are similar. In this particular example, even matching additional digits of the SOC codes may not show whether or not two jobs are similar.
For example, the SOC code for a stonemason is 47-2022. The job description for a stonemason is:
Build stone structures, such as piers, walls, and abutments. Lay walks, curbstones, or special types of masonry for vats, tanks, and floors.
The SOC code for a boilermaker is 47-2010, which contains the same first four numbers of the stonemason’s SOC code (47-20). However, the job description for a boilermaker is significantly different from that of stonemason:
Construct, assemble, maintain, and repair stationary steam boilers and boiler house auxiliaries. Align structures or plate sections to assemble boiler frame tanks or vats, following blueprints. Work involves use of hand and power tools, plumb bobs, levels, wedges, dogs, or turnbuckles. Assist in testing assembled vessels. Direct cleaning of boilers and boiler furnaces. Inspect and repair boiler fittings, such as safety valves, regulators, automatic-control mechanisms, water columns, and auxiliary machines.
Q4. The December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo states that a discrepancy between the wages of two jobs may be used to decide if the two positions are the same or similar, but the memo also states that a difference in the wages of the two jobs cannot be used as the sole basis for denial in adjustment of status portability cases. Can USCIS provide further explanation on how wages are used to determine whether two jobs are in the same or similar occupational classification?
A4. Section I, Question 3 from the December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo provides USCIS officers with the flexibility to consider a “substantial discrepancy” in the wages offered in two positions to
assist them in deciding if the two jobs are in the same or a similar occupational classification. A “substantial discrepancy” in the wages of the two jobs may be a contributing factor in a denial when the evidence is considered in its totality. However, a USCIS officer should not deny a case solely because a second position pays more or less than the original.
Section 1, Question 5 from the December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo references a “difference” in the wages to inform both USCIS officers and the public that a difference in wages should not be used as the sole basis for a denial. This means there can be an allowance for normal raises that occur through the passage of time to account for inflation and other factors such as higher rates of pay in different metropolitan locations.
Q5. Can I accept a different position or receive a promotion from my employer and remain eligible to adjust my status to permanent residence?
A5. USCIS will evaluate these situations on a case-by-case basis. The job duties for each position, the SOC codes for each position, and any differences in the wages will be the determining factors as to whether you remain eligible. Regardless of whether the new job is considered a demotion, a lateral move or a promotion within the company for which the beneficiary is employed, the job duties must be sufficiently similar. USCIS officers will view the totality of the circumstances in light of the congressional intent, expressed in INA section 204(j), as enacted by 106(c) of AC21, to facilitate job mobility within the same or similar occupational classification for qualifying aliens with long-pending adjustment applications.
Last updated:04/07/2011
U.S. Legal Permanent Residents: 2010 (.pdf)
This Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Flow Report presents information obtained from applications for LPR status on the number and characteristics of persons who became LPRs in the United States during FY 2010.
(PDF, 6 pages, 446 KB)
USCIS to Start Accepting H-1B Petitions for FY 2012 on April 1, 2011
VIA USCIS
March 18, 2011
WASHINGTON – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today it will start accepting H-1B petitions subject to the fiscal year (FY) 2012 cap on April 1, 2011. Cases will be considered accepted on the date USCIS receives a properly filed petition for which the correct fee has been submitted; not the date that the petition is postmarked.
U.S. businesses use the H-1B program to employ foreign workers in specialty occupations that require theoretical or technical expertise. Such workers include scientists, engineers, and computer programmers, among others.
The cap (the numerical limit on H-1B petitions) for FY 2012 is 65,000. The first 20,000 H-1B petitions filed on behalf of individuals with U.S. master’s degrees or higher are exempt.
USCIS will monitor the number of H-1B petitions received and will notify the public of the date when the numerical limit of the H-1B cap has been met. This date is known as the final receipt date. If USCIS receives more petitions than it can accept, it may on the final receipt date randomly select the number of petitions that will be considered for final inclusion within the cap. USCIS will reject petitions that are subject to the cap and are not selected, as well as petitions received after it has the necessary number of petitions needed to meet the cap.
In addition to petitions filed on behalf of people with U.S. master’s degrees or higher, certain other petitions are exempt from the congressionally mandated cap.
Petitions for new H-1B employment are exempt from the annual cap if the beneficiaries will work at:
-
Institutions of higher education or related or affiliated nonprofit entities;
-
Nonprofit research organizations; or
-
Governmental research organizations.
Petitions filed on behalf of beneficiaries who will work only in Guam or the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands are exempt from the cap until Dec. 31, 2014. Employers may continue to file petitions for these cap-exempt H-1B categories for beneficiaries who will start work during FY 2011 or 2012.
Petitions filed on behalf of current H-1B workers who have been counted previously against the cap do not count towards the H-1B cap. USCIS will continue to process petitions filed to:
-
Extend the amount of time a current H-1B worker may remain in the United States;
-
Change the terms of employment for current H-1B workers;
-
Allow current H-1B workers to change employers; and
-
Allow current H-1B workers to work concurrently in a second H-1B position.
H-1B petitioners should follow all statutory and regulatory requirements as they prepare petitions, to avoid delays in processing and possible requests for evidence. USCIS has posted on its website detailed information, including a processing worksheet, to assist in the completion and submission of a FY2012 H-1B petition.
For more information on the H-1B nonimmigrant visa program and current Form I-129 processing times, visit www.uscis.gov or call the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.
Last updated:03/18/2011
The U.S. Immigration Law Blog by Ashwin Sharma 
The Sharma Law Office, P.A. congratulates Benjamin C. Moore, Esq. on being named Partner.