Siskind Susser

Green Card LotteryABCs of ImmigrationHiring A LawyerHealth Care Info CenterImmigration SitesFashion, Arts & / Sports Newsletter

Siskind Immigration Bulletin Request Consultation Ask Visalaw Client Login
About the Firm
Our Offices
Our Team
In the News
Practice Areas and Services
Scheduling a Consultation
ABCs of Immigration
Requests For Proposals
Press Room


Immigration Forms
Government Processing Times
State Department Visa Bulletin
Siskind's Immigration Professional
Working in America
Washington Updates
Publications
The Visalaw Blog

MEMBER OF THE
AMERICAN
IMMIGRATION
LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION


LAUNCH CHAT

< back

Click for more articlesCOURT ISSUES INJUNCTION IN EB-2 CLASS ACTION CASE

Last year a lawsuit was filed by San Francisco law firm Berry, Appleman and Leiden against the INS for denying EB-2 applications where the underlying ETA-750 said that a bachelor’s degree plus five years of experience could be accepted in lieu of an advanced degree.  This week, the court certified the case as a class action, and issued an injunction ordering the INS to accept the applications.

The court found that the case encompassed two sub-classes.  The first are those who had EB-2 petitions pending with the INS on March 20, 2000.  The second are those whose applications are no longer pending and were denied after July 1, 1997.

INS regulations define an advanced degree as any academic or professional degree above that of a baccalaureate degree and provides that “a US baccalaureates degree or a foreign equivalent followed by at least five years of progressive experience in the specialty shall be considered the equivalent of an advanced degree.”  Despite this language, the INS was denying applications where the ETA 750 did not require an advanced degree. 

While the INS did on March 20, 2000 issue a memorandum outlining the approach that should be taken in cases like this, because memos do not carry the weight of law, there is no guarantee that the INS will adhere to it.  Therefore, the court ordered the INS to adjudicate the applications of class members under the terms of the March 20 memo.  Members of the first sub-class, whose applications were pending on March 20, do not need to take any action, as the INS is under orders to adjudicate their cases according to the memo.  Members of the second subclass, whose applications were denied after July 1, 1997, need to file a motion to reconsider.  The INS must accept these motions even though they are untimely, and should re-adjudicate the petition under the March 20 memo. 

Because the improper denials of the EB-2 applications have severely impacted the ability of many to adjust their status, the court also ordered the INS to accept adjustment of status applications from class members who would otherwise be eligible for adjustment, but for the lack of an approved EB-2 application. 

For more information on the suit, go to http://www.usabal.com/appeal/.

Click for more articles

Siskind Susser Bland
1028 Oakhaven Rd.
Memphis, TN 38119
T. 800-343-4890 or 901-682-6455
F. 901-682-6394
Email: info@visalaw.com

Home | Immigration Bulletin | Green Card Lottery Center | ABCs of Immigration | Hiring A Lawyer
Hot Topics | Health Care Info Center | Immigration Sites | Search



This is an advertisement. Certification as an Immigration Specialist is not currently available in Tennessee. Siskind Susser Bland limits its practice strictly to immigration law, a Federal practice area, and we do not claim expertise in the laws of states other than where our attorneys are licensed. Siskind Susser Bland does not retain clients on the strength of advertising materials alone but only after following our own engagement procedures (e.g. interviews, conflict checks, retainer agreements). The information contained on this site is intended to educate members of the public generally and is not intended to provide solutions to individual problems. Readers are cautioned not to attempt to solve individual problems on the basis of information contained herein and are strongly advised to seek competent legal counsel before relying on information on this site. Siskind Susser Bland and its advertisers are independent of each other and advertisers on this site are not being endorsed by Siskind Susser Bland by virtue of the fact that they appear on this page. Site is maintained by Siskind Susser Bland's Memphis, TN office and overseen by Gregory Siskind. Copyright © 2003-2006 Siskind Susser Bland. All rights reserved.