Interim Decision #3012 

MATTER OF AMERICAN PARALEGAL ACADEMY, INC. 

Request for Recognition 

Decided by Board April, 8, 1986 

(1) "Nominal charges," as set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) (1986), are not defined in 

terms of specific dollar amounts but have been interpreted to mean a very small 

quantity or something existing in name only as distinguished from something real 

or actual. 

(2) The applicant, whose charges for services exceed amounts which can be construed as "nominal," may not rely upon the notion that its fees are substantially 

less than those charged by law firms or that its fees are one of the means by 

which it is able to fund itself. 

(3) The applicant's detailed fee schedule and its statement that it will provide free 

services as funds become available from contributions suggest that payment is in 

fact a prerequisite to service; therefore, the applicant's characterization of the 

amounts it requests in payment for services as "donations" is not persuasive in a 

determination of "nominal charges." 

(4) "Nominal charges," as contemplated by 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) (1986), were not intended as a means by which those who are able to pay for assistance help offset 

the expenses of those who cannot. 

BY: 1VIilhollan, Chairman; Dunne, Morris, and Vacca, Board Members 

An application, Request for Recognition to Represent before the 

Board of Immigration Appeals and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (Form G-27), was submitted by American Paralegal 

Academy, Inc., requesting recognition under 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) 

(1986)- The application will be disapproved. 

Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) (1986), a nonprofit religious, charitable, social service, or similar organization established in the 

United States may be recognized by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Such an organization must establish to the satisfaction of the 

Board that it makes only nominal charges, assesses no excessive 

membership dues for persons given assistance, and has at its disposal adequate knowledge, information, and experience. 

Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(b) (1986), an organization seeking 

recognition must file an application with the Board, ulvilg with 

proof of service of a copy of the application on the appropriate district director. The Service is required by this regulation to review 

386 
Interim Decision #3012 

the application and submit to the Board its recommendation for approval or disapproval and the reasons therefor. The Service recommends disapproval of the applicant's request. 

The applicant explains that it is an organization which will provide legal counseling services to documented and undocumented 

aliens in the United States. It also offers paralegal training in 

order to train and educate American citizens and lawful permanent residents so that they may provide such counseling services. 

The applicant maintains that it will provide such services free of 

charge to students and clients who are unable to pay. With respect 

to its fee policy, the applicant's bylaws state the following: 

The corporation will charge no fees to its students or clients. However, to help 

cover its expenses, the corporation will ask clients to contribute to their defense 

at a substantially reduced cost according to the bylaws, and students will be asked 

to make donations to the corporation to help cover their registration and tuition 

costs, as is also stated in these bylaws. THE ACADEMY will also request gifts, 

donations and other contributions from organizations and the public in general. 

Scholarships and free services will be provided as funds become available from 

gifts, dux-Rations and other contributions from students, eliprtts, organizations and 

the public in general. 

The applicant has submitted a detailed "Donation Schedule" 

with its request for recognition. This schedule lists charges up to 

$350 for adjustment of status and asylum applications and for visa 

petitions. The applicant's submission reflects that such amounts 

vary according to the client's income and family size. Depending on 

these factors, a client may pay either no fee, half fee, or the full 

amount of the stated charge. 

The Board has never defined the phrase "nominal charges," as 

set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) (1986), solely in terms of specific 

dollar amounts. We have used a case-by-case analysis and have 

given the word "nominal" its usual and customary meaning; that 

is, a very small quantity or something existing in name only as distinguished from something real or actual. The fact that an applicant's fees may be substantially less than those charged by law 

firms is not a proper standard for consideration since such organizations are not law firms. By regulation, recognition is limited to 

nonprofit religious, charitable, or social service organizations. 

Moreover, the imposition of nominal fees was not intended as a 

means through which an organization could fund itself. Applying 

these principles in the present case, we find that many of the 

charges stated in the applicant's submission exceed amounts which 

can be construed as "nominal " 

We also find that the applicant's characterization of the amounts 

it requests in payment for its services as "donations" is not persuasive in a determination of nominal charges. The applicant itself 

RR7 
Interim Decision #3012 

refers to such amounts as "fees" in its "Donation Schedule." Its detailed fee schedule also raises a question as to the voluntary nature 

of payment and suggests that such contributions are not payable in 

the client's discretion but rather waivable, if at all, only by the applicant. In fact, the applicant's statement in its submission that 

free services will be provided to those unable to pay appears contradicted by its bylaws, which state that "free services will be provided as funds become available from gifts, donations, and other 

contributions from students, clients, organizations, and the public 

in general." (Bylaws, Article 4, Section 2). Such statement, combined with the applicant's detailed fee schedule, suggests that payment is in fact a prerequisite to service and indicates, at a minimum, that some of the applicant's clients who are financially able 

may pay the full amount of the fee. The term "nominal charges," 

as contemplated by 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) (1986), was not intended, 

however, as a means by which those who are able to pay for assistance help off-set the expenses of those who cannot. 

Based upon our review of the applicant's submission, we also conclude that it has not demonstrated that it has at its disposal adequate knowledge, information, and experience in immigration law 

and procedure. The applicant cites legal resources and publications 

available to it and states that it has access to attorneys and others 

experienced in immigration matters. We also note that one 

member of the applicant's Board of Directors was previously an accredited representative of another agency recognized by the Board 

under 8 C.F.R. § 292.2(a) (1986). It is not clear, however, from the 

applicant's submission to what extent the experience of these individuals will be available to the applicant, or that the expertise of its 

staff, who will provide assistance to the applicant's clients, is sufficient to warrant recognition. 

Because the applicant has not demonstrated that it makes only 

nominal charges for the services its renders and that it has at its 

disposal adequate knowledge, information, and experience in immigration law and procedure, the application will be disapproved. 

ORDER: The application is disapproved. 

388