Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/05/12/2014-10733/enhancing-opportunities-for-h-1b1-cw-1-and-e-3-nonimmigrants-and-eb-1-immigrants
Timestamp: 2015-03-05 10:26:16
Document Index: 123992663

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 501', '§ 402', '§ 402', '§ 501', 'ART 204', 'art 214', 'art 2', '§ 214', 'art 248', '§ 248', 'art 274', '§ 214', '§ 214']

Federal Register | Enhancing Opportunities for H-1B1, CW-1, and E-3 Nonimmigrants and EB-1 Immigrants
Dates: Written comments must be received on or before July 11, 2014
-26886 (17 pages)
Document Number: 2014-10733
Shorter URL: https://federalregister.gov/a/2014-10733 Related Topics
Enhancing Opportunities for H-1B1, CW-1, and E-3 Nonimmigrants and EB-1 Immigrants 3 actions from May 12th, 2014 to April 2015
A. E-3Nonimmigrant Classification
B. H-1B1Nonimmigrant Classification
C. CW-1Nonimmigrant Classification
D. EB-1Outstanding Professor and Researcher Immigrant Classification
1. E-3, H-1B1, and EB-1Classifications
2. CW-1Nonimmigrant Classification
1. E-3 or H-1B1Nonimmigrant Workers
2. CW-1Nonimmigrant Workers
1. E-3 and H-1B1Nonimmigrant Workers
3. EB-1Outstanding Professors and Researchers
All interested parties are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of this proposed rule. DHS and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) also invite comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result from this proposed rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to USCIS in implementing these changes will reference a specific portion of the proposed rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority that supports a recommended change.
Designates E-3 and H-1B1 classifications as authorized to work for the specific employer listed in their petition without requiring separate approval for work authorization from USCIS (8 CFR 274a.12): This designation would update DHS regulations to match current practice, under which E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrant visa holders are authorized to work for the duration of their authorized stay in the United States without applying separately for employment authorization. The E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrant classifications were established by statute in 2005 and 2003, respectively. See REAL ID Act of 2005, Public Law 109-13, § 501, 119 Stat. 231; United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 108-78, § 402, 117 Stat. 948 (2003); United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 108-77, §§ 402-404, 117 Stat. 909 (2003). Since that time, the DHS employment authorization regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12 have not been updated to include principal E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants as aliens authorized to accept employment in the United States as authorized by statute. This rule proposes to specifically include these two classifications in the regulation at proposed 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(25) and 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(9). This reflects statutory authority and codifies current practice into the regulation.
Allows a petitioner who wants to employ an outstanding professor or researcher to submit evidence comparable to the evidence otherwise described in 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(i) that demonstrates that the beneficiary is recognized as an outstanding professor or researcher. The current EB-1 regulations do not allow petitioners for outstanding professors and researchers to submit evidence that the beneficiary is recognized internationally as outstanding in a specific academic area such as, in certain circumstances, important patents or prestigious peer-reviewed funding grants. This rule proposes to modify the regulatory limitation on initial evidence for outstanding professors and researchers to allow a petitioner to submit evidence that is comparable to the list of currently accepted evidence and that demonstrates that the beneficiary is recognized as outstanding. The new regulatory criterion for initial evidence would be similar to those found under the aliens of extraordinary ability and the aliens of exceptional ability classifications. This would broaden the range of evidence that professors and researchers may submit and therefore provide petitioners with an opportunity to present additional or alternative documentation demonstrating the beneficiary's achievements if the evidence otherwise described in 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(i) does not readily apply.
E-3, H-1B1 and CW-1Nonimmigrants
Automatic extension of stay of 240 days for an H-1B1, E-3 or CW-1 nonimmigrant while a petition to extend stay is pending
Avoided cost of lost productivity for U.S. employers of E-3, H-1B1and CW-1 nonimmigrants and avoided lost wages by the nonimmigrant workers. Not quantified.
Clarify that E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants are work authorized incident to status, and specify current filing procedures for requesting change of status or extension of status
Ensures the regulations are consistent with statutory authority and codifies current practice.
EB-1Outstanding Professors and Researchers
Allow the use of comparable evidence to that listed in 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(i)(A)-(F) to establish that the EB-1 professor or researcher is recognized internationally as outstanding in his or her academic field
May facilitate recruitment of EB-1 outstanding professors and researchers for U.S. employers. Not quantified. Would provide equity for EB-1 immigrants relative to other employment-based immigrants listed in 8 CFR 204.5. Qualitative benefit.
The Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT90), among other things, reorganized immigrant classifications and created new employment-based immigrant classifications. See 101, 104 Stat. 4978. The new employment-based immigration provisions were intended to cultivate a more competitive economy by encouraging increased immigration of skilled individuals to meet our economic needs.
Those IMMACT90 provisions were enacted to address the need of American businesses for highly skilled, specially trained personnel to fill increasingly sophisticated jobs for which domestic personnel could not be found. See Employment-Based Immigrants, 56 FR 30703 (July 5, 1991). The need for high-skilled workers was based on an increasing skills gap in current and projected U.S. labor pools. Id.
American businesses continue to need skilled nonimmigrant and immigrant workers. As such, our legal immigration system can be improved by reducing barriers for these workers.
By attracting the “best and brightest” from around the world, the United States can harness their talents, skills, and ideas to help the U.S. economy grow.
Attracting and retaining highly-skilled workers is critical to sustaining our nation's global competitiveness. Governments seeking to make the most of their highly skilled immigration face the challenge of identifying, attracting, and retaining those with the best prospects for success.
Not only does the U.S. economy lose opportunities for expansion, but the loss is compounded when highly-skilled immigrants leave the United States and fuel innovation and economic growth in countries that compete with the American economy.
Consistent with this vision of attracting and retaining foreign workers, DHS has identified four employment-based (EB) classifications for which simple harmonizing changes to the regulations would further the goal of removing unnecessary obstacles for highly-skilled workers or transitional workers to continue working in the United States or seek admission as an immigrant. These classifications are the E-3, H-1B1, and CW-1 nonimmigrant classifications and the EB-1 outstanding professor and researcher immigrant classification.
Principal E-3 aliens are subject to an annual numerical limitation of 10,500 initial E-3 visas per fiscal year (FY). See INA section 214(g)(11), 8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(11). To determine numerical limitation compliance, USCIS counts initial E-3 visa applications submitted abroad, initial petitions for a change of status to E-3, and E-3 applications for an extension of stay requesting a change of employers against the numerical limitation. See INA section 214(g)(11)(A), 8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(11)(A); AFM Chapter 34.6(a)(3) Note 3. USCIS does not count the dependent spouse and children of E-3 principal aliens against the numerical limitation. See INA section 214(g)(11)(C), 8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(11)(C); 22 CFR 41.51(c)(2). B. H-1B1Nonimmigrant Classification
The CW classification includes CW-1 nonimmigrants, referring to principal workers, and CW-2 nonimmigrants, referring to dependent spouses and minor children. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(2) and (3). The CW nonimmigrant classification was created in accordance with title VII of the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 (CNRA). See Pub. L. 110-229, 122 Stat. 754, 853 (2008). Title VII of the CNRA made effective the immigration laws of the United States in the CNMI and replaced the immigration laws of the CNMI. Id. The CNRA included provisions for a “transition period” to phase-out the CNMI's nonresident contract worker program and phase-in the U.S. Federal immigration system in a manner that minimizes the adverse economic and fiscal effects and maximizes the CNMI's potential for future economic and business growth. See section 701 of the CNRA, 48 U.S.C. 1806 note. The CNRA authorized DHS to create a nonimmigrant classification that would ensure adequate employment in legitimate businesses in the CNMI, while preventing adverse effects on wages and working conditions of workers already authorized to be employed in the United States, during the transition period, which is set to end on December 31, 2014, unless extended by the Secretary of Labor.
See id.; 48 U.S.C. 1806(d)(2).
Consistent with the CNRA, DHS published a final rule
on September 7, 2011, effective October 7, 2011, amending its regulations to add a new provision at 8 CFR 214.2(w) that implemented a temporary CW classification. See Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Transitional Worker Classification, 76 FR 55502 (Sept. 7, 2011) (hereinafter, 2011 CW classification final rule). With limited exception, the CW classification provides a method for certain aliens to transition from the former CNMI foreign worker permit system to the U.S. immigration system. Id. at 55502.
Unlike the nonimmigrant specialty occupation worker classifications, this classification does not require a certified LCA from DOL prior to filing a petition with USCIS. Instead, a U.S. employer seeking to classify an alien as a CW-1 nonimmigrant worker must first file a petition with USCIS. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(5). Specifically, such employer must file a Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker, Form I-129CW, or other form prescribed by USCIS, with the accompanying CW Supplement and supporting evidence. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(1)(x), (w)(5), and (w)(6). For individuals in the CNMI in another nonimmigrant status, the Form I-129CW may also be used to change status to that of a CW-1 nonimmigrant worker. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(18); Instructions to Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker, Form I-129CW, page 1. Employers may also file a Form I-129CW to request an extension of stay for a CW-1 nonimmigrant worker in the CNMI or to petition to change employers. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(7), (17); Instructions to Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker, Form I-129CW, page 1. Upon obtaining CW-1 nonimmigrant status, CW-1 nonimmigrant workers are employment authorized incident to status, but only in the CNMI and with the petitioning employer. 8 CFR 214.2(w)(22)(iv). This means that CW-1 nonimmigrants are authorized to work for the specific employer listed in their petition without requiring separate approval for work authorization from USCIS.
CW-1 nonimmigrant workers are subject to an annual numerical limitation per FY. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(1)(viii). The CNRA mandates an annual reduction in the number of transitional workers and total elimination of the CW classification by the end of the transition period.
Consistent with this mandate, DHS established the CW-1 numerical limitation for FY 2011 at 22,417 and for FY 2012 at 22,416. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(1)(viii)(A) and (B). The numerical limitation for FY 2013 was set at 15,000. See CNMI-Only Transitional Worker Numerical Limitation for Fiscal Year 2013, 77 FR 71287 (Nov. 30, 2012). The numerical limitation was set at 14,000 for FY 2014. See Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)-Only Transitional Worker Numerical Limitation for Fiscal Year 2014, 78 FR 58867 (Sept. 25, 2013). USCIS counts initial petitions for a change of status to CW-1, CW-1 petitions for an extension of stay, and requests for a change of status from another nonimmigrant status to CW-1 status against the numerical limitation. USCIS does not count CW-2 nonimmigrant dependent spouses and children of CW-1 principal aliens against the numerical limitation. Id. at 58868.
The outstanding professor and researcher immigrant classification constitutes one of the three EB-1 immigrant worker categories.
See INA section 203(b)(1)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(1)(B). The professor or researcher must:
DHS recognizes that attracting and retaining these highly-skilled workers is important given the contributions of these individuals to the U.S. economy, including advances in entrepreneurial and research and development endeavors, which are highly correlated with overall economic growth and job creation. By some estimates, immigration was responsible for one-third of the explosive growth in patenting in past decades, and these innovations have the potential to contribute to increasing U.S. gross domestic product (GDP).
According to one study, in over 25 percent of technology companies founded in the United States from 1995 to 2005, at least one key founder was foreign-born.
Likewise, in 2012, the Kauffman Foundation reported that immigrants were more than twice as likely to start a business in the United States as the native-born and a report by the Partnership for a New American Economy found that more than 40 percent of 2010 Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children.
When Congress established the E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrant classifications, it authorized certain foreign workers to apply to the Department of State (DOS) for a visa without first obtaining a petition approval from USCIS. See REAL ID Act of 2005, Public Law 109-13, § 501; United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 108-78, sec. 402; United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 108-77, secs. 402-404; see also 22 CFR 41.51(c); 9 FAM 41.51 N16.1; 9 FAM 41.53 N27.2 and N27.3 (respectively). In this regard, the procedures for obtaining status under the E-3 and H-1B1 classifications require fewer administrative steps than those required for the similar H-1B nonimmigrant classification.
U.S. employers of E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants save associated petition filing fees and processing times as a result.
For the EB-1 outstanding professor and researcher immigrant classification, the prospective U.S. employer must file an Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, Form I-140, and supporting evidence. Unlike most other employment-based immigrant classifications, however, the employer is not required to obtain and submit an approved labor certification application issued by DOL prior to filing the petition with USCIS.
See 8 CFR 204.5(i)(1) and 204.5(i)(3)(iii).
While the procedures for the E-3, H-1B1, and EB-1 classifications may contain fewer administrative steps than procedures for other nonimmigrant or immigrant classifications, statistics indicate that these classifications are still underutilized. Even though there are 10,500 E-3 visas and 6,800 H-1B1 visas available per FY, DOS and USCIS statistics indicate that in FY 2013, DOS issued 3,946 new E-3 nonimmigrant visas and USCIS approved 622 extensions of stay requests and 102 requests for change of status to the E-3 nonimmigrant classification. Also in FY 2013, DOS issued 571 new H-1B1 visas and USCIS approved 411 extensions of stay requests and 315 requests for change of status to the H-1B1 nonimmigrant classification.
In FY 2012, the most recent year that data has been released, a total of 3,394 persons obtained lawful permanent resident status in the EB-1 outstanding professor and researcher category, 16 of whom were new arrivals admitted to the United States as EB-1 immigrants whereas the remaining 3,378 individuals adjusted their status in the United States.
For the CW nonimmigrant classification, facilitating the retention of workers is not the objective, since Congress specifically directed a reduction in the number of aliens extended CW-1 nonimmigrant status during the transition period.
Instead, the express congressional intent of the CNRA provisions is to minimize the potential adverse economic and fiscal effects of the federalization of immigration in the CNMI. See 48 U.S.C. 1806(d)(2). While DHS believes that it issued implementing regulations consistent with congressional intent, see 76 FR 55502, DHS has identified improvements that can be made to the regulations to further minimize the effects of federalization and, therefore, better facilitate eligibility for continuing employment of CW-1 nonimmigrant workers during the transition period.
IV. Proposed Rule Back to Top
Attracting and retaining high-skilled workers is critical to sustaining our nation's global competitiveness. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, doing so will lead to greater economic growth because it will add more high-demand workers to the labor force, increase capital investment and overall productivity, and lead to greater numbers of entrepreneurs starting companies in the United States.
These individuals add to real GDP growth by boosting investment and raising productivity.
Once these skilled workers are here, it is important to provide employers with continued access to their current foreign workers if and when they decide to extend the stay of such workers. The regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20) provide aliens in specific nonimmigrant classifications with authorization to continue employment with the same employer for a 240-day period beyond the period specified on the Arrival-Departure Record, Form I-94, as long as a timely application for an extension of stay is filed on an alien's behalf. This provision applies only to the classifications specified in the regulation—not to all nonimmigrants.
The E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrant classifications did not exist when the provision authorizing an extension of employment authorization while an extension of stay request is pending was promulgated.
As a result, although principal E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants may remain in the United States without accruing unlawful presence until USCIS renders a decision on a timely filed petition for an extension of stay, they may not continue to work for the petitioning U.S. employer while the petition is pending once their authorized stay has expired. See INA 212(a)(9)(B)(iv), 8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(9)(B)(iv); see also Memo from Donald Neufeld, Acting Assoc. Dir., Consolidation of Guidance Concerning Unlawful Presence for Purposes of Sections 212(a)(9)(B)(i) and 212 (a)(9)(C)(i)(I) of the Act 35 (May 6, 2009). To avoid gaps in employment authorization, U.S. employers of principal E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants must file a petition to extend the nonimmigrant status of their E-3 and H-1B1 workers well before their period of authorized stay in the United States expires (the expiration date is indicated on the Arrival-Departure Record, Form I-94).
As of March 2014, processing times at the USCIS Vermont Service Center for Petitions for Nonimmigrant Workers, Form I-129, filed for E-3 and H-1B1 extensions average 2 months.
Alternatively, rather than apply for an extension of stay with USCIS, principal E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants may choose to leave the United States, apply for a new visa at a U.S. consulate, and seek readmission to the United States in E-3 or H-1B1 status once the visa is issued. This process can involve substantial expense and may result in unanticipated delays related to issuance of a new visa or readmission to the United States. In either case, both employers and employees could face a gap in employment. The potential gap in the work authorization period can be disruptive for aliens and may be a determining factor in whether or not they decide to come to the United States on these visas.
The change of employer provisions at 8 CFR 214.2(w)(7) were included in the 2011 CW classification final rule to provide a mechanism for employees to freely transfer between employers as mandated by the CNRA. See 48 U.S.C. 1806(d)(4). However, DHS did not include provisions to address employees who decide to extend their stay with the same employer. Such employees may experience gaps in employment authorization after their CW-1 nonimmigrant status expires while awaiting a decision on their request for an extension of stay with the same employer. While the 2011 CW classification final rule was silent regarding employment authorization in this situation, long-standing regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20) covering other nonimmigrant classifications provide for continued employment authorization for up to 240 days.
Therefore, in the CW nonimmigrant worker context, current regulations have placed new employers petitioning for CW-1 nonimmigrant workers in a better position than existing employers of CW-1 nonimmigrant workers. The new petitioner has the advantage of work authorization for the alien beneficiary based on filing the petition, rather than upon it being granted. This effectively allows the beneficiary to work for a new employer pending adjudication of the petition as long as it is filed before the date of expiration of the CW-1 nonimmigrant worker's authorized period of stay, but the beneficiary cannot continue to work for his or her current employer on the same terms. This disparity may serve as an incentive for CW-1 nonimmigrant workers to change employers. To remedy this effect and to ensure that current and new employers are on equal footing, DHS is proposing to amend the regulations to harmonize the CW nonimmigrant provisions regarding continued employment authorization during the pendency of requests for either change of employers or extension of stay. Specifically, DHS is proposing to amend 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20) to add the CW-1 nonimmigrant classification to the list of employment-authorized nonimmigrant classifications that receive an automatic extension of employment authorization of 240 days while the employer's timely filed extension of stay request remains pending.
While processing times vary, USCIS expects to adjudicate within the 240-day time period.
Professors and researchers play a vital role in the educational and economic future of the United States by enhancing our competitiveness within the global marketplace. The United States is in constant competition with other developed nations to attract and retain the greatest number of high-skilled researchers and professors to enhance economic and educational stability.
Providing for a seamless immigration system is important to attract and retain high-caliber foreign national professors and researchers.
In implementing the employment-based immigrant classifications in 1991, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) recognized the importance of establishing a system which provided access to these high-skilled and specially-trained personnel for American businesses. See Employment-Based Immigrants, 56 FR 60897 (Nov. 29, 1991). In the regulations implementing IMMACT90, INS provided for petitioning procedures and eligibility and admission requirements for these employment-based immigrants. Id. INS recognized the importance of providing petitioners with some flexibility in the documentation that could be submitted to establish a beneficiary's eligibility. Id. The final rule retained or added the comparable evidence provision for certain employment-based immigrant categories, including EB-1 aliens of extraordinary ability under section 203(b)(1)(A) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(1)(A), and the employment-based second preference (EB-2) aliens of exceptional ability under section 203(b)(2) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(2). INS retained or added the comparable evidence provision in response to commenters' concerns that the proposed evidentiary criteria could exclude some aliens from qualifying for either the EB-1 aliens of extraordinary ability or the EB-2 aliens of exceptional ability classification. See 56 FR at 60900. The EB-1 classification consists of three types of skilled workers (persons of extraordinary ability, outstanding professors and researchers, and executives and managers of multinational employers) but INS only extended the comparable evidence provision to one of those categories—persons of extraordinary ability. However, INS did not extend the comparable evidence provision to EB-1 outstanding professors and researchers because the public did not suggest a similar change to this EB-1 provision. See 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3); 56 FR at 60899 and 60906. In the rule, INS limited the initial evidence for demonstrating that the alien is recognized internationally as an outstanding professor or researcher in their academic field, to six criteria. See 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(i).
Stakeholders in the educational and research arena have recently expressed concern that the current regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3) do not allow petitioners to submit comparable evidence that the beneficiary is recognized internationally as an outstanding professor or researcher, as allowed for related classifications. These stakeholders believe that the current list at 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3) is dated and may no longer be reasonably inclusive.
They have opined that changing the regulations to permit petitioners to submit comparable evidence would provide petitioners with the opportunity to fully document the alien's achievements, as they relate to the classification, without the constraints of a limited list of acceptable initial evidence.
Following review of the applicable regulatory provisions, DHS agrees that amending 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3) to include a comparable evidence option is appropriate in order to attract eligible professors and researchers to emigrate to the United States. In this rule, DHS proposes to modify the regulatory limitation on initial evidence for outstanding professors and researchers to allow a petitioner to submit “comparable evidence” in lieu of or in addition to the current list at 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3) that demonstrates that the beneficiary is internationally recognized as outstanding, if the evidence listed in the current regulation does not readily apply. See proposed 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(ii) (re-designating current 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(ii) and (iii) as 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(iii) and (iv), respectively). The new regulatory criterion for initial evidence would be similar to those found under the aliens of extraordinary ability and the aliens of exceptional ability classifications.
See 8 CFR 204.5(h)(4) and (k)(3)(iii). This change will allow the petitioner to submit additional evidence to establish eligibility for the classification; it will not change the standard for meeting the eligibility requirements.
The costs and benefits of the proposed rule are summarized in Table 2. Table 2—Summary of Costs and Benefits Back to Top
E-3, H-1B1, and CW-1Status Holders
Automatic continued employment authorization of up to 240 days for an H-1B1, E-3, or CW-1 nonimmigrant worker while an extension of stay petition is pending
Avoided cost of lost productivity for U.S. employers of E-3, H-1B1, and CW-1 workers. Not quantified. Would provide equity for E-3 and H-1B1 status holders relative to other employment-based nonimmigrants listed in 8 CFR 274a.12.(b)(20) and provides equity for CW-1 nonimmigrant workers whose extension is filed by the same employer, similar to other CW-1 nonimmigrant workers. Qualitative benefit.
EB-1Outstanding Professor and Researcher Classification
May facilitate recruitment of EB-1 outstanding professors and researchers for U.S. employers. Not quantified. Would provide equity for EB-1 status holders relative to other employment-based immigrants listed in 8 CFR 204.5. Qualitative benefit.
Nonimmigrant (temporary workers)
2 years, indefinite extensions
Nationals of Chile or Singapore
1 year, indefinite extensions
1,400 for Chilean nationals; 5,400 for Singaporean nationals.
Limited to workers in the CNMI during the transition to U.S. Federal immigration regulations
1 year, extensions available through December 31, 2014 unless extended by DOL
Maximum of 14,000 in FY 2014.
EB-1 outstanding professor and researcher
Outstanding professors and researchers (any nationality)
Immigrant (permanent workers)
Apportioned from the approximate 40,000 available annually to first preference employment-based immigrant visas.
This provision of the proposed rule would not create additional costs for any petitioning employer or for the E-3 or H-1B1 nonimmigrant worker. The benefits of the proposed rule would be to provide equity for E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants relative to other employment-based nonimmigrants listed in 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20). Additionally, this provision may allow employers of E-3 or H-1B1 nonimmigrant workers to avoid the cost of lost productivity resulting from interruptions of work while an extension of stay petition is pending.
Table 4—Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, Form I-129 Filed for an Extension of Status for E-3 and H-1B1 Nonimmigrants Back to Top
USCIS does not have an estimate of either the number of cases where E-3 and H-1B1 nonimmigrants have lost work authorization because their petition for an extension of stay was not adjudicated before the expiration of their authorized period of stay or the duration of the lost work authorization.
Because of this data limitation, we are unable to quantify the total aggregate estimated benefits of this provision of the rule. To the extent that this rule would allow U.S. employers to avoid interruptions in productivity that could result if the extension of stay is not adjudicated prior to the expiration date noted on the nonimmigrant worker's Form I-94, the rule would result in a benefit for U.S. employers.
The CW-1 nonimmigrant visa classification is temporary. DHS has established numerical limitations on the number of CW-1 nonimmigrant visas that may be granted, as shown in Table 5. The numerical limitations apply to both initial petitions and extension of stay requests, including change of employer petitions, in a given FY. DHS has not yet determined the reduction in the numerical limitation for the remainder of the transition period from October 1, 2013 (beginning of FY 2014) to December 31, 2014 (the end of the transition period, unless the transition period is extended by the Secretary of Labor).
Table 5—Numerical Limitations of CW-1 Visas Back to Top
Period from October 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014
DHS set the numerical limit of CW-1 temporary visas at 15,000 for FY 2013 and petitioning employers filed initial petitions for 696 beneficiaries; extension of stay requests from the same employer for 6,079 beneficiaries; and extension of stay requests from new employers for an additional 1,358 beneficiaries.
The population affected by this provision of the proposed rule would be those CW-1 nonimmigrant workers whose subsequent extensions of stay requests were filed by the same employer. Accordingly, if this proposal were in place in FY 2013, all of the 6,079 CW-1 nonimmigrant workers with extension of stay requests with the same employer would receive the continued 240-day employment bridge, generally putting these workers on par with CW-1 nonimmigrant workers with extension of stay request for new employers.
While USCIS does not have data to permit a quantitative estimation of the benefits
of this provision, the provision is offered in response to a request from stakeholder organizations to provide for continuing work authorization pending adjudication of extension of stay requests filed on behalf of original CW-1 nonimmigrant workers.
In this rule, DHS is proposing to allow the substitution of comparable evidence (examples might include important patents and prestigious, peer-reviewed funding or grants) for that listed in 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(i)(A)-(F) to establish that the EB-1 professor or researcher is recognized internationally as outstanding in his or her academic field. See proposed 8 CFR 204.5(i)(3)(ii). The other requirements remain unchanged. This change is being proposed in response to stakeholder concerns that the current evidentiary list is dated and may not allow the beneficiary to present the full documentation of their talents.
Table 6—Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (I-140) With Outstanding Professor or Researcher Preference Receipts and Completions, FY 2003-2013 Back to Top
Receipts32
10-Yr Avg: 91.88
DHS welcomespublic comments from impacted stakeholders, such as employers or prospective employers of an EB-1 outstanding professor or researcher, providing information or data that would enable DHS to calculate the resulting benefits of the proposed provision.
Accordingly, DHS is requesting comments on revisions for 60-days until [Insert date 60 days from date of publication in the Federal Register]. Comments on this information collection should address one or more of the following four points:
PART 204—IMMIGRANT VISA PETITIONS Back to Top
2.Section 204.5 is amended by: a. Redesignating paragraphs (i)(3)(ii) and (i)(3)(iii) as paragraphs (i)(3)(iii) and paragraph (i)(3)(iv), respectively; and
3.The authority citation for part 214 is revised to read as follows: Authority:
8 U.S.C. 1101, 1102, 1103, 1182, 1184, 1186a, 1187, 1221, 1281, 1282, 1301-1305 and 1372; sec. 643, Pub. L. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009-708; Pub. L. 106-386, 114 Stat. 1477-1480; section 141 of the Compacts of Free Association with the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and with the Government of Palau, 48 U.S.C. 1901 note, and 1931 note, respectively; Title VII of Pub. L. 110-229; 8 CFR part 2.
4.Section 214.1 is amended in paragraph (c)(1) by: a. Revising the paragraph heading; and
(1) Extension of stay for certain employment-based nonimmigrant workers. A petitioner seeking the services of an E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, H-2A, H-2B, H-3, L-1, O-1, O-2, P-1, P-2, P-3, Q-1, R-1, or TN nonimmigrant beyond the period previously granted, must apply for an extension of stay on the form designated by USCIS, with the fee prescribed in 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1), with the initial evidence specified in § 214.2, and in accordance with the form instructions. * * *
5.The authority citation for part 248 continues to read as follows: Authority:
6.Section 248.3 is amended by revising the section heading and paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 248.3 Petition and application.
7.The authority citation for part 274a continues to read as follows: Authority:
8.Section 274a.12 is amended by: a. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (b)(9);
(b) * * * (9) A temporary worker or trainee (H-1, H-2A, H-2B, or H-3), pursuant to § 214.2(h) of this chapter, or a nonimmigrant specialty occupation worker pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b1) of the Act. * * *
(20) A nonimmigrant alien within the class of aliens described in paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(8), (b)(9), (b)(10), (b)(11), (b)(12), (b)(13), (b)(14), (b)(16), (b)(19), (b)(23) and (b)(25) of this section whose status has expired but who is the beneficiary of a timely application for an extension of such stay pursuant to §§ 214.2 or 214.6 of this chapter. * * *
1. See Statement by President upon Signing of the Immigration Act of 1990, 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N 6801-1 (Nov. 29, 1990), available at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=19117#ixzz1KvDlYZql. See also H.R. Rep. No. 101-723(I), at 6721 (1990) (“[I]mmigration can and should be incorporated into an overall strategy that promotes the creation of the type of workforce needed in an increasingly competitive global economy without adversely impacting on the wages and working conditions of American workers.”).
2. See White House, Building a 21st Century Immigration System May 2011, at 9, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/immigration_blueprint.pdf.
4. See Demetrios G. Papademetriou and Madeleine Sumption, Attracting and Selecting from the Global Talent Pool, Policy Challenges, Migration Policy Inst., Sept. 2013, at 4, available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/attracting-and-selecting-global-talent-pool-%E2%80%94-policy-challenges.
5. See Madeline Zavodny, Immigration and American Jobs, Am. Enter. Inst. & the Partnership for a New Am. Econ., Dec. 2011, at 5, available at http://www.aei.org/files/2011/12/14/-immigration-and-american-jobs_144002688962.pdf.
10. See generally Jennifer Hunt & Marjolaine Gauthier-Loiselle, How Much Does Immigration Boost Innovation?, Nat'l Bureau of Econ. Research, Sept. 2008, available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w14312.
11. See Vivek Wadhwa et al., Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain—America's New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part III, Ctr. for Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness, Aug. 2007, at 2, available at http://www.cggc.duke.edu/documents/IntellectualProperty_theImmigrationBacklog_andaReverseBrainDrain_003.pdf; Vivek Wadhwa etal., America's New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Duke School of Engineering and the Univ. of Cal. Berkeley School of Info., Jan. 4, 2007, at 11, available at http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/&sim;anno/Papers/Americas_new_immigrant_entrepreneurs_I.pdf; Julia Preston, Work Force Fueled by Highly Skilled Immigrants, N.Y. Times, Apr. 15, 2010, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/us/16skilled.html?_r=1.
12. See Robert Fairlie, Kauffman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity: 1996-2012, The Ewing Marion Kauffman Found., Apr. 2013, at 10, available at http://www.kauffman.org/what-we-do/research/2013/04/kauffman-index-of-entrepreneurial-activity-19962012; Partnership for a New Am. Econ., 2011, The “New American” Fortune 500, June 2011, at 2 available at http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2011/partnership_for_a_new_american_economy_fortune_500.pdf.
15. For visas issued: See DOS, Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Report, Table XVI(B), Nonimmigrant Visas Issued by Classification (Including Crewlist Visas and Border Crossing Cards) Fiscal Years 2009-2013, available at http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/AnnualReports/FY2013AnnualReport/FY13AnnualReport-TableXVIB.pdf. Source for USCIS processing volumes: USCIS Office of Performance and Quality, April 2014.
16. See DHS, Office of Immigration Statistics, 2012 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics Table 7, available at https://www.dhs.gov/yearbook-immigration-statistics-2012-legal-permanent-residents.pdf.
18. See Executive Office of the President, White House Report: The Economic Benefits of Fixing Our Broken Immigration System (July 10, 2013), at 4, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/report.pdf; Congressional Budget Office, The Economic Impact of S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (June 18, 2013), at 5, available at: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44346.
19. See Economic Report of the President (Mar. 10, 2014), at 88, available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/full_2014_economic_report_of_the_president.pdf.
22. See USCIS Processing Time Information, available at https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processTimesDisplayInit.do.
24. See Jonathan Rothwell et al. Patenting Prosperity: Invention and Economic Performance in the United States and its Metropolitan Areas. Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings, Feb. 2013, at 33, available at http://www.brookings.edu/&sim;/media/research/files/reports/2013/02/patenting%20prosperity%20rothwell/patenting%20prosperity%20rothwell.pdf.
25. See Letter from Marlene M. Johnson, Executive Director and CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, to Ivan K. Fong, General Counsel, DHS (April 13, 2011), available at http://www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/DHSregreviewcommentApr122011%20public.pdf.
31. See Letter from Marlene M. Johnson, Executive Director and CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, to Ivan K. Fong, General Counsel, DHS (April 13, 2011), available at http://www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/DHSregreviewcommentApr122011%20public.pdf.