US Immigration News

Answer

Generally, all documents submitted to the USCIS must be in English or accompanied by an English translation. Translated documents must be certified by the translator as complete and accurate, and the translator must certify competency to translate from the foreign language into English. (28.Oct.2025)

Sheela Murthy and other senior attorneys provide guidance that clarifies the law. For information on our FREE online services, click here. Access more FAQs here.

 

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post What is the process for submitting documents to the USCIS that are not in English? appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

An applicant for adjustment of status (form I-485) or naturalization (form N-400) may face denial on two broad legal grounds: mandatory and discretionary. Understanding when a denial is compelled by statute, as opposed to when it reflects a negative exercise of discretion, is essential for strategic planning and case presentation.

Mandatory vs. Discretionary Denials

A mandatory denial is one that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) must issue under statute or regulation if certain disqualifying facts are present. For example, for adjustment of status, an applicant may be barred based on a certain type of conviction for, or a commission of, a criminal offense. If the applicant fails to meet a mandatory eligibility requirement, the USCIS must deny rather than weigh factors.

By contrast, a discretionary denial arises when the officer can choose whether to deny the application even if the statutory eligibility requirements are satisfied. In a discretionary adjudication, the officer balances positive and negative factors to see what is communicated by the totality of these circumstances. The USCIS Policy Manual explains that, for discretionary benefits, the applicant must first clear the mandatory eligibility thresholds, and only then may discretion be considered.

In the adjustment of status context, the USCIS confirms that many adjustment cases are discretionary and that even if all eligibility criteria are met, the USCIS must decide whether the applicant “warrants a favorable exercise of discretion.”

Understanding Discretionary Denials

In immigration adjudications, discretion means that the USCIS may decline to approve a benefit even when the applicant meets all statutory and regulatory criteria. The decision hinges on whether the negative factors in the applicant’s history outweigh the positive ones.

Under the current policy regime, the USCIS has signaled stronger and more explicit consideration of negative discretionary factors and expanded grounds for what may be considered disqualifying conduct. For example, the USCIS has indicated that support for “anti-American” or antisemitic ideologies will be treated as overwhelmingly negative factors. Some other examples of negative factors include past immigration violations or unauthorized employment, misrepresentations or inconsistencies, failure to pay taxes or child support, arrests even if not culminating in conviction, or association with ideologies judged “anti-American” or extremist in nature.

Positive factors that may mitigate negatives include long-term U.S. residence, strong family ties, community involvement, consistent tax compliance, rehabilitation after past mistakes, and humanitarian or compelling circumstances such as medical needs or family hardship.

When Ordinary Conduct Becomes “Negative” in Immigration Cases

Many acts that resolve quietly for U.S. citizens or leave no long-term record may provoke scrutiny or negative inference in immigration adjudications. A dismissed or expunged arrest may be harmless for most people, but for an immigrant, it may still be flagged as conduct requiring explanation. Slightly different dates or addresses across forms may be viewed as misrepresentation rather than innocent error. Past lawful use of public benefits may be perceived as a negative factor in discretionary review. Even youthful or minor misconduct that resulted in no conviction may resurface decades later.

These actions often leave no lasting record, but under a discretionary lens, the USCIS may infer a negative pattern of behavior. The remedy is careful presentation of context and evidence of reform and new behavior patterns through affidavits explaining the circumstances, letters of community support, records showing no recurrence, and proof of positive contributions and lawful conduct.

Applicants should proactively review their history before filing to identify such risks and prepare explanatory evidence. In many cases, these potential negatives can be neutralized or contextualized so that they do not outweigh positive equities.

Documentary Requirements: Naturalization (N-400) vs. Adjustment (I-485)

The USCIS imposes different evidence obligations for naturalization and adjustment applicants, particularly regarding arrests and court dispositions. For naturalization, the USCIS Policy Manual  states that applicants must provide certified court dispositions for offenses committed during the statutory period, as well as in the following circumstances regardless of conviction: arrests for criminal acts during the statutory period, arrests on or after 29.Nov.1990, that may be aggravated felonies, arrests for murder, arrests for any offense that would render the applicant removable, arrests outside the statutory period that, when combined with others, would preclude good moral character, and arrests where the applicant is still on probation at the time of adjudication or may have been incarcerated for 180 days during the statutory period.

Because of these limits, most naturalization applicants will not need to submit court documents when filing. However, the USCIS still may issue a request for evidence for additional records, giving the applicant a chance to respond and provide context.

In contrast, adjustment applicants must submit original or certified copies of arrest records or court dispositions for any prior arrest, regardless of outcome. This requirement generally is nonwaivable and stricter than the naturalization standard.

Responding to Discretionary Concerns

When the USCIS indicates discretionary or negative concerns in a request for evidence or during an interview, applicants should emphasize rehabilitation and changed circumstances. Submitting strong positive equities such as community letters, volunteer records, employment documentation, tax returns, and family support can demonstrate reform and responsibility. A personal statement that provides context, without minimizing the incident, can humanize the applicant and show accountability. Applicants also should address the specific concerns raised, explaining each event clearly. Proactive preparation with an attorney can help identify issues early and shape the narrative in a favorable light. If the USCIS issues an unfavorable decision, a motion to reopen or motion to reconsider may be advisable, if it is available.

Conclusion

Denials of immigration benefits, such as I-485 and N-400 applications, rest on two distinct legal bases. Mandatory denials are compelled by statute or regulation, leaving no room for discretion. Discretionary denials hinge on balancing negative and positive factors and, in recent months, the USCIS has broadened the range of conduct that may be viewed negatively. Minor events such as dismissed arrests, inconsistent paperwork, or youthful mistakes that would have little impact for U.S. citizens may carry significant consequences for immigrants. To counter this, applicants should anticipate possible concerns, document positive contributions, and present evidence of reform and good moral character.

Attorneys at the Murthy Law Firm continue to monitor adjudication trends and assist clients in preparing the strongest possible cases for adjustment of status and naturalization.

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post Mandatory and Discretionary Bases for Denying Forms I-485 and N-400 appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) from implementing the $100,000 fee for H1B petitions imposed by presidential proclamation in September 2025. The complaint challenges both the legal authority for the fee and its practical impact on American businesses and the broader economy.

Background on the H1B Program

The H1B visa program has operated for over seventy years as a mechanism for U.S. employers to access specialized talent in fields such as engineering, science, medicine, and technology. Congress established the program with specific requirements designed to balance employer needs for skilled workers with protections for American workers, including prevailing wage requirements, annual numerical limitations, and maximum periods of stay.

Under the statutory framework and implementing regulations, standard H1B petition fees historically have totaled approximately $3,600 per case. These fees are structured to recover the costs of immigration services, fraud prevention, and program administration.

The Presidential Proclamation

The September 2025 presidential proclamation imposed a $100,000 fee on certain H1B petitions, representing a nearly thirtyfold increase over existing fee levels. According to statements from the White House Press Secretary and Secretary of Commerce, the fee appears to apply primarily to initial H1B petitions for individuals who have not previously held H1B status, though significant questions remain about the precise scope and application of the requirement.

For employers ranging from large corporations to small businesses and startups, the fee represents a substantial financial burden that could affect hiring decisions and workforce planning.

Legal Arguments in the Chamber’s Complaint

The Chamber of Commerce’s lawsuit centers on the argument that the presidential proclamation exceeds executive authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The complaint asserts that Congress has established specific procedures for setting immigration fees through statute and regulatory rulemaking, and that the $100,000 fee imposed by executive order circumvents these legislative frameworks.

The lawsuit contends that immigration fee levels fall within Congress’s constitutional authority and that any substantial changes to fee structures can only proceed through proper statutory or regulatory channels rather than unilateral executive action.

Economic Impact Concerns

Beyond the legal arguments, the complaint addresses the economic consequences of the fee requirement. The Chamber argues that the substantial cost increase will impede businesses’ ability to access specialized talent, potentially affecting job creation, innovation, and American competitiveness in the global economy. The fee may effectively close pathways for many employers, particularly smaller companies and startups that lack the resources to absorb such significant additional costs for each foreign national hire.

Current Status and Next Steps

The lawsuit joins other pending legal challenges to the presidential proclamation. The court will need to determine whether the executive branch possesses authority to impose fees of this magnitude outside the statutory framework Congress has established for immigration benefit costs. As litigation proceeds, employers and immigration practitioners await clarity on both the legal validity of the fee and any potential preliminary relief that might suspend its implementation pending final judicial resolution.

Conclusion

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s lawsuit raises fundamental questions about the separation of powers and the proper procedures for establishing immigration benefit fees. The outcome of this litigation could have far-reaching implications for the H1B program and executive authority over immigration policy. The Murthy Law Firm will continue to monitor developments in this case and provide updates as the litigation progresses.

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post U.S. Chamber of Commerce Files Lawsuit Challenging $100,000 H1B Fee appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

Answer

No, the $100,000 fee would not apply to an F-1 student, if the H1B is approved as a change of status. (23.Oct.2025)

Sheela Murthy and other senior attorneys provide guidance that clarifies the law. For information on our FREE online services, click here. Access more FAQs here.

 

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post I am still confused about the $100,000 fee. If am in the U.S. in F-1 status and am hoping to change status to H1B in next year’s lottery. Does the fee apply in this situation? appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

Answer

Ordinarily, yes, the priority date from any I-140 petition filed for an EB1, EB2, or EB3 case can be applied for any other EB1, EB2, or EB3 case filed for the same beneficiary. (23.Oct.2025)

Sheela Murthy and other senior attorneys provide guidance that clarifies the law. For information on our FREE online services, click here. Access more FAQs here.

 

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post A few years ago, my EB2 I-140 was approved based on my position as a Software Engineer. Last year, I went to India to work for our parent company as a manager for one year, and my employer is now filing an EB1(c) I-140 for me. Can I use the priority date from my Software Engineer position and apply it to my managerial position? appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

Answer

We have heard this claim many times, but we have not seen any evidence to support the contention that an H1B petition (or any other type of petition) has a greater risk of denial because premium processing was requested. (23.Oct.2025)

Sheela Murthy and other senior attorneys provide guidance that clarifies the law. For information on our FREE online services, click here. Access more FAQs here.

 

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post Is it true that using premium processing increases the chances an H1B petition will be denied? appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

A soon-to-be-published proposed rule would cut EB5 filing fees by 14% to 61%, add a $95 tech fee, clarify I-829 filings for derivatives, and set processing time goals under the EB5 Reform & Integrity Act. 60-day comment period is expected. Read more.

The post USCIS Proposes Reduced EB5 Fees appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will publish a proposed rule on October 23, 2025, that would significantly reduce fees for most EB5 immigrant investor program applications and petitions. The proposed fee schedule represents decreases ranging from 14 percent to 61 percent for existing EB5 forms, while maintaining a commitment by the USCIS to improve processing times. The proposed rule also clarifies procedures for derivative beneficiaries filing form I-829 petitions.

Substantial Fee Reductions Across Most Categories

Under the proposed rule, fees for initial form I-526 (Immigrant Petition by Standalone Investor) and form I-526E (Immigrant Petition by Regional Center Investor) would decrease from the current $11,160 to $9,625. Note that this fee includes a new EB5 technology fee of $95, but the total decrease still represents a 14 percent reduction. The fee for form I-829 (Petition by Investor to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status) would drop from $9,525 to $7,860, a 17 percent decrease.

Regional center-related fees would see even more dramatic reductions. The fee for initial form I-956 (Application for Regional Center Designation) would decrease from $47,695 to $28,895, a 39 percent reduction. Amendment filings on form I-956 would drop to $18,480, representing a 61 percent reduction from the current fee. Form I-956F (Application for Approval of an Investment in a Commercial Enterprise) would decrease to $29,935, a 37 percent reduction.

The proposed fee for form I-956G (Regional Center Annual Statement) would be reduced from $4,470 to $2,740, a 39 percent decrease.

New Fees for Previously No-Cost Filings

The proposed rule would establish fees for several EB5 filings that currently have no associated cost. Form I-956H (Bona Fides of Persons Involved with Regional Center Program) would carry a proposed fee of $55. Form I-956K (Registration for Direct and Third-Party Promoters) would have a proposed fee of $2,740.

Additionally, the USCIS proposes creating a new Form I-527 (Amendment to Legacy Form I-526) with a proposed fee of $8,000. This form would be used by investors who filed Form I-526 petitions before the EB5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 was enacted and who choose to amend their petitions to retain eligibility under certain provisions following regional center termination or debarment of their new commercial enterprise or job-creating entity.

Processing Time Goals

The EB5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 established specific processing time goals that the USCIS aims to achieve. The adjudication targets include the following:

• 120 days for form I-526E petitions based on an investment in a targeted employment area (TEA)
• 240 days for form I-526E petitions based on an investment in an area that dose not qualify as a TEA.
• 240 days for form I-829 petitions
• 180 days for form I-956 applications
• 180 days for form I-956F applications (90 days if the new commercial enterprise is located in a Targeted Employment Area)

While the statute establishes these processing time goals, the USCIS emphasizes that they are targets rather than hard deadlines, and the agency will strive to process applications as quickly and efficiently as possible while maintaining program integrity.

Clarification on Form I-829 Filings by Derivatives

The proposed rule clarifies when derivative beneficiaries (spouses and children of immigrant investors) should file separate form I-829 petitions. Under the proposal, when the principal investor is deceased, all derivatives may be included on a single Form I-829 petition. In all other cases where derivatives are not included on the investor’s Form I-829 petition, each derivative must file a separate petition. The deadline for derivatives filing separately would be the same as would have applied to the principal investor.

Technology Fee Component

As previously noted, the proposed fees for initial Forms I-526 and I-526E include a $95 technology fee. The USCIS would use this revenue to modernize the Immigrant Investor Program Office, which processes all EB5 petitions, from a paper-based filing system to an electronic process and make other technological improvements.

Public Comment Period

The proposed rule is subject to a 60-day public comment period. Stakeholders are encouraged to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at regulations.gov. After reviewing public comments, the USCIS will publish a final rule that will take effect 60 days after publication, as required by the EB5 Reform and Integrity Act.

Conclusion

The lower fees, combined with the processing time goals established by Congress, represent a positive change for EB5 investors. Stakeholders should review the complete proposed rule and supporting documentation in the Federal Register to understand the full scope of the changes and consider submitting comments during the public comment period.

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post USCIS Proposes Rule to Reduce EB5 Filing Fees appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

Today, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services posted guidance on its website clarifying who is subject to the $100,000 fee imposed by Trump’s September 19, 2025 executive proclamation. Among other points of clarification, the updated guidance indicates that virtually all H1B workers will be subject to the fee, if the petition is filed for consular notification.

Petitions Subject to the Fee

The $100,000 payment applies to new H1B petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025, at 12:01 a.m. EDT, on behalf of beneficiaries who are outside the United States and do not have a valid H1B visa. The fee also applies to petitions filed on or after that date that request consular notification, port of entry notification, or pre-flight inspection for an alien in the United States.

Additionally, if a petition filed on or after September 21, 2025, requests a change of status, amendment, or extension of stay, and the USCIS determines the beneficiary is ineligible for that benefit, the fee will apply. This includes situations where the beneficiary is not in valid nonimmigrant status or departs the United States prior to adjudication of a change of status request.

Petitions and Visa Holders Not Subject to the Fee

The proclamation does not apply to any previously issued and currently valid H1B visas, or any petitions submitted prior to September 21, 2025, at 12:01 a.m. EDT. Holders of current H1B visas may continue to travel in and out of the United States without triggering the fee requirement.

Importantly, the fee does not apply to petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025, that request an amendment, change of status, or extension of stay for an alien inside the United States where USCIS grants such amendment, change, or extension. Beneficiaries of these approved petitions will not be subject to the payment even if they later depart the United States and apply for a visa or seek to reenter on a current H1B visa.

Payment Process and Timing

Petitioners must make the $100,000 payment through pay.gov prior to filing the H1B petition with the USCIS. Proof of scheduled payment from pay.gov or evidence of an exception granted by the Secretary of Homeland Security must be submitted at the time of filing. Petitions subject to the fee that are filed without proper payment documentation will be denied.

Rare Exceptions for U.S. National Interest

The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant exceptions in “extraordinarily rare circumstances” where the foreign national’s presence as an H1B worker is in the national interest, no American worker is available to fill the role, the alien does not pose a security threat, and requiring the payment would significantly undermine U.S. interests.

Conclusion

The updated guidance from the USCIS makes it clear that this $100,000 fee will be a tremendous burden to H1B employers and workers. We will now have to wait on the result of the various court cases challenging the proclamation to see if the courts allow it to remain in effect.

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

 

The post USCIS Clarifies Who Will Be Subject to $100,000 H1B Fee appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently implemented a revision to the filing process for certain H2A temporary agricultural worker petitions. Here are the key points you need to know:

• Petitioners seeking unnamed H2A beneficiaries can electronically file a petition for a nonimmigrant worker: H2A classification (form I-129H2A) after the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has issued a notice of acceptance, and before the DOL has approved the temporary labor certification.
• This will allow the USCIS to immediately begin processing the H2A petition. However, approvals will not be issued until the DOL has certified the temporary labor application.
• At this time, the process does not allow legal representatives to file on behalf of employers. The USCIS expects to expand the process to allow legal representation in the near future.
• Those with named beneficiaries must continue to utilize the traditional paper filing process and must wait for the temporary labor application to be certified prior to filing the petition.

Your Takeaway

This new streamlined process is beneficial for employers that utilize the H2A program, especially for those with a history of augmenting their labor needs. However, the current criteria of the streamlined process significantly limit its overall value to agricultural employers. Nonetheless, it is a step in the right direction, and we are hopeful it will be expanded to those with legal representation and to employers with named beneficiaries.

 

Copyright © 2025, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

The post Murthy Snapshot: Streamlined Filing Process for H2A Temporary Agricultural Workers appeared first on Murthy Law Firm | U.S Immigration Law.