President Obama has always made it known that he favors the enactment of some form of comprehensive immigration reform to allow for a “path to citizenship” for at least some of the approximately 12 million living in the U.S. without legal immigration status. During his term, it’s been a Republican Congress that’s been the main obstacle to getting any type of immigration reform initiative passed, whether it be the DREAM Act, or more comprehensive reform proposals. If you are wondering how the Republican candidates for President would approach the issue – below are direct quotes attributed to each of them, along with my own peanut gallery assessment:

Mitt Romney
“My view is, people who have come here illegally, we welcome you to apply but you must get at the back of the line, because there are millions of people who are in line right now that want to come here legally. I want those to come here legally. Those that are here illegally have to get in line with everybody else.” [Republican Debate, December 15, 2011]

RH – What line are you talking about Mr. Romney? The vast majority of undocumented individuals currently have no avenue toward legal status in the first place, and thus have no line to get into! This sounds good, but has no basis in reality. Maybe, like most politicians, he is just saying what he thinks the public wants to hear just to get elected, and once elected will do whatever suits his political agenda and survival. After Iowa, it looks like BS and nice sound bytes take you places though. Slick guys finish first?

“If I were elected and Congress were to pass the DREAM Act, would I veto it? The answer is yes.” [Washington Post, December 31, 2011]

RH – Same assessment as above. Sounds tough, and that’s what Romney thinks he has to sound like on immigration issues. Any reasoning he would cite, like in the first quote, would likely have no basis in reality. Nevertheless, slick guys appear to finish first.

“As President, [I] will also work to establish a policy that staples a green card to the diploma of every eligible student visa holder who graduates from one of our universities with an advanced degree in math, science, or engineering. As President, a first step that [I] will take is to raise the ceiling on the number of visas issued to holders of advanced degrees in Math, Science, and engineering who have job offers in those fields from US companies.” [Believe in America, September 6, 2011]

RH – Great idea, and sounds great.

Newt Gingrich
“I do not believe that the American people are going to tolerate going after somebody who has been here 25 years, who has a family, has children and grandchildren, belongs to a local church. What I proposed is very standard things. Control the border by January 1, 2014. Make English the official language of government. Go to a much better visa program that’s much…that makes it more desirable to visit the U.S. legally. Go to a better deportation program to move people out who shouldn’t be here.” [CBS News, December 18, 2011]

RH – Congratulations Newt. You may win the award for the most honest of this bunch. Your answer is practical and real. Be careful though, honesty may not get you too far in this race. The tougher, “law and order” talk seems to be what most of the other politicians think will win the day.

“Let me start and just say I think that we ought to have an H-1 visa that goes with every graduate degree in math, science and engineering so that people stay here.” [Republican Debate, November 22, 2011]

RH- Great idea! Sounds great.

Ron Paul
“Somebody who’s been here and it’s their country I think there should be a program to bring them into the fold…but I want it to be done systematically. I think we need more efficiency at our borders, and allow the people to come in, especially for people who can take care of themselves. But you ask about what we do with 11 million and I would say you have to work out a program of assimilation, but you can’t just say borders don’t count and people should be rewarded for breaking the law.” [Univision, October 2, 2011]

RH- same commentary as for Newt. Its honest, real talk. Not as sexy as law and order though.

“End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.” [Ron Paul 2012]

RH- whether you agree with his stance or not, he is honest and truly believes what he is saying, particularly regarding the attractiveness of US citizenship for all children born here. His blunt commentaries appear to be getting him places.

Voted “yes” on H.R. 3736, a bill that increased the number of highly skilled workers from 65,000 to 115,000 by the year 2000. [U.S. House of Representatives, September 24, 1998]

RH- consistent with earlier commentary, he is honest and realistic on this issue as well. What planet he lives on other issues, such as foreign policy, is a whole other question.

Rick Perry
“Amnesty is not on the table period. There will be no amnesty in the United States. We’re a country of law and the idea that we’re going to tell people that somehow or another that that’s all forgiven is not going to happen.” [ABC News, November 29, 2011]

“But I do think that there is a way. That after we secure that border that you can have a process in place for individual who are law- abiding citizens who have done only one thing, as Newt says, 25 years ago or whatever that period of time was, that you can put something in place that basically continues to keep those families together.” [Republican Debate, November 22, 2011]

RH – Amnesty…a word loaded with toxicity in the immigration debate. However Rick, there is already a de facto amnesty in place now, as the US government is looking the other way for the millions in the U.S. without status. True to his inner character, Rick comes off like he wants it both ways and talks from both sides. He is not brave like Newt and some of the others – who says it like it is. Too slick for his own good it seems.

“But if you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they’ve been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart. We need to be educating these children, because they will become a drag on our society. I think that’s what Texans wanted to do.” [Republican Debate, September 22, 2011]

RH – sounds a little braver, but he tends toward back pedaling whenever one of his controversial positions, such as this, are taken issue with. After Iowa, he seems to be on his way out anyway.

“We need highly technical, trained engineers and biomedical scientists. And a lot of times, you can’t get those people because they can’t get an H-1B visa, for instance.” [CNBC, September 29, 2011]

RH- True!

Rick Santorum
“The idea people who are here 20 or 25 years and came here illegally only committed one illegal act, well, you can’t be here and commit one illegal act because almost everything you’re doing while you’re here is doing things against the law…So we say, we should let that happen. We shouldn’t break up families. We should let them all come…This is false compassion.” [CNN, December 6, 2011]

RH – Honest and practical. No waffling, so it seems.

“First off, I’m actually for a system that allows for people to come here, if they come here on a student visa or they come here on a visa that — you know, where they’re getting some sort of higher education or they’re learning some great skills that are good and necessary for the country — my feeling is, you know, if they graduate and do well, we should — you know, we should have — actually give folks the opportunity to have a green card and to stay here and work.” [Fox News, November 29, 2011]

RH – Sounds good. Is good.

Michele Bachmann
“Well, I don’t agree that you would make 11 million workers legal, because that, in effect, is amnesty. And I also don’t agree that you would give the DREAM Act on a federal level.” [Republican Debate, November 22, 2011]

RH – She sure is honest, and she does not waffle. Is she crazy? Is there any practicality to her approach? Those are separate questions. My take on the practicality of deporting 11 million people – including placing them in removal proceedings and providing “due process”? – HA, Good luck federal government! Anyway, after IOWA, all of her talk, and my commentary, is perhaps moot.

“We think about the United States and what’s in the best interests of the United States. If we can utilize these workers, like Steve jobs wanted to, then we need to offer those visas. That will help the United States. But I don’t agree that we should make 11 million workers who are here illegally legal.” [Republican Debate, November 22, 2011]

RH – Practical and smart on the visas for professionals and skilled workers. Not so much on the other issue.

Jon Huntsman
“I think you have to take a very practical approach to having them [undocumented immigrants] wait in line. There have to be certain requirements. Language requirements. English as an official language for example. Paying back taxes, if that is applicable. There needs to be some steps along the way that would suggest that they have paid whatever price and penalty in order to come out of the shadows and to gain citizenship in this country. You have to create a system whereby you can move towards citizenship. You can’t wish people away. You can’t just use rhetoric that says we’ll ship people back.” [Think Progress, September 19, 2011]

RH – Honest and practical, except for that “line” comment.

“I believe immigration is a human as well as an economic issue, and that children of illegal immigrants shouldn’t be punished for the sins of their parents.” [CBS News, September 23, 2011]

RH – Honest and practical.

“We can’t process people. The H1B visa process is broken. We need to bring in brain power to this country to shore up our economic might. We need to bring in foreign capital to raise real estate prices as well.” [Republican Debate, September 12, 2011]

RH – Smart, practical and honest!

PUBLISHED January 4, 2012 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2012, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

The Administrative Appeals Office (“AAO”) is a specially designated unit within the Department of Homeland Security/Citizenship and Immigration Service charged with reviewing appeals of various immigration related petitions and applications.  Sometimes the choice of filing an appeal vs. simply re-filing the same application or petition with new evidence depends on a variety of factors, including the time it takes the Administrative Appeals Office to review the original decision and issue their own assessment.  Since processing times at the AAO can be quite prohibitive, re-filing a new petition or application with the office that has already issued a denial, but this time – with new evidence or authority, is indeed a bona fide option for applicants to consider after their initial filing is denied for a legal or factual deficiency.  It should also be noted though, that most every appeal to the AAO will first get reviewed by a supervisor from the unit that originally issued the denial, and if determined to have merit, the appeal will be treated as a request to reopen proceedings and effectuate a reversal, and without the filing ever being sent for AAO review, and subject to AAO processing delays.  The following are current AAO processing times:

**** “CURRENT” means “within the USCIS processing time goal of six months or less”

PUBLISHED December 14, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

As of November 22, 2011, the allotment of 85,000 H-1B work visas for Fiscal Year 2012 (which includes 20,000 visas reserved for those receiving advanced degrees in the US) has been exhausted.  Thus, any H-1B petitions received by CIS after November 22, 2012 will be rejected, with all paperwork and filing fees returned to the filing party.

In the meantime, petitions involving workers that are otherwise exempt from the cap will continue to be accepted, including petitions to:

• extend a current H-1B worker’s status in the U.S.;
• 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.

Also exempt from the H-1B cap are prospective workers for various types of not for profit petitioning entities, such as institutions affiliated institutions of higher learning.  In the meantime, most parties interested in pursuing a petition for a new H-1B worker are left having to gear up for April 1, 2012, the first day an H-1B petition can be filed for fiscal year 2013, which starts on October 1, 2012.

PUBLISHED November 23, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

For an H-1B work visa to be issued to a foreign worker, there must be the right type of job offer from the right type of company for the right type of worker.  The right type of job offer, in general, is one that involves duties that are of a “specialty occupation” or “professional” in nature where the worker typically is required to have attained the equivalent of at least a U.S. Bachelor’s Degree to competently carry out the proposed duties.  The right type of company is one that is of a size and nature that would ordinarily have use for the proposed worker.  And the right type of worker is one who possesses the equivalent of a US bachelor’s degree in the form of education and/or experience, and with such education or experience having a correlation to the job being offered.  At present, nearly two thirds of the 85,000 supply of H-1B visas for the upcoming fiscal year continue to be available.

Over the past several years, the immigration service centers reviewing H-1B petitions have been applying a fine tooth comb in the decision making process, and below are what appear to be, rightly or wrongly, the three most common reasons an H-1B petition is denied.

1)  The position offered is not truly a “specialty occupation”. Indeed, the petition and supporting job offer may say that a 4 year university degree is a prerequisite to perform the duties set forth, and the worker may have the degree deemed by the parties to be necessary and appropriate – BUT, the officer reviewing the petition at the Department of Homeland Security/Citizenship and Immigration Services “Service Center” alleges that the position is not suitable for H-1B classification because workers without Bachelor Degrees typically fill such a position.

The employer is first notified of such an assessment in a “Request for Evidence”, where boilerplate, laundry list type language points out all the reasons the position is inappropriate for H-1B classification.  The employer though is then given an opportunity to respond and provide evidence such as a) previous company advertisements for the position where a BS or BA was listed as a requirement, b) affidavits from professional associations or colleagues in the industry confirming that a BS or BA is a standard industry requirement for such a position or c) job advertisements posted by companies of similar size and for similar positions where a 4 year university degree is listed as a requirement.  Recently, our office has had H-1B petitions for Interior Designers, Rehabilitation Manager and Quality Assurance Coordinator (Healthcare) scrutinized in this regard.  In most cases our office’s responses to Requests for Evidence in such cases have led to DHS/CIS issuance of approval notices.

2)  The position is not truly the position the petitioner claims it to be.  What? Sounds silly, right?  However, if for example, we have a company that consists of 3 or 4 employees with annual revenues of say $150,000.00 or less, and are submitting an H-1B petition for an accountant (universally recognized as an “specialty occupation” and suitable for H-1B classification), the typical DHS/CIS response will be to the effect:  come on, why in the world would this company need to employ a staff accountant at a rate of $40,000.00 per year?  Despite employer claims that the company is growing and has a tremendous horizon for expansion, DHS/CIS will second guess the plan and usually deny the petition, alleging that the position is really that of a “bookkeeper”, if that, and a position that can be carried out by a worker with far less education that a Bachelor’s Degree.

3)  The petitioning employer will not be the true employer, but instead just a company to facilitate the worker’s employment at a third party location.  This type of allegation most often rears its ugly head in the context of H-1B petitions filed by IT consulting companies looking to assign a computer programmer, software engineer or systems analyst to a third party location, or a healthcare staffing company looking to assign a healthcare professional, such as a physical therapist or occupational therapist, to a third party site.  To respond to such an allegation, the employer will usually be requested to provide documentation that unequivocally confirms the job duties and that the worker will be under the control and supervision of the petitioning H-1B employer and not some manager from the third party client/location.

As is the case with most immigration related filings, careful planning and strategizing (including deciding when not file!) will maximize the chances for avoiding a denied H-1B petition.

PUBLISHED June 30, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

For most government agencies, including Department of Homeland Security’s Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), fiscal year 2012 starts on October 1, 2011.  Starting on that date, U.S. employers will be able to benefit from a new crop of foreign workers who are issued H-1B work visas.  As early as April 1, 2011, interested employers and foreign workers have had an opportunity to start the process of accessing the annual supply of 85,000 visas – with 65,000 visas in the general supply and 20,000 reserved for U.S. graduate school degree holders – with workers then becoming eligible to commence employment in the U.S. as of October 1, 2011.  As of this writing, more than 40,000 H-1B visas continue to be available from the general supply, and approximately 9,000 from the supply allotted for U.S. educated advanced degree holders.

Taking into account the trend from the previous fiscal year along with the plentiful supply of visas still available as of this writing, it may very well be the case that H-1B visas will continue to be available for the upcoming fiscal year throughout the spring or even summer 2012.

As a reminder, H-1B visa eligibility is generally premised upon a bona fide job offer in a “specialty occupation” (where the attainment of a university degree is usually required), and the prospective employee must possess a degree or experiential equivalent in the field at issue.  Also, positions with a government agency or not-for-profit organization affiliated with an institution of higher learning (e.g. university) are among the type of jobs that are not subject to the H-1B cap described above.  Further, the H-1B visa cap does not impact those who already have an H-1B visa and are otherwise eligible to extend their status or change H-1B employers.

PUBLISHED June 30, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

Pricey filing fees for certain companies seeking to employ H-1B and L-1 workers have gotten even pricier in the past month – specifically, where the petitioning company employs 50 or more workers, and more than 50 percent of the workforce is currently on an H-1B or
L-1 visa. This new rule will add $2,000.00 to the base H-1B visa petition fee, and $2,250.00 to L-1 visa petitions. Current H-1B filing fees for mid to larger companies submitting an initial petition are $2,320.00 (now $4,320.00), and for L-1 petitions, $820.00 (now $3,070.00). Clearly the U.S. government is set on penalizing midsize to larger companies that rely heavily on foreign professional, managerial, and executive workers.

PUBLISHED August 25, 2010 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2010, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

For most government agencies, including Department of Homeland Security’s Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), fiscal year 2011 starts on October 1, 2010. Starting on that date, U.S. employers will be able to benefit from a new crop of foreign workers who are issued H-1B work visas. As early as April 1, 2010, interested employers and foreign workers have had an opportunity to start the process of accessing the annual supply of 85,000 visas – with 65,000 visas in the general supply and 20,000 reserved for U.S. graduate school degree holders – with workers then becoming eligible to commence employment in the U.S. as of October 1, 2010. As of this writing, almost 40,000 H-1B visas continue to be available from the general supply, and approximately 9,000 from the supply allotted for U.S. educated advanced degree holders.

In years past, the allotment for both supplies of H-1B visas were exhausted within the same week they were first available, which is the April preceding the start of the fiscal year. This year, given the plentiful supply of visas still available as of this writing, it may very well be the case that H-1B visas will continue to be available throughout the fiscal year.

As a reminder, H-1B visa eligibility is generally premised upon a bona fide job offer in a “specialty occupation” (where the attainment of a university degree is usually required), and the prospective employee must possess a degree or experiential equivalent in the field at issue. Also, positions with a government agency or not-for-profit organization affiliated with an institution of higher learning (e.g. university) are among the type of jobs that are not subject to the H-1B cap described above. Further, the H-1B visa cap does not impact those who already have an H-1B visa and are otherwise eligible to extend their status or change H-1B employers.

PUBLISHED July 30, 2010 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2010, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

We are already talking fiscal year 2011, and for Department of Homeland Security/Citizenship and Immigration Services, it starts October 1, 2010. As early as April 1, 2010, interested employers and foreign workers can start the process of accessing the 85,000 visas that will be available, with 65,000 visas in the general supply and 20,000 reserved for U.S. graduate school degree holders – with workers then becoming eligible to commence employment in the U.S. as of October 1, 2010. As of this writing, those are the numbers for the annual allotment of new H-1B visas that employers and their (prospective) foreign national employees will be scrambling for come April, 2010. 65,000 is the general supply, and an additional 20,000 are for individuals who have been awarded graduate degrees in the U.S.

Unlike in years past, last year’s April 1 filing date came with far less hoopla as a result of a depressed economy and far fewer job opportunities being offered to foreign professionals. In fact, job opportunities in the H-1B context were so scarce last year that H-1B visas remained available all the way through the end of December, 2009. This scenario is in sharp contrast to the frenzy of previous years where the H-1B visa supply was exhausted within just days of April 1 – and more than 5 months before the fiscal year in question began. In those years, DHS/CIS, by the end of the first week of April would receive 3 petitions for every H-1B visa slot available. Oh my, how times – and our economy – have changed!

If accepted and approved, an H-1B petition allows the beneficiary worker to commence work in the U.S. come the following October. With October, 2010 less than 7 months away, it is not too early to start thinking about filing a petition.

As a reminder, H-1B visa eligibility is generally premised upon a bona fide job offer in a “specialty occupation” (where the attainment of a university degree is usually required), and the prospective employee must possess a degree or experiential equivalent in the field at issue. Also, positions with a government agency or not-for-profit organization affiliated with an institution of higher learning (e.g. university) are among the type of jobs that are not subject to the H-1B cap described above. Further, the H-1B visa cap does not impact those who already have an H-1B visa and are otherwise eligible to extend their status or change H-1B employers.

PUBLISHED March 8, 2010 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2010, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

The H-1B work visa is available to foreign workers who have earned the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor’s degree, and who are being petitioned to work in the U.S. in a “specialty occupation” – where the attainment of a U.S. bachelor’s degree is typically a minimum requirement for the position. A significant number of H-1B petitions filed every year involve employers assigning workers to off-site, client locations to perform professional/specialty services, most notably in the information technology and healthcare industries. However, according to a memo issued by Department of Homeland Security/Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) last month, it is this type of H-1B worker arrangement that has become of concern, particularly with regard to issues of pay, work conditions and management issues. As a result, H-1B petitions involving third party workplace assignments are becoming the subject of unprecedented scrutiny, with requests for a wide range of documentation confirming the nature of the work assignment becoming the new policy.

In essence, CIS wants to make sure that a true employer/employee relationship exists between the H-1B petitioning company and the subject worker and thus will be inclined to request documentation to confirm, among other details: a) the H-1B worker is working under the direction and control of the H-1B petitioning employer and not the management of the company the worker is assigned to, b) a contractual relationship between the H-1B employer and their client (off-site workplace) and that the contractual language indicates that the worker will be under the H-1B employer’s control and management – with the H-1B employer retaining the right to hire, train and/or fire the worker and c) an itinerary for off site assignments during the course of the requested H-1B period of employment, and that each workplace allows for the worker to be under the H-1B employer’s control.

 While some H-1B employers may be able to provide the type and volume of documents requested by CIS, others may not, particularly where the off-site assignment path may not be certain at the time the H-1B petition is filed. To the extent this type of H-1B employer/employee relationship is contemplated, the parties are advised to draft as much of the supporting documentation (contracts, itineraries, etc) with the above CIS concerns in mind and include these documents in their initial H-1B filing.

PUBLISHED February 8, 2010 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2010, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

For about the tenth time in the past decade, I am writing about a new legislative initiative presented to allow for the legalization of the vast majority of those present in the U.S. in violation of our immigration laws. This time, the initiative is called Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security and Prosperity Act of 2009 (“CIR ASAP”). The measure was introduced before the U.S. House of Representatives on December 15, 2009 by Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), a lawmaker who has shown himself to be a leader in the comprehensive immigration reform movement. Gutierrez, like many other politicians in Congress, along with our President, realizes that eventually our society has to make a choice about what we will do about our nation’s 15 million or so undocumented individuals. Absorb? Deport? Some stay, some go?

Whatever the solution, for sure, by doing nothing our country ignores the issue and pretty much establishes a de facto amnesty, where the status quo is maintained and the undocumented population continues to be allowed to live and work in the U.S., albeit in the shadows. Based on the underlying premise of most undocumented workers’ embarking for the U.S. in the first place (“better to be in the U.S. illegally and make a living and get ahead than be in my home country legally”), this population will not be packing their bags for a trip home anytime soon, no matter the level of immigration enforcement.

CIR ASAP includes a broad range of initiatives, including enhanced border security and immigration law enforcement, improved verification systems for employers and otherwise establishing some integrity in our broken immigration system. The truly potent, provocative goodies in the legislative proposal involve the legalization of the undocumented population.

The most notable provision allows for the out of status/no status foreign national to establish an interim legal status by, among other requirements,

a) documenting their unlawful status in the U.S as of December 15, 2009,
b) paying an application fee, along with a $500 fine, and
c) attesting to having made societal contributions through employment, education, military service, or social service volunteering.

The applicant would also need to demonstrate a relatively clean criminal record, where a felony or three (3) misdemeanors will prompt ineligibility.

Other highlights of the CIR ASAP:

• Allows for adjustment to permanent status after a six (6) year interim, conditional status. In conditional status, while awaiting permanent status, an applicant will have the right to work in the U.S. and travel internationally; individuals in removal proceedings will be among the pool of eligible applicants.
• DREAM ACT: similar to above provision, except that students brought to the U.S. before 16 years of age would have an accelerated path to permanent residence upon high school graduation, completion of two (2) years of college study or several other milestones,
• Expands opportunities for U.S. employers to hire and keep foreign workers by liberalizing rules for facilitating temporary and permanent (immigrant) visas for foreign workers and
• Provides greater discretionary authority for Immigration Judges presiding over a long time U.S. resident’s removal (deportation) hearing.

There are at least another 100 interesting provisions included in this legislative proposal. Most likely, though, if and when any of these measures get signed into law, the details and language will probably only faintly resemble this proposed language. To many in Congress, a measure like CIR ASAP is toxic territory, where any type of support for this cause will open up the floodgates for criticism and accusations of “rewarding the lawbreaker.”

Certainly, for any sort of immigration reform to pass, courage and brutal honesty will have to find a way into the discussion — particularly to get past the argument that, in the end, the lawbreaker may very well be rewarded. But, looking at the potential benefits such reform may yield for our society, including a substantial economic shot in the arm (think of all the billions of dollars the 15 million undocumented will start spending knowing that their stay here is secure), as well as the cost of doing nothing, comprehensive immigration reform, in some form or another, is inevitable. Here’s hoping that the introduction of CIR ASAP at least gets an honest and courageous conversation started.

PUBLISHED December 16, 2009 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2009, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois