Shusterman's Immigration Update
April 2003

Volume Eight, Number Four

Los Angeles Top Immigration Lawyer SHUSTERMAN’S IMMIGRATION UPDATE is the most popular e-mail newsletter regarding U.S. immigration laws and procedures with over 40,000 subscribers located in more than 120 countries.

Published by the Law Offices of Carl Shusterman, 600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1550, Los Angeles, California, 90017. Phone: (213)623-4592, Fax: (213) 623-3720

Home Page: http://www.shusterman.com

To subscribe to SHUSTERMAN’S IMMIGRATION UPDATE, fill out the brief online form at

http://www.shusterman.com/subscribe.html#subscribe

or send an e-mail message to

majordomo@ls.shusterman.com

with the words “subscribe visalaw” in the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, fill in your e-mail address at

http://www.shusterman.com/subscribe.html#unsubscribe

or send an e-mail message to

majordomo@ls.shusterman.com

with the words “unsubscribe visalaw” in the body of the message.

For back issues of SHUSTERMAN’S IMMIGRATION UPDATE, see

http://www.shusterman.com/newsletterbackissuesusimmigration.html

Disclaimer: This newsletter is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship. All information contained in this newsletter is generalized. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.

This month’s issue contains the following items:

NEWS FLASHES:

Asylum- The State Department has released the Country Rights Reports on Human Rights Practices for the year 2002. Why spend over $60 to buy the report when you get the report online for free? See
http://shusterman.com/asylumusimmigration.html#2

and click on “2002 State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (March 2003)”. We also have links to previous reports starting from 1998.

Barahona Settlement- The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) announced that a notice was published in the Federal Register on March 20 regarding a settlement agreement in the Barahona-Gomez v. Ashcroft class action lawsuit. This agreement, effective January 17, 2003, may benefit eligible individuals who applied for suspension of deportation and had their immigration hearings within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (which encompasses Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) and whose application could have been adjudicated by the Immigration Courts or the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) between February 13, 1997, and April 1, 1997. The complete text of the EOIR posting is available at
http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/press/03/Barahona.htm
CSC Processing Guidelines- The California Service Center of the BCIS (formerly the INS) has issued new processing guidelines for applications and petitions submitted to the CSC. The new guidelines are required reading for anyone who plans to submit an immigration application or petition to the CSC (i.e., generally residents of California, Arizona, Hawaii, Nevada or Guam). The new guidelines may be accessed online at
http://shusterman.com/pdf/csc2003.pdf
H-1B Statistics- As a preclude to the biennial Congressional battle regarding the H-1B cap which is scheduled to fall from 195,000 to 65,000 starting on September 30, 2003, the latest BCIS (INS) numbers on H-1B usage for the fiscal year which ended on September 30, 2002 are very interesting.The agency received over 215,000 H-1B petitions in FY2002. At least half of these petitions were for extensions of stay. The agency approved only 79,100 H-1B petitions subject to the cap for first time employment. It seems like the H-1B system is responding to the decreased need for professional labor in accordance with market conditions. If only the Congress could see fit to eliminate the cap (which never existed until 1991), this issue would not have to be revisited every two years. See the BCIS press release at
http://uscis.gov/graphics/publicaffairs/newsrels/h1bpetition-040403.htm
India Currents- Since 1999, we have been writing articles answering questions about common immigration problems at indiacurrents.com We link to these articles from our “India” page at
http://shusterman.com/indiausimmigration.html
Physicians Lawsuit Update – On April 10, the Federal Judge in our lawsuit challenging the INS regulations relating to physicians seeking permanent residence through national interest waivers notified both our law firm and the U.S. Attorneys Office to attend a “Scheduling Conference” on June 9 at 11:00am.

SEVIS- On April 2, the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims conducted an oversight hearing on “Immigration Student Tracking: Implementation and Proposed Modifications”. We link to the witness list and testimony at
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/immigration.htm
Special Registration – Hasn’t the deadline for Group IV applicants been extended to April 25? Yes and no. Yes, the deadline has been extended to April 25. But if you have a pending application for immigration benefits at one of the BCIS Service Centers, do not expect your application to be approved unless you have already registered. If you used the Premium Processing Program to obtain work status, the Service Centers will refund your $1,000 rather than grant you an immigration benefit unless you have already registered. Orders from Headquarters!

1. May 2003 State Department Visa Bulletin

On April 10, we posted the May 2003 Visa Bulletin, the same day that the State Department posted the dates on their web site.

There was more forward movement in the worldwide family categories than we have seen in some time. All of the worldwide family categories, with the exception of the 3rd category (married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens) which moved forward only one week, advanced between five and eight weeks.

The Mexican categories either moved slowly forward (The 2B category – unmarried adult sons and daughters of U.S. citizens advanced one week.) or extremely rapidly (The 1st category – unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens – advanced six months.

Even the Philippine family categories awoke from their prolonged slumber. The 1st category (unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens) advanced five weeks while the 2A and the 2B dates, moved forward along with the worldwide dates. The other Philippine categories advanced four to five weeks with the 4th preference finally entering the year 1982, meaning that brothers and sisters whose U.S. citizen siblings petitioned for them over 21 years ago can finally be interviewed to immigrate to the U.S.

Least any Filipino rejoice prematurely, the May 2003 Visa Bulletin warns that “continued heavy applicant demand for numbers in the PHILIPPINES Family First, Third, and Fourth preference categories could require the retrogression of those cut-off dates later in the year. This action would be necessary to hold visa issuance within the annual numerical limits.”

The Visa Bulletin creates false expectations. As long as a category advances less than four weeks each month, the waiting period listed on the bulletin cannot be relied upon. Unless Congress acts to reform the family-based system, the 3.5 million persons waiting to immigrate to the U.S. based on approved family-based petitions should consider other options for immigrating.

All of the employment-based numbers remain current. The time to apply for your labor certification or visa petition is now.

The May 2003 Visa Numbers can be found at

http://shusterman.com/statedepartmentvisabulletin.html

For an explanation of what the categories, dates and symbols listed below mean, see

http://shusterman.com/greencardsthroughrelatives.html

and

http://shusterman.com/employmentgreencards.html

Check the State Department’s official version to see complete information about the movement of family, employment and lottery numbers, at

http://travel.state.gov/visa_bulletin.html (Link is no longer operational.)

2. Latest Governmental Processing Times

Most immigration applications and petitions must be submitted to one of the following INS Regional Service Centers: (1) Laguna Niguel, California; (2) Lincoln, Nebraska; (3) Mesquite, Texas; and (4) St. Albans, Vermont and (5) Missouri.

Our web site contains the waiting times of each center and enumerates each state served by the center and any foreign offices within the center’s jurisdiction.

The service centers periodically issue lists of their processing times for various types of applications. Our web site contains the latest list issued by each service center.

Warning: Processing times may appear faster on the official lists than they are in reality. These processing times are not recognized as official by the INS in Washington, D.C. and are not posted on the official INS web site.

To see how fast (or slow) your service center is processing a particular type of petition or application, see our Government Processing Times Page at

http://shusterman.com/waitingtimesusimmigration.html#1

Processing times at BCIS District Offices may be accessed at

http://shusterman.com/waitingtimesusimmigration.html#2

To check the Official Processing Times of your Department of Labor Regional Office and your State Workforce Agency (SWA), click on

http://shusterman.com/waitingtimesusimmigration.html#3

and scroll down to “Labor Certification and LCA Processing Times”.

Administrative appeals of denials of most petitions denied by the BCIS are adjudicated by BCIS’s Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in Washington, DC.

The AAO’s most recent processing times may be found at

http://shusterman.com/aao.html (Link is no longer operational.)

3. Operation Liberty Shield: DHS’s First Immigration Foray

On March 28, we attended the first seminar sponsored by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) to feature officials from the new Department of Homeland Security (DHS). On March 1, the DHS took over the functions of the INS. Benefits programs are centralized in the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS). Interior enforcement is the responsibility of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) while border control is handled by the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

A senior official of the DHS spoke to the AILA attorneys at the luncheon. In a very friendly manner, he related that he himself was an attorney, and promised us that the DHS would strive to reduce waiting times for immigration benefits and would respect due process rights of individuals in its enforcement responsibilities.

He certainly was talking the talk, but was he walking the walk? Some attorneys at my table literally cringed every time that the official mispronounced the name of Eduardo Aguirre, the newly-appointed head of the CIS. Over and over again, he said “Ag-weary” rather than “A- geary”. As far as I am concerned, if he can reduce the H-1B processing times to 30 days and I-485 times to 180 days, I don’t much care about his pronunciation.

What was a bit more unsettling was the manner in which he defended the DHS’s first immigration initiative, “Operation Liberty Shield” (OLS), unveiled on March 17. OLS provides for “increased security at borders”, a concept that few would object to.

As usual, however, the devil is in the details. OLS would, for the first time, allow FBI agents to enforce the immigration laws. Immediately, the FBI began interviewing thousands of Iraqi natives who reside in the U.S. Also, OLS would also allow CBP inspectors to arrest and detain individuals from 33 counties, most of them predominantly Muslim, who request asylum at their point of entry to the U.S. They would not be released unless and until their applications were granted, a process that could take several months.

The official announced that in the first 11 days of the asylum- detention program, only one person had been detained under OLS and he had “overstayed” his visa. Since the asylum detention policy applies only to new arrivals, not to persons already in the U.S., one of the AILA attorneys questioned the official about how the detainee could have overstayed his visa. The official’s response revealed his difficulty in acquiring expertise in the immigration field in less than a month on the job.

Nationally, the new asylum detention policy sparked an immediate outcry. Former INS Commissioner Doris Meissner stated that “There is a propensity in this administration to establish blanket policies that prejudge guilt based on country of origin.” The organization Human Rights Watch stated, in a press release, that “the Bush administration has criticized the human rights records of abusive regimes, such as Iraq. Yet, under this policy, the administration will jail people simply because they have fled those same abusive regimes.” However, David Martin, the former INS General Counsel during the Clinton administration, countered that “in a time of war and a time of risk, to impose (a categorical deterrence policy) is defensible”.

Although the DHS refused to identify the 33 countries that the new policy applies to, the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights identified these countries as Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Yemen. Asylum seekers from the Gaza strip and the West Bank will also be detained.

Although, the DHS, in announcing the new policy, pointed to a number of persons who had requested asylum in the U.S. only to engage in terrorist or criminal acts, the same rationale could be used to detain persons entering the U.S. as visitors or students. It is difficult to imagine why an intending terrorist would request asylum in the U.S., thereby insuring the creation of a government file on him when he could simply enter the U.S. as a tourist, the way the September 11th terrorists did.

Is the DHS really going to detain women and children, the young and the old, and those persecuted by oppressive governments?

One can only hope that DHS policy will become more practical and nuanced sooner rather than later.

We link to DHS and FBI information and press releases about Operation Liberty Shield as well as to private organizations critical of the program from our “September 11th” page at

http://shusterman.com/september11immigration.html#1A

4. How to Avoid the Dreaded Request for Evidence: I-140′s

Strange as it seems, many people who qualify for temporary O-1 visas as persons of extraordinary ability do not automatically qualify for the permanent EB1-1 category even though the standards are the same. It is therefore important to prepare an I-140 petition for a person of extraordinary ability according to the statutory and regulatory guidelines in order to avoid a Request for Evidence:

Ensure that all forms are completely filled out.
Clearly document in a letter from the Petitioner, or from the alien if it is a self petition, how the individual is qualified for this eminent category.
Ensure that the alien meets at least three of the required criteria as listed below. Although meeting three of the following ten criteria won’t guarantee that the alien will qualify as an individual of extraordinary ability in the arts, sciences, education, business or athletics, if he cannot satisfy at least three of these items, it may be wise to consider another category.
1. Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
2. Documentation of the alien’s membership in associations in the field for which the classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines;
3. Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications/journals or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which the classification is sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation;
4. Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or allied field of specification for which classification is sought;
5. Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
6. Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media;
7. Evidence of the display of the alien’s work at artistic exhibitions or showcases;
8. Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation;
9. Evidence that the alien has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field; or
10. Evidence of commercial successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disc, or video sales.
Clearly document through both primary and secondary evidence that the alien qualifies for each category. Three examples of this are:
1. If the alien is internationally published, provide copies of the published papers and circulation information proving that the journal is internationally published;
2. If the alien has received an award, show proof of the receipt of the award and then show the criteria for the award and why it is so important in that person’s field;
3. If the alien is highly paid, show that he is paid more than the weighted average by showing copies of salary surveys for that particular position.
If this is an employer-sponsored petition, document the employer’s ability to pay through
1. Copies of Signed Corporate Federal Tax Returns;
2. Copies of Audited Financial Statements; or
3. If the company has over 100 employees provide a signed statement from the Chief Financial Offer (not the Human Resources Department) documenting the Petitioner’s ability to pay.
If this is a self petition, document the following to demonstrate how the alien intends to support himself through: a. Offer of Employment or Contract; b. Proof of Current Assets
Remember that the BCIS (the agency formally known as the INS) will not approve an EB1-1 petition simply because the alien meets three of the ten criteria listed in number three above. An individual of extraordinary ability is one who belongs to that “small percentage” who has “risen to the very top of the field of endeavor”.

5. Immigration Trivia Quiz: Green Card Soldiers

I’ll tell you a little secret: Operation Iraqi Freedom is not being fought exclusively by American soldiers. Oh, that’s not much of a secret is it? There are British and Australian troops fighting along side our soldiers.

What most people don’t realize is that thousands of young men and women in the U.S. Armed Forces who voluntarily put themselves in harm’s way are not citizens of our country.

Some are even “illegal aliens”. see

http://shusterman.com/illegalmarinegainsgreencard.html

and

http://shusterman.com/privateromerobecomesuscitizen.html

The soldiers who have fought and died in Operation Iraqi Freedom are no different. Try your luck in our latest Immigration Trivia Quiz at

http://shusterman.com/marines.html (Link no longer operational.)

The winner will receive a free legal consultation (thus saving $350) with me during the month of April.

6. Employers: Tyson Foods Acquitted Of Alien Smuggling

During the past few years, the INS has all but abandoned enforcement of the employer sanctions provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. This law requires employers to complete I-9 forms verifying the identity and the ability to work in the U.S. of all new hires.

The goal of the employer sanctions provisions is to remove the “magnet” of jobs for persons who would work illegally in the U.S. The actual effect of the program has been to spawn a huge industry which produces easily-available fraudulent documents for I-9 purposes. The September 11th terrorists received considerable aid and comfort from the false documents industry. However, the 1986 law did precious little to decrease the number of persons working illegally in the U.S. The number of these workers has increased exponentially over the past 17 years.

As a result, the Justice Department has turned away from employer sanctions enforcement and toward high-profile criminal smuggling cases against corporate defendants.

In the January 2002 issue of SHUSTERMAN’S IMMIGRATION UPDATE, we reported that the Justice Department had brought a 36-count indictment for alien smuggling against Tyson Foods, Inc., the largest producer, processor and marketer of poultry-based food products in the U.S.

On February 5, 2003, the Tyson trial opened in Chattanooga, Tennessee with great fanfare. However, from the very beginning, the case was a disaster for the government. The Federal Judge dismissed nine counts before the beginning of the trial, and 15 more counts after the prosecution had presented its case, including all counts related to alien smuggling. Then, on March 26, the jury acquitted the company on the remaining 12 charges.

We link to both the Justice Department’s December 19, 2001 press release announcing the indictment, the complete text of the indictment, and a compendium of news releases on the case from Tyson’s web site at

http://shusterman.com/uscitizenshipandimmigrationservices.html#5

We were unable to find a statement or press release on the Justice Department’s web site after the conclusion of the trial.

Now that the responsibility for the enforcement of the immigration laws has been transferred from the Justice Department to the Department of Homeland Security, we believe that national security concerns, the government’s failure to enforce the employer sanctions laws and to win a criminal conviction against Tyson should prompt a fundamental rethinking of the government’s immigration enforcement strategy.

The verdict in the Tyson’s case should be a wake-up call in the no-win war on illegal immigrants and U.S. employers who hire them, either intentionally or, more often, unwittingly.

Both employers and labor unions are united in calling for the repeal of the employer sanctions laws. The fact that these laws have utterly failed to achieve their objectives should prompt the DHS to ask Congress to reconsider what to do about the ever-growing number of undocumented persons working in the U.S. A flexible visa program for foreign-born workers would allow the government to document millions of workers, cripple the fraudulent documents industry and permit the DHS to focus its attention on persons who are threats to our national security, not on those who are simply filling a void in our economy.

7. Deportation: Fraud Waiver Granted to Permanent Resident

The surest way to doom your chances to become a permanent resident is to lie on an application for immigration benefits. Fraud creates a bar to admissibility to the U.S.

Yet, strict as they are, the immigration laws allow for waivers to be granted to some persons who obtained permanent residence through fraud or misrepresentation.

Recently, an Immigration Judge granted our client’s application to remain in the United States despite a material misrepresentation on his application for a green card. In 1989, the U.S. Embassy in his country issued him a visa to come to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident. He claimed eligibility to become a lawful permanent resident based on an approved visa petition submitted on his behalf by his mother, a U.S. citizen.

The application was based upon the fact that he was an “unmarried son” of a U.S. citizen. At the time of his immigrant visa interview at the Embassy, he claimed to be unmarried although he was married with two children.

Five years later, he applied for naturalization. The INS conducted an overseas investigation and discovered that he was married prior to immigrating to the U.S.

He was charged with committing fraud and misrepresentation and placed in deportation proceedings before an Immigration Judge. He hired our law firm to represent him in Immigration Court. We filed an application for a “waiver” on his behalf under §237(a)(1)(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

This type of waiver is available to certain sons, daughters, spouses, and parents of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents.

In determining whether to grant a waiver, an Immigration Judge must balance the “adverse and favorable” factors in the individual’s case.

Adverse factors include:

Nature of the underlying circumstances of the fraud or misrepresentation involved;
Nature, seriousness, and recentness of any criminal record;
Other evidence of bad character or undesirability.

Favorable factors include:

Family ties in the United States;
Residence of long duration in the United States, particularly where it commenced when the individual was young;
Evidence of hardship to individual or family if deportation occurs;
A stable employment history;
Existence of property or business ties;
Evidence of value and service to the community;
Other evidence of the individual’s good character.

In our client’s case, he is the sole support for his wife and two children who are living in an impoverished third world country. His wife suffered a heart attack two years ago, and is unemployed. Although our client attended a vocational school for automotive training before coming to the U.S., he was unable to get a job there. Since coming to the U.S., he has had numerous jobs. He sends about $200 to $300 a month to his wife and children. His family ties in the U.S. include his mother, sister and three brothers, all of whom are citizens. Other than one misdemeanor shoplifting conviction in 1994, he has not been in trouble with the authorities.

In support of his application for a waiver, we submitted the following documents to the Immigration Judge:

Record from the State Bureau of Criminal Identification;
Articles regarding the current country and economic conditions in his native country;
Letter from a psychologist as to his state of mind;
Certified tax returns from the IRS;
Money orders and cancelled checks sent to his wife;
Employment letter;
Medical reports for family members;
Naturalization certificates of family members.

Based on this information and his testimony, the Immigration Judge found that if he had to return to his native country, he would be unable to provide for his wife and two children. The Immigration Judge held that his family members in the U.S. would be burdened with providing him with assistance.

The Judge granted his application for a waiver. This enables him to remain in the U.S. and apply for citizenship. After he becomes an American citizen, he will be able to obtain permanent residence for his wife and children.

8. Schedule of Upcoming Immigration Law Seminars

The following is a partial list of Immigration Seminars in which I am scheduled to participate during the next few months:

April 25, 2003 Los Angeles, CABasics of Immigration Law
- Sponsored by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA)I will speak about “Nonimmigrant Visas” at 9:45amFor program and registration information, see

http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.aspx?bc=8,2270,173,2372
May 22, 2003 San Francisco, CAAmerican Psychiatric Association – 156th Annual MeetingI will be participating in a 90-minute workshop and speaking about immigration solutions for foreign-born physicians.For registration and program information, see
http://www.psych.org/sched_events/ann_mtg_03/index.cfm (Link is no longer operational.)
June 29 – July 2, 2003 San Antonio, TexasAmerican Health Lawyers Association – Annual Conference For registration and program information, see
http://www.healthlawyers.org/programs/annual03/index.cfm (Link is no longer operational.)
August 17-20, 2003 Denver, ColoradoAmerican Society for Healthcare Human Resources Administration (ASHHRA) – “Cultivating Our Human Capital”My presentation will be entitled “Immigration & Foreign Health Professionals – Is the Door Half Open, or Half Shut?For more information, see
http://www.hospitalconnect.com/ashhra/education/conferences.html

9. Chat Schedule, Transcripts, Audios & Videos

Chats

In May 1999, we pioneered the concept of free online chats on various immigration topics. Our chats are always focused on a particular subject. Together with About.com’s Immigration Guides, Jennifer and Peter Wipf, we have conducted over two dozen chats on a wide variety of subjects, all related to immigration laws and procedures.

Our most recent chat was entitled “How to Cope with Special Registration.” It was held on Monday, January 6. A transcript of the chat is online at

http://shusterman.com/september11immigration.html#A

To read the complete text of our chats, see our Chat Page at

http://shusterman.com/shustermanchatsusimmigration.html

Immigration Audios

Are your eyes getting tired from reading all of our information about immigration laws and procedures? Then sit back, close your eyes, and listen to any (or all!) of the following immigration audios:

Welcome To Our Web Site!
http://shusterman.com/audio/welcome.ram
Understanding the H-1B Cap Law: AC-21
http://shusterman.com/audio/h1bcapla.ram
Temporary Visas to Visit, Study or Work in the U.S.
http://shusterman.com/audio/temp.ram
Obtaining A Green Card To Live and Work in the U.S.
http://shusterman.com/audio/gc.ram
How to Become a Citizen of the U.S.
http://shusterman.com/audio/usc.ram
IMG’s and Canadian Physicians
http://shusterman.com/audio/md.ram

Immigration Videos

See our new videos and accompanying power point presentations:

Physicians: J Waivers, H-1B and O-1 Visas
http://shusterman.com/video/img100302_p1.ram
Physicians: Obtaining Permanent Residence
http://shusterman.com/video/img100302_p2.ram
Physicians: Questions and Answers
http://shusterman.com/video/img100302_qa.ram

See my testimony before the Senate Subcommittee On Immigration on May 22, 2001 regarding “Immigration Policy: Urban And Rural Health Care Needs” at

http://shusterman.com/video/carlsenate.ram

or read the complete transcript of my testimony at

http://shusterman.com/shustermantestimonysenate.html

Also, see a video and an audio of President Bush announcing the creation of the new Department of Homeland Security at

http://shusterman.com/departmentofhomelandsecurity.html

Remember, you will need to download a free copy of RealPlayer which you can find at

http://shusterman.com/audiosvideoswebcastsusimmigration.html

in order to hear the audios or to view the videos.

10. Answer to the March 2003 Immigration Trivia Quiz

Within minutes after we e-mailed the March 2003 issue of our newsletter to subscribers, we received the following message in response to our trivia quiz:

“In response to the Shusterman’s Trivia quiz, here is the information.

9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Feb. 13, 2003. First paragraph of Ramirez-Alejandre v. Ashcroft analogizing administration of the Immigration & Nationality Act:

In the book Bang the Drum Slowly, members of the fictional New York Mammoths amused themselves by drawing in dupes with a card scam known as “Tegwar,” which was an acronym for “The Exciting Game Without Any Rules.” Mark Harris, BANG THE DRUM SLOWLY 8 (Alfred A. Knoff, Inc. 1956). The mark, lured into the game by the players’ enthusiasm, would be given a handful of cards and encouraged to make wild bids using a weird vocabulary of calls that changed from round to round. Id. at 48, 60-64. The poor cluck would always lose but would be reassured of the game’s legitimacy by the veneer of rationality that appeared to overlie the seemingly sophisticated game.”

Who won the quiz, and how did he figure out the meaning of TEGWAR? Read on.

Ms. Ghosh,

Thank you for granting the opportunity. I have developed a heuristics- based data mining algorithm, which helped me in this search. Just kidding!! Some very basic googling helped me find the answer. I was just doing it for fun. Right answer was a pleasant surprise for me as well.

I have been your avid reader since past several years.

http://www.shusterman.com

is the treasure-trove of immigration and often the only place i need to look for any immigration related information. Being quite familiar with the wide audience you have, I hope you will understand when I keep my personal information to minimum.

Regards,

Abhijit

April 10, 2003
Carl Shusterman

Certified Specialist in Immigration Law, State Bar of California
Former U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service Trial Attorney (1976-82)
Board of Governors, American Immigration Lawyers Association (1988-97)
Phone: (213) 623-4592 Fax: (213) 623-3720
Law Offices of Carl Shusterman, 600 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1550
Los Angeles, California 90017

“If we’re an arrogant nation, they’ll view us that way. But if we’re a humble nation, they’ll respect us.”

- George W. Bush during the 2000 presidential campaign

Shusterman's Immigration Update April 2003