It is with great difficulty that an immigrant acquires the status of permanent residence in the United States. But this does not mean that an immigrant should act indifferently once he gets his permanent resident status. Once obtained, he has a greater responsibility of maintaining that status. This is because it takes only moments to wash away all the hard work that has been put in to acquire that status.

The most important of all the reasons for the loss of a permanent residence status is indulging in any form of criminal activity. No government of any country can tolerate its immigrants adding to the crime rate. It is similar with the United States government.

Being a law abiding society, it is but obvious that all the permanents of the United States are to follow the laws of the country. If any of the immigrants are convicted for any form of criminal activity or practice activities that are considered a crime in the United States or any other country, which would pose a barrier to their status. The immigrant would instantly be deported back to his native country and would not be permitted to enter the United States ever again.

Some of the following criminal activities that could hamper the permanent residence status of an individual include the following:

• Any form of violent activities and the punishment of such crimes include a minimum of a year of service in the prison.
• Committing murder.
• Activities involving terror which would may pose a threat to the local population.
• Rape, molestation and sexually assaulting women and children.
• Illegal dealings in arms, drugs and human trafficking.
• Sexual misconduct, causing physical harm, any fraudulent practices which have led to loss or damage to people and property.
• Threatening someone for one’s own means as well as reckless behavior.

Additionally, there would be a serious outcome incase of the following:

• Providing with false information and lying to get immigration benefits.
• Claiming to be a citizen of the United States when the immigrant is actually not.
• Participating in elections – federal or local, that is only permitted to the citizens of the United States.
• Indulging in drinking or being a habitual drunk as defined by the US immigrant department as well as using drugs illegally.
• If an individual is married to two people at a given period of time.
• Neglecting the responsibilities of supporting the family.
• Found to be practicing domestic violence.
• Not filing tax returns on time.

In case an individual has been involved in any of the above, the first thing that he must do is to contact an immigration lawyer or any community based organization which provides legal support to these immigrants.

Guest Post Author

Ajay Sharma is an immigration expert who provides his valuable advice to people seeking immigration in countries like Canada, Denmark, USA, Australia and many others. With years of experience under his belt, he is the principal immigration consultant of ABHINAV.com, which is in business since 1994. Over the years, Abhinav has continually stood the test of time and has helped its clients in accomplishing their relocation dreams to foreign lands, successfully and smoothly.

The recent deportation of a number of Indian H1B IT workers from Newark and JFK airports has sent shock waves through the H-1B community. H-1B employers, employees and their attorneys alike are flabbergasted by this brazen act of official highhandedness where individuals arriving on H-1B visas were singled out even before their primary immigration inspection, put through a sham questioning, forced into making coercive statements, issued expedited removal orders, and sent back! Their crime? They landed in the U.S. with legitimate H-1B visas to work for genuine U.S. entities, but at a location other than their office, i.e., at a client site or third party site!

H1B employees working at a client site or a third party site is a practice as old as the H1B program itself, and is not a violation of the regulations when supported by appropriate documentation. What is shocking is that the disgraceful action by CBP inspectors was triggered by an overzealous (mis)interpretation of a recent Memo issued by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director, Service Center Operations, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

At its core, the Neufeld Memo underlines the requirement of an employer-employee relationship that would last the entire period of the foreign individual’s H-1B stay in the United States. In such a relationship the employer should have the “actual” control or the “right” to control the employee, to hire, fire, pay, and to decide when, where, and how the employee will be employed.

Based on the experience of this writer in processing thousands of H-1B petitions over a period of more than 15 years (and attending to the resultant issues), this situation can be addressed with a little foresight, logical planning, and preparation and maintenance of appropriate documentation. Also, H1B employees should be educated on how to answer questions from overbearing government officials. Pardon me for saying this, a small minority of companies, through a lackadaisical attitude towards adhering to the regulations, seem to bring a bad name to the entire H-1B community and to the H-1B program itself, resulting in such sweeping governmental actions that affect legitimate H1B employers and put the lifestyle of unsuspecting employees and their families in jeopardy. Moreover, this supplies fodder to the anti-H-1B bogey that is becoming more and more vociferous in the light of rising unemployment in the United States. We, at our office, always make it a point to emphasize to H-1B employers and employees alike to strictly adhere to the governing regulations and requirements of the H-1B program.

As stated above, the focus of the CBP enforcement action is as to who the actual employer is. It should be noted, in situations where an individual works at a location different from the petitioning company’s office, the question is whether such petitioner employer has the “actual” control or the “right” of control over the H1B employee. When the H-1B employee works at a client site, or a third party site, the H-1B employer may not always be able to exercise “actual” control over the individual’s employment. But to maintain the H-1B status and be in compliance with the regulations, the H1B employer needs to prove the “right” to control, if not the “actual” control. There are various ways to meet the requirements of actual control or right to control, as we have been advising our clients, by ensuring acquisition, usage, and maintenance of appropriate documents. It takes logical planning under effective legal guidance.

In conclusion, we would like to remind our clients and other readers of this article that the government’s enforcement of the regulations can be expected to become stricter in the future, and appropriate proactive steps will save the employers and employees alike a lot of hardship and aggravation.
Guest Post Author

Disclaimer: The information in the above article is of a general nature only and should not be taken as legal advice. Always seek professional legal advice before proceeding with your case.

Copyright: The Law Offices of Morley J. Nair, Inc.

Morley J. Nair is the founder of The Law Offices of Morley J. Nair, located in Philadelphia, PA, practicing Immigration Law in all the 50 states. The firm has processed thousands of H-1Bs and hundreds of employment-based immigrant visas. The firm websites are http://www.visaworks.com and http://www.h1bplanet.com