- with readers working within the Advertising & Public Relations industries
Pabian Law Clients and Friends,
We hope this Year-Round Immigration Quarterly Update finds you well. We are pleased to share this edition of the Pabian Law Quarterly Update, which provides educational information on recent government and regulatory developments, immigration trends, and practical considerations for employers navigating the evolving immigration landscape.
As background, Pabian Law has two primary practice areas: our H-2B Visa Practice, which supports seasonal hospitality employers, and our Year-Round Immigration Practice, which assists hospitality employers with a wide range of visa and green card matters, including TN visas, O-1 visas, H-1B visas, and employment-based permanent residence applications. We also advise employers on I-9 and E-Verify compliance, helping organizations manage employment verification obligations across the United States.
Topics Covered in This Quarterly Update
- $100,000 H-1B visa fee returns while DHS appeal is pending
- USCIS signature policy update
- USCIS more strict on what it considers as an error on applications
- Priority date movement slows as of July
- Adjudication pause lifted for certain countries
- Save the Date for our 2027 Staffing Summit!
$100,000 H-1B Fee Returns While DHS Appeal is Pending
As many employers are aware, one of the most significant immigration developments over the past year has been the implementation – and subsequent litigation -surrounding the $100,000 supplemental H-1B visa filing fee. In June, a federal district court ruled that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) lacked the legal authority to impose the additional fee and vacated the policy. However, DHS promptly appealed the decision, and the appellate court granted an administrative stay while the appeal is pending. As a result, the $100,000 fee is once again in effect, at least temporarily.
The fee continues to apply only to certain H-1B visa petitions requesting consular processing and generally does not apply to petitions requesting an extension of stay, amendment, or change of status for workers already in the United States.
Because the litigation remains ongoing, employers should expect additional developments over the coming months. Should DHS ultimately lose its appeal, the fee will be eliminated. If they succeed, the fee will stay in effect until September 30, 2026, after which time it may either end or get renewed by the Administration.
Practical takeaway: If your organization is considering sponsoring an employee for H-1B visa status and you believe the process may need consular processing, be sure to discuss the applicability of the supplemental filing fee with us before moving forward with the petition.
USCIS Adopts Stricter Signature Requirements
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has continued its recent trend toward stricter filing requirements by issuing updated guidance regarding signatures on immigration applications and petitions.
Although USCIS has long required copies of original (“wet ink”) signatures for many filings, the agency has now clarified that starting with filings on or after July 10, 2026, USCIS may now reject or deny an application if it believes that an employer’s signature was electronically generated, copied from another document, or otherwise not personally executed by the appropriate individual. Importantly, USCIS is no longer required to issue a Request for Evidence (RFE) before taking adverse action based on a defective signature. This means that applicants are not given an opportunity to correct any signature deficiencies, and may stand to lose thousands of dollars filing fees should the petition be denied.
Practical takeaway: Before filing any immigration petition, we ensure that every required signature is a copy of an original, wet ink signature. We also advise that you keep originals of any signed petition pages you provide to us electronically. Finally, we advise signing in blue ink, as it is easier to tell that it is an original.
USCIS Taking a Harder Line on Filing Deficiencies
Along with its updated signature policy, USCIS officers have started to exercise greater discretion to reject or deny filings that contain omissions, even if they are immaterial, rather than overlooking the issue or issuing an RFE.
Historically, relatively minor clerical errors – such as failing to check a non-crucial box or inadvertently leaving a question unanswered if it did not apply – often resulted in an RFE or were simply disregarded if they did not affect eligibility. In recent months, however, USCIS has begun rejecting and denying petitions, even if the omission was not material.
A rejected filing is a big deal, as rejections are treated as though the petition was never filed. This can have serious consequences where visa availability, maintenance of status, or statutory filing deadlines are involved.
Practical takeaway: Employers should expect USCIS to apply a much stricter standard to all filings and should carefully review every application before submission to avoid unnecessary delays and refiling costs.
Priority Dates Slow Significantly as Demand Continues to Increase
Many employers sponsoring workers for employment-based permanent residency (“green cards”) noticed an unwelcome trend in the July Visa Bulletin: priority date advancement slowed considerably across several employment-based preference categories.
A priority date is an employee’s place in line for a green card. A foreign national generally cannot move to the final stage of the green card process until their priority date becomes current. A visa number is one of the limited employment-based green cards available each year. Once a visa number becomes available for an employee’s priority date, they can generally complete the green card process.
Because Congress limits the number of immigrant visas available each fiscal year, the U.S. Department of State has slowed advancement of the priority dates to ensure that annual visa numbers are not exhausted before the end of the government fiscal year on September 30.
For many applicants, this means waiting several additional months before becoming eligible to file before being able to file or receive final green card approval.
The good news is that October 1st marks the beginning of the federal government’s new fiscal year, when a fresh allotment of employment-based immigrant visa numbers becomes available. Historically, the October Visa Bulletin often reflects renewed forward movement in priority dates as visa availability resets. Although there are no guarantees, employers and foreign national employees may see faster advancement beginning in October.
Employers should also remember that USCIS determines each month whether applicants may rely on the Final Action Dates chart or the Dates for Filing chart. This distinction can significantly affect when an employee becomes eligible to submit an Adjustment of Status application.
Practical takeaway: Employers considering green card sponsorship should continue initiating PERM green card cases (EB-3 green card applications) as early as possible. Even when visa numbers begin moving more quickly again in October, overall processing times remain longer than they were in prior years.
USCIS Resumes Processing Immigration Benefit Applications for Nationals of 39 Countries
One of the most significant immigration developments of the past few months received far less publicity than many expected. Earlier this year, USCIS implemented an internal policy placing a broad hold on the adjudication of many immigration benefit applications filed by nationals of 39 designated countries while the agency conducted additional national security screening and developed enhanced vetting procedures. The pause affected thousands of pending applications, many of which had already been pending for months.
The affected countries included: Afghanistan, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Burma (Myanmar), Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon, The Gambia, Haiti, Iran, Laos, Libya, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Republic of the Congo, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
Unlike a travel ban, this policy affected applications already pending with USCIS inside the United States. Depending on the applicant’s nationality and immigration category, USCIS placed holds on numerous benefit requests, including:
- Form I-485 Applications to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
- Form I-765 Applications for Employment Authorization;
- Form I-131 Applications for Advance Parole and other travel documents;
- Certain Form I-589 asylum applications;
- Employment-based petitions and other immigration benefit requests that required USCIS adjudication before a final decision could be issued; and
- Certain naturalization and other benefit applications requiring additional security review.
In June, a federal district court ruled that USCIS’ blanket adjudication pause was unlawful and ordered the agency to resume processing the affected applications. USCIS has since begun adjudicating many of these long-pending cases, although significant backlogs remain as officers work through the inventory that accumulated during the pause.
Practical takeaway: Employers with workers from one of the affected countries who have pending I-485, I-765, or other USCIS applications should begin seeing movement on previously stalled cases. However, because USCIS is processing a substantial backlog, adjudications may continue to take longer than normal for some time.
Save the Date for our 2027 Staffing Summit!
Conclusion
We hope you found this Year-Round Immigration Quarterly Update helpful. The immigration landscape continues to evolve, and these developments highlight the importance of proactive planning and careful compliance with USCIS filing requirements.
Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions about the topics discussed above or any other immigration-related matters.
Warm regards,
Keith Pabian and your friends at Pabian Law
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]