NYC Bar’s event below is not only informative for folks stuck in immigration twilight on what to do, but also provides a great outline starting point for attorneys with respect to legal strategies for their immigration clients. Additionally, event outlines a number of social programs that are available to New York residents in general, and immigrant community in particular.
Published January 5, 2018 by Yuri Starikov
Published December 7, 2017 by Yuri Starikov
Discussion will explore possibility of appealing a number of questions from October 2017 Customs Broker License Examination. Sample Appeal Packet will be mailed out to registrants after attendance. Tentative questions that are marked for discussion will be: Question 10. CBP stated that correct answer is (C). Legal arguments will be explored for answers (A), (B), and (E). Question 32. CBP stated that correct answer is (D). Legal arguments will be explored for “No Possible Correct Answer” option. Question 33. CBP stated that correct answer is (E). Legal arguments will be explored for “No Possible Correct Answer” option. Question 42. CBP stated that correct answer is (C). Legal arguments will be explored for “No Possible Correct Answer” option. Question 49. CBP stated that correct answer is (D). Legal arguments will be explored for “No Possible Correct Answer” option. Question 52. CBP stated that correct answer is (D). Legal arguments will be explored for answer choice (C). Question 62. CBP stated that correct answer is (D). Legal arguments will be explored for answer choice (C). Question 67. CBP stated that correct answer is (B). Legal arguments will be explored for “No Possible Correct Answer” option. Question 73. CBP stated that correct answer…
Published December 4, 2017 by Yuri Starikov
An interesting issue came to the attention of our office: apparently, some courts deny pro se (self-represented) appearance to sole proprietors for bringing issues arising out of their business. So the question is whether sole proprietors need to hire an attorney in order to resolve issues related to their business as sole proprietors. For civil actions, the starting point is the statute CPLR 321(a) which states, in relevant part: A party, other than one specified in section 1201 of this chapter, may prosecute or defend a civil action in person or by attorney, except that a corporation or voluntary association shall appear by attorney, except as otherwise provided in sections 1809 and 1809-A of the New York city civil court act, sections 1809 and 1809-A of the uniform district court act and sections 1809 and 1809-A of the uniform city court act, and except as otherwise provided in section 501 and section 1809 of the uniform justice court act. If the issue relates to breach of contract civil action, Sections 1201 (family proceeding) is not applicable. CPLR 321(a) explicitly prohibits “corporation or voluntary association” from non-attoney appearances. Limited Liability Companies are within “corporation or voluntary association” clause because “[an] LLC,…
Read More Pro Se (Self Represented) Appearance by Sole Proprietors
Published May 12, 2017 by Yuri Starikov
Attorney General Jeff Sessions guided Department of Justice with respect to charging and sentencing policy through May 10, 2017 Memorandum. Memo directs prosecutors to “charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense.” Memo defines most serious offense as one that carries “the most substantial guidelines sentence, including mandatory minimum sentences.” Deviation from directive would require approval “by a United States Attorney or Assistant Attorney General, or a supervisor designated by the United States Attorney or Assistant Attorney General, and the reasons must be documented in the file.” Memo further directs prosecutors to stock to 18 U.S.C. § 3553 guidelines for sentencing. The memo still leaves open flexibility of application of “most serious” rubric on case by case basis. Nonetheless, the guidance may be a useful tool during Deferred Prosecution / Non-Prosecution Agreement negotiation. Memorandum is published at the following DOJ link: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/965896/download
Read More Charging and Sentencing Guidelines to Federal Prosecutors
Published April 20, 2017 by Yuri Starikov
Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control published a guideline for persons to petition for removal from Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list. Persons that are on SDN list are generally proscribed from transacting business with U.S. persons. The link is below. https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/SDN-List/Pages/petitions.aspx
Published October 25, 2016 by Yuri Starikov
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that applications and petitions postmarked or filed on or after December 23, 2016 will have new fees. Some of the affected fees are included in the following table. Form No. Title Current fee Final fee G-1041 Genealogy Index Search Request $20 $65 G-1041A Genealogy Records Request (Copy from Microfilm) 20 65 G-1041A Genealogy Records Request (Copy from Textual Record) 35 65 I-90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card 365 455 I-102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document 330 445 I-129/129CW Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker 325 460 I-129F Petition for Alien Fiancé(e) 340 535 I-130 Petition for Alien Relative 420 535 I-131 6/I-131A 7 Application for Travel Document 360 575 I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker 580 700 I-191 Application for Advance Permission to Return to Unrelinquished Domicile 585 930 I-192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant 585 8 585/930 I-193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa 585 585 I-212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After Deportation or Removal 585 930 I-290B Notice of Appeal or Motion 630 675 I-360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant 405 435 I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status…
Read More U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Scheduled Fee Increases
Published October 24, 2016 by Yuri Starikov
DOJ’s recent news release about Yevgeniy Nikulin, a visitor to Czech Republic from Russia, adds a new country to Mr. Nikulin’s travel itinerary: the United States of America. Instead of a tourist visa, the document allowing the U.S. visit would be a grand jury indictment for allegedly hacking computers of LinkedIn, Dropbox and Formspring. List of countries with which the United States has extradition agreements is a public information, freely available to anyone, and codified under 18 U.S.C. § 3181. Unofficial, but more colorful version is also available on Wikipedia. Russian Federation is not on the list. But, Czech Republic extradition history with the U.S. goes back to 1925. Recent confirmation of US-Czech extradition friendship is Treaty Doc. 109-14 (Agreement to ensure conformity with U.S.-EU Extradition Treaty), placed Czech Republic. Perhaps, more interesting are the the charges that Mr. Nikulin faces, because these apply to anyone (within and without U.S.). According to the indictment, these are: 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1028A(a)(1), 1029(a)(2), 1030(a)(2)(C), 1030(a)(5)(A). Fraud and related activity in connection with computers 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(C) states: Whoever— * * * intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains— * * * information from any protected…
Published October 21, 2016 by Yuri Starikov
Now human resources professionals are officially guided by Justice to refrain from certain acts when competing for talent. October 2016 Guidance provides pointers which include employer agreements: Not to recruit certain employees; Not to compete in terms of compensation; Boycotting temporary employees; Fees and terms of compensation for contractors. Guidance cites enforcement actions on entities that came under its radar, including: Arizona Hospital & Healthcare Association, eBay, Intuit, Lucasfilm and Pizar, Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, Debes, Council of Fashion Designers of America. According to Justice, these entities entered into agreements that violate Sherman Antitrust Act. The guidance does not stop at “agreements”, but goes further to proscribe “sharing sensitive information.” Even if an individual does not agree explicitly to fix compensation or other terms of employment, exchanging competitively sensitive information could serve as evidence of an implicit illegal agreement.
Published October 18, 2016 by Yuri Starikov
Modern trend for eyewear has been heavier and heavier glasses. Heavy glasses affect one’s appearance, probably in a better way, and therefore make it more difficult for officials to recognize one’s original features. In response, U.S. State Department decided to make its own fashion statement: No Glasses on the Passport Photos Beginning November 1, 2016! Beginning November 1st, 2016, customers applying for their U.S. passport or U.S visa or renewing their U.S. passport must remove glasses for their photo. Last year, more than 200,000 U.S. passport customers submitted poor quality photos which we couldn’t accept. The #1 problem was glasses. We had to put their passport applications on hold because we couldn’t clearly identify them from their photo. Many U.S. visa applications have been delayed due to the same problem. If the photo of you in your unexpired U.S. passport or U.S. visa has glasses, don’t worry about it. You don’t have to get a passport or visa now. Next time you renew your passport or apply for a new visa, though, you’ll have to take your glasses off.
Published October 17, 2016 by Yuri Starikov
Consider a following hypothetical. You are in New York. Your friend or someone you know hands you the keys and asks you to drive giving you any reason (e.g. “I had some drinks”). As a conscientious fellow human being, you take the keys and get behind the wheel. Then, police pulls you over and issues you an appearance ticket / summons for driving a vehicle for which the registration has been suspended. You explain the officer that this is not your car and you had no way of knowing (registration sticker on the windshield shows that the status is current). Officer politely places the appearance ticket in your hands and even more politely asks you to explain this to the judge. You look at the ticket, you look at the person who gave you the keys, and ask yourself “what is going on”!? The person who gave you keys just recalls that she did not pay for car insurance in light of current global financial crisis, causing the insurance company to report to DMV, which in turn suspended the registration. You probably still wonder what is going on. Well, police officer and the person who asked you to drive a…
Read More Driving someone’s car with suspended registration in New York