We can provide phone, zoom, or in person consultations
Published on:

By

Awards occupy a privileged place in O-1 adjudication because they appear, at first glance, to offer objective proof. A certificate, trophy, competition ranking, fellowship, grant, or public announcement may seem to answer the question of distinction. Yet in O-1 practice, the existence of an award rarely ends the inquiry. USCIS asks a narrower and more demanding question: does the award show nationally or internationally recognized excellence in the field?

For O-1A cases, which include science, education, business, and athletics, the regulation permits evidence of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence. For O-1B arts cases, the regulation requires significant national or international awards or prizes, and it gives examples such as the Academy Award, Emmy, Grammy, or Directors Guild Award. These examples do not mean that only those awards qualify. They do, however, show the level of significance USCIS will consider.

Review of AAO decisions provides useful examples. In a dance choreographer case, the beneficiary won second and third place awards at an international dance competition. The record described the event as large and international, with thousands of dancers. The AAO still found the evidence insufficient because the petitioner did not prove the purpose of the awards, selection process, eligibility criteria, or recognition of the awards beyond the event itself. In a tattoo artist case, the petitioner relied on magazine contest awards and social media recognition. The AAO rejected the claim because public voting, self-promotional posts, and general statements about the magazine did not establish that the awards carried significance comparable to the regulatory examples.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Zneimer & Zneimer P.C. is a Chicago law firm representing employers, professionals, families, and foreign nationals in immigration matters, including employment-based petitions, adjustment of status, consular processing, waivers, and complex immigration strategy. Our immigration practice monitors USCIS policy developments closely because even technical agency memoranda can affect real people, workplaces, families, and long-term immigration planning.

This article provides the public with a practical and legally grounded analysis of USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199. The memorandum has generated understandable concern because it discusses adjustment of status as a discretionary benefit and directs officers to weigh certain facts more carefully.  The memorandum does not end adjustment of status, does not repeal INA § 245, does not eliminate dual intent, and does not create a categorical bar to green card approval inside the United States.

This article offers general information and public legal analysis. It does not substitute for individualized legal advice, because adjustment strategy depends on the applicant’s immigration history, status, category, family facts, travel history, employment records, and admissibility issues.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The Chicago immigration lawyers of Zneimer & Zneimer are monitoring the evolving immigration restrictions.  In this blog we provide an overview of visa restrictions affecting various countries under current U.S. immigration policy. The restrictions are organized into three categories based on the type and scope of limitations imposed.

Overview of Restriction Types

The United States currently maintains three distinct types of visa restrictions:

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

When the federal government changes the rules of entry overnight, families and employers feel the impact first and they feel it hardest. The immigration lawyers at the Law Office of Zneimer & Zneimer read the proclamation text, and can assist in mapping it to visa categories, and develop a plan that fits the client’s facts.

The legal engine: INA 212(f) plus a moving country list

The President issued Proclamation 10949 on June 4, 2025, then expanded and modified the framework in Proclamation 10998 on December 16, 2025. Proclamation 10998 takes effect at 12:01 a.m. Eastern on January 1, 2026.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The U.S. immigration landscape is shifting again for H-1B workers and employers. On September 19, 2025, the President issued a Presidential Proclamation on Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers, a significant policy change aimed at reforming the H-1B visa program. Under this directive, certain H-1B petitions filed on or after 12:01 a.m. Eastern time on September 21, 2025 must include an additional $100,000 payment as a condition of eligibility.

USCIS has now issued more instructions interpreting the Proclamation. Employers and foreign professionals must understand how this new requirement works .

Who Must Pay the $100,000

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The recent presidential proclamation imposing a $100,000 fee on certain H-1B petitions has caused alarm among employers, workers, and their counsel. At Zneimer & Zneimer, P.C., we want our clients to understand the scope of this rule, why it applies only to entry, and what risks arise when a worker changes employers and later travels abroad.

Authority under INA § 212(f)

The proclamation rests on INA § 212(f), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f), which empowers the president to “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens” or impose “any restrictions” deemed appropriate on their admission. Importantly, this power governs entry at the border, not the status of people who are already inside the United States.  By its terms, the proclamation:

  • Applies to foreign nationals outside the U.S. seeking to enter after the effective date after 12:01 AM (ET) on September 21, 2025
  • Does not apply to extensions of status or change-of-status petitions filed while the worker remains inside the United States.
  • Does not alter the validity of previously approved H-1B petitions or visas.

USCIS and CBP have both confirmed that the rule is entry-focused as it imposes a condition of admission, not a retroactive obligation for individuals already maintaining lawful status in the U.S.

What Happens with New Petitions and Travel?

A thorny question arises under the Proclamation when a worker already in the U.S. changes status to H-1B or is already in H-1B and changes employers after the effective date of the proclamation.  In both cases, the filing will be a new H-1B petition on behalf of the foreign worker.   Suppose a beneficiary has a valid H-1B petition and a subsequent employer files a new petition (“H-1B transfer”). While the worker remains in the U.S., the proclamation does not apply based on its express terms:

 Section 1.  Restriction on Entry.

(a)  Pursuant to sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), the entry into the United States of aliens as nonimmigrants to perform services in a specialty occupation under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), is restricted….

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall restrict decisions on petitions not accompanied by a $100,000 payment for H-1B specialty occupation workers under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, who are currently outside the United States….

See, Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers, Presidential Proclamation (Sept. 19, 2025), issued under INA §§ 212(f) and 215(a), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(f), 1185(a).

Let’s parse this language. 

Textual Analysis Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Immigration law often hides in the details of statutory authority. When the White House announces changes to visas, the form of the announcement – executive order or presidential proclamation – signals the legal foundation beneath it. With the recent H-1B fee increase, the administration chose a proclamation. That choice tells us a great deal about power, process, and potential challenges.

Executive Orders Talk To the Agency

An executive order directs the federal bureaucracy. It tells agencies how to interpret or enforce existing law. For example, a president may issue an executive order instructing the Department of Homeland Security to review fraud detection in the H-1B program. An executive order does not create new legal obligations for the public. It organizes how agencies carry out duties Congress has already assigned.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

On September 19, 2025, President Trump issued a Proclamation titled Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers. This Proclamation introduces a substantial new cost for employers filing new H-1B petitions and signals further regulatory reforms to the H-1B program.  The H-1B Attorneys of Zneimer & Zneimer provide this brief guidance.

Key Change – New $100,000 Filing Requirement

Effective September 21, 2025 at 12:01 a.m. ET, any new H-1B petition must be accompanied by a $100,000 payment. This requirement applies to:

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Immigration law is never just about paperwork. Meeting the statutory requirements for a benefit such as adjustment of status, naturalization, or certain employment-based petitions does not guarantee approval. In many cases, the final hurdle is discretion. USCIS officers must decide whether to grant a benefit as a matter of judgment, weighing favorable and unfavorable factors under the “totality of circumstances.” This balancing test is open-ended, meaning officers may consider any relevant fact about the applicant’s conduct, history, and ties.

The immigration lawyers at Zneimer & Zneimer, P.C. carefully follow every development in USCIS policy. The latest Policy Alert, issued August 19, 2025 (PA-2025-16), clarifies several areas where discretion plays a decisive role, especially when an applicant has engaged in or supported anti-American or terrorist activities, when parole or admission applications were inconsistent with the law at the time, and in limited employment-based contexts like National Interest Waivers and EB-5 investor petitions.

The Factors USCIS Weighs

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

At Zneimer & Zneimer P.C., our experienced immigration attorneys often guide physicians through the complicated process of moving from a J-1 visa waiver to a green card. Many physicians who secure a Conrad 30 waiver, DHHS waiver, or other J-1 waiver believe they can immediately apply for adjustment of status, but the law is clear that a J-1 physician must complete the full three-year service obligation before filing for a green card through adjustment of status.

Understanding this requirement is critical for avoiding delays, denials, and immigration complications.

Why Does the Three-Year Service Requirement Exist?

The legal foundation comes directly from the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and its regulations.  According to the INA, a physician who received a J-1 waiver based on agreeing to serve in an underserved area may not apply for a green card until completing the required service.  The INA specifically prohibits a J-1 waiver physician from applying for adjustment of status until completing at least three years of full-time employment in a designated shortage area.

Federal regulations bar J-1 waiver physicians from filing Form I-485 until the service is completed and require physicians to submit evidence proving that they have fulfilled the three-year commitment before adjustment of status can be filed.

In other words, physicians cannot adjust status while still working toward completion of their waiver service. Filing early will result in a denial.

Physician National Interest Waivers (PNIW): Is There an Exception?

Some physicians pursue a Physician National Interest Waiver (PNIW) to obtain permanent residence without employer sponsorship. However, even for PNIW applicants, the three-year service completion rule applies. Specifically, the National Interest Waiver for physicians requires:

  • The physician to work full-time in a medically underserved area or a Veterans Affairs facility.
  • The physician to complete either three or five years of service (depending on when the petition was filed).
  • The physician must complete the required service before adjustment of status can be granted.

A physician applying for a PNIW may file the I-140 petition before completing the service. However, the Form I-485 adjustment of status application cannot be approved until the physician satisfies the full three- or five-year service requirement.  USCIS will hold the I-485 pending until the service is completed.  There is no exception that allows a physician who has not completed the service obligation (whether for a J-1 waiver or PNIW) to actually receive a green card through adjustment.

To summarize the NIW and J-1 waiver interaction: Continue reading →

Contact Information
4141 N Western Ave
Chicago, IL 60618
Phone: 773-516-4100
Fax: 773-304-3185

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2014 – 2026, Zneimer & Zneimer, P.C.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design