The U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (“CBP”) confirmed that individual H-1B holders returning to the U.S. via Newark airport have been targeted for further questioning, and have in some cases been subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.   Members of the American Immigration Lawyers Association have reported that H-1B nonimmigrants, in particular from India, were asked who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. 

According to the CBP,  several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) for ongoing fraud.  The CBP notes that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. They also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on “the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.” In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS – Fraud Detection and National Security (“FDNS”) and the Department of Labor – Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.

In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person’s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.

During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children.

Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.

In all cases, H-1B and L-1 individuals should thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition, and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.