President Trump signed a spending bill thereby averting a government shutdown.  The continuing resolution (CR) provides for a short-term extension of the EB-5 Regional Center Program through December 21, 2018.  The CR also extends the E-Verify and Religious Workers programs.   The CR extends the EB-5 Regional Center Program without any changes.  We will be closely following activity on Capitol Hill surrounding EB-5 reform and/or extension efforts.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued its long-awaited Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to amend USCIS Regulations relating to cap-subject H-1B petitions filed under both the regular cap and advanced degree exemption. Comments from the public may be submitted to the agency within the next 30 days.  This does not affect cap-exempt H-1B petitions.

 While the proposed changes are subject to possible modification, be aware that the upcoming H-1B cap season will likely be dramatically different from past years.  Highlights of the proposed changes include:

Pre-Registration

Electronic Registration/Pre-Registration
There is a proposed requirement that all cap-subject H-1B employers first register each intended petition electronically with USCIS during a designated period rather than directly filing complete H-1B petition packets with USCIS.  Basic information relating to the petitioner and beneficiary would be required in order to register. An employer would be limited to one registration per beneficiary within the same fiscal year.  USCIS does not plan to impose a registration fee at this time.  Only those employers whose registrations are selected (selected registrants) would be eligible to file cap-subject H-1B petitions during the particular filing period. 

Initial Registration/Random Selection 
An initial, time-limited registration period would be created with a start date at least 14 days prior to April 1st, which is the first date when cap-subject petitions may be filed each year. During the initial registration period USCIS would determine whether sufficient employer registrations were received to reach the regular cap for the new fiscal year.

  • If not, USCIS would notify all registrants that they may file their H-1B cap-subject petitions on behalf of the named beneficiaries and registration would remain open to employers.

    • On a rolling basis, USCIS would continue accepting and selecting electronic registrations until the regular H-1B cap is met, checking registration numbers at the end of each day to determine when there are enough to meet the cap.
    • A random selection may or may not be conducted as determined by USCIS.
  • If so, USCIS would close the registration period and randomly select enough registrants to meet the regular cap.
  • USCIS would notify the selected registrants of the applicable H-1B petition filing period and where to file their H-1B cap-subject petitions.
  • After the selection process is completed for the regular cap, USCIS would determine whether there are enough remaining eligible registrants to meet the 20,000 advanced degree exemption.
    • If not, USCIS would notify all registrants that they may file their H-1B cap-subject petitions on behalf of the named beneficiaries and registration would remain open to employers.
    • USCIS would continue accepting and selecting electronic registrations until the advanced degree exemption is met. A random selection may or may not be conducted as determined by USCIS.
  • If so, USCIS would close the registration period and use a computer-generated random selection process to meet the advanced degree exemption.

Petition Filing for Selected Registrants Only
USCIS would notify the selected registrants when and where they may file their H-1B petitions on behalf of the named beneficiaries.  Only the selected registrants would be permitted to file cap-subject H-1B petitions.

  • An employer that registers to file multiple petitions (each on behalf of a different beneficiary) may be selected to file some of its petitions and not selected for others.

Unselected Registrations
Unselected registrations would remain on reserve for the fiscal year so that if USCIS determined that it must increase the number of registrations to meet the regular cap or advanced degree exemption (presumably in case some of the selected registrants fail to file or their H-1B petitions are denied), then USCIS would select from among the reserve registrants and if needed re-open the registration until the regular and advance degree exemptions are met. 

  • If the registration period is re-opened, USCIS would announce the re-opened registration period start date on its website and accept additional registrations sufficient to meet the new projected amount of registrations needed to meet the regular cap and/or advanced degree exemption. 

 Selection Process

Regular Cap Exhausted First
With the goal of maximizing approvals for the most-skilled or highest-paid petition beneficiaries, the proposed regulations would change the sequence for considering petitions filed for beneficiaries counted against the regular cap or beneficiaries counted under the advanced degree exemption.

  • USCIS would select registrants toward the regular cap first until that cap is reached.  This would include all registrants (that is, those seeking to employ beneficiaries with only bachelor degrees or equivalent as well as those with advanced degrees from US education institutions).
  • Only when the projected number of registrations needed to meet the regular cap is reached would USCIS select registrants who are eligible for the advanced degree exemption.

The proposed rule states that by changing the selection order, USCIS believes that the total number of petitions selected under the regular cap for H-1B beneficiaries possessing a master’s or higher degree from a U.S. institution of higher education will increase overall each fiscal year.

If you wish to discuss your plans for the upcoming H-1B cap season or the proposed rule, please contact your Fox Rothschild attorney or any of the firm’s Immigration Practice Group co-chairs.

Employers large and small need to understand how immigration policy updates and enforcement affect their workplace compliance status. In a time of ramped-up government inspections, lack of preparation or information can leave businesses facing penalties. In fact, common structural changes like mergers, reorganizations, downsizing, relocations and layoffs require employers to reassess documentation for visa-holding employees and potentially notify government agencies. Knowing what to do is half the battle.

Immigration Practice Co-Chairs Alka Bahal, Ali Brodie and Catherine Wadhwani offer a free webinar on November 13, Immigration Compliance: What Employers Need To Know, that focuses on key issues facing employers who hire personnel from all corners of the globe.

 •   The immigration landscape in 2018 under the Trump administration

•   Current Form I-9 requirements – avoiding potential pitfalls

•   Organizational tips and best practices

•   Proactive steps to improve your compliance program

•   Audits and inspections by ICE and Department of Homeland Security

The event is open for registration through November 11.

Is your company I-9 compliant or complicit?  With governmental workplace audits and raids on the rise, all businesses must be extra vigilant their I-9s are compliant.  Failure to comply subjects a company to massive fines and possible criminal prosecution.  Our attorneys have tremendous expertise auditing hundreds of thousands of I-9s, conducting training for human resource personnel and management, drafting and implanting I-9 compliance programs, and responding to ICE in the event of an inspection.  ICE inspections are expected to continue—this alert provides employers with practical advice as to maintaining I-9 compliance.

On Saturday, September 22, 2018, the Trump administration announced the upcoming publication of a proposed rule designed to redefine a status known as “public charge” — a category used to determine whether someone seeking permanent resident status is “likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence” for those seeking to immigrate to the United States. This rule was signed by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen on September 21, 2018 and will open for comment on the date of the official version’s publication in the Federal Register. As per past practices, the comment period should last for 60 days from the date of publication.

The 400 page rule expands greatly on how the government proposes to enforce a determination that a foreign national who is seeking a U.S. immigration benefit is or is likely to become a “Public Charge”, which means an individual who is likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense. Specifically, under Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, an individual seeking admission to the United States or seeking to adjust status to that of an individual lawfully admitted for permanent residence (green card) is inadmissible if the individual, “at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge.” Public charge does not apply in naturalization proceedings. If an individual is inadmissible, admission to the United States or adjustment of status is not granted. (Note that there are many exceptions in which a public charge finding would not apply, including but not limited to: Refugees and Asylees, those who are victims of violence (VAWA), Special Immigrant Juveniles (SIJ), Temporary Protected Status (TPS) applicants, Amerasians, Afghan/Iraqi interpreters or U.S. Government employees, Cuban Adjustment Act applicants, NACARA applicants, etc.)

Currently, there is no formal definition of a public charge, but DHS states that “A number of factors must be considered when making a determination that a person is likely to become a public charge”. The proposed new rule would define a public charge as “an alien who receives one or more public benefits.” In the past, people have been at risk of being defined a “public charge” if they took cash welfare — known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or Supplemental Security Income — or federal help paying for long-term care. (Immigrants must be in the country legally for five years before being eligible for TANF or SSI.) The new rule would expand the list to include some health insurance, food and housing programs. Specifically, it would penalize green-card applicants for using Medicaid under certain conditions, using food stamps, Section 8 rental assistance, federal housing vouchers and even enrollment in a Medicare Part D program subsidy.

Specifically, pages 95-96 of the proposed Rule lists the following that would be considered Public Benefits:
· Monetizable benefits: – Any Federal, State, local, or tribal cash assistance for income maintenance, including: Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and Federal, State or local cash benefit programs for income maintenance (often called “General Assistance” in the State context, but which may exist under other names);
– Benefits that can be monetized in accordance with proposed 8 CFR 212.24:
· Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or formerly called “Food Stamps”),
· Public housing defined as Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program;
· Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance (including Moderate Rehabilitation); and
· Non-cash benefits that cannot be monetized:
– Many Benefits paid for by Medicaid;
– Premium and Cost Sharing Subsidies for Medicare Part D; Benefits provided for institutionalization for long-term care at government expense;
– Subsidized Housing under the Housing Act of 1937.

While public charge is an old idea dating back to the 1990s, the proposed changes are unprecedented. Including programs like Medicaid and food stamps, which are much wider in scope, is a significant change.

In the past, DHS has been forgiving regarding the issuance of immigration benefits if someone had obtained government benefits in the past, so long the individual can prove that he or she is not likely to become a public charge in the future. Under the proposed rule as currently envisioned, it is clear that DHS will not be forgiving now looking at multiple factors including age, health, and past employment history, and, most importantly, receipt of past public benefits.

If implemented as contemplated, DHS will look back within a 36 month period of receipt of government benefits in making their decision on admissibility. Immigrants are encouraged to reexamine any currently public benefits that he/she is currently receiving to determine whether in the upcoming months it will be necessary to drop-out of these public benefit programs once the new public charge rule formally goes into effect.

DHS estimates that 2.5 percent of eligible immigrants would drop out of public benefits programs because of this change — which would tally about $1.5 billion worth of federal money per year, but others expect a much larger impact, including a chilling effect on the use of routine health benefits, particularly for children. In the proposed rule, DHS itself notes that the changes could result in “worse health outcomes,” “increased use of emergency rooms,” “increased prevalence of communicable diseases,” “increased rates of poverty” and other concerns.

Fear of being deemed a public charge and being unable to attain lawful permanent residency, and ultimately U.S. Citizenship will necessarily result in a detriment to low-income immigrant populations and eventually, the separation of families.

This is an early step in the complex federal rule-making process and many things could still change. Once the proposed rule appears in the Federal Register, it opens a 60-day public comment period allowing members of the public to provide input. As such, a final rule is unlikely to take effect before 2019.

We recommend that any immigrant, regardless of immigration status, who has previously received a public assistance benefit in the past for themselves, or immediate family members, should contact an immigration attorney for evaluation of their case.

Fox Rothschild immigration attorney, Kristen Schneck will be speaking on this topic as a panelist on Oct 24th, at the DHS Advisory Committee meeting to be held in Pittsburgh hosted by the Allegheny Dept. of Human Services.

Fox Rothschild will continue to monitor and report on activity regarding these rule making efforts. Over the course of the next few weeks, we will publish a series of blog posts with more details and updated regarding the Public Charge proposed rule. As always, please refer to ImmigrationView for the latest information on topics of importance in the immigration law practice.
For questions or more information about this alert, please contact Mark Harley at (412) 391-2418 or mharley@foxrothschild.com, Alka Bahal at (973) 994-7800 or abahal@foxrothschild.com or any member of the firm’s Immigration Practice

 

 

President Trump signed a bill today, H.R. 6157, with a short-term continuing resolution (CR) preventing a government shutdown and extending certain programs, including the EB-5 Regional Center Program, through December 7, 2018.  Without the CR, the EB-5 Regional Center Program would have expired on September 30, 2018.  The CR extends the EB-5 Regional Center Program without any changes.  The spending bill includes funding for the departments of Defense, Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor.  We continue to closely follow activity on Capitol Hill as efforts towards EB-5 reform continue.

In our continuing series of reports, Charles (“Charlie”) Oppenheim, Chief of the Visa Control and Reporting Division, U.S. Department of State, shares his most recent analysis of current trends and future projections for the various immigrant preference categories with AILA (the American Immigration Lawyers’ Association).

Below are highlights from the most recent “check-in with Charlie” (September 13, 2018), reflecting his analysis of current trends and future projections for the various immigrant preference categories.

This month, Charlie comments on the close of this fiscal year and the recovery in certain categories at the start of FY2019, provides his predictions on final action date movement in the coming months, and answers questions from the public.

Check-in with DOS’s Charlie Oppenheim: September 13, 2018

On September 14, 2018, USCIS announced that it would accept adjustment of status applications based on the “Dates for Filing” chart for both family-based and employment-based cases.  Since Charlie sets the “Dates for Filing” based on where he expects the final action dates will be in the next 8 to 12 months, these charts are also helpful in understanding how far the final action dates are likely to advance in the near term.

Family-Based Preference Categories

Since most family-based cases are processed at Embassies/Consulates, Charlie’s visibility into family-based demand is good, which avoids dramatic fluctuations in the final action dates.  These categories are expected to advance modestly or hold steady, except Mexico.  Given lower than anticipated demand members may see the Mexico family-based categories move more rapidly than normal.  Demand from China continues to be relatively low, whereas India demand has rebounded over the past year.

Employment-Based Preference Categories

EB-1:  For October, EB-1 Worldwide along with all other countries except China and India, advances ten months to April 1, 2017.  Charlie remains pessimistic that the EB-1 Worldwide final action date will advance before the end of this calendar year.  He forecloses the possibility of advancement in November and is pessimistic that there will be advancement in December but notes that there will be some forward movement in all EB-1 categories after the beginning of 2019.  Demand is sufficiently high that Charlie is unable to predict at this time whether this category will become current in FY 2019.  Charlie does not expect any advancement of EB-1 China or EB-1 India before January 2019 and believes it is “almost guaranteed” that both categories will be subject to a final action date through the fiscal year.

EB-2 and EB-3 Worldwide:  As previously predicted, EB-2 Worldwide and EB-3 Worldwide will return to current in October and will remain current for the foreseeable future and well into the next calendar year.  Charlie has not seen expected growth in EB-3 Worldwide.

EB-2 China and EB-3 China:  While EB-2 China recovers to April 1, 2015 in October, it will not surpass the EB-3 China final action date, which advances to June 1, 2015.  It is unclear whether EB-3 China’s two-month lead will be significant enough to spur downgrade demand.  If there are not as many downgrades, EB-3 China could advance more rapidly than expected.  Charlie has no visibility into EB-3 China “downgrade” demand until a visa number is requested, so this category may move modestly to avoid future retrogression.

EB-2 India and EB-3 India:  EB-2 India advances to March 26, 2009 in October, with EB-3 India trailing behind by less than three months at January 1, 2009.  Based on the dates for filing and depending on the level of demand in each of these categories, it is possible that EB-3 India may surpass EB-2 India at some point this fiscal year.

EB-3 Philippines and Other Workers Philippines:  As predicted, EB-3 Philippines and Other Workers Philippines will recover to June 1, 2017 in October. Nnly minimal movement during the first quarter of the fiscal year is expected.

EB-4:  As predicted, EB-4 Mexico will fully recover in October to its June Visa Bulletin date of October 22, 2016, EB-4 India will return to current, and EB-4 El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras remain at February 15, 2016 in October.  There will be forward movement in EB-4 El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras this fiscal year, but anything more than minimal movement is unlikely in Q1.  Due to visibility into preadjudicated cases filed prior to the imposition of a final action date in May 2016, as well as potential future demand by cases with old priority dates, Charlie is moving this category conservatively to avoid a future retrogression.

EB-4 India:  It is expected that this category will be subject to a final action date again, but that will not likely happen until late in the fiscal year.

EB-5 Non-Regional Center:  for China and Vietnam will advance to August 15, 2014 and January 1, 2016 respectively in October.

EB-5 China:  Demand remains high, so members should not expect much movement in this category throughout the fiscal year.  EB-5 Vietnam, in contrast, is likely to advance modestly early in the fiscal year until it reaches its per country limit, at which time, its final action date will track EB-5 China.

Expiration of Two Visa Categories

Unless reauthorized by Congress, the EB-4 Religious Worker and EB-5 (I5 and R5) categories will be unavailable after September 30, 2018.  If Congress reauthorizes these programs, the EB-4 Religious Worker category will become current in October, except EB-4 El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras which will have a final action date of February 15, 2016 and EB-4 Mexico, which will have an October 22, 2016 final action date.  If reauthorized, EB-5 Worldwide (I5 and R5) would become current, with EB-5 China (I5 and R5) subject to an August 15, 2014 final action date, and EB-5 Vietnam (I5 and R5) subject to a January 1, 2016 final action date.

QUESTION:  USCIS data from July 2018 indicates that there are only 473 pending applications for EB-3 India.  USCIS notes that this is for service centers only and doesn’t include field offices.  The number of EB-3 China cases is 161.  Do these numbers track to the information DOS is receiving from USCIS about pending demand?

CHARLIE’S RESPONSE: As these are USCIS statistics, I would suggest that you pose your question to USCIS.  However, I am told that the Service Centers have dramatically reduced their inventories as pending adjustment cases which were filed years ago have become current and were approved, and new cases are now being sent to field offices via the National Benefits Center (NBC).  If I were to speculate, the numbers posted likely represent only India and China cases that were pending and subject to a priority backlog on March 6, 2017, when USCIS started sending new cases to the NBC.  Therefore, it should be expected that the number of cases at the NBC and the field offices far exceeds those which remain at the Service Centers.

QUESTION: Can you explain why sometimes final action dates are the same for different countries in a certain preference category and why sometimes they are different?

CHARLIE’S RESPONSE: Whenever the total number of documentarily qualified applicants for an individual country or category exceeds the supply of numbers available for a particular month, it is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a final action date is established.  The final action date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who cannot be accommodated for a visa number.  For example, if the monthly allocation target for the China and India EB-2 preference categories were 250, and each country had demand in excess of 500, a final action date would be established so that only 250 numbers would be allocated.  In this case, the final action date for each country would be the priority date of the 251st applicant.  That date could be widely different based on EB-2 demand patterns for each country.

QUESTION: Using the EB-1 patterns we have observed over the past couple of years as an example, can you explain how “otherwise unused” numbers are allocated?

CHARLIE’S RESPONSE: Section 202(e) of the INA says that if there are “otherwise unused” employment numbers under the respective Worldwide preference limit, such numbers may be made available to those countries which have already reached the per-country preference limit.  In the past, EB-1 has been listed as “Current” for all countries for at least the first six months of each fiscal year because the worldwide level of demand at that time was insufficient to use all numbers available under the annual limit.  However, the “otherwise unused” numbers situation is constantly monitored, and subsequent changes in demand patterns can negatively impact the availability of future numbers to countries which had previously benefitted from their use.  Such increases in EB-1 Worldwide demand later in the year have eventually required the imposition of a final action date for EB-1 China and India to allow other countries that had not yet reached the per-country limit to remain “Current.”  Any remaining unused numbers are then made available strictly in priority date order without regard to country, and a single date would be applied.  That has been the case in past years when it has been necessary to apply a final action date to govern the use of a more limited amount of unused numbers (or none) available for use by China and India EB-1 applicants.  This is the reason why the October China and India EB-1 date is earlier than the Worldwide date, with both being required to govern number use within the overall annual limit.

You may access the September 2018 Visa Bulletin here and the October 2018 Visa Bulletin here.

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP, specializing in corporate immigration law and compliance.  Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Morristown, New Jersey office though she practices throughout the United States and at Consulates worldwide.  You can reach Alka at (973) 994-7800, or abahal@foxrothschild.com.http://www.foxrothschild.com/alka-bahal/

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that the filing fee for premium processing will increase from $1,225 to $1,410, beginning on October 1, 2018.  According to USCIS, this 15% increase in price is in step with inflation since DHS last adjusted premium processing rates in 2010 and will allow USCIS to more effectively adjudicate petitions and maintain service to petitioners.  The new rule was published in the Federal Register on August 31, 2018.

Premium processing is an optional expediting service that is currently authorized for certain employment-based petitioners filing Forms I-129 or I-140.  The premium processing fee is paid in addition to the base filing fee and any other applicable fees, which cannot be waived.  Under premium processing, USCIS has 15 days to process these specific types of employment-based immigration benefit requests.  Without premium processing, adjudication can take upwards of 4 months.

“Because premium processing fees have not been adjusted since 2010, our ability to improve the adjudications and service processes for all petitioners has been hindered as we’ve experienced significantly higher demand for immigration benefits.  Ultimately, adjusting the premium processing fee will allow us to continue making necessary investments in staff and technology to administer various immigration benefit requests more effectively and efficiently,” said Chief Financial Officer Joseph Moore.  “USCIS will continue adjudicating all petitions on a case-by-case basis to determine if they meet all standards required under applicable law, policies, and regulations.”

Premium processing is available for certain employment based nonimmigrant visas, including H-1Bs, L-1s, O-1s and Ps, as well as some employment base permanent residency categories.  Earlier this year, USCIS suspended premium processing for all H-1B petitions subject to the annual quota on H-1 visas (i.e. “cap cases”).  This suspension was initially slated to end on September 10, 2018, but USCIS has now pushed that date back to February 19, 2019.  Additionally, USCIS also announced that, as of September 11, 2018, it will expand the suspension to include H-1B petitions seeking to amend existing H-1B status, to request a change of employer, or to change status.  Only H-1B petitions seeking an extension of status (with no change in circumstances or employer) or H-1B petitions filed under the H-1B Cap Exemption will be able to file under premium processing beginning September 10, 2018.  In the absence of premium processing, USCIS may take four to six months (or longer) to complete the processing of an H-1B petition.

Employers and employees alike will have to take into consideration the impact of processing times and increased fees when planning to file nonimmigrant and immigrant visa petitions.  The unavailability of premium processing can impact the timing of employment and prolong restrictions on international travel.

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP, specializing in corporate immigration law and compliance.  Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Morristown, New Jersey office though she practices throughout the United States and at Consulates worldwide.  You can reach Alka at (973) 994-7800, or abahal@foxrothschild.com.

On May 21, 2018, I posted a blog regarding the then Proposed USCIS Policy Change for F, J, and M Nonimmigrants and Unlawful Presence implications.  On August 9, 2018, USCIS issued a revised final policy memorandum, effective that day.  USCIS made changes to its proposed policy after considering feedback the agency received during the public comment period mentioned in the prior blog post.

Effective August 9, 2018 (last Thursday), F and M nonimmigrants who timely file for reinstatement of status with USCIS after falling out of status will have the accrual of unlawful presence suspended while their application for reinstatement is pending.  The reinstatement application is considered timely if filed within a five month window of the student falling out of status. If the reinstatement is ultimately denied, unlawful presence will start accruing on the day after the denial.

J nonimmigrant reinstatement requests are administered by the Department of State (DOS) and if the J-1 reinstatement applicant’s request is approved, unlawful presence will not accrue.  Likewise, Unlawful Presence would start to accrue in the instance of a denial, although DOS has not weighed in at this time as to when it will begin to accrue.

USCIS will host a stakeholder meeting on August 23rd.  Please refer back to this blog as more information becomes available.

 

On August 3, 2018, the US District Judge for District of Columbia, John D. Bates, ruled that the Trump administration must fully restore the DACA program. In the decision, the court stated, “The Court therefore reaffirms its conclusion that DACA’s rescission was unlawful and must be set aside.” In addition, the court also denied the government’s motion to reconsider, stating that “The Court has already once given DHS the opportunity to remedy these deficiencies—either by providing a coherent explanation of its legal opinion or by reissuing its decision for bona fide policy reasons that would preclude judicial review—so it will not do so again.” However, the judge delayed the order until August 23, 2018 to allow the government to determine whether it will appeal the court’s decision.

The August 3rd decision will not make any new changes to the DACA program. It is still being implemented on the terms of the prior court rulings. USCIS is still accepting and processing DACA Renewal applications who have previously been approved for DACA as a result of the two nationwide injunctions issued in California and New York earlier this year. USCIS is still not accepting the new or initial applications for the first time.

Considering the pending litigation, the American Immigration Lawyer Association recommends the eligible DACA recipients who would like to renew their DACA to consult with an attorney and submit their DACA renewal application as soon as possible.