Header graphic for print

Immigration View

Navigating Complex U.S. Immigration Laws

Traveling to Canada? Be aware of new rules!

Posted in Consular Issues, General Immigration News and Updates

The Canada Border Services Agency (“CBSA”) issued a message on May 10, 2016 to all Legal Permanent Residents (“LPRs”) of the U.S. traveling to Canada by air.  CBSA advised that changes to entry requirements are now in effect. Below are the highlights:

  • Electronic Travel Authorization (“eTA”) is a new Canadian entry requirement for visa-exempt foreign nationals traveling to Canada by air.  As a U.S. permanent resident, you are expected to have an eTA when flying to or transiting through Canada, effective on March 15, 2016.  You do not need an eTA when you enter by land or sea.
  • Visa-exempt foreign nationals who fly to or transit through Canada are expected to have secured eTA first.  Exceptions to this requirement include U.S. citizens and travelers with a valid Canadian visa (see full list of exemptions).  U.S. Legal Permanent Residents must have an eTA before boarding a flight to Canada as of March 15, 2016.
  • Until September 29, 2016, travelers who do not have an eTA can board their flight, as long as they have a valid travel document, such as a passport and meet other requirements.  The Border Services officers can admit travelers without an eTA into the country, but they will remind travelers of the new requirement.
  • LPRs traveling to Canada can apply for an eTA, which costs $7 Canadian. The application process takes a few minutes and is linked to your passport and valid for five years or until the passport expires, whichever comes first. This means that you can travel to Canada repeatedly within this period without having to reapply for an eTA. You will need to travel with the same passport you used to apply for your eTA.
  • For LPRs enrolled into the NEXUS program, the passport used to apply for the eTA will need to be the same passport used when the LPR enrolled into the NEXUS program.  Otherwise, the LPR cannot continue to use the accelerated service through the NEXUS self-serve kiosks.  If you were issued a new passport since you joined NEXUS or used another document to apply, you must visit a NEXUS Enrolment Centre and have the passport that is linked to the eTA also linked to your NEXUS membership

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Corporate Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP. Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Roseland, 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.

Immigrant Visa Processing Changes – EB1 retrogression expected; EB2 Worldwide and India will retrogress; EB2/3 China remains backlogged; Visa Office on Priority Dates, Demand, and Predictions

Posted in PERM Labor Certification, Permanent Residence, Priority Dates

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” (June 9, 2016), reflecting his analysis of current trends and future projections for the various immigrant preference categories.

This month, Charlie examines the final action date movements in the July 2016 Visa Bulletin and his analysis of current trends and future projections for the various immigrant preference categories.

EB-4 and Certain Religious Workers (SR) Preference Categories. As previously predicted, and noted in the July Visa Bulletin, a cut-off date of January 1, 2010 will be imposed in July for EB-4 Mexico. This is the same cut-off date imposed earlier this fiscal year for EB-4 El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. There will be no forward movement in these categories prior to the end of the fiscal year. Despite the cut-off date in these categories, it is expected that EB-4 Mexico will become current in October and EB-4 El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras should advance to a 2015 cutoff date. A more precise prediction of the cut-off cannot be made until pending demand in September is reviewed. Charlie predicts that a cutoff date for EB-4 India will need to be imposed for August.

Family-Based Projections. FB-4 China, which shared the FB-4 Worldwide final action date until retrogressing in June to January 1, 2003, will remain at that cut-off date through July. Last month, Charlie raised the possibility of advancement in FB-4 China before October. Of course, any forward movement this fiscal year would require a decrease in demand in the FB-1, FB-2, and FB-3 preference categories. Once there is an infusion of new visa numbers in October, it is expected that the category will recover to the prior cut-off date of July 2003 no later than November.

Similar to FB-4 China, FB-4 India recently tracked the FB-4 Worldwide final action date until it retrogressed in June . However, unlike FB-4 China, the final action date for FB-4 India will definitely remain at January 1, 2001, through September. Charlie predicts that FB-4 India will advance to the former July 2003 cutoff date early in the next fiscal year, but expects that recovery to happen more slowly than for FB-4 China. Charlie anticipates that the FB-4 India date will reach late 2002 for October, and may fully recover to July 2003 by the end of the calendar year.

China EB-2 and EB-3. In June, the final action date for both EB-2 and EB-3 China retrogressed to January 1, 2010. Charlie reminds us that there will be no forward movement in either of these categories this fiscal year.

EB-2 Worldwide and India. It is likely that a cut-off date will be imposed for EB-2 Worldwide by September due to sustained high demand. In May alone, 4,300 EB-2 numbers were used worldwide (including PRC and EB-2 India demand). The impetus for this demand is unclear; it is unlikely the result of EB-3 upgrades, since the EB-3 date has essentially been “current” for a long time. In May, Charlie allocated EB-2 numbers to more than 1,400 applicants with priority dates of 2014 and earlier.

Charlie anticipates EB-2 India’s final action date will be one week beyond EB-3 India through the rest of the fiscal year. Based on current usage, there should be sufficient available unused EB-3 numbers worldwide to enable moderate forward movement in India EB-3 in the month of September.

Cutoff Date for China and India EB-1 Expected by End of Fiscal Year. In May alone, Charlie received requests for approximately 4,000 EB-1 numbers worldwide (including China and India). Members should expect to see a cut-off date imposed for China EB-1 and India EB-1 this fiscal year in either August or September. Both categories are expected to become current again in October. A cut-off date will not be imposed for EB-1 Worldwide (i.e., rest of the world, besides India and China) this fiscal year.

 

You may access the July 2016 Visa Bulletin here and the June 2016 Visa Bulletin here.

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Corporate Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP. Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Roseland, 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.

 

 

Forget Time Management, Try Distraction Management

Posted in Uncategorized

I thought I’d take a little different approach to this weeks blog post.  I saw a post about time/distraction management and it struck a chord with me.  We all struggle through our busy days trying to juggle a million different tasks, while trying to being responsive to calls/inquiries/emails/texts/etc. on a moment to moment basis.  Sometimes, we need to find time to focus on more involved, complex tasks, which is always a time management challenge.  I thought these suggestions (some of which I employ myself) were most helpful, so I thought I would share.

While many experts urge busy people to focus on time management to be productive, in today’s world it’s better to focus on distraction management.  Distractions are what really consume our days.  It takes our brains time to shift back and forth between tasks and to refocus on that task. Each time we are distracted we lose precious time. Plus, according to Carnegie Mellon University research, the distractions drain cognitive skills-yes, make us dumber!

Ergo, minimize distractions, increase productivity! So what are some things to try?

  • Get rid of that email pop-up notification in Outlook.
  • Reduce the number of notifications and alerts you receive on your smartphone.
  • Use the “Do Not Disturb” function on your smartphone during times you need to concentrate.
  • Don’t constantly check email. This is often a learned habit used to avoid doing more difficult work. Check it between tasks, not during one.
  • Unsubscribe from email listservs and newsletters that are no longer useful.
  • Create a daily list of the tasks you must get done that day. Be mindful of your goal of not allowing or creating disruptions during each task.
  • When starting a longer task, close your door even if just for 20-30 minutes to signal you are not to be disturbed.
  • Don’t leave Facebook or other social networks open on your Internet browser to reduce temptations to sneak a peek.
  • With these done, spend a week tracking your distractions and try to find several other ways to lessen your distractions and increase your productivity.

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Corporate Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP. Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Roseland, 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.

Immigrant Visa Processing Changes – EB2 India retrogresses; EB2/3 China retrogresses- Visa Office on Priority Dates, Demand, and Predictions

Posted in Consular Issues, Permanent Residence, Priority Dates

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” (May 9, 2016), reflecting his analysis of current trends and future projections for the various immigrant preference categories.

This month, Charlie examines the final action date movements in the June 2016 Visa Bulletin and his analysis of current trends and future projections for the various immigrant preference categories.

Family-Based Projections. In May, the final action dates for China and FB-4 India remained consistent with the FB-4 Worldwide final action date of July 22, 2003. As noted in the May Visa Bulletin and in previous editions of this column, it was anticipated that FB-4 India might retrogress as early as June and FB-4 China might retrogress by late summer.

As expected, FB-4 India will retrogress in June as a result of the high level of demand in this preference category. In addition, because FB-4 India number usage is so close to the annual limit, there is “no hope” that the current cut-off date of January 1, 2001 will advance for the remainder of the fiscal year. Similarly, due to extremely high demand, the final action date for FB-4 China will retrogress in June to January 1, 2003. However, unlike FB-4 India, there is still a possibility that the cut-off date for FB-4 China will advance before October.

Continue to Watch EB-4 and Certain Religious Workers (SR) Preference Categories. It is expected that the final action date of January 1, 2010 that was imposed in May for EB-4 and certain religious workers from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras will remain the same for the remainder of this fiscal year. This is necessary to ensure that numbers remain available for applicants from countries which have not yet reached their per-country limit for this category.

Last month we reported that it would be “extremely likely” that EB-4 India and EB-4 Mexico would also become oversubscribed during the summer. At this time, it appears that it will definitely happen, and that it is only a matter of when the retrogression will occur. When it does occur, a January 1, 2010 cut-off date will be applied.

The establishment of a cut-off date for EB-4 India and EB-4 Mexico is impacted by a lack of unused numbers that would otherwise fall down to these categories. Demand for EB-4 Mexico is driven by high levels of demand in Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJS) filings. By contrast, demand for EB-4 India is driven by a number of factors, including demand for religious worker visas.

China EB-2 and EB-3. As reported in the May Visa Bulletin, the final action date for EB-2 China is September 1, 2012 and for EB-3 China, August 15, 2013. In previous months, we reported that EB-3 China would likely retrogress in June and that number usage would also stop at that time. In June, the final action date for both EB-2 and EB-3 China will retrogress to January 1, 2010. It is expected that this cut-off date will remain in place, thereby ending the downgrade phenomenon, at least through the end of this fiscal year.

EB-2 Worldwide and EB-2 India Demand. As a result of extremely high EB-2 demand, it has been determined that there will no longer be any “otherwise” unused numbers available for use in excess of the normal EB-2 per-country limit. While this has occurred in the past, it has not previously happened this early in the fiscal year. The EB-2 India final action date for May is November 8, 2008. As the combined EB-2 Worldwide and EB-2 India demand is expected to remain high, a retrogression of the EB-2 India final action date to October 1, 2004 was required for June. As noted in the June Visa Bulletin, Charlie predicts that the final action date may nevertheless advance slowly for the remainder of the fiscal year, consistent with the pace of EB-3 India advancement.

EB-2 India demand is partly attributable to EB-3 India upgrades. Visibility into EB upgrade and downgrade requests only happens at the time the I-485 is adjudicated and a visa number is requested. If visibility into demand for employment based visas was possible earlier in the process, retrogressions would not happen so abruptly.

EB-1 Demand and Impact to Other Categories. Demand for EB-1 Worldwide remains very high. As we cautioned last month, should the demand continue at this pace or increase, it is possible that some type of corrective action may be required before the end of the fiscal year.

You may access the June 2016 Visa Bulletin here and the May 2016 Visa Bulletin here.

https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bulletin/2016/visa-bulletin-for-june-2016.html

https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/law-and-policy/bulletin/2016/visa-bulletin-for-may-2016.html

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Corporate Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP. Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Roseland, 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.

Lawsuit Seeking Transparency in H-1B Lottery Selection Process

Posted in General Immigration News and Updates, H-1B Temporary Workers, Non-Immigrant Visas (other than Es, Ls and H-1B)

Recently, the American Immigration Council (Council) and the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) teamed up on a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) seeking to “obtain the information needed to provide the public with an understanding of the operating procedures and Defendant USCIS follows when administering the H-1B lottery. AILA seeks declaratory, injunctive and other appropriate relief under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, to compel the release of records …”

As stated in the complaint, with an annual limit of 65,000 visas for new hires, and 20,000 additional visas for professionals with an advanced degree from a U.S. university, employer’s demand for H-1B visas has exceeded the statutory cap for more than ten years. As a result, U.S. employers seeking highly skilled foreign professionals have to submit petitions to USCIS on the first five business day of April for the limited pool of H-1B nonimmigrant visa numbers that are available for the coming fiscal year. If USCIS determines at any time during the first five business days of the filing period that it has received more than enough petitions to meet the numerical limits, the agency will use a computer-generated random selection process (or “lottery”) to choose those petitions that will be accepted for processing according to the statutory limits, taking into account a percentage of the petitions selected which will be denied, withdrawn, or otherwise rejected. Petitions not selected will be returned to the petitioning employers.

“When petitions are submitted to USCIS in April, it’s as if they disappear into a ‘black box,’” said Melissa Crow, Legal Director of the American Immigration Council. “This suit is intended to pry open that box and let the American public and those most directly affected see how the lottery system works from start to finish, and to learn whether the system is operating fairly and all the numbers are being used as the law provides.” As stated by Benjamin Johnson, AILA Executive Director, “Despite the Obama Administration’s public commitment to the values of transparency and accountability, frankly, our attempts to see into this process have been resisted. Instead of responding to our requests for information about how the lottery is conducted, how cap-subject petitions are processed, and how the numbers are estimated and tracked, USCIS has kept the process entirely opaque. This litigation is intended to shine a necessary light on an important process in America’s business immigration system. ”

USCIS Proposes to Increase Fees

Posted in EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program, General Immigration News and Updates, H-1B Temporary Workers, Immigrant Visas, Intrcompany Transferees (L-1 and Permanent Residence), Investors, Traders and Entrepreneurs (E visas and Permanent Residence), Non-Immigrant Visas (other than Es, Ls and H-1B)

In a continuation of its effort to encourage eligible immigrants to become U.S. citizens, the Obama administration is proposing adjustments to the immigration benefit fee schedule that would raise the cost of some benefits but reduce naturalization fees for certain low-income immigrants.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released its proposed changes to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Fee Schedule on May 4, 2016, affecting its fees for services.  The proposed rule has been published in the Federal Register (81 FR 26904, 5/4/16) and is open for comment. Comments are due by July 5, 2016. The proposed changes are likely to go into effect this fall.

According to USCIS, it conducted a comprehensive fee review, after refining its cost accounting process, and determined that current fees do not recover the full costs of the services it provides.  Accordingly, it has stated that adjustment to the fee schedule is necessary to fully recover its costs for services and to maintain adequate service levels.  DHS proposes to increase USCIS fees by a weighted average of 21 percent and add one new fee.  In addition, DHS proposes to clarify that persons filing a benefit request may be required to appear for biometrics services or an interview and pay the biometrics services fee, and make a number of other changes.  USCIS last adjusted its fee schedule in 2010.

This chart summarizes the proposed changes.  The range of fee changes varies, for example, increasing by $45 for an application for naturalization and by $195 for an application for a fiancé visa. The rules also include a new fee of $3,035 to recover the full cost of processing the Employment Based Immigrant Visa, Fifth Preference (EB-5) Annual Certification of Regional Center, Form I-924A.  In addition, the DHS proposal would clarify that people who apply for a benefit may be required to appear for biometrics services or an interview and to pay the biometrics services fee, among other changes

Largely exempt from the increases, however, are low income immigrants who wish to become U.S. citizens.  Under the proposed rule, “DHS would charge a reduced fee of $320 for naturalization applicants with family income greater than 150 percent and not more than 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines.”

“DHS is proposing this change to increase access to United States citizenship,” the proposed rule explains.  The allowance effectively cuts in half the current cost of naturalization — $680, including the $85 biometric fee for these individuals while seeking an additional $45 increase in the cost of naturalization applications for those immigrants who can afford it.

Rep. Luis V. Gutiérrez (D-IL), who has been promoting naturalization and voter registration across the country as a means for immigrants to “Stand Up to Hate,” cheered the rule.  “Right now, a lot of immigrants face a difficult choice: pay $700 or so for the chance to take all the tests and apply for citizenship, or pay $450 to renew a green-card for five years,” Gutiérrez said in a statement.

“Now, the math is much better,” he continued. “You can apply for citizenship and a fee waiver and become an American citizen – with all the rights, duties and honor of citizenship – for a more attainable price or maybe even for free.  The new calculation is going to mean that millions of those who are already eligible can finally take the step and apply for citizenship.”

Applicants can apply for a fee waiver if their income is below or 150 percent of the poverty line, they are receiving a means-tested benefit, or they are experiencing “financial hardship.”

In recent years the Obama administration has put an emphasis on encouraging the estimated 8.8 million eligible legal permanent residents in the U.S. to naturalize and become citizens. Immigration activists, like Gutiérrez, have also embarked on campaigns to help immigrants naturalize and register to vote in a bid to influence the upcoming 2016 election.

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Corporate Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP. Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Roseland, 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.

USCIS Starts to Accept Inquires from Employer If I-129 Petition Seeking Extension of Status or Change of Employer Pending for Over 210 Days

Posted in General Immigration News and Updates, H-1B Temporary Workers, Non-Immigrant Visas (other than Es, Ls and H-1B)

USCIS has been working on mitigating the impact caused by the processing delay on I-129 petitions. In addition to transferring cases from Vermont Service Center to other Service Centers to balance caseloads, USCIS recently began allowing petitioners who filed Form I-129 requesting an extension of status or change of employer to contact USCIS after the petition has been pending for 210 days or more for an inquiry based on the petition being outside of normal processing time.

Petitioners or the legal representative of record may submit an inquiry by calling the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283 (TDD for deaf and hard of hearing: 1-800-767-1833). When making an inquiry, be prepared to provide the receipt number and specify that the case has been pending for 210 days or more.

L-1A Executives Receiving Scam Letters

Posted in General Immigration News and Updates, Intrcompany Transferees (L-1 and Permanent Residence)

A number of employers have reported receiving suspicious letters being sent to L-1A executives.  The letters use incorrect grammar, and claim to be signed by Lori Scialabba, Deputy Director of USCIS.  Upon learning of these suspicious letters, The American Immigration Lawyer’s Association (AILA) reached out to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which confirmed that USCIS did not send the letters.  If you receive a similar letter that appears to be a scam (see sample below), please send a copy to Public.Engagement@uscis.dhs.gov, with the subject line “L-1A Executive Letter Scam.”  If you are unsure of the authenticity of any correspondence you receive from USCIS, contact your immigration attorney at Fox Rothschild for assistance.

L-1A Executive Letter Scam

___________________________

Alka Bahal is a Partner and the Co-Chair of the Corporate Immigration Practice of Fox Rothschild LLP. Alka is situated in Fox Rothschild’s Roseland, 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.

FY2017 H-1B Cap: Data Entry Complete for Lottery Winners

Posted in H-1B Temporary Workers, Startup Companies, Uncategorized

Moving quickly along, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) informed the public that it completed data entry of all “winning” fiscal year 2017 (FY2017) H-1B cap-subject petitions (i.e., petitions that were selected in the computer-generated random process).  The announcement was made on May 2, 2016.  Considering that approximately 236,000 H-1B cap-subject petitions were received by USCIS in early April, it is quite a feat that the Immigration Service conducted the lottery and completed data entry on the selected petitions so fast.

Due to volume and to balance the workload, USCIS stated that it will be transferring some of the selected petitions from the Vermont Service Center (VSC) to the California Service Center (CSC).  Employers whose petitions are transferred will be notified via mail and should communicate with the indicated Service Center going forward, including for such things as upgrading to premium processing.

USCIS will return the “unselected” cap-subject H-1B petitions to employers, but could not provide a time frame for this due to the large number of petitions for which there were no available H-1B numbers.  USCIS stated that it will issue an announcement after all of the unselected petitions are sent for return.

__________________

Catherine Wadhwani is a Partner in Fox Rothschild LLP’s Immigration Practice Group.  She may be reached at (412) 394-5540 or cwadhwani@foxrothschild.com.

 

Evenwel v. Abbott:  What “One Person – One Vote” Means 

Posted in General Immigration News and Updates

Ashe Puri writes:

On March 15, 2016, I hosted a program for the South Asian Bar Association-Southern California at Fox Rothschild on a case pending before the United States Supreme Court, Evenwel v. Abbott, that had the potential to drastically change the landscape by which states apportion legislative districts and allocate state funds.  Under the traditional “one person-one vote” approach, states design legislative districts with equal population numbers based on the total population count determined by the decennial census.  Where the maximum population difference between the largest and smallest district is less than 10%, a state or local legislative map presumptively complies with the one-person, one-vote rule.

After the 2010 decennial census, Texas adopted a State Senate map that has a maximum total-population difference of 8.04% within the presumptively permissible 10% range.  However, if measured by the voter-population (eligible or registered voters), the maximum population difference exceeds 40%.  Plaintiffs Sue Evenwel and Edward Pfenniger, who live in a district in Texas with large voter population, filed suit against the Texas Governor and Secretary of State arguing that apportioning legislative districts based on total population is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.  Plaintiffs argued that legislative districts should be apportioned based on voter population rather than total population, thereby having the effect of allocating state funds away from communities (especially major cities) with higher concentrations of people ineligible to vote including non-citizens, children, mentally incapacitate persons and disenfranchised felons.

The program I hosted at Fox Rothschild included speakers from the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office and the South Asian Network (SAN), a South Asian community organization based in Southern California.  The City Attorney’s Office had submitted an amicus brief to the United States Supreme Court advocating against using voter population in deciding how to apportion legislative districts.  Among other things, the Office argued that such a system would harm America’s cites and deny equal representation to their residents, both voters and nonvoters, which, in turn, would cause residents in less-populated rural areas to obtain more representation in state government than their population warrants.

On April 4, 2016, just three weeks after my program, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision against Plaintiffs Sue Evenwel and Edward Pfenniger.   Delivering the opinion of the Court, Justice Ginsburg wrote that “[a]dopting voter-eligible apportionment as constitutional command would upset a well-functioning approach to districting that all 50 States and countless local jurisdictions have followed for decades, even centuries.”  Justice Ginsburg further explained that “[n]onvoters have an important stake in many policy debates- children, their parents, even their grandparents, for example, have a stake in a strong public-education system-and in receiving constituent services, such as help navigating public-benefits bureaucracies.”  Accordingly, the current practice of states using total population in apportioning legislative districts remains intact.


Ashe Puri is an associate in the Intellectual Property Department, resident in the firm’s Los Angeles (Century City) office.