Page 39 - The Indian EYE 082925

IMMIGRATION AUGUST 29, 2025 | The Indian Eye 39

the attorney to handle the represen- upon termination.[9] In Rite Aid The conflict waiver was upheld representation in H-1B cases while
tation of both clients more readily if Corporation Securities Litigation, because the CEO was an accommo- safeguarding the interests of both the
there is termination down the road. [10] which was not an immigration dation client as he agreed to engage employer and the employee. In the
There may be situations where case but a good example of how this counsel through the corporation. It is event that the attorney has to opt out
the attorney started representing the would play out in immigration prac- worth pointing out that in the immi- from representing the employee, that
employer and not the H-1B worker tice, the court held that the informed gration context, the attorney contin- may be permissible if the employee
who may have been overseas at the consent standard may be dropped ues to represent the employer client is expeditiously referred to indepen-

time of initiating the H1-B process. to its lowest point when there is an but withdraws from representing the dent counsel to represent them in the
However, it would still be incum- “accommodation client.” There the terminated H-1B worker and does removal case.
bent upon the attorney to notify the same law firm represented Rite Aid not take any adverse action against As USCIS practices change un-
employee about the potential con- and the CEO, and in the engagement the worker such as claiming damages. der the Trump administration, im-
sequences of the employer notifying letter, the law firm indicated that in By setting clear expectations, ob- migration lawyers must continually
the USCIS about the termination. the event of a conflict, the firm would taining informed consent, and nav- reassess their engagement strategies
The employee should also be ad- continue to represent Rite Aid while igating conflicts with diligence, at- and update conflict waivers to reflect
vised about the consequences of the CEO would retain separate counsel. torneys can effectively manage dual new risks.
withdrawal, which could potential- ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ly result in the initiating of removal Cyrus D. Mehta, a graduate of Cambridge University and Columbia Law School, is the Managing Partner of Cyrus D. Mehta
proceedings. If the attorney will be
unable to represent the employee in & Partners PLLC in New York City. Mr. Mehta is a member of AILA’s Administrative Litigation Task Force; AILA’s EB-5 Com-
removal proceedings, the employee mittee; former chair of AILA’s Ethics Committee; special counsel on immigration matters to the Departmental Disciplinary
should be advised to seek indepen- Committee, Appellate Division, First Department, New York; member of the ABA Commission on Immigration; board member
dent counsel in this regard. of Volunteers for Legal Services and board member of New York Immigration Coalition. Mr. Mehta is the former chair of the
In a situation where the attorney Board of Trustees of the American Immigration Council and former chair of the Committee on Immigration and Nationality
is more in contact with an employ- Law of the New York City Bar Association. He is a frequent speaker and writer on various immigration-related issues, including
er and is advising that employer on on ethics, and is also an adjunct professor of law at Brooklyn Law School, where he teaches a course entitled Immigration and
a variety of immigration matters for Work. Mr. Mehta received the AILA 2018 Edith Lowenstein Memorial Award for advancing the practice of immigration law
its employees, the employee could be
considered as as an accommodation and the AILA 2011 Michael Maggio Memorial Award for his outstanding efforts in providing pro bono representation in the
or secondary client that may enable immigration field. He has also received two AILA Presidential Commendations in 2010 and 2016. Mr. Mehta is ranked among
the attorney to continue to represent the most highly regarded lawyers in North America by Who’s Who Legal – Corporate Immigration Law 2019 and is also ranked
the employer and not the employee in Chambers USA and Chambers Global 2019 in immigration law, among other rankings.

www.TheIndianEYE.com